052/052B Class Destroyers

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Mysterre said:

Personally this would be one of the most exciting developments for the CCL, more than any other missile system IMO, VLA's or VL ASCM's. It would be a massive force multiplier for 054A's if it could be quad-packed into their hot launch VLS tubes.

Click to expand...

I'm curious to the relationship between the VLS system on 054A and 052D. Questions that come to mind are:

1. Is the 054A's VLS a shorter version of the one on the 052D?
2. Or is the 054A's VLS system different and smaller in both diameter and length?
3. If it was possible to quad-pack DK-10's on the 054A, would the added weight of the missiles have a detrimental effect on the 054A's performance?

IMO quad-packing ESSM-type missiles on the 054A would increase the ship's munitions, but it won't offer significant gains in the reach of the missiles. Assuming the HQ-16's range is 32-40km, the DK-10 will only increase the reach to 50 km. It does however free up VLS cells for other types of munitions.

What would make a great improvement for the 054A (and its successors) is if the VLS can accommodate longer-range SAM's. But that would probably require upgrading the ship's sensors as well ($$!).

In the short term, if they can fit a HQ-10 in the back of the newly built 054A's, that would also improve the ship's defense capabilities. Speaking of HQ-10, I saw a pic today with 15-round launcher (see attached photos). It appears to have the same width as the 8 round launcher installed on the 056.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

adeptitus said:

I'm curious to the relationship between the VLS system on 054A and 052D. Questions that come to mind are:

1. Is the 054A's VLS a shorter version of the one on the 052D?

Click to expand...

Nope -- it's obviously different. 054A is only hot launch, with the central exhaust in the middle, and it's smaller too.

2. Or is the 054A's VLS system different and smaller in both diameter and length?
3. If it was possible to quad-pack DK-10's on the 054A, would the added weight of the missiles have a detrimental effect on the 054A's performance?

IMO quad-packing ESSM-type missiles on the 054A would increase the ship's munitions, but it won't offer significant gains in the reach of the missiles. Assuming the HQ-16's range is 32-40km, the DK-10 will only increase the reach to 50 km. It does however free up VLS cells for other types of munitions.

Click to expand...

I remember there was a post quoting the naval shipborne weapons magazine (or some other credible source like that) saying HQ-16 has a range of 70km, which makes more sense than the previously stated 50km (given DK-10, a much smaller missile has that range).

Personally I don't think 054A's VLS is big enough to quad pack DK-10. For the entirety of their service lives, 054A will probably be limited to HQ-16 and the VLA weapon (regardless of whether it's fitted at the moment, we cannot deny that the placard those months ago said it could hold them), and newer variants depending on size. For instance an ER HQ-16 probably won't fit as a booster will be longer than the missile tube itself.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Bltizo said:

I remember there was a post quoting the naval shipborne weapons magazine (or some other credible source like that) saying HQ-16 has a range of 70km, which makes more sense than the previously stated 50km (given DK-10, a much smaller missile has that range).

Click to expand...

The limiting factor here is probably the limited range of the FCR's rather than the actual range potential of the missile motor, and/or the SARH guidance of the HQ-16. The SM-2 received a massive boost to its range when it switched to terminal-only SARH with mid-course updates. For the HQ-16 to achieve its maximum potential, one or both of these have to be upgraded.

Bltizo said:

Personally I don't think 054A's VLS is big enough to quad pack DK-10.

Click to expand...

I think that if the "DK-10" comes in a version with folded fins it is more than small enough to quad-pack inside a 054A's VL tube. I believe the ESSM is bigger than a PL-12 and those can still quad-pack.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Mysterre said:

The limiting factor here is probably the limited range of the FCR's rather than the actual range potential of the missile motor, and/or the SARH guidance of the HQ-16. The SM-2 received a massive boost to its range when it switched to terminal-only SARH with mid-course updates. For the HQ-16 to achieve its maximum potential, one or both of these have to be upgraded.

Click to expand...

Yep, unfortunately I don't think we quite know the exact guidance of HQ-16 at the moment. Regardless, the 70km range is a number to keep on the list of consideration.

I think that if the "DK-10" comes in a version with folded fins it is more than small enough to quad-pack inside a 054A's VL tube. I believe the ESSM is bigger than a PL-12 and those can still quad-pack.

Click to expand...

I somewhat doubt DK-10 will have folding fins, mostly because I think this weapon is designed to be exclusively quad packed for the CCL VLS and I'm not sure if PLAN will see the benefits to funding a backwards convertible variant of a weapon for a line of ships which will soon end its run, equipped with a non-consistent VLS compared to the future universal standard. Not to mention electronic upgrades to support the missile.

But if DK-10 can fold its wings to quad pack into 054A that would indeed be a massive boost in firepower. I somewhat doubt it will eventuate however.

I think ESSM has a smaller overall wingspan than PL-12, but DK-10 has a reduced wingspan itself compared to PL-12 it's based on. and Mk 41 is a larger VLS than 054A's VLS so the comparison between ESSM and PL-12 is moot anyhow.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Bltizo said:

I somewhat doubt DK-10 will have folding fins, mostly because I think this weapon is designed to be exclusively quad packed for the CCL VLS and I'm not sure if PLAN will see the benefits to funding a backwards convertible variant of a weapon for a line of ships which will soon end its run, equipped with a non-consistent VLS compared to the future universal standard. Not to mention electronic upgrades to support the missile.

Click to expand...

If I were a PLAN commander given the opportunity to boost the firepower of 16 of my most modern ships fourfold, I would do it in a heartbeat.

Bltizo said:

I think ESSM has a smaller overall wingspan than PL-12, but DK-10 has a reduced wingspan itself compared to PL-12 it's based on. and Mk 41 is a larger VLS than 054A's VLS so the comparison between ESSM and PL-12 is moot anyhow.

Click to expand...

Mk 41 looks to my eye to be almost exactly the same size as the 054A's launchers, in fact I'm willing to bet the PLAN designers looked directly to the Mk 41 for guidance during the design process.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Mysterre said:

Mk 41 looks to my eye to be almost exactly the same size as the 054A's launchers, in fact I'm willing to bet the PLAN designers looked directly to the Mk 41 for guidance during the design process.

Click to expand...

Hmm I don't think anyone's ever done even a semi comprehensive study in regards to the size of Mk 41 vs 054A.

Clearly 054A's VLS operates similarly to Mk41 (as well as slyver), in its hot launch, central exhaust design and was likely influenced by it. But to copy it in size? Somewhat doubtful.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Bltizo said:

Yep, unfortunately I don't think we quite know the exact guidance of HQ-16 at the moment. Regardless, the 70km range is a number to keep on the list of consideration.

Click to expand...

Well, we know that the 054As use radar illuminators, and that gives us very strong clues as to the guidance method.

However, something to take into consideration is that we know the rough dimensions of the HQ16, and it is not that much smaller than the HQ9. As such, no matter what the current limiting factor is, be it guidance method, missile speed, flight path or sth else, if it was desired, it should be possible, maybe even fairly straight forward, to reprogramme or redesign the HQ16 to follow the HQ9 method and achieve much greater range.

This would hardly be unprecedented, all you need to to is look at the US SM1,2,6 development to see how massive range increases were achieved without needing to change the external dimensions of the missile itself much.

I somewhat doubt DK-10 will have folding fins, mostly because I think this weapon is designed to be exclusively quad packed for the CCL VLS and I'm not sure if PLAN will see the benefits to funding a backwards convertible variant of a weapon for a line of ships which will soon end its run, equipped with a non-consistent VLS compared to the future universal standard. Not to mention electronic upgrades to support the missile.

But if DK-10 can fold its wings to quad pack into 054A that would indeed be a massive boost in firepower. I somewhat doubt it will eventuate however.

I think ESSM has a smaller overall wingspan than PL-12, but DK-10 has a reduced wingspan itself compared to PL-12 it's based on. and Mk 41 is a larger VLS than 054A's VLS so the comparison between ESSM and PL-12 is moot anyhow.

Click to expand...

Folding fins is hardly an insurmountable technological challenge. In addition, if they develop a quad packable version of the DK10 that can fit inside the VLS of the 054A, it would be a piece of cake to re-package that to fit in the much larger new common VLS.

There are many benefits to developing a compact quad pack option for 054As, the obvious increase in missile loads and added flexibility in engagement options of the large existing fleet of 054A FFGs aside, depending on just how much bigger the new universal VLS is, there is a chance that if they can quad pack missiles in the 054A VLS, they might be able to nonuple pack them in the new VLS.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

A.Man said:

D3

Click to expand...

Is that really 052d? It looks more like 054a.

Edit: Looks like just an angle issue

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Women on board a Type 052B DDG

[video=youtube;dl0r97qTQeM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl0r97qTQeM[/video]

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

151 with new pennant number style