052/052B Class Destroyers

Lintuperhonen

New Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

I've got a simple question regarding the sole Type 051B, Shenzhen (167). Will its future refit be similar to that of the 052s (But with the original Sea Eagle being replaced with the newest version)?
 

escobar

Brigadier
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Type 052B DDG, 168 Guangzhou open to public

militaire052b0220201212_zps259af233.jpg

militaire052b0221201212_zps1b71226e.jpg

militaire052b0222201212_zps6b54f1a4.jpg

militaire052b0224201212_zpsc2dfa073.jpg

militaire052b0225201212_zps7cf1ca6a.jpg

militaire052b0226201212_zpsffe3eb35.jpg

militaire052b0227201212_zps4216d749.jpg

militaire052b0228201212_zps4f079c48.jpg
 

jobjed

Captain
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Selections of my photos of the DDG Guangzhou

DSC04041_zps3c302d33.jpg


Control panel inside the hangar, not too sure what it does, need some pros to decipher its purpose.

DSC04039_zpsdc2aaf1d.jpg


Aiming sights on the QBZ-95

DSC04010_zps60e804de.jpg


Interior shot, aimed upwards into the next floor.

DSC03984_zps0f930bf6.jpg


Say hello to my little friend!

DSC03963_zpse0aa128f.jpg


Close up of the SAM: 9M3173 (Che) (De) 4 (Er) 4024. Whatever that means :confused:

DSC03942_zpsaef621a1.jpg


Welding not of the "best" quality.

DSC03928_zps5c3989f1.jpg

DSC03927_zps781b12c8.jpg

DSC03926_zpscea8d668.jpg

DSC03925_zps4650f958.jpg

DSC03924_zps06d82d65.jpg


Interior of the Z-9C
 

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Selections of my photos of the DDG Guangzhou

DSC04041_zps3c302d33.jpg



DSC03942_zpsaef621a1.jpg


Welding not of the "best" quality.

Interior of the Z-9C


That depends on where the weld is, but still it does look below standard in today's day and age and for a DDG that is simply not acceptable, you do not want these kinds of welds in a ocean going warship, in war that could make all the deference, no matter how good your damage control sailors are

But then this isn't today's warship, it was built over a decade ago when it was most likely a "first" attempt, the pace at which Chinese warship design and construction has advanced is almost unbelievable and a look at a Type 054A and Type 052C will prove it

Nevertheless the other pictures show a good standard of maintainence, everything is squared away organised and it looks they are following a standard operating procedure by the way it is presented, most things have a fixed place and they are safely installed

Modern Chinese welding and machinery technology is on par with the best warship designs, For Azmat Class the technology's were all imported for the 2nd ship and installed at Karachi dockyard who also have French technology for construction of Agosta Class SSK, same for JF17 the precision technology machine tools were imported for the construction for the aircraft, all of them pretty good

Sometimes you wonder how well the PLAN sailors are under war like conditions, for example, how would they react when there is a explosion on board, how is the body language, how do the people responsible take charge, how does the captain lead from the front, what effect does the explosion have on injured sailors and moral, how quickly do they get the scene under control, do they show valour and risk of life to save the ship, this is what wins battles this is what it takes to save a ship and recover it

Not that anyone wants a explosion on board but some times you can't help but think about what are very real issues for sailors at sea
 
Last edited:

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

You're assuming AShM carried by planes are equivalent to SS-N-22 carried by Sovremenny. They are not. Even if they are, you cannot reduce the value of a platform to the weapon it carries. Destroyer are not moving arsenal of missles, they are the principle combatant of naval warfare, their mere presence are irreplaceble by any planes. Planes need to be armed, scrumbered, briefed on where to fly and what to strike and form formations. A salvo of missles can be launched in seconds.
The US Navy is not sitting on it laurels with respect to anti-shipping capabilities for its surface vessels. It still uses the Harpoon Missile, but they are reaching the end of their service life and the US Navy has decided not take up the developer on a VLS version of the missile.

That's because they have three other development processes going.

The first will be a Multi-Mission Tomahawk (MMT) missile derived from the Tomahawk BLock IV missile which will have significant range, countermeasure, retargeting, loiter, and BDA capabilities which will far outclass the old 250km TASMs that were withdrawn from service in the 1990s. NAVAIR is set to award a contract to Raytheon for development of this MMT anti-ship missile based on the Block IV Tactical Tomahawk as we speak.

The second is the LRASM (Long Range Anti-ship Missile)is being developed by DARPA. The Navy has already awarded a 157 milion dollar contract to Lockheed to work with DARPA in developing this missile, either a high altitude supersonic version, or a low altitude, sub-sonic more stealthy version. Both would be VLS launchable from the Mk-41 launchers and would have significant range and intelligence and countermeasure capabilities over the exitsing Harpoon.

Defense Update reports that:

Defense Update: DARAPA said:
Unlike current anti-ship missiles, LRASM will be capable of conducting autonomous targeting, relying on on-board targeting systems to independently acquire the target without the presence of prior, precision intelligence, or supporting services like Global Positioning Satellite navigation and data-links. As an autonomous weapon LRASM will rely exclusively on on-board sensors and processing systems. According to DARPA, these capabilities will enable positive target identification, precision engagement of moving ships and establishing of initial target cueing in extremely hostile environment. The missile will be designed with advanced counter-countermeasures,to effectively evade hostile active defense systems.

Finally, DARPA is also pursuing the ArcLight project calls for a 2,000 mile range, hypersonic missile to be able to make 1st strike hits on enemy shipping from US vessels and their VLS launchers. Essentially, it will be a quick reaction weapon that calls for hitting time critical targets at a distance of 2,000 nautical miles within 30 minutes. ArcLight will employ a rocket booster, sustainer accelerating the weapon to hypersonic speed, from where the strike vehicle will glide at high speed, carrying a warhead to strike the target with pinpoint accuracy at that range.

So, this is where the US Navy is heading over the next 3-15 years in its anti-shipping missile plans. We will see how much actually falls out, but I am pretty sure that the new Multi-mission Tomahawk (MMT) for anti-shipping duties and the LRSASM will probably be developed and deployed. The MMT by 2015, and the LRASM probably no later than 2020.

Reference:

1) Navy Matters: New Anti-ship Missiles, August 5, 2012

2) United States Naval Institute Proceedings, “New Tomahawks Ordered, Offensive Antisurface Weapon Planned”, Edward Walsh, Aug 2012

3) Defense Update,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, “Next Generation Missiles – LRASM”
 
Last edited:
Top