052/052B Class Destroyers

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

FORBIN said:

I see that you mention the capacity of ships "AEGIS" or equivalent.

It seems to me that it would be interesting to know the number of targets can be engaged simultaneously (Hundreds followed).

I have read in the book ' Flottes de combat 2006 " :
Aegis Burke / Tico: 18
Destroyer Horizon: 12
Daring with the Sampson radar best ?
And Type 052C and D?

New Kolkata with the new AESA radar can be considered "AEGIS" ?

Click to expand...

Not sure what "simultaneously" means in this context but if you want to be technical Burkes can only handle 4 simultaneous engagements and AB's only 3, as that is how many SPG-62 illuminators they have per ship, which are mechanically steered and therefore cannot utilize ICWI like the APAR can, for example.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

C3 & D1 on Jan. 1, 2013

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

third Type 052C, 150



4th, 5th



6th



D1

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Mysterre said:

Why? Trees? If the land-based system is limited by terrain there is no reason to state any specific numbers since trees and hills are obviously never uniformly the same height and would therefore present different limitations at any given time. A land-based system located on a hilltop would have no minimum altitude restrictions at all. If there are differences in minimum altitude between land and sea-based systems in terms of quotes in brochures, I doubt it's the terrain. Then again, you have not demonstrated there are actually any such differences to begin with.

Click to expand...

Never a good idea to purely use export brochures to judge the exact capability of domestic system. Also as shown with recent articles on HQ-16, the naval versions do have lower minimum altitude.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

tphuang said:

Never a good idea to purely use export brochures to judge the exact capability of domestic system. Also as shown with recent articles on HQ-16, the naval versions do have lower minimum altitude.

Click to expand...

If those brochures are all you have, they are at least better than pure speculation. And which articles are you referring to?

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Type 052B, 168 Guangzhou

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

timepass said:

In above add the following who are also still very capable vessels:

DDGs:
051B/051Cs/052s/052Bs/SOVs (Total 11 DDGs)

FFGs:
053H2Gs/053h3s/054 (Total 16 FFGs)

FACs:
022s (arround 100 plus)

Click to expand...

Well, I would not include the Type 053s as modern, state of the art effective FFGs for the blue water. Nor would I include the FACs for any blue water consideration. Coastal defense and operations within the first island chain, yes. Blue water operations, no.

I would add the Type 054s in there...but only marginally because their self defense in terms of anti-air are severely lacking and they are therefore very vulnerable.

I would also add the Sovs and the Type 052Bs and Type 051Cs in there as strong blue water platforms...but not the Type 051B or the 052s...for the same reasons. Their air defense capabilieites are severelly lacking.

When you get down to it, with the six 052Cs and ultimately, let's say eight 052Ds (though we do not know how many they will actually build), and then with the two 052Bs, two 051Cs and four Sovs, the PLAN will have a total of 22 what I consider very effective, modern blue water DDGs.

With the 16 Type 054As and two Type 054s they will have 18 strong, state of the art blue water FFGs.

These 40 vessels represent a significant force in the Western Pacific, and when you add to them the new carriers the PLAN is contemplating, one of which is already commissioned, and the three LPDs, and whatever follows them, the PLAN is developing a very capable and very robust surface fleet.

I still contend that their great weakness in this regard, particularly in the blue water, is the lack of strong, state of the art SSNs in any appreciable numbers. It is a severe liability and vulnerability for them. Until they address this, in any potential conflict they will be at a very significant disaddvantage if they get outside the 1st island chain.

FORBIN said:

I see that you mention the capacity of ships "AEGIS" or equivalent.

It seems to me that it would be interesting to know the number of targets can be engaged simultaneously (Hundreds followed).

New Kolkata with the new AESA radar can be considered "AEGIS" ?

Click to expand...

For an excellent site regarding all of the AEGIS and AEGIS-Like vessels of the world, see the following:


Lots of good info there on every calls in service.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Jeff Head said:

Well, I would not include the Type 053s as modern, state of the art effective FFGs for the blue water.

I would add the Type 054s in there...but only marginally because their self defense in terms of anti-air are severely lacking and they are therefore very vulnerable.

...but not the Type 051B or the 052s...for the same reasons. Their air defense capabilieites are severelly lacking.

Click to expand...

This got me think, perhaps SD-10 based systems would be viable upgrade path for these vessels in the Navy. Tons of HQ-7 based ships in the navy that still have service life left in them. A quad packed 8 cell (or even 16 cell on larger ships) VLS (4m version) may be possible.

Essentially making the F16U export concept marketed years ago a modernized reality.