052/052B Class Destroyers

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Bltizo said:

Well that's where 055 is meant to come in, but I don't think the PLAN can afford a fleet of burke sized destroyers.

that said, while the "standard loadout" of an 052D will have to cater to everything from LR SAM, MR SAM, ASW, AShM, and LACM, an 052D operating in tandem with 052Cs can probably forsake their LR SAM load (which would probably make up a large proportion of its VLS cells) to emphasise land attack, etc, given 052Cs aren't exactly an AAW lightweight.




Even if it's only 8 SR SAMs, you're still looking at a fairly decent overall loadout.
---

USN is the only navy in the world who have PAR equipped, near 100 cell ships as their principle surface combatant. Even in JMSDF and ROCN, their aegis equipped ships are considered super high end.
PLAN knows they can't afford the pump out ships like that (and they probably don't need to either -- hell I think USN is a bit top heavy with their 60 odd burkes), so they compromise with 64 cell 052D instead. Ship by ship,052D packs less punch than a sejong or atago, but if 052D outstrips them in production (and by all accounts they probably will), then that gives PLAN a more flexible, potentially larger, force.
Throw in a few high end 055s and you have yourself a much more potent force.


I think what people aren't seeing, is that 052D isn't the "atago/kongo" or "sejong" of the future PLAN, but rather their "akizuki/takanami" or "KDXII". PLAN are still in a transition, modernization period and we should recall that as 052Ds are entering service, 051s will simultaneously be retired. 052D will do to the PLAN's destroyer force what 054A did to the PLAN's frigate composition

Click to expand...

I agree with your assessment. I think the 52D/C will be sort of their bread and butter destroyers and 055 will be their high end major combatant in the forseeable future. I also think that the 055 will be the last of PLAN's conventional 'looking' destroyer before the next major evolutionary step where the next PLAN destroyer/cruiser after 055 will most likely have exotic weapons (by today's standards) like rail gun , laser CIWs etc and probably looking drastically different than the current hull design. Of course we're talking at least 10-15 years from now but in naval timeline it is really not that long since ships can last 30 or 40 years or more.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

I don't understand the obsession with comparing the 052D DDG to ships that should be classed as cruisers.

Furthermore, as Bltizo has already touched on, the 052D is going to be the workhorse of the PLAN, and produced in much larger numbers than the few 'show horse' cruisers the Japanese and South Koreans have produced.

The 055 is going to be the top dog of the PLAN, and that should be what is compared to the Kongos and Sejongs, and even then, I expect the PLAN to build many more 055s that either the Japanese or South Koreans would Kongos and Sejongs.

Thus, comparing 052Ds to far heavier ships seems like a rather silly and pointless exercise unless all you are interested in is trying to find an example to brag about how 'my stick is bigger than your stick'.

The PLAN is following a methodical, well planned, long term modernisation roadmap that is also sustainable. In the long run, that is a far superior approach than having a poorly balanced fleet for the sake of having some show off ships to so fanboys can play top trumps.

With regards to the 052D's likely armament, well I think some people are making the mistake of assuming the PLAN will do everything exactly like how the USN and other western navies would operate.

While it is true the PLAN has never been shy about the wholesale adoption of the practices, procedures and even dress code of others, it would be insulting to both the PLAN and our own intelligence to think that all the PLAN is doing is blindly copying and following.

The PLAN will shamelessly rip off things that are useful and works for them, but that is just an extension of their pragmatic and open minded philosophy, and that philosophy also means they will reject group think and anything that doesn't make sense or is ill suited to their needs and circumstances.

Based on that, I seriously doubt the PLAN will adopt the jack of all trades approach of most western navies when it comes to arming their ships, because unlike most western navies, the PLAN actually have a well-balanced, modern fleet with few extra curricular commitments.

At any given time, pretty much the entire PLAN is available for deployment. 052Cs or Ds will never sail into harms way alone or unsupported, and neither are China's likely wars far from home where only heavy ships can deploy quickly.

In any likely conflict scenario involving the PLAN, not only will the heavy principle combatants like 052C/D, 054A, 051C, 052Bs and Sovs etc be involved, but also the swarms of smaller ships. The 022s, 056s and even older Jianghu and JiangWeis. The 052Ds would not need to waste cells packing medium range missiles because there will be plenty of 054As on hand to provide that lay of defence.

The new universal VLS will add a great deal of flexibility in the load outs the PLAN can adopt, but in the event of a major war, the 052Ds' cells will be pack pretty much exclusively of long range SAMs, with maybe 8 cells max reserved for AShMs and a handful more for quad packed PL12s if they are available.

The primary anti-surface and anti-land punch will be carried by the Air Force, future carrier aircraft, and even 022s before the likes of the 052Ds sacrifice valuable cell space to pack cruise missiles.

The only time you might see the PLAN's surface ships adopt a more traditional western style weapons load out is if the PLAN is engaged in a traditional western style conflict - an expeditionary mission half way around the world to beat on some hopelessly outmatched opponent, where the outcome of the conflict was never in doubt, and the only question is how long it might last and how much the PLAN might have to pay for victory.

Since such scenarios are not even on the horizon for China, one can see why there is not great haste to conform to western standards and fill the supposed 'holes' in the PLAN force structure western analysts tend to see in the PLAN.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Video: PLAN is ready to take C4-151

[video]http://www.56.com/u78/v_OTcwNjE4Njc.html/1030_zcwshw.html[/video]

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

A.Man said:

Video: PLAN is ready to take C4-151

[video]http://www.56.com/u78/v_OTcwNjE4Njc.html/1030_zcwshw.html[/video]

Click to expand...

Yes.....recent images at JN shipyard had shown the 4th 052C getting its final touch up done.
It did seem to take the pennant number painter at JN a long time to get around to putting the number '151' on the 4th 052C...haha.

This 052D vs other Destroyers.........its not so much the total number of missiles carried, but the performance of the actual missiles themselves. The Japs know that the Chinese supersonic anti-ship missiles with a very long range can strike their principle ships, before they can get anywhere near to launching thier subsonic, shorter range obsolescent Harpoon missiles. This is just one example!

Anyway, i agree with previous posters, its more than likely a ship wont be operating alone................but, even so there are still enough anti-aircraft missiles carried alone on one ship, to protect it from an aerial assault..........unless the enemy literally send scores of warplanes at once!

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

steve_rolfe said:

This 052D vs other Destroyers.........its not so much the total number of missiles carried, but the performance of the actual missiles themselves. The Japs know that the Chinese supersonic anti-ship missiles with a very long range can strike their principle ships, before they can get anywhere near to launching thier subsonic, shorter range obsolescent Harpoon missiles. This is just one example!

Anyway, i agree with previous posters, its more than likely a ship wont be operating alone................but, even so there are still enough anti-aircraft missiles carried alone on one ship, to protect it from an aerial assault.

Click to expand...

I believe the Type 052D is going to be an excellent DDG, particularly as they get all options available to it for its VLS.

It will have more than enough cells to have a very good AAW load out for both itself and accompanying vessels (and particularlu in conjunction with some of those vessels like an 052C or a 054A) and still have a very strong AAS and ASW load out for multi-role missions, or the flexibility to be more heavily weighted to any one of thos three missions as desired.

The point here is that with 64 cells and its other weaponry, it has the flexibility to do all of that. I believe they will produce them in some numbers, probably more than the 052C.

Also, by the way, Steve, could you avoid the use of the particular term you used for the Japanese in the last post? It is derogatory and any similar names for US or Chinese or other groups would not be good on SD either. Thanks.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Jeff Head said:

Also, by the way, Steve, could you avoid the use of the particular term you used for the Japanese in the last post? It is derogatory and any similar names for US or Chinese or other groups would not be good on SD either. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Ok........i wasnt intentionally being derogatory!

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

I think having the ability to deploy a larger number of smaller platforms that are individually less heavily armed, but singlely and together as well equipped in sensors and battle management capability, is a better way to ensure sustained effectiveness in most high intensity battle situations.
A cluster of 8 type 052D is a better bet for remaining effective longer than a group of 4 notional type 055 with the same combined armament load out.

The reverse side of this approach would be:

1. Smaller platforms would be less sea worthy, so fleet reliant on larger number of smaller platforms would suffer high sea-state related degradation in capability than a fleet relying on a smaller number of larger platforms. A fleet escorted by type 052D would be down to 12 knots while a fleet escorted by type 055 might still do 16, while the carrier itself, if unescorted, could still do 25 knots. A 052d might be rolling 45 degrees to each side and effectively unarmed and blind when a 055 might be rolling 20 degrees, still somewhat effective, while the Liaoning herself might be rolling 10 degrees and still able to launch and recover aircraft in a pinch.

2. Larger number of smaller platforms would both be less fuel efficient overall, and in having larger number of ships to service, place much more demand on underway replenishment and suffer a larger percentage of replenishment related outages. It would take a larger number of replenishment vessels, carrier more fuel overall, to keep 8 type 052D going than it takes to keep 4 055 going.

So:

If a fleet is attempting to build up to the highest possible level of nominal strength (in terms of number of missile silos) for the least overall cost (low underway replenishment needs, low dry dock needs, low service slip needs, etc), a few big ships, like the Korean and Japanese Burke derivatives, ot 055, is the way to go.

If the fleet expects to encounter high intensity combat in stromy heavy seas, then 055 is the way to go.

But if the fleet is attempting to build the greatest possible actual combat strength for a theater close to home and not subjected to frequent heavy storms, and the fleet expected continued favorable budgetary environment for a considerable amount of time into the future, then more medium sized ships like the 052D, seems a better bet than a few heavy ships.

For China, if the primary theater of operation for majority of its navy remains in west pacific west of guam, and south China sea north of Philippine, and it expects to continue double digit defence expensiture growth for the foreseeable future, then having a few big cruisers (such as the hypothetical type 055) do not make a huge amount of sense to me. The carrier task force in these theaters can be adaquately escorted without excessive replensihment needs by a larger number of medium sized but well equipped destroyers in most circumstances, except when Typhoons strike.

If it needs to occassionally operate out of theater, provided these operations do not become critical to Chinese security, then it could make do with medium sized ships and accept their sub optimality for this role.

It would only make sense for China to adopt larger cruisers if its mission demands major portion of its fleet operate out of home theater frequently or even permanently, as with the US fleet, or if it expectes high likelihood that it would be called into battle during typhoon season in South China sea.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

chuck731 said:

I think having the ability to deploy a larger number of smaller platforms that are individually less heavily armed, but singlely and together as well equipped in sensors and battle management capability, is a better way to ensure sustained effectiveness in most high intensity battle situations.
A cluster of 8 type 052D is a better bet for remaining effective longer than a group of 4 notional type 055 with the same combined armament load out.

The reverse side of this approach would be:

1. Smaller platforms would be less sea worthy, so fleet reliant on larger number of smaller platforms would suffer high sea-state related degradation in capability than a fleet relying on a smaller number of larger platforms. A fleet escorted by type 052D would be down to 12 knots while a fleet escorted by type 055 might still do 16, while the carrier itself, if unescorted, could still do 25 knots. A 052d might be rolling 45 degrees to each side and effectively unarmed and blind when a 055 might be rolling 20 degrees, still somewhat effective, while the Liaoning herself might be rolling 10 degrees and still able to launch and recover aircraft in a pinch.

2. Larger number of smaller platforms would both be less fuel efficient overall, and in having larger number of ships to service, place much more demand on underway replenishment and suffer a larger percentage of replenishment related outages. It would take a larger number of replenishment vessels, carrier more fuel overall, to keep 8 type 052D going than it takes to keep 4 055 going.

So:

If a fleet is attempting to build up to the highest possible level of nominal strength (in terms of number of missile silos) for the least overall cost (low underway replenishment needs, low dry dock needs, low service slip needs, etc), a few big ships, like the Korean and Japanese Burke derivatives, ot 055, is the way to go.

If the fleet expects to encounter high intensity combat in stromy heavy seas, then 055 is the way to go.

But if the fleet is attempting to build the greatest possible actual combat strength for a theater close to home and not subjected to frequent heavy storms, and the fleet expected continued favorable budgetary environment for a considerable amount of time into the future, then more medium sized ships like the 052D, seems a better bet than a few heavy ships.

For China, if the primary theater of operation for majority of its navy remains in west pacific west of guam, and south China sea north of Philippine, and it expects to continue double digit defence expensiture growth for the foreseeable future, then having a few big cruisers (such as the hypothetical type 055) do not make a huge amount of sense to me. The carrier task force in these theaters can be adaquately escorted without excessive replensihment needs by a larger number of medium sized but well equipped destroyers in most circumstances, except when Typhoons strike.

If it needs to occassionally operate out of theater, provided these operations do not become critical to Chinese security, then it could make do with medium sized ships and accept their sub optimality for this role.

It would only make sense for China to adopt larger cruisers if its mission demands major portion of its fleet operate out of home theater frequently or even permanently, as with the US fleet, or if it expectes high likelihood that it would be called into battle during typhoon season in South China sea.

Click to expand...

It does make sense for PLAN to invest in bigger vessels and your analysis actually proves that. Western Pacific has pretty rough seas and the Typhoon season can last anywhere from July to November. Even if PLAN intends on only operating inside of the 2nd island chain most of the time, having larger vessels is advantageous because the waters there are rough. Even during the months outside of typhoon seasons there are still storms appearing quite regularly.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

ww2 U.S. destroyers capsized due to typhoon's

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

?_? Why do people assume quad-packed missiles on the 052D will be SR-SAM? If it has ~30km-50km range and provides local area air defense like ESSM, wouldn't be it a MRSAM?