052/052B Class Destroyers

Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Totoro said:
...

and as far as i could find
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
...
Click to expand...

I just woke up, have to run to work, the document is cool, p. 8 (in this PDF) for example with terminal velocity, time of flight on the same graph; stuff about ballistic coefficients; p. 26 with how the terminal velocity goes through a minimum wrt the range (I noticed this for a 15" http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/mil...-startegy-discussions-13-6728.html#post267773, was explained later in that very tough :) thread); etc. so thanks, Totoro! and it's midnight in America so go to bed ;-)
 
T

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

You misunderstand me tphuang, i am all for development of such rounds. I would like them on my ship. And yes its a great supplement to have, provided one doesbt *always* wait to get in gun range just to use their missiles as well.

As for oth targeting, there are helicopters which are the main asset for those purposes, in these hypothetical casess where no other platforms are available. Which is wwhy a single ship vs ship is unlikely anyway. So helicopters of both fleets will fly, they will detect each other and fleets will either stay away from each other or one fleet will press onto the other fleet. If the latter happens, there *will* be tracking and targeting from a few hundred km away, provided one fleet is faster than other, or other is cornered or so on.

Or we have a situtation where one fleet will sneak past other one for an ambush and get close. In those cases gun could be very useful. In extreme cases having a ww2 battleship would also be very useful. But it just wont happen often enough that commanders rely on that.

Us navy removed their harpoons because they dont attack large fleets with ships. If they did, they would have at least 8 such missiles. Plus two per helo, as two is the minimum when we talk about these small missiles (which still pack a larger punch than gun rounds) but thats really a past standard. Just like up until now there wasnt such ammo like vulcano. Todays emerging standarD is to have option of vls based ashm. so we really are talking about more than 8 missiles per ship.

But like i said, it will probably be fleet versus fleet. Maybe enemy fleet can intercept 16 missiles before one of their ships is neutralized. Maybe it can destroy as many as 32. depending on number, and depending on number of lrasm, brahmos, kalibr, yj18 and so in whole opposing fleet they may succeed, maybe against one ship or half the ships or more. So yes, nothing is certain.

Plus we clearly agree its a great system to have and its a nice supplement to have for certain situations which arent rare at all. So we really agree on most points.
 
P

peterAustralia

New Member
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

The flight time of a shell on a ballistic path say at 80km, is a long time. Might be well over 2 minutes. I could do the maths if I had to. In WW2, they were able to observe incoming shells on radar, and advise if those shells were going to fall forwards or aft. Thus if the target ship comes under gun fire, it could track the shell trajectory, and alter its course to get far away. Once the shell gets close of course it can use IR guidance. In the 2 minutes the shell is in the air, the ship can move a long way away, possibly too far away for terminal guidance to work.

The flight time of the paris gun of 130km range was 182 seconds (three minutes)

I assume the shell does not have midpoint correction capabilites,, so that if the target moves this way, the shell starts making changes early on. To shoot down a 130mm shell with a CIWS, yes it would be possible, but it would be a small target. Assume an exocet if about 60cm diameter, a 13cm diameter shell would have only 5 percent of the frontal area, thus much harder to hit (twenty times harder!)

Even for water cooled guns, I dont know how long they can sustain high rates of fire for. The more shells at the target the better I guess. If the target ship had a minute or two warning that it was under fire from IR terminally guided artillery then I would think the target ship would have the advantage, if however it was caught by suprise then the target ship would be in big trouble. Can radar track 130mm artillery shells, my guess is that they can. What about a faceted round (using a sabot) with shealth coatings, could radar track that? I guess the firing ship could compensate by firing to the left, to the right, behind and in front of the target ship, so that wherever it goes, some of the shells could use their terminal guidance
 
tphuang

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Totoro said:
You misunderstand me tphuang, i am all for development of such rounds. I would like them on my ship. And yes its a great supplement to have, provided one doesbt *always* wait to get in gun range just to use their missiles as well.

As for oth targeting, there are helicopters which are the main asset for those purposes, in these hypothetical casess where no other platforms are available. Which is wwhy a single ship vs ship is unlikely anyway. So helicopters of both fleets will fly, they will detect each other and fleets will either stay away from each other or one fleet will press onto the other fleet. If the latter happens, there *will* be tracking and targeting from a few hundred km away, provided one fleet is faster than other, or other is cornered or so on.

Or we have a situtation where one fleet will sneak past other one for an ambush and get close. In those cases gun could be very useful. In extreme cases having a ww2 battleship would also be very useful. But it just wont happen often enough that commanders rely on that.

Us navy removed their harpoons because they dont attack large fleets with ships. If they did, they would have at least 8 such missiles. Plus two per helo, as two is the minimum when we talk about these small missiles (which still pack a larger punch than gun rounds) but thats really a past standard. Just like up until now there wasnt such ammo like vulcano. Todays emerging standarD is to have option of vls based ashm. so we really are talking about more than 8 missiles per ship.

But like i said, it will probably be fleet versus fleet. Maybe enemy fleet can intercept 16 missiles before one of their ships is neutralized. Maybe it can destroy as many as 32. depending on number, and depending on number of lrasm, brahmos, kalibr, yj18 and so in whole opposing fleet they may succeed, maybe against one ship or half the ships or more. So yes, nothing is certain.

Plus we clearly agree its a great system to have and its a nice supplement to have for certain situations which arent rare at all. So we really agree on most points.
Click to expand...
I think we differed on three points:
1) how soon this might be available and how effective it will be
2) how likely a conflict will get to the scenario where opposing ships will be within the range of a main gun (even one with 120 km range).
3) modern ships are moving toward carrying 16 or even 32 missiles.

That's fine. I think 3 is your weakest point.

Another interesting thought here is with USN removing harpoon from their surface fleet, will PLAN be moving in that direction too in the future with 052D. USN leaves its ASuW missions to the naval aircraft and submarines. Although, AB class can bring as much ASuW firepower as most other ships if it starts launching SM-2s and ESSMs at them, but that's not needed within a USN carrier group. PLAN's naval aviation and submarines are unlikely to be ready for that in the near future against a well armed opponent. So, I guess it would really depend on the mission and other ships in the flotilla.

peterAustralia said:
The flight time of a shell on a ballistic path say at 80km, is a long time. Might be well over 2 minutes. I could do the maths if I had to. In WW2, they were able to observe incoming shells on radar, and advise if those shells were going to fall forwards or aft. Thus if the target ship comes under gun fire, it could track the shell trajectory, and alter its course to get far away. Once the shell gets close of course it can use IR guidance. In the 2 minutes the shell is in the air, the ship can move a long way away, possibly too far away for terminal guidance to work.

The flight time of the paris gun of 130km range was 182 seconds (three minutes)

I assume the shell does not have midpoint correction capabilites,, so that if the target moves this way, the shell starts making changes early on. To shoot down a 130mm shell with a CIWS, yes it would be possible, but it would be a small target. Assume an exocet if about 60cm diameter, a 13cm diameter shell would have only 5 percent of the frontal area, thus much harder to hit (twenty times harder!)

Even for water cooled guns, I dont know how long they can sustain high rates of fire for. The more shells at the target the better I guess. If the target ship had a minute or two warning that it was under fire from IR terminally guided artillery then I would think the target ship would have the advantage, if however it was caught by suprise then the target ship would be in big trouble. Can radar track 130mm artillery shells, my guess is that they can. What about a faceted round (using a sabot) with shealth coatings, could radar track that? I guess the firing ship could compensate by firing to the left, to the right, behind and in front of the target ship, so that wherever it goes, some of the shells could use their terminal guidance
Click to expand...

My guess is that by the time you actually get to use gun, you will be much closer than 130 km, but let's just use your numbers.

in 3 minutes, a ship that can travel at 30 knots can move at most 1.5 nm. In reality, it will probably be a lot less than that, because it takes time for ship to track a shell, change directions and get up to that speed. Of course, there is also human decisions involved in how to handle threats (you could be facing missiles/shell from that ship and other ships) and I would imagine that doesn't happen instantenous even in the most well operated air defense system. There are also possibly nearby ships that could be at danger. As for how far a IR guided shell can track a target from its original pre-launch location, that I really wouldn't have answer to. The other thing is that if a shell comes reasonably close to hitting an opposing ship, that ship will probably not take any chances and try to either score a soft or hard kill on it.
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

tphuang said:
... As for how far a IR guided shell can track a target from its original pre-launch location, that I really wouldn't have answer to. ...
Click to expand...

me neither :) but as for the Volcano: "The ammunition is thus programmed to enter a descending trajectory already a few miles before entering the target area, allowing the built-in IIR seeker to scan the surface of the sea to detect and track the heat signature of the enemy vessel." according to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
P

peterAustralia

New Member
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Ummm, they were a british ship from memory, scenario was battle of the barents sea (top of Norway). I read this story in a book, the radar officer was watching the german shells fly through the air, and was able to advise the bridge if the shells would be falling aft or forwards. In the end some of the shells (might have been from Scharnhorst), found their mark and the radar officer in person was killed. I dont think the radar at the time was able to determine if shells were going to fall short or far, just aft or stern (2D radar, not 3D). If you really want to know more, I can look up my books for exact details.

Two minute flight time, at 30 knots. Thats one thirteeth of an hour. At 30 knots the ship can travel exactly one nautical mile. Thus if the target ship detected shells at 80km, it could move one nautical mile in any direction. If I was in charge of the firing ship I and I had artillery with IR guided shells, I would fire lots and lots of shells. Some at the target, some 1 mile aft, some 1 mile forward, some 1 mile far, and some 1 mile short. Well maybe as these are the extreme ranges that the target ship could go, I might try .08miles here, 0.8miles there, etc etc,,, plus some at 0.5miles here. 0.5miles there, sort of a shot gun approach, pepper the entire area, so whereever the ship went to, some of the shells would come under IR guidance range.

I dont know how much terminal IR guided shells can deviate from their ballistic trajectory, (a few hundred yards at a guess). The advantage of the firing ship is that it can keep on firing and firing and firing. Hundreds of rounds if need be, eventually the CIWS may well run out of ammunition (assuming if can hit such a small target, which it might do, but my guess is success rate would be less than ideal)
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

tphuang said:
Another interesting thought here is with USN removing harpoon from their surface fleet, will PLAN be moving in that direction too in the future with 052D. USN leaves its ASuW missions to the naval aircraft and submarines.
Click to expand...
And it has been a mistake...but one that was made on the basis that they did not go to the VLS Harpoon because they had the ASM Tomahawks...and then later, when those were removed, felt they would have something else...but never did.

Until now.

With the LRASM now coming along, which will be able to launch from the VLS tubes, they will load however many they may need if they ever feel they are standing into any situation that might require it.

And it will be a good solution. There will definitely be an air launched LRASM. We will have to see of they develop a sub launched version. I would be surprised if they didn't.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Jeff Head said:
And it has been a mistake...but one that was made on the basis that they did not go to the VLS Harpoon because they had the ASM Tomahawks...and then later, when those were removed, felt they would have something else...but never did.
Click to expand...

I think Tphuang wasn't talking about VL harpoons but harpoons that are slant launched. Of course even then the statement isn't wholly true because ticos and earlier burkes obviously have harpoon, although I believe many flight iia burkes lack harpoons.
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Bltizo said:
I think Tphuang wasn't talking about VL harpoons but harpoons that are slant launched. Of course even then the statement isn't wholly true because ticos and earlier burkes obviously have harpoon, although I believe many flight iia burkes lack harpoons.
Click to expand...
There were no VL Harpoons for the surface ships. The development was canceled as I mentioned That was my point

When they went with the huge build of IIA Burkes, they took the Harpoons out of the design. They decided not to include them because at first they had the VL ASM Tomahawks...but then the US Navy removed those too.

So all of those new build Flight IIA Burkes didn't have any Harpoons.

Anyhow, I thought that is what Tphuang was speaking of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top