Re: DDG 052C Thread
How do you know that? is jiangnan really that much ahead of other chinese shipyards?
How do you know that? is jiangnan really that much ahead of other chinese shipyards?
052/052B Class Destroyers
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Re: DDG 052C Thread
Regarding DDG 052C, we take it that all the future batch of it all launch with the cold launch rotary VLS.
Is it possible in future(3-5yrs) that the cold launch will be replace by hot launch box VLS in any future refit? I think its possible but it will be costly.
Are PLAN probably taking up this option?
Regarding DDG 052C, we take it that all the future batch of it all launch with the cold launch rotary VLS.
Is it possible in future(3-5yrs) that the cold launch will be replace by hot launch box VLS in any future refit? I think its possible but it will be costly.
Are PLAN probably taking up this option?
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Re: DDG 052C Thread
Unless they designed the ships with hot launch vls in mind and installed all the venting or at least left room for them, then a refit will be very costly and time consuming, and may not really be worth it ultimately.
The PLAN no doubt would like a flexible cell based VLS like the mk41, but considering the HQ16 was their first cell based hot launch vls, it was probably optimistic to hope theu would have a mk41 equivilant so soon after.
Tbh, i think the 052c will likely remain as they are till retirement. They are pretty fine ships after all, and its not like the PLAN plan on doing that much long range ground attak in the future. And if they did, the varyag's air wing would make a far more cost effective means to blowing something up far from Chinese shores.
If the PLAN desperately need cruise missile launchers, im sure they can fit them on the J15, and in a worst case scanario, they can strip a few land based launchers on the 071 LPD and send that along.
Unless they designed the ships with hot launch vls in mind and installed all the venting or at least left room for them, then a refit will be very costly and time consuming, and may not really be worth it ultimately.
The PLAN no doubt would like a flexible cell based VLS like the mk41, but considering the HQ16 was their first cell based hot launch vls, it was probably optimistic to hope theu would have a mk41 equivilant so soon after.
Tbh, i think the 052c will likely remain as they are till retirement. They are pretty fine ships after all, and its not like the PLAN plan on doing that much long range ground attak in the future. And if they did, the varyag's air wing would make a far more cost effective means to blowing something up far from Chinese shores.
If the PLAN desperately need cruise missile launchers, im sure they can fit them on the J15, and in a worst case scanario, they can strip a few land based launchers on the 071 LPD and send that along.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Re: DDG 052C Thread
Can someone explain why hot launch is so much better than cold launch? I mean is weight that big of a factor?
Can someone explain why hot launch is so much better than cold launch? I mean is weight that big of a factor?
Last edited:
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Re: DDG 052C Thread
With hot launch, you could double or quad pack a cell with two or four missiles instead of one for cold launch. That gives you tge flexability to fit different missiles into the cell and could drastically increase your missile carrying capacity.
The other point is that square cells are more space efficient then round ones, so you could pack more square cells in the same space compared to round ones. Although this is only the case with HQ9 and S300 missiles, since cold launch does not automatically mean round cells. The Tor is a good example of a square celled cold launch missile.
With hot launch, you could double or quad pack a cell with two or four missiles instead of one for cold launch. That gives you tge flexability to fit different missiles into the cell and could drastically increase your missile carrying capacity.
The other point is that square cells are more space efficient then round ones, so you could pack more square cells in the same space compared to round ones. Although this is only the case with HQ9 and S300 missiles, since cold launch does not automatically mean round cells. The Tor is a good example of a square celled cold launch missile.
MwRYum
Major
Re: DDG 052C Thread
US experience in developing and using the MK41 VLS system would give China all the hint that modular hot-launch system have great merits, however should the design only officially certified just this year or last year, it'd still take time for their military-industrial complex to filter it down to make missiles (SAM, ASROC, ASM, LACM) fit to use this platform.
Hot launch VLS have the long slats as the vents, and the expected weight saving from cold- to hot-launch means conversion shouldn't be too difficult, so long the ship's desgin have upgrade potentials built into its design.
As for offensive punch, future's China carrier air group not too likely to carry the offensive punch until they solved the catapult take-off system - ski takeoff grossly limit the payload capacity of its carrier-borne fighter jets. That said, for the foreseeable future it's offensive punch would've to follow the modified version of the old Soviet doctrine - aircraft primary for air-defense while heavy cruise missiles do the attack work, paired with naval aviation's H-6 cruise missile platform and JH-7A strike fighter. And until 052C carries a modular VLS systems and in greater number - or with a successor class more in line with the Arleigh Burke class in design and performance - it'd better that it stay dedicated as air defense destroyer.
US experience in developing and using the MK41 VLS system would give China all the hint that modular hot-launch system have great merits, however should the design only officially certified just this year or last year, it'd still take time for their military-industrial complex to filter it down to make missiles (SAM, ASROC, ASM, LACM) fit to use this platform.
Hot launch VLS have the long slats as the vents, and the expected weight saving from cold- to hot-launch means conversion shouldn't be too difficult, so long the ship's desgin have upgrade potentials built into its design.
As for offensive punch, future's China carrier air group not too likely to carry the offensive punch until they solved the catapult take-off system - ski takeoff grossly limit the payload capacity of its carrier-borne fighter jets. That said, for the foreseeable future it's offensive punch would've to follow the modified version of the old Soviet doctrine - aircraft primary for air-defense while heavy cruise missiles do the attack work, paired with naval aviation's H-6 cruise missile platform and JH-7A strike fighter. And until 052C carries a modular VLS systems and in greater number - or with a successor class more in line with the Arleigh Burke class in design and performance - it'd better that it stay dedicated as air defense destroyer.
Ambivalent
Junior Member
maozedong
Banned Idiot
Re: DDG 052C Thread
you are right, if J-15 ski-jump take off, the combat capability only 1/2 of ground base fighters, just air to air combat capability. the other ground base Flanks,JH-7A just carry JY-62,C-801,but not for CJ-cruise missile, only H-6K can do it.
my oppinion is PLAN still "yelow water" navy,defence strategy between coastal and far-ocean, I even think China no need to build 10,000ton DDG now, until China owns second carrier, I think after Varyag in service, she still sail along china coastal for training.
052C with cold VLS is fine, compare to hot VLS, cold VlS has to take more space in the ship but more safety. such system is ok for China strategy now.
UK and Franch new DDG also 48 air defence missiles.
China no need to learn Japan now, Japan needs its DDG compact USN, to build the national air defence system, the US carrier protect Japan's war ship,and Japan to buy MK-41 system is so easy.
you are right, if J-15 ski-jump take off, the combat capability only 1/2 of ground base fighters, just air to air combat capability. the other ground base Flanks,JH-7A just carry JY-62,C-801,but not for CJ-cruise missile, only H-6K can do it.
my oppinion is PLAN still "yelow water" navy,defence strategy between coastal and far-ocean, I even think China no need to build 10,000ton DDG now, until China owns second carrier, I think after Varyag in service, she still sail along china coastal for training.
052C with cold VLS is fine, compare to hot VLS, cold VlS has to take more space in the ship but more safety. such system is ok for China strategy now.
UK and Franch new DDG also 48 air defence missiles.
China no need to learn Japan now, Japan needs its DDG compact USN, to build the national air defence system, the US carrier protect Japan's war ship,and Japan to buy MK-41 system is so easy.
Last edited:
Re: DDG 052C Thread
The only real benefit of hot launch is deck space and internal volume efficiency, which is a very hot commodity on a warship. This consideration probably trumps all the benefits of cold launch, which actually are not insubstantial themselves. Cold launch allows for much greater mediocrity in the quality of missiles such that the missiles in the worst case scenario would simply be ejected into the air, fail to ignite (or ignites improperly), and falls harmlessly into the ocean; whereas a misfire (restrained launch) in a hot launch cell requires the module to sustain the heat and energy of the missile's entire burnout duration. This may be a stronger consideration for PLAN and the Russian Navy than for the USN. Cold launch is also easier on the launcher itself because it doesn't have to repeatedly withstand the massive heat of individual launches. Cold launch can also be adapted to multi-pack missiles nearly as easily as hot launch. If you could design a cold launch module that came in compact square-shaped sizes, it would have the best of both worlds. But if it were easy, it probably would already have been done.
The only real benefit of hot launch is deck space and internal volume efficiency, which is a very hot commodity on a warship. This consideration probably trumps all the benefits of cold launch, which actually are not insubstantial themselves. Cold launch allows for much greater mediocrity in the quality of missiles such that the missiles in the worst case scenario would simply be ejected into the air, fail to ignite (or ignites improperly), and falls harmlessly into the ocean; whereas a misfire (restrained launch) in a hot launch cell requires the module to sustain the heat and energy of the missile's entire burnout duration. This may be a stronger consideration for PLAN and the Russian Navy than for the USN. Cold launch is also easier on the launcher itself because it doesn't have to repeatedly withstand the massive heat of individual launches. Cold launch can also be adapted to multi-pack missiles nearly as easily as hot launch. If you could design a cold launch module that came in compact square-shaped sizes, it would have the best of both worlds. But if it were easy, it probably would already have been done.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Re: DDG 052C Thread
Really? How would that work exactly?
Currently, with a cold launch module, even if square, you can pack as many missiles in the module as you like, but as soon as you trigger the launch, they are all flung out into the air at the same time. Not exactly ideal...
Really? How would that work exactly?
Currently, with a cold launch module, even if square, you can pack as many missiles in the module as you like, but as soon as you trigger the launch, they are all flung out into the air at the same time. Not exactly ideal...