052/052B Class Destroyers

Re: DDG 052C Thread

hkbc said:

Hi tphuang,

Can you elaborate? My take below

The current PLAN vessels seem to have either steam, CODOG or CODAD plants. I don't think CODAD is on the cards.

To stick with the CODOG arrangement of the 52C and signifacantly upscale the tonnage the ship will need more powerful GT and Diesels to maintain peak and cruise speeds. The current GTs are rated at ~22300shp each and the Diesels ~4400shp each. Don't think the diesels will be a problem but the GTs will need to be in the ~30000shp region, otherwise it won't be a much bigger ship unless its going to be a lot slower than the current vessels.

They could go COGAG with 4 smaller (at least 16000shp) GTs but that will need significant infrastructure and layout changes for the extra pair of GT exhausts and reduction gearboxes plus more tankerage for the more thirsty GTs (cf the diesels) to maintain cruise range.

So for a bigger ship a GT in the latest LM2500 or RR MT30 power class is needed to stay with CODOG or a significant re-design with at least RR spey sized Marine GT for a COGAG arrangement.

Can you shed some light on what the domestic gas turbine projects are aiming to produce?

Thanks

Click to expand...

alright, I don't want to self promote too much, but this thing I posted a while back sheds some light on some of the gas turbine projects they have. Check the last post

That would be a smart move. The PLAN vessels need a more balanced and layered coverage in air defense.

Click to expand...

In many ways, they really need something like RAM too, because HH-7 simply takes too much space and has to rely on CLOS guidance. It's amazing how Raytheon developed such a reliable interceptor that takes up so little space. Until then, Type 730 has to do the job.

As a "modern" concept, I have a nagging feeling that this slap-huge-arrays-into-superstructure concept has a dead end. The height you can put the arrays limit their ability to peer down the horizon, and you cannot put arrays further up without affecting the ship's roll balance.

I thought what I see in the 054A maybe a better way to go. The tracking radar is smaller but fitted much higher on a second mast in the ship. Though the Type 364 radar now is a mechanically steering one, its not hard to see if you can put a SAMPSON style ESA radar on top of the second mast, which then can be physically rotated and steered to different directions.

You probably do not have the sheer power and range of the large arrays, but you get better peer down the horizon ability needed to counter antiship missiles and low flying aircraft.

Click to expand...

I do think in many ways 054A concept wise is probably the most advanced ship in PLAN (especially if its followup variant use what I think will be used). It's not as big of a problem on 052C since they put SR-64 on the front mast, giving it theoretically a even farther radar horizon than 054A.

Re: DDG 052C Thread

tphuang said:

alright, I don't want to self promote too much, but this thing I posted a while back sheds some light on some of the gas turbine projects they have. Check the last post

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link having looked through it I think we might have to agree to disagree about propulsion not been the biggest issue with the PLAN making a vessel significantly larger than a 52C since it looks like they'll need to use a COGAG arrangement which would rule out just upscaling the existing design.

Re: DDG 052C Thread

Personally I would rather have a bunch of 052Cs running about instead of a Chinese carrier.

In my opinion, its good to wait. The 052C design is good but not perfect. Following previous trends and known design philosophies, I expect the 052C to be followed up by a more refined design. My most obvious candidate is a mating of the 052C design with the VLS launchers seen in the 054A.

Re: DDG 052C Thread

Oh, Goose Chase?

Re: DDG 052C Thread

Some recent texts have raised a valid point that I have overlooked before. So, my question is: where are the fire control radars/target illuminators for the hq9 missiles on the 52c destroyer? Can someone point out such systems on a picture of the destroyer?

Re: DDG 052C Thread

If it isen't intergrated to the Phassed array plates (similar ways as in Fort) then there isen't such systems onboard 052C. Correct me if I'm wrong but does Track-Via-Missile guidance system (supposedly what the hq-9 have) even need a target illuminators?

Re: DDG 052C Thread

While theoretically possible that the phased arrays are used for that - i find it unlikely, as that'd mean they work in a wavelength not really best suited for long range surveillance. When talked about the arrays, it is usually said they're in S band.

As for tracking via missile, i don't see the guidance radar.TVM still needs one to illuminate the target, though, unlike pure sarh, it doesn't need to be continuous wave illumination. Still, it would be a fairly large radar plate, like we see with patriot and/or s300 batteries.

Re: DDG 052C Thread

Totoro said:

While theoretically possible that the phased arrays are used for that - i find it unlikely, as that'd mean they work in a wavelength not really best suited for long range surveillance. When talked about the arrays, it is usually said they're in S band.

As for tracking via missile, i don't see the guidance radar.TVM still needs one to illuminate the target, though, unlike pure sarh, it doesn't need to be continuous wave illumination. Still, it would be a fairly large radar plate, like we see with patriot and/or s300 batteries.

Click to expand...

it's my belief that HH-9 uses different guidance system from HQ-9. I think it's active and it gets mid-course guidance from the MFRs.

Re: DDG 052C Thread

Gollevainen said:

If it isen't intergrated to the Phassed array plates (similar ways as in Fort) then there isen't such systems onboard 052C. Correct me if I'm wrong but does Track-Via-Missile guidance system (supposedly what the hq-9 have) even need a target illuminators?

Click to expand...

There is actually two kinds of TVM, one that uses illuminators from the ground and another, with the missile itself. It is odd that if you have an emitter on board why not just go autonomous ARH directly. The answer is that with autonomous ARH, the only source of information the missile has is from the seeker, while TVM allows you to consolidate and integrate data from various sources working with a more capable computer on the ground, all of which can make it more accurate, decoy and ECM resistant.

There has been photos of the panel structure behind the array, and none of which suggests there is room or provision for separate illuminators within the panel. There basically what appears to be four emitters on each corner of the array, with a center array shaped like a diamond divided into four sections. Looks like a monopulse layout. Without a separate illuminator, if the radar goes into prioritized target tracking and illumination, it cannot multitask for volume search and track while scan.

The Fort, RIF-M has another radar doing the volume search while the main radar controls the missiles. Dunno if that is possible on the 052C, unless you suspect that spherical radar on the top mast is an SR-64 like on the other ships. On the 51C, you have the Sea Eagle/Fregat and the SR64 that will cover for the search and track tasks, while the Tombstone handles the missile fire control. Fregat (and assuming the Chinese copies too) should have track while search functions, given that it is equipped on the ships with Orekhs, and the Orekhs appear to be dedicated prioritized target tracking and illumination FCRs. On the 054A, the Sea Eagle and the SR64 should be updating volume search and track while scan, while the Orekh clones handle direct FCR.

Re: DDG 052C Thread

COGAS could be an interesting development for follow-on designs, as waste heat from gas turbines can be used to fire up steam turbines for additional power gen.