052C/052D Class Destroyers
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
With others countries possible have a feeling for shipbuilding plans as USA do with CRS reports to 30 years ofc at this time the numbers are in general different but close.
China provide nothing so with her u can look max to up 5 years for to be reasonnable in more despite they build cheaper her budget for a big army in personnel is enough limited and they are not for construstion the rate as USSR do... far far...
They build each year these last : 1 Yuan, almost 1 SSN, 2/3 DDG, 2/3 FFG, some year a LPD it is important but not enormous.
She can' t rivalized with USA before minimum 2050 and again no sure.
They don' t have CV CATOBAR, Strategic Bombers almost no Tankers, EW aircrafts, very few big Cargos... and on 2300 Fighter-bombers remains 1000 J-7-A-5- old J-8 few capable no BVR capable, small weapons load and range, she is 2nd the true is.
China provide nothing so with her u can look max to up 5 years for to be reasonnable in more despite they build cheaper her budget for a big army in personnel is enough limited and they are not for construstion the rate as USSR do... far far...
They build each year these last : 1 Yuan, almost 1 SSN, 2/3 DDG, 2/3 FFG, some year a LPD it is important but not enormous.
She can' t rivalized with USA before minimum 2050 and again no sure.
They don' t have CV CATOBAR, Strategic Bombers almost no Tankers, EW aircrafts, very few big Cargos... and on 2300 Fighter-bombers remains 1000 J-7-A-5- old J-8 few capable no BVR capable, small weapons load and range, she is 2nd the true is.
Last edited:
The point is that the targets and timeline you stated earlier are on the very ambitious end of the spectrum and can be reasonably described as both unrealistic and unnecessary for the purposes stated.
Obviously nobody knows for sure what will happen in the future but I think the commonly estimated 20-30 years for the PRC to achieve military technology parity with the US is a fair assessment. Effective military deterrence by the PRC around its periphery against any and all opponents will likely be achieved a few years before technological parity while military dominance or control will likely be achieved some years after.
What we can do is project China's military budget in 15 years time, given reasonable economic growth. That has to be done when you have weapons programmes that take 10 years to come to fruition,
And the key requirement again is the Western Pacific, not global power projection which would need those CATOBAR CVs, Strategic Bombers, Tankers, Transport aircraft etc that you mention.
After 15 years, it will be 2031, and depending on how China's economy, and overall socioeconomic and socio-political situation fares over the next decade and a half, I think it would be just as presumptuous to suggest that China's military industry and overall military capability may be able to achieve parity in the ways you described, as it is to suggest that such a prospect is unrealistic.
Remember, 15 years ago in 2001 the idea of even developing and producing domestic AEW&C, stealth fighters, aegis type destroyers, frigates, carriers, BVR missiles, PGMs, UAVs and UCAVs, all at once, would have seemed like pies in the skies.
Obviously the rate of advancement in technology and capability over the last 15 years does not mean that the rate of advancement in the next 15 years will be as fast, for all sorts of reasons (it may well be slower, or it might even be faster than the last 15 years)... but overall I think Andrew's projection is not excessively over-ambitious or unrealistic, unless the US or other powers manage to develop as of yet unforeseen game changing leap ahead technologies that China is unable to develop effective equivalents or counters for.
I think "80-90" Aegis-type destroyers is unrealistic in the short term but achievable in the medium term. In the long term nobody can make any reasonable predictions, but I think at least until the middle of this century China will not be a match for the US in overall capability, assuming neither country collapses or experiences a massive economic depression; this is not out of the realm of possibility for either country IMO. I have always thought that the banks and Wall Street are the biggest threats to US national security, not terrorism or major countries. /rant off
In any case, assuming the PLAN continues construction of Type 052D at a rate of ~2/year and 055 at a rate of 1/year starting this year, China will have by
2020: ~26 052C/D + 4 055
2030: ~46 052C/D/E + 14 055/A
2040: ~64 052C/D/E + 24 055/A
But note that numbers are not equivalent to US warships, as the Arleigh Burke is about 1/3 larger and perhaps more than 1/3 more capable than the 052D, and the 055 will be about as capable or slightly more capable than the Arleigh Burke.
In any case, assuming the PLAN continues construction of Type 052D at a rate of ~2/year and 055 at a rate of 1/year starting this year, China will have by
2020: ~26 052C/D + 4 055
2030: ~46 052C/D/E + 14 055/A
2040: ~64 052C/D/E + 24 055/A
But note that numbers are not equivalent to US warships, as the Arleigh Burke is about 1/3 larger and perhaps more than 1/3 more capable than the 052D, and the 055 will be about as capable or slightly more capable than the Arleigh Burke.
It doesn't make sense for China to produce ~64 or even ~46 052C/D/E. China is in the processing of catching up both in quantity and quality. 052C/D/E are decent modern destroyers, but may not be good enough for China in the 2040's.
A better destroyer structure will consider the balance and technology advancement in the next 25 years. In that sense, I would say by the 2040's, a more balanced structure would be 24-36 052C/D/E + 24-36 055/A + 024 DDG(X), assuming the same total number as above. Here I assume DDG(x) would the next generation destroyers replacing 052x, displacing 9k+ tons.
A couple points. First, who in their wildest dreams could've predicted in say 2000 that the PLA would be able to surpass Russia in conventional military power in 25 years? (I don't think there'll be any doubt by 2025 whether the PLA is superior to the VVS) 35 years is a long time, and if the China can surpass Russia in 25, I think it's quite likely that China can surpass the U.S. at least in the Westpac in 35.
Second, great nations don't fall from without, they fall from within. The Americans' biggest threat was always themselves, as it is for China.
Second, great nations don't fall from without, they fall from within. The Americans' biggest threat was always themselves, as it is for China.
I agree with weig2000 -- at this point I find it a little bit unlikely that 052D (or 052E) production will reach the numbers suggested. Of course, I also agree that 80-90 aegis type destroyers will not be reached anywhere in the short term (and I think it would be dangerous to automatically aim for such a number of ships to begin with -- China's navy should adopt the force composition most suitable for itself).
If anything there are rumblings that we may see 055 production ramp up faster than previously predicted, with three shipyards (JNCX, DL and HPLX) all capable of producing 055s as well as 052Ds for a while.
Making my own prediction, I think it is likely that post 2020, annual 055 launching will either be equal to or exceed annual 052D (or 052E) launches. And I think making specific numerical predictions beyond 2030 is almost pointless.
Of course, if we're looking at the overall Chinese Navy surface combatant force in comparison with any other navy such as the USN, we have to take into account frigates, including 054As which are continuing production, but also its expected successor which will likely begin production before 2020 as well.