052C/052D Class Destroyers

Radars now have "experience"?

What's next? Missiles have experience as well? Like, super-experienced Western missiles will not hit airliners anymore, unlike back then with Iran Air 655? Or experienced western bullets will magically search for the weakpoints of the enemy body-armor to kill the enemy soldier deader than inexperienced Chinese bullets?

Seriously. Stop that meme with "experience" and "[insert anything] traditions" here. Physics doesnt care about experience. What works just works. And what is better is just better.

AESA >>>>>>>> PESA

Insignius said:

Radars now have "experience"?

What's next? Missiles have experience as well? Like, super-experienced Western missiles will not hit airliners anymore, unlike back then with Iran Air 655? Or experienced western bullets will magically search for the weakpoints of the enemy body-armor to kill the enemy soldier deader than inexperienced Chinese bullets?

Seriously. Stop that meme with "experience" and "[insert anything] traditions" here. Physics doesnt care about experience. What works just works. And what is better is just better.

AESA >>>>>>>> PESA

Click to expand...

Straw man attacks are a sign of intellectual weakness, as is the tendency to dichotomize things into black and white. If I told you that one AESA could track 200 targets while another PESA could track 2,000 targets you would still be non-stop perseverating "better is just better". ROFLMAO

Iron Man said:

It's not really fair to compare a 7,500t warship to a 9,200t warship. But yes the Burke's overall capability is obviously greater than that of the 052D. As for the radar performance specifically, as I said before, there is really no way to tell from our perspective, and anyone trying to tell you something definitive one way or the other based on generalities alone is smoking crack.


Not that I know of, but there is technology that will massively enhance the capability of AESAs already coming down the pipeline, namely GaN (gallium nitride) that will replace standard GaAS (gallium arsenide) MMICs. This technology will increase the power output of individual MMICs by several times, e.g. 10W vs 50-80W or even more for a comparable MMIC. Probably every new military radar design going forward is going to use GaN instead of GaAs. The SPY-6 will use GaN and Raytheon's claim is that it will detect an object half as large at twice the distance compared to the SPY-1. If there is a "Type 346B" (055/A?) it will probably use GaN as well.

Click to expand...

Has China got the production technology for GaN ? ..

antiterror13 said:

Has China got the production technology for GaN ? ..

Click to expand...

Not sure, but China has been researching GaN since at least 2011, probably even earlier:


This paper suggests that Chinese GaN technology in 2011 was more than 5 years behind the US:


Here is a 2014 article talking about a successfully developed GaN MMIC, though I'm not sure if it is for military applications:

antiterror13 said:

Has China got the production technology for GaN ? ..

Click to expand...

if they do not already I imagine they will be able to quite soon.

Here is a link to a big non-classified document () from cetc 13th from their website () regarding their GaN modules (variants from L band to X band), and which directly states applications as being for APAR/AESA use as well as other rf systems, telemetry systems, and other general microwave applications. It's pretty obvious they are there as information for prospective customers so I imagine they were already able to produce them in practically large quantities.

The thing is I don't know if those modules they're showing are directly used for any in service radar systems, however even if those modules are more generic in nature I imagine there would be substantial overlap between producing generic APAR capable GaN modules, with a GaN module meant to be part of a specific radar system.

Also, I first found this site/document back in 2014 (https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/ch...lj-series-and-others.t6755/page-6#post-376733), so I imagine they would've made substantial progress since then in applying GaN technology to radar systems and improving upon it.
The problem is that we don't know which radar systems may be GaN and which are still GaA, and that's because we don't know if the Chinese military media will ever bother telling us. That is to say, I'm not confident if they would report on a new GaN radar system entering service and highlight the fact that it is GaN rather than GaA, because such a distinction is actually quite a fairly technical difference that most people probably won't understand.

Iron Man said:

Straw man attacks are a sign of intellectual weakness, as is the tendency to dichotomize things into black and white. If I told you that one AESA could track 200 targets while another PESA could track 2,000 targets you would still be non-stop perseverating "better is just better". ROFLMAO

Click to expand...

I would like to see your sources and citations on both numbers.

And I'm already calling BS if you quote ONI or any other western source on the number of Chinese radar capability.

Unsubstanciated meme-arguments like "experience" and "naval traditions" in discussions about hardware capabilities only deserve strawman answers.

Especially as this reeks of orientalist arrogance to assume that the US can always pump out the "Block 9000" variant of their crappy 1980s designs which is automatically a million times better than anything the dumb commie chinese can bring out in the year 2017 (and who are also seemingly incapable of upgrading their hard and software). All because they have "muh experience" and "muh naval traditions".

Insignius said:

Radars now have "experience"?

What's next? Missiles have experience as well? Like, super-experienced Western missiles will not hit airliners anymore, unlike back then with Iran Air 655? Or experienced western bullets will magically search for the weakpoints of the enemy body-armor to kill the enemy soldier deader than inexperienced Chinese bullets?

Seriously. Stop that meme with "experience" and "[insert anything] traditions" here. Physics doesnt care about experience. What works just works. And what is better is just better.

AESA >>>>>>>> PESA

Click to expand...

A thousand Thumbs up.... (Y)

DDG 173, Changsha The First 052D Destroyer Visiting A Foreign Country.

On June 18, a PLA Navy Task Force of Destroyer Changsha, Frigate Yuncheng (571) and Supply Ship Luomahu (964) is set forth to Baltic Sea conducting a joint naval exercise with Russia Navy.

A.Man said:

DDG 173, Changsha The First 052D Destroyer Visiting A Foreign Country.

On June 18, a PLA Navy Task Force of Destroyer Changsha, Frigate Yuncheng (571) and Supply Ship Luomahu (964) is set forth to Baltic Sea conducting a joint naval exercise with Russia Navy.

Click to expand...

Meanwhile, PLA Navy having other 3 task forces around the world:
Frigates 577 Huanggang, 578 Yangzhou and Supply Ship 966 Gaoyuhu in Gulf of Aden;
Destroyer 150 Changchun, Frigate 532 Jingzhou and Supply Ship 890 Chaohu in Indian Ocean;
Frigate 568 Hengyang, 569 Yulin and Supply Ship 963 Honghu in Pacific Ocean.



亚丁湾 577黄冈舰 578扬州舰 966高邮湖舰
印度洋150长春舰 532荆州舰 890巢湖舰
大洋洲568衡阳舰 569玉林舰 963洪湖舰
波罗的海 173长沙舰 571运城舰 964骆马湖舰深海里还有潜艇部队；

A.Man said:

DDG 173, Changsha The First 052D Destroyer Visiting A Foreign Country.

On June 18, a PLA Navy Task Force of Destroyer Changsha, Frigate Yuncheng (571) and Supply Ship Luomahu (964) is set forth to Baltic Sea conducting a joint naval exercise with Russia Navy.

Click to expand...

Would this mark 052D's first exercise and deployment overboard if they also plan to rotate for Aden anti-piracy mission?