052C/052D Class Destroyers
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
What I would call the money shot.
Very nice lines indeed...but we all already knew that. It's just nice to see them so eloquently displayed.
IMHO, that's the best shot so far.172 again.
What I would call the money shot.
Very nice lines indeed...but we all already knew that. It's just nice to see them so eloquently displayed.
volleyballer
Banned Idiot
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Hey Jeff, could you translate what those signal flags mean for me? Thanks!
Hey Jeff, could you translate what those signal flags mean for me? Thanks!
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
I think, that is simply the ship's number, 172.
I think, that is simply the ship's number, 172.
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Naval Maritime Signal Flag Code Thread on Sinodefence Forum
The entire manual is linked there. It's a great source and tool here on SD.
You may need, depending on the flags used, both the signal flags and the Manuevering Codes (In Chapter 2 of the manual) to decipher it...all available at that thread.
In this case, the signal looks very simple...I'll let you do the leg work.
Use this thread...it was placed here on SD so any member could do this themselves.
Naval Maritime Signal Flag Code Thread on Sinodefence Forum
The entire manual is linked there. It's a great source and tool here on SD.
You may need, depending on the flags used, both the signal flags and the Manuevering Codes (In Chapter 2 of the manual) to decipher it...all available at that thread.
In this case, the signal looks very simple...I'll let you do the leg work.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
It's definitely not as state of the art as Zumwalt. I don't think any major warship is at the moment either deployed or even in the design/planning phase. Even the 055 is not comparable to Zumwalt but at parity to the King Sejong/Flt IIA or even flt III Burkes which are all extremely capable ships.
I would say capability wise the 052D is probably closest in parity with the Burke Flt II but the ASW is probably the weakest link in the ship when compared to the Burkes. I do not believe the sonar is as good as the SQS-53XX on the Burkes nor the single helo anywhere close to the effectiveness of the dual LAMPS III Seahawks.
I do however need to caution you that comparing each individual weapon systems vis a vis each other is often an exercise in futility especially when it comes to complex systems like a destroyer. In the real world it's almost meaningless because you have 1000 other variables which makes a weapon system effective that is not necessarily technology related or driven. You have to talk about crew effectiveness, organizational aspects of warfare, operational readiness, experience, organic components and other support systems available i.e C4ISR etc....
I've noticed you have a habit of doing that. On certain weapon system it is totally fine to compare like say comparing an assault rifle, optics, missiles etc but complex system you have to almost compare individual components and the overall effectiveness of the entire entity.
It's definitely not as state of the art as Zumwalt. I don't think any major warship is at the moment either deployed or even in the design/planning phase. Even the 055 is not comparable to Zumwalt but at parity to the King Sejong/Flt IIA or even flt III Burkes which are all extremely capable ships.
I would say capability wise the 052D is probably closest in parity with the Burke Flt II but the ASW is probably the weakest link in the ship when compared to the Burkes. I do not believe the sonar is as good as the SQS-53XX on the Burkes nor the single helo anywhere close to the effectiveness of the dual LAMPS III Seahawks.
I do however need to caution you that comparing each individual weapon systems vis a vis each other is often an exercise in futility especially when it comes to complex systems like a destroyer. In the real world it's almost meaningless because you have 1000 other variables which makes a weapon system effective that is not necessarily technology related or driven. You have to talk about crew effectiveness, organizational aspects of warfare, operational readiness, experience, organic components and other support systems available i.e C4ISR etc....
I've noticed you have a habit of doing that. On certain weapon system it is totally fine to compare like say comparing an assault rifle, optics, missiles etc but complex system you have to almost compare individual components and the overall effectiveness of the entire entity.
Last edited:
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
It's kind of pointless to talk what is better if you don't have anything to rate the 052D.
The design and role of the 052D is closer to the Burke than of the Zumwalt - which is more a stealthy strike platform than an air defence ship.
The adventage of the 052D would the AESA radar and the wide-range of anti-ship missiles and two different CIWSs , while the Burke is able to carry alot more missiles and can use the extremly capable and well tested AEGIS system.
It's kind of pointless to talk what is better if you don't have anything to rate the 052D.
The design and role of the 052D is closer to the Burke than of the Zumwalt - which is more a stealthy strike platform than an air defence ship.
The adventage of the 052D would the AESA radar and the wide-range of anti-ship missiles and two different CIWSs , while the Burke is able to carry alot more missiles and can use the extremly capable and well tested AEGIS system.
Re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Lovely chart. I think I might get a Zulu flag for the bedroom, Useful to raise it when lighting the red lantern is not an option
Come to think of it, might get a Romeo for Mrs Sampan when she's driving!
Lovely chart. I think I might get a Zulu flag for the bedroom, Useful to raise it when lighting the red lantern is not an option
Come to think of it, might get a Romeo for Mrs Sampan when she's driving!
