052C/052D Class Destroyers

Lethe · Oct 10, 2017

Note that having hangar space for two helos doesn't mean that two helos always have to be onboard. For different missions one could carry submersible drones, airborne drones, potentially a single larger helicopter (Z-18) instead. Or just more stuff.

A frigate is typically understood to be a flexible asset able to operate independently or as part of a larger task force, contributing across the full range of possible mission scenarios. The flexibility that a large hangar offers in the modern and future environment seems well suited to that role, and hence I expect it to happen at some point, if not with 054B then with its successor.

AndrewS · Oct 10, 2017

Iron Man said:
Here the rest of us are debating between 15-20 and 20-30 055s while there you are talking about 60 055s. So yes, a mild chuckle escapes me. These reasons you give here are all just hand-waving blowhardisms that are neither here nor there, and certainly don't legitimize your outsized predictions about the 055.

Recent history in the numerous civilian sectors has demonstrated that China regularly thinks and plans on a very big scale.

And you haven't addressed the logic behind my prediction.

Namely that China has the strategic requirement for the world's largest navy and also the industrial/financial capacity to continue building 3 large destroyers every year.

abc123 · Oct 10, 2017

So, do you think that PLAN will stop at 18 Type 052D?

AndrewS · Oct 10, 2017

Jeff Head said:
Having two ASW helos available is a paramount capability...anywhere.

The PLAN, I am relatively certain, will, in the case of ever thinking that there might be an ASW danger...and contrary to what you may think, there is always that threat.

he US regularly has several LA F Light III or Virginia class subs at sea patrolling the western Pacific.

So, the PLAN will probably have two DDGs or FFGs, or one of each, at a minimum to ensure that they can keep two helos in the air.

That works...but only in so far as there is a single sub threat. What if the US is operating two subs in conjunction with one another for this very reason?

The PLAN has built earlier vessels with two helo capable...but only a couple. Now they are going to build a good number of Type 055s. This will help.

But, IMHO, you are going to find future FFGs and DDGs allowing for two for these very reasons.

Unless the land based ASW aircraft are already in the air and available at short notice, they may arrive too late.

Anyhow, lets just all hope and pray that all of these theories are not put to real life threat. That is the best we can hope for.

Land-based fixed-wing MPA aircraft should be readily available in the Western Pacific.

Just look at the distances and actual sea area, which means there is likely to be an aircraft nearby.

If there's a shortage of ASW platforms to prosecute possible submarine contacts, then it would be better to buy more MPA aircraft than field additional helicopters based on ships. Fixed-wing aircraft just give you more capability for less money.

AndrewS · Oct 10, 2017

abc123 said:
So, do you think that PLAN will stop at 18 Type 052D?

I think they've already moved entirely to the Type-55 from the Type-52D.

The acquisition cost difference is apparently 6 Billion RMB versus 5 Billion RMB, which is only a 20% increase. And a Type-55 has way more than a 20% increase in capability. And China can afford to continue building 3 ships per year.

And if the Type-52D was going to continue production, then why did Dalian switch to the Type-55?

It would have made more sense for Dalian to continue with Type-52D construction instead of switching to Type-55. It gets more VLS cells and ships into the water sooner.

And remember that Jiangnan will be launching the first two Type-55 anyway, so why couldn't Jiangnan build the other 2 Type-55 as well?

It would work out cheaper and the delay would only be about 1 year later. Plus it's not like this delay would make a huge difference.

asif iqbal · Oct 10, 2017

Andrew your thinking is totally wrong

If you have to provide Type 055 for twin helicopter operations you are seriously using a very expensive form of ASW

The Type 052C/D should have been optimised for dual helicopter operations

This would mean 6 x Type 052C and 18 x Type 052D would carry 48 helicopter capacity

Instead it's just 24, to add another 24 you need 12 x Type 055 billion dollar CG

Not good use of funds

If you think DDG is not a Ocean going vessel for high intensity then rethink your naval knowledge

AndrewS · Oct 10, 2017

Lethe said:
Note that having hangar space for two helos doesn't mean that two helos always have to be onboard. For different missions one could carry submersible drones, airborne drones, potentially a single larger helicopter (Z-18) instead. Or just more stuff.

A frigate is typically understood to be a flexible asset able to operate independently or as part of a larger task force, contributing across the full range of possible mission scenarios. The flexibility that a large hangar offers in the modern and future environment seems well suited to that role, and hence I expect it to happen at some point, if not with 054B then with its successor.

Yes, in the future, we're going to see a requirement for a lot more airborne and seaborne assets deployed from ships.

But the key point I'm trying to make is that fixed-wing aircraft are just more efficient and effective than rotary-wing helicopters.

So for ships deployed in the Western Pacific, fixed wing aircraft from land bases provide more capability for less money than embarked helicopters.

AndrewS · Oct 10, 2017

asif iqbal said:
Andrew your thinking is totally wrong

If you have to provide Type 055 for twin helicopter operations you are seriously using a very expensive form of ASW

The Type 052C/D should have been optimised for dual helicopter operations

This would mean 6 x Type 052C and 18 x Type 052D would carry 48 helicopter capacity

Instead it's just 24, to add another 24 you need 12 x Type 055 billion dollar CG

Not good use of funds

If you think DDG is not a Ocean going vessel for high intensity then rethink your naval knowledge

No.

In a high-intensity conflict today, China's navy will likely stay within the first island chain, possibly venturing out into the second island chain. These areas are all well within range of land based aircraft. China would be very foolish to sent its Type-52D beyond air cover from the mainland, which would include support from AWACs, fighters, MPA and land-based cruise missiles.

In the future, if China wants to operate further, there will be plenty of Type-55 which are designed for long-range operations with dual helicopters and the greater fuel capacity to match. Plus there will be carriers for airborne support.

The money spend on making the Type-52D dual helicopter capable is better spent on land-based MPA aircraft.

Jura The idiot · Oct 10, 2017

Iron Man said:
ROFLMAO

I've noticed the predictions by
AndrewS
are the highest posted on the SDF, as in Jul 29, 2017

AndrewS said:
What is the endgame?

At the moment, I think they're working to an end-strength of roughly matching the USN. So after another 20 years, it will end up something like this

6+ Aircraft Carriers
90+ Large DDG Type-55/52 (3 per year)
60+ FFG Type-54 (2 per year)
60+ OPV (one off)

But I imagine that they revise the desired force structure every 5 years, according to how much the economy has grown (as military spending tracks at approximately 2% of GDP).

So a 7% growth rate over the next 5 years results in an overall increase of 40%, in which case they would revise the desired end-strength upwards.

it's going to be very interesting to follow this game, considering for example Yesterday at 4:02 PM

Jura said:
not sure what to say
The U.S. Navy will start losing its largest surface combatants in 2020
13 hours ago
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

etc.

AndrewS · Oct 10, 2017

Jura said:
I've noticed the predictions by
AndrewS
are the highest posted on the SDF, as in Jul 29, 2017

it's going to be very interesting to follow this game, considering for example Yesterday at 4:02 PM
etc.

Yes, I recognise that my predictions are the highest. But does that mean they are wrong?

The national security council in the US is being asked to contemplate a world where China grows economically 3x larger than the USA on 2040, which is just 23 years in the future.

But time will tell

052C/052D Class Destroyers

Lethe

Captain

AndrewS

Brigadier

abc123

Junior Member

AndrewS

Brigadier

AndrewS

Brigadier

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General

AndrewS

Brigadier

AndrewS

Brigadier

Jura The idiot

General

AndrewS

Brigadier