052C/052D Class Destroyers

Lethe said:

will certainly offer more than 25% additional capability.

Click to expand...

How many missions, which type 052D realistically can't perform, 055 can?

Of course bigger hull is better, but justifiably, how much better it is?
Are these types of missions really required from every single destroyer in the fleet?
Will this superiority make much difference, justifying costs?

Lethe said:

I mean that 055 is unlikely to require >25% more crew than 052D, while it will certainly offer more than 25% additional capability. Unless crew requirements for 052X can be brought down significantly, it will offer comparatively poor capability:crew ratio.

Of course 022 and 056 suffer from the same problem, where an 054 frigate (~160 crew) delivers more capability than two 056s (2x ~80 crew) or four 022s (4x ~40 crew). So long as the required number of hulls can be maintained, big ships deliver more bang for buck, in large part because crew requirements do not scale linearly with capability. This relationship becomes ever more important as wages increase and personnel costs become the single largest input into total lifecycle cost.

Click to expand...

The crew of a 022 is more like 15, not 40. In any case, bigger is not always better; this fact should be considered to be empirically true without any further evidence necessary besides the fact that the PLAN is producing masses of ships in multiple classes of ships. Besides being cheaper, there are many logistical, tactical and even strategic reasons why more smaller ships are better than fewer larger ships. For example, two 052Xs provide far superior offensive and defensive area coverage, increase deployment options, and represent less eggs in one basket to an enemy force, compared to a single 055. While larger ships may provide (marginally) more bang for the buck than smaller ships, the operational needs for smaller but more numerous ships far outweighs whatever small financial gains come from fewer larger ships.

Gloire_bb said:

How many missions, which type 052D realistically can't perform, 055 can?

Of course bigger hull is better, but justifiably, how much better it is?

Click to expand...

Estimated 055 vs. 052D/X capability gains, from largest to smallest:

Gains significantly above Cost
Land Attack: +100% (or more)
Anti-Ballistic Missile: +100% (or more)
Fleet Command/Coordination: +75%
Anti-Ship: +75%

Gains roughly in line with cost
Anti-Submarine Warfare: +50%
Anti-Air: +50%

Gains significantly below cost
Showing the Flag: +25%
Anti-Piracy: +25%
Humanitarian Assistance, Disaster Relief: +25%

Are these types of missions really required from every single destroyer in the fleet?

Click to expand...

No. You could build a ship with the same or even better ASW capability than 055 for much less, and there is good reason to do so. The real question is whether it makes sense to build a big expensive Aegis ship and another, somewhat smaller Aegis-style ship.

Iron Man said:

The crew of a 022 is more like 15, not 40. In any case, bigger is not always better; this fact should be considered to be empirically true without any further evidence necessary besides the fact that the PLAN is producing masses of ships in multiple classes of ships.

Click to expand...

Until very recently PLAN has been a capital-poor nation with masses of low wage labour to draw on. As circumstances change, the types of ships being built change. Type 022 belongs to the past, and Type 055 to the future. The rest are somewhere in between.

Besides being cheaper, there are many logistical, tactical and even strategic reasons why more smaller ships are better than fewer larger ships. For example, two 052Xs provide far superior offensive and defensive area coverage, increase deployment options, and represent less eggs in one basket to an enemy force, compared to a single 055. While larger ships may provide (marginally) more bang for the buck than smaller ships, the operational needs for smaller but more numerous ships far outweighs whatever small financial gains come from fewer larger ships.

Click to expand...

This is true to a certain extent -- and then it isn't. If you have enough ships, then you have enough ships. There is a reason the US Navy does not consist of 1000 3000-ton frigates despite their "far superior offensive and defensive area coverage, increase deployment options, and represent less eggs in one basket to an enemy force". Indeed, while most nations are scraping the bottom of the barrel just to afford the minimum number of ships required to maintain peacetime deployments and so favour almost anything that reduces per-unit cost, US Navy studies have repeatedly demonstrated the value proposition of larger combatants and it is this which has shaped the fleet over generations. Of course can reasonably argue that today's US Navy has swung too far in this direction and that it is in dire need of a modest frigate like the 054 series, but then I am not only referring to the excesses of the post-Cold War era, but to the preceding era that produced designs like Spruance, Arleigh Burke, and FFG-7 -- which, despite its domestic image, was not a small or particularly modest design in the global context of the time.

Lethe said:

Estimated 055 vs. 052D/X capability gains, from largest to smallest

Click to expand...

Most of the things you've mentioned are quantitative, not qualitive. I.E. 052D can successfully perform the same tasks, because it essentially has more or less the same mission equipment, and it is also a full-scale ocean going warship.

Qualitive differences are expected flagship facilities (which is a huge addition, but is unrequired on every single ship), possible AA flagship capability(control node with enhanced sensor suite) and speculated ABM capability (which isn't exactly 100% or more if Chinese navy intends to get cooperative engagement capability).
None of these justifies replacement of cheaper class, which can be build faster, in greater numbers and in more places.

But even this is questionable: Slight upgrade of 052D brings most of the same to the table(including size of VLS array, if it's so important). Chinese naval budget isn't Reagan era American one, snd even then CSGN was eaten by Ticos, and Ticos were eaten by endless Burkes.

Gloire_bb said:

flagship facilities (which is a huge addition, but is unrequired on every single ship)\

Click to expand...

Not sure if this concept exists for the PLAN. Command suites aboard PLAN vessels are all joint task force-capable but sized for small, large, or extra large. The only difference seems to be quantitative. In other words, practically all PLAN vessels are fleet command-capable; they differ only in the number of ships in the fleet to be commanded.

jobjed said:

Not sure if this concept exists for the PLAN.

Click to expand...

It isn't about concept, it's about necessary space and communication/c&c equipment.
Basically, light cruiser-sized warship is insufficient if not specifically fitted, and equipment is both redundant and expensive.
Type 055 is quite likely to have it(it lacks some traditional external features like VLR radio sets, but no one cares since the end of CW).

Gloire_bb said:

It isn't about concept, it's about necessary space and communication/c&c equipment.
Basically, light cruiser-sized warship is insufficient if not specifically fitted, and equipment is both redundant and expensive.
Type 055 is quite likely to have it(it lacks some traditional external features like VLR radio sets, but no one cares since the end of CW).

Click to expand...

Could you provide a list of the requisite equipment and why they're necessary?

jobjed said:

Could you provide a list of the requisite equipment and why they're necessary?

Click to expand...

Extra spaces to fill in flag officers and staff, intelligence accumulation(plotting), command&control facilities, cooperative engagement node equipment.
Furthermore, larger aviation space and hangers are desirable.

Gloire_bb said:

Extra spaces to fill in flag officers and staff, intelligence accumulation(plotting), command&control facilities, cooperative engagement node equipment.
Furthermore, larger aviation space and hangers are desirable.

Click to expand...

I'd be interested specifically in

Gloire_bb said:

communication/c&c equipment.

Click to expand...

from your post 36 minutes ago
I mean what particular "communication/c&c equipment" regular ships wouldn't have these days?
(it's kind of obvious more beds are needed if the brass may arrive)