052C/052D Class Destroyers

Biscuits said:

The Darings simply doesn't seem like much of an asset at all. A 054A receiving linked information from a bigger ship could probably do similarly. Both have too few missiles to ward off determined attacks.

Click to expand...

Seriously? You know, comparing ships just by cells is almost almost a kind of internet illness.
Again: if you come under determined attack, no one will let you use your dozens of missiles. Most countries simply don't have sufficient ascm stocks to waste them this way.
If anything, Daring is comparable/arguably superior to current Burke in fending off real world low-flying ASCM strikes(worse against other threats, though). Both against itself and against its group. Simply because it is fine-tuned against exactly to provide area defence against them.
Comparing it with 054A, which can reliably incapacitated by any typical anti-ship strike package(air or ship launched) and is incapable of performing serious area defence, is but a joke.
Comparing Darings with 052D is perfecly fine, but 054A?

With regards to several of the comments above,

I have heard other numbers like 12 Type 055, or 8 Type 071 several times. I just do not know what will happen but we will find it out soon enough.

Comparing ships just in terms of displacement is kinda cheap, but it is a decent rule of thumb when both navies have similar technological levels.

Some people here also seem to be confused with LHDs vs LPDs. China has a decent amount of LPDs but no LHDs as of yet. We are talking about something like a Mistral or one of the South Korean/Japanese helicopter carriers. Let alone ships as competent as the US America-class which is close to the Kuznetsov-class in displacement.

I think China needs to have two carrier classes similar to what happened in WWII: fleet carriers and escort carriers. Contrary to current Chinese designs, I think both ships be equipped with catapults in the long run. The escort carriers would have a lighter UCAV/helicopter component, while the fleet carriers would have a heavier figher-bomber/UCAV component.

The UCAVs would be the 'eyes' of the fleet. While the helicopters could either be used for within range ASW, land/ship attacks, or troop deployment and SAR. The fighter-bombers would be used for strategic or tactical attacks on large targets. Air defense would be done with ship based missile defenses and either the UCAVs or the fighter-bombers.

asif iqbal said:

Does it?

Click to expand...

Then why didn't the Chinese Navy go with a VLS specification like the much smaller Mk41 or Mk57?

But there may well be a lag until larger missiles are deployed.

this one is interesting:

AndrewS said:

A Type-52D Universal VLS cell has almost THREE times the internal volume of a Burke Mk41 Cell.

That comes is useful particularly for large long-range SAMs and ASMs

Click to expand...

taking 28" width ()
and 25 ft length of the Mk 41 Strike module (),
the volume would be 0.5842*0.5842*7.62 m which is about 2.6 cubic meters;

3*2.6 = 7.8; divided by 0.85 squared (I've read here the diameter of the Chinese UVLS is 85 cm): 3*2.6/0.85^2 is about 10.8 (almost eleven meters in length)

is it true Iron

Iron Man said:

The

Click to expand...

?

Jura said:

this one is interesting:

taking 28" width (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)
and 25 ft length of the Mk 41 Strike module (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

),
the volume would be 0.5842*0.5842*7.62 m which is about 2.6 cubic meters;

3*2.6 = 7.8; divided by 0.85 squared (I've read here the diameter of the Chinese UVLS is 85 cm): 3*2.6/0.85^2 is about 10.8 (almost eleven meters in length)

is it true Iron

?

Click to expand...

More accurate figures are as follows:

UVLS Strike: 0.85 x 0.85 x 9 = 7.78 M2
Mk41 Strike: 0.5842 x 0.5842 x 7.62 = 2.59 M2

That is 2.5x larger already.

There is a Milspec in Chinese that is available.

And remember that a larger cell is generally more efficient at using all the available volume.

AndrewS said:

More accurate figures are as follows:

UVLS Strike: 0.85 x 0.85 x 9 = 7.78 M2
Mk41 Strike: 0.5842 x 0.5842 x 7.62 = 2.59 M2

That is 2.5x larger already.

There is a Milspec in Chinese that is available.

And remember that a larger cell is generally more efficient at using all the available volume.

Click to expand...

LOL the power of the third power

by the way I've always liked the third power dependence of a shell weight on its caliber, now randomly picked

8"/45 (20.3 cm) Mark 6

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

AP shell weighing 118 kg, and picked some 12": not randomly, but to be from the same era;

(12/8)^3 is 27/8 so without looking one would expect SOMETHING LIKE 3200/8 = 400 kilos, and ...

12"/50 (30.5 cm) Mark 7

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

AP: 394.6 kg

LOL!

Type 052DL at JNCX

From East Pendulum's tweet.




This was during the visit of the cruiser Varyag and the destroyer Admiral Panteleyev at Qingdao.


This is one of the photos that makes you wonder what they are talking about. Or you want to meme in your own dialog. The crew of Destroyer 117 Xining acted as hosts for the Russians.

yankeesama about the current status and the variants of this class.

Klon said:

yankeesama

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

about the current status and the variants of this class.

Click to expand...

Do you have a summary for our members who don't speak English? It is against forum rules to provide a link in a foreign language without at least summarizing the details in English.

Below is the relevant forum regulation (Version 3.3, 12142017), under section "GENERAL RULES", paragraph two:

This is an English language forum. You may post in a any language, however provide an English translation for any non-English post and any links posted.

Click to expand...