052C/052D Class Destroyers

One way I was thinking is to redesign both helo deck and hanger so it will fit Z-20. If you eliminate the raised spine on the hanger if you are retiring Ka-28, you can fit two Z-9C as alternative. Reworking the hanger let's you exchange the Type 730 CIWS with a 24 missile HHQ-10 and some SATCOMs.

If you are keeping the hanger as is, you might be able to fit 2 x 8 U-VLS but set the position sideways. Or 1 x 8 U-VLS if set normal. This will depend on the ship's center of gravity.

Tam said:

You do get the ability to use quad pack missiles so your total missile count will greatly increase. 32 U-VLS cells we can configure to 24 HHQ-9 and 32 quad pack SAM for example.

Click to expand...

Not sure about the 555 things. It may not happen at all... Anyway, if the 052C refit goes for the U-VLS, I personally prefer the 32+16 configuration and the hangar should be moved toward the centerline while adding a 24-cell HQ-10 launcher on the top.

blindsight said:

Not sure about the 555 things. It may not happen at all... Anyway, if the 052C refit goes for the U-VLS, I personally prefer the 32+16 configuration and the hangar should be moved toward the centerline while adding a 24-cell HQ-10 launcher on the top.

Click to expand...

Only reason to have a centerline hanger with a raised spine is for the Ka-28. The raised spine is to clear for the height of the Ka-28. But you are retiring the Ka-28 anyway.

If you go with a 1 x 8 U-VLS set sideways, it's possible for the hanger to have two Z-9C instead. If you eliminate the VLS and move the hanger northwards, you can increase the helo deck and fit Z-20C instead.

Least modification would be to replace the two aft circular VLS with two U-VLS set sideways or 1 U-VLS set normal. But we have seen with 052B refit, PLAN is willing to go through a hanger work over.

If and IF the same HHQ-9B canister can work with compatibility on circular VLS as it is on U-VLS, you may not need VLS change. But VLS change is not the most expensive thing to refit on the ship. It will be the complete radar overhaul which includes installing an all liquid cooling system. The radar overhaul is necessary to be able to use the HHQ-9B to its full range capacity, otherwise 9B performance is stunted and you are only using a glorified 9A. Analogy is like you need radar upgrade on J-10 and J-11 to use PL-15 instead of just PL-12.

I believe change to U-VLS is worth it to support quadpack SAM and ASROC.

blindsight said:

Not sure about the 555 things. It may not happen at all... Anyway, if the 052C refit goes for the U-VLS, I personally prefer the 32+16 configuration and the hangar should be moved toward the centerline while adding a 24-cell HQ-10 launcher on the top.

Click to expand...

Why are you not sure about the 555 missile?

A quad packable MR SAM for the PLAN is basically guaranteed, it's just a matter of time, if it hasn't already entered service already.

One thing I've always wondered: with the addition of the new dome atop the hangar (satcom?) on the 052DLs, can the HQ-10 still fire on the full back arc? Or does it get blocked

sndef888 said:

One thing I've always wondered: with the addition of the new dome atop the hangar (satcom?) on the 052DLs, can the HQ-10 still fire on the full back arc? Or does it get blocked

Click to expand...

They would have tested that before the plans get approved, so no I don't think the HQ-10 gets blocked.

SATCOM is really just the same old one, only relocated from under the Type 517 VHF radar to this position. There were two of the same before to guarantee as much arc availability, but with the new position, one is enough. In previous ships, there has been other SATCOMs in this area in the hanger behind the HQ-10, so if there is any blocking its not any different from the old ships. Note there are differences of the SATCOM in the ships.

sndef888 said:

One thing I've always wondered: with the addition of the new dome atop the hangar (satcom?) on the 052DLs, can the HQ-10 still fire on the full back arc? Or does it get blocked

Click to expand...

As a missile based CIWS, the HQ-10 does not fire its missile in a direct line of sight to the incoming target. Instead, it is fired slightly upwards, and the missile itself gains some altitude before intercepting the incoming target, preferably at some good distance away from your ship (a few kilometers at least).

That is to say -- the only way in which the various domes on the hangar would "obstruct" the passage of the HQ-10, is if your HQ-10 was literally commanded to fire at a target that was within 10 meters of the stern of the ship, at very low (below 2 meters) sea skimming height.


Needless to say, such a target will basically never eventuate, and frankly if you were having to engage such a target that was expected to be in such close proximity to your ship, then you are basically screwed anyway.

Chinese language wikipedia shows the 26th - 29th 052D destroyers are currently under building. Is this info accurate?

hellodarknez said:

Chinese language wikipedia shows the 26th - 29th 052D destroyers are currently under building. Is this info accurate?
View attachment 86066

Click to expand...

So far there appears to be four hulls under construction but whether or not they are 052D or 055 and which particular hull is which, it may take longer to visually identify without a doubt.

Four 052Ds are under constraction at Dalian