052C/052D Class Destroyers
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Don't think so. 055 third batch maybe. 052E maybe
They cannot build 052e if they want more ships of this class in their future fleet. They need a new design in that size with ieps, room from growth, hangar and flight deck suitable for future flight ops, greater automation, roomier berthing for long trips, maintenance system for blue water operation and modern damage control setup. Have this ready for maybe 2030s.
If they are, they would still be under the sheds and it would be in a launch state before these ships would be pulled out from the sheds and into the dry docks. Jiangnan's build process differs from Dalian's significantly.
I don't know if these vessels are still credible. At the time of retirement these vessels are either obsolete by technology or found themselves useless and obsolete by changes in doctrine, technology, bad design decisions, or just having too many issues. For example the sudden retirement of the Alaska class in the USN after only 3 years of service.
Spruance can cost as much as a Ticonderoga in terms of operating costs, human and maintenance, while offering much less capability. 051 can costs as much as a 052D in terms of living costs and a 053H1 as much as a 054A while the older ships offer far less capabilities and a much greater headache in terms of logistics and maintenance. This isn't about maturity its about preparing for war. A peacetime time can afford such gross inefficiencies because the older ships are there for display and political purposes. For example the Russian Navy. A Navy's most valuable resource is its trained personnel and you want them allocated in the most effective and efficient way possible. So you want them put of inefficient and obsolete ships (obsolete either by doctrine changes and technology) and into the best ones are possible.
The PLAN's retirement of these ships is a confluence of both doctrinal changes and technology changes all happening at the same time, along with a vast expansion of building capability. The lack of a proper SATCOM capability on the 022 is a fatal issue for this fleet for example when China's satellite capabilities surged in the last decade. Even the obsolete 051s and 053H1s are being fitted with brand new satcoms.
Last edited:
New design is already answered by 055.
I don't believe there will be any more drastic changes to the 052X hull. There won't be a new 052X with sufficient changes that will justify a new letter suffix like "E". Instead we may have a further refinement of the "052DL". The refinement may be in terms of changes and updating the radars and sensor equipment which would be relatively easy to do and don't amount to any fundamental changes to the ship at least mechanically and structurewise. Call these changes "low fruit hanging on the tree".
For instance an improvement on the Type 346X radar. However such improvements tend to be internal so you won't see it visualized with external changes. Another improvement would be replacing the Type 364 surface search radar which is the round dome at the top of the mast to the Type '368' radar that its successor and serving in the Type 075. This will appear as a small dual sided AESA. Another change would be to replace the Type 344 and 366 fire control radars on top of the bridge with a phase array fire control radar.
That all makes sense. Mlu for 052d that would elevate the earliest ones to have similar capabilities to the latter ones. With 20 in servic and another 10 to 20 expected, it's going to be in service with plan for a long time. And makes sense to continue to upgrade them.
With shipborne drones a major advancement in the future, I wonder if that will be another major capability upgrade for the 052d that can't support z20. Z9s are a little too small.
Around the second batch of 052D, there is a change in the Tupe 346A radars that removed the external calibration booms. Which means whatever they now use to read and calibrate the array is now at the array itself or built into the modules. So its likely there is a revision and upgrade to the modules itself. For reference purposes I would call this Type "346AG" or "346A-1". I don't know if there is any performance upgrades to the changed array but such improvements are possible and not off the table.
The second change to the batch is a pair of ESMs near the base of the mast, left and right of the Type 366 'Mineral' domes, and above the Type 346A radars. In the previous batch, these ESMs have a cylindrical shape with a base. In the newer batch, the ESMs have an R2D2 like casing with legs. I believe these units function like the Czech VERA systems or the Chinese DWL-002 passive radar, the later is used to support the land based HQ-9. Incidentally the newer units look like the VERA NG externally.
Not only did the new ESM units appear in the newer batches but about the same time, the 052C began retrofitting with them. This suggest these units are important enough to do such, and the 052C themselves have started to have some electronic upgrades to use such equipment. The earlier 052D have not upgraded however as of now but I would expect them done in the future.
The third upgrade is the Type '520' "fly swatter" array replacing the Type 517A Knife Rest VHF radar. This began with the third batch with the extended hanger.
I do not expect earlier 052D to have lengthened hangers, as the old hangers allow them to use the Mil-28 ASW helicopters still currently active in inventory and which are too high for the extended for Z20 hangers. But in the future they could switch the main radars to the boom less 346A-1, the new generation ESM, and the Type '520' Fly Swatter. If replacing the Type 364, 366 and 344 radars are on the table with new AESA ones, which by the way should be shared in parallel with 054A MLU, these will further extend the 052D's sensors.
The 052C can go through the same upgrades minus the new generation ESM which they have already. The ESM mast on the 052C can be switched to the new 052D standard. They can still retain the old VLS or switch to the U-VLS in the bow section. The aft can retain its slanted ASM launchers or switch to the YJ-12 ones or to U-VLS. Switching to the VLS is the preferred but more expensive option.
All these changes not only enhance the older ships but it makes them share the same logistical and maintenance base as the newer ships. By now I would assume the operation of HHQ-9B, the new 555 quadpack, new ASROC and YJ-21.
drunkmunky
Junior Member
how many men & women aboard each vessel?