052C/052D Class Destroyers

Zichan said:

SPY-4 is “ready”. It’s installed on the Ford carrier. It’s just that its main platform, the Zumwalt class was cancelled and funding was redirected to the AMDR project which became the SPY-6.

Click to expand...

And the conversation back there was about SPY-1, its replacement SPY-6, how SPY-1 series (except E) did not use AESA and ...

Zichan said:

The whole point of your exercise was to demonstrate China’s alleged technological advantage in naval radar technology. While China has made tremendous strides in the last 20 years, the evidence is simply not there yet that it is a world leader. The US has put several AESA radar designs to sea since the mid 2000s, therefore they’ve had the technological means to pull off a “Type 346A”, but for various reasons opted to wait for a GaN AESA instead for their Aegis ships.

Click to expand...

... that the point is China was never that far behind even 20 years ago. My post was in response to another post claiming how far China's come in recent decades when it was far from an overnight thing. This was a step by step improvement over many, many decades. China was developing AESA radars with one program resulting in 346, over 20 years ago. It isn't my purpose to demonstrate China's alleged tech advantage ... I never said advantage. The exercise and posts were to show that this all didn't come from seemingly out of nowhere and in a short span of time. It took so much monumental national effort over such span of time to get here ... competitive and indeed world leading. You talked about SPY-4 cancelled with Zumwalt but put onto a post 2020 carrier. We were talking about 346. Not 346A not 346B where there are years to decades between the three. 346 and SPY-1. SPY-4/6 are indeed AESA. In my original post I said that SPY-1 series and Burke flights I and II do not even use AESA. That in itself isn't untrue but seems to have set you off a bit. It's also not untrue that during this era (well before SPY-4 and SPY-6) China had AESA search and fire control in 346 while the Americans had PESA SPY-1 series. That choice I didn't comment on. They have their choices. It doesn't mean and I didn't say they aren't capable of AESA. That's ridiculous. The Americans had AESA radars on the ground and in aircraft well before China had AESA in anything.

My point about China never having been that far behind in radars still stands. That was the entire purpose of the exercise. Here's the quote I replied to.



In light of this post screenshot is it not reasonable to explain that China's radar tech even 30 years ago was working on 346... which made use of AESA tech... 30 years ago when it started development, the radar reaching service in the early 2000s now more than 20 years ago. 346 coming out well before Sampson - the best the UK and France could develop much later than China... and honestly inferior in capability to even 346 (in capability not necessarily sophistication but then even that remains to be seen... if not then there's 346A). Japan uses SPY series as does Korea. Russia hasn't yet developed a 346 equivalent today. What's wrong with pointing out the simple fact that 346, a 30 year old Chinese program and 20+ year old radar uses AESA while SPY-1 series of that era did not? I didn't choose to go into listing the reasons why the Americans didn't use AESA until SPY-6... or if you insist, until SPY-4 in any major mainstay ship or classes.

Zichan said:

One detail that’s not mentioned often is that SPY-1, unlike an AESA radar, can channel all its power through a single radar face, effectively quadrupling its power. This is what they’ve been doing for ABM defense. Perhaps they observed that a GaAs AESA would not be superior in ABM role going against that much emitted RF power?

Click to expand...

This is interesting information and I appreciate it. It certainly explains their choices but it is sort of not part of that discussion about "China's radars being so behind 20 years ago"... as explained above.

Zichan said:

Type 055 is not an electric ship. It has more installed total power than Zumwalt, but less electrical power. Another destroyer that has more electrical power is the British Type 45, yet another full electric ship.

I prefer to stick with what we know with a high degree of certainty. That is that there are 6 electrical generators onboard the Type 055, and based on vents that they are diesel engine based. We have no clue about their power output. They could be anywhere between 2MW to 6MW per unit, as Henri K explained 5 years ago. Again, because this is not an electric ship I lean towards the lower range. Even at the highest end of the spectrum that still puts it at less than half the electrical power of the Zumwalt.

Click to expand...

Yeah 055 isn't yet IEP full electric ship. We speculate this is the direction PLAN wants to go obviously and if 055 isn't IEP, then they want to work towards that direction.

Even if we lean towards unreasonably low assumptions on output, 055's available power is significantly greater to other destroyers. Okay, installed power. This I'm not familiar with or knowledgeable on. What is the effective difference between that? Is it more to do with propulsion having a certain share and where that power can be directed? Or how it is stored and used? The effects of which mean full electric IEP ships have more power for electronics? Does 055 use a lot more installed power to compensate for not being IEP?

ougoah said:

SPY-1E, which I mentioned in my post, is the only radar that was AESA based that can be considered as put into service. SPY-4 never became a thing. In the Type 346 era - 1990s to 2010, there were no SPY series radars that used AESA. SPY-4 isn't even ready and won't be since it's a cancelled program where SPY-6 is the program that aims to "replace" SPY-1 series.

So in the in service SPY series radars, none are AESA except 1E and that was really more of a test and evaluation platform. Wasn't aware of the Dutch ship. That appears to be the world's first then? In any case my post about SPY series is correct when I said they don't use AESA technology. One offs don't really count but okay maybe I should have mentioned that. I thought I did make that clear enough by mentioning SPY-1E (AESA variant).



We don't know exactly how much power any of these ships have but it is pretty much 100% Maya has A LOT less power than 055. It's most likely that at the moment, no in service naval destroyer comes close to available power of 055. Zumwalt again ... one off etc etc plus Zumwalt is a cancelled project. Maya may have more than half the power 055 has... perhaps I should have written that. The point stands, 055 for some reason has been packed with so much electrical power generation capability it makes one wonder what it's running in electronic weapons and sensors to require ROUGHLY about twice as much power as other modern large destroyers. 100% more or 80% more power, the point stands.



Yeah it's both a shame and a good thing we don't know even quite as much as this about the 055... except for the near certainty that its power generation capabilities are quite potent to say the least.

Click to expand...

SPY-2 was developed around 2002 to 2003 as an AESA but got cancelled.

SPY-3 is X-band AESA developed for the Zumwalt. Went into service with the first two Zumwalt and Gerald Ford.

SPY-4 is S-band developed for the Zumwalt and can cancelled for cost reasons. It will still enter service only with the Gerald Ford.

SPY-5 is reserved for a proposed X-band AESA intended to be used as part of DBR. This seems to be dunked in favor of the SPQ-9B for cost reasons.

SPY-6 needs no explanation.

SPY-7 is Lockheed Martin's GaN AESA contender for the contract that Raytheon won with the SPY-6. LM however continues to market the SPY-7 in other markets, with wins in Canada, Spain and Japan the last as AEGIS ASHORE.

ougoah said:

My point about China never having been that far behind in radars still stands. That was the entire purpose of the exercise.

Click to expand...

Then I must've misunderstood. I agree with that point.

ougoah said:

Even if we lean towards unreasonably low assumptions on output, 055's available power is significantly greater to other destroyers. Okay, installed power. This I'm not familiar with or knowledgeable on. What is the effective difference between that? Is it more to do with propulsion having a certain share and where that power can be directed? Or how it is stored and used? The effects of which mean full electric IEP ships have more power for electronics? Does 055 use a lot more installed power to compensate for not being IEP?

Click to expand...

On legacy ships main engines are mechanically coupled to the propulsion screws. They do not provide service power. Instead, such ships have separate generator sets for that purpose. For example, the newest FLIIA Arleigh Burke destroyers have 100MW of propulsion power from its 4 gas turbines (although I don't know how much of that is converted to shaft power?) and 9MW of electrical power via 3 gas turbine based generator sets. A similar arrangement can be seen on the Type 055.

On full electric ships (IFEP), engines or sometimes also referred to as prime movers are not mechanically coupled to the propeller shafts: some electric ships don't even have protruding propeller shafts, but use externally mounted azipods instead. All electric power generated by these prime movers is routed to an onboard power grid where it can be distributed to propulsion, sensors, weapons and hotel load based on their individual needs. A further benefit of the mechanical decoupling is that the prime movers can be run at the most fuel efficient profiles resulting in noticeable fuel savings and/or range improvements. The Type 45 IFEP destroyer has a range in excess of 7000nm at 18kts, while Burkes manage only 4400nm at 20 kts.

Zumwalts have 78 MW of electrical power to distribute over its various systems, including propulsion. Obviously, if it is running at flank speed some sacrifices will have to be made ... The top dog at the moment is the Ford class carrier: 125 MW of electrical power on top of 260 MW shaft power into the propellers, just edging out the Queen Elizabeth class carrier (IFEP) with 118 MW electrical power.

Tam said:

Having GaN does not automatically mean the module is more powerful, it means it has the potential to be more powerful. You still have to pump more juice into it. The main feature if GaN is that it runs cooler, allowing for a lighter cooling equipment, to produce the same rf power as a GaAs part would. A GaN part would therefore be able to take much more power than a GaAs part before it burns out. It does not automatically confer more power. You can have a GaN radar that isn't so powerful but you can reduce the bulky cooling that goes with it and less power needed for the cooling system.

The 052D is still limited by the power infrastructure it inherited from the 052C unless it's generators have been upgraded. I would think the 052D's modules makes more power than the 052C's, being all liquid cooled instead of a hybrid air and liquid cooling (all air cooling limits the power on the Type 45's SAMPSON radar). I do not think the 052D's modules were GaN, at least not from the start anyway. If it were GaN it would begin where the 052D's second batch, where they dropped the calibration field booms off the radars, indicating that the modules have been redesigned so calibration support is now on the module itself, possibly by mutual coupling (extending the size of the wave until it interferes the next element, allowing the elements to read each other's output, and this interference is then measured if it's the correct level). If the modules have to be redesigned, it opens the opportunity that the modules might have other changes.

Click to expand...

makes sense. I think it's quite unlikely the first batch of 052Ds use GaN modules.

Tam said:

Hence if the first few 052D has the Type 346A (the first four ships in the 9th Destroyer Division, like 172 to 175), then at some point where the second batch begins (example would be 154 of the 6th Destroyer Division) you have the improved boom less 346A. These improved radars should be called 346A+. The extended 052D should come with this too.

Assuming 346A+ radar now uses GaN, the ship needs to pump more power to the radar to actually see a better performance benefit, and this requires an updated cooling and power infrastructure to the radars. I may think the power infrastructure between the 052C and 052D may have been improved but I'm not too sure between the first and second 052D batches although it's still entirely possible the power is pushed further. But it's nowhere like what you see on the 055 which is expressedly built for that purpose while the 052D hull is one that's already highly pushed to its limits already. The main benefit of using GaN then might be to improve the reliability of the radar modules by running cooler while the power increase might be minimal due to the limitations of the ship. I think the 055's radars are so powerful that it does not need the support of a VHF radar like the way the 052D still does.

Click to expand...

I would agree that power infrastructure is unlikely to change that much between batches. Assuming they have the foresight that future batch will use GaN modules, it would reason that earlier ships that GaA modules may not be fully utilizing the power at hand. Given the general shift in PLA from radars using GaA to GaN modules, it would reason that for cost/weight/maintenance/compatibility reasons recent batches of 052D should be using GaN modules.

Good point on 055 radar being so powerful that VHF is not needed for long range search. Although, it does take away from counter stealth.

Tam said:

This one in China goes as far as 1200w.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

You wonder who is using that.

Click to expand...

Nice one, if this is what goes on 055, that's a lot of power in those huge panels.

tphuang said:

makes sense. I think it's quite unlikely the first batch of 052Ds use GaN modules.

I would agree that power infrastructure is unlikely to change that much between batches. Assuming they have the foresight that future batch will use GaN modules, it would reason that earlier ships that GaA modules may not be fully utilizing the power at hand. Given the general shift in PLA from radars using GaA to GaN modules, it would reason that for cost/weight/maintenance/compatibility reasons recent batches of 052D should be using GaN modules.

Good point on 055 radar being so powerful that VHF is not needed for long range search. Although, it does take away from counter stealth.


Nice one, if this is what goes on 055, that's a lot of power in those huge panels.

Click to expand...

I went through every product that company listed in that page compared to what I remember a few years ago. More product are now on GaN and some at least a 1000w.

This X-band is offers 2000w peak on transmit. This either goes to a naval or land fire control radar or possibly to an airplane such as a fighter jet.

Tam said:

I went through every product that company listed in that page compared to what I remember a few years ago. More product are now on GaN and some at least a 1000w.

This X-band is offers 2000w peak on transmit. This either goes to a naval or land fire control radar or possibly to an airplane such as a fighter jet.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Would be interesting to see if those 2000w GaN X-band modules are used on the J-20's radar or the Type 055's X-band radars on its integrated mast. That's the subject for another thread.

It's possible that the main Type 346B S-Band radars on the Type 055 may not be the only thing that gets the GaN treatment. The X-band ones on the integrated mast might also as well as the ECM.

Tam said:

Would be interesting to see if those 2000w GaN X-band modules are used on the J-20's radar or the Type 055's X-band radars on its integrated mast. That's the subject for another thread.

It's possible that the main Type 346B S-Band radars on the Type 055 may not be the only thing that gets the GaN treatment. The X-band ones on the integrated mast might also as well as the ECM.

Click to expand...

Sorry for the ignorance here, but if J-20 has 2000 T/R modules, then wouldn't each module having even 100w in peak power (25 in average power) be pretty much unprecedented?

tphuang said:

Sorry for the ignorance here, but if J-20 has 2000 T/R modules, then wouldn't each module having even 100w in peak power (25 in average power) be pretty much unprecedented?

Click to expand...

Even if it were possible to build such a miniature radar today with 50kW output, a major challenge would be to keep it cool and feed the beast in the confined space of a fighter the size of J-20. A radar of that power might need close to half a megawatt of wall plug power to operate, possibly even more.

Just to appreciate how ludicrously powerful such a radar would be, the much feared AN/TPY-2 X-band missile defense radar is estimated to have around 25,000 T/R elements and an average transmitter power of 81 kW (radiated is less due system losses) The whole system apparently needs 2.1 MW of electrical power to operate.

Continuing on my post above, solid state HPA lose efficiency with increasing frequency, bandwidth and power. Therefore, even GaN X-band HPA are not going to be particularly efficient. Top end military grade GaN X-band HPAs from an industry leader like Qorvo have PAE efficiency at saturation power in the low 30s % and can drop into the 20s at the higher frequency part of the spectrum. Their peak power is between 24W-32W depending on the model and operating frequencies. When run at much lower power outputs the same HPA can approach PAE efficiencies of 45%.

To get even more power output, it is necessary to combine multiple HPAs, which will adversely impact efficiency and package dimensions.

Here's an example of a 2021 Qorvo GaN X-band 25W PA for military radar and data link applications. Its PAE is 40% at 85C. It is built on Qorvo's QGaN15 process, i.e. 0.15μm GaN on SiC substrate, the most power dense process of its class in 2021. The numbers from my previous post came from a reconfigurable S/X band PA with inherently lower efficiencies.

Qorvo is a major RF chip supplier to Apple, Samsung and Huawei (was?), Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo for their smartphone business.