052C/052D Class Destroyers

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Between 1991 and 2011, the USN commissioned 3 Arleigh Burke per year. I am wondering when the Chinese could reach this production rate with regards to 052D. In fact, if the Chinese were to "catch up" with the U.S. and Japan, the current rate of DDG commissioning is simply far from enough.
It was more like 2.4 per year.

And they have started that production back up.

I do not think the PLANs goal is to surpass the US Navy in overall numbers...at least not in the foreseeable future.

They do not need to. They are far more concentrated than the US Navy in terms of really being concerned with the China Sea, the far western Pacific, and the SLOC over to Africa and the Mid-East.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
What's the total 052D China plan to built? My feeling at least 12, 4 for each North, South & East sea fleet as appropriate for a regional power
I believe 12 is probably a good number too...but time will tell.

They may also buildup to eighteen depending on if they use that class to replace the older DDGs they will be decommissioning over the next ten years.
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
I believe 12 is probably a good number too...but time will tell.

They may also buildup to eighteen depending on if they use that class to replace the older DDGs they will be decommissioning over the next ten years.
Given the recent US-JP defense developments, my guess is PRC will continue to increase military spending by double digits and we'll see two to three dozen of 052D, E, or F. Maybe more.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Could well be Blackstone. They may well have their own different "flights" of the vessel, like the US has done with the Burkes. And their Type 055 will be their Ticonderoga cruiser in terms of the fit within their overall force.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Between 1991 and 2011, the USN commissioned 3 Arleigh Burke per year. I am wondering when the Chinese could reach this production rate with regards to 052D. In fact, if the Chinese were to "catch up" with the U.S. and Japan, the current rate of DDG commissioning is simply far from enough.

China doesn't necessarily have to catch up with USN burke commissioning rates; it just needs to catch up with JMSDF and USN pacific fleet in terms of total surface combatant number/capability, if that is what you're getting at.

And in that sense, PLAN is well on its way in having more aegis type surface combatants than JMSDF by 2020 and even if each 052D may not have as many VLS as a Kongo or Atago the discrepancy in overall capability is quite present; not to mention the presence of supporting 054As whose air defence capabilities are quite modern as well.

But for PLAN to be fully comfortable in surface combatants vis a vis JMSDF and USN's pacific fleet, imho, a 48 DDG and 48 FFG strong fleet should probably be a long term goal that will provide parity in conjunction with supporting ships and land based air power and missile assets.


What's the total 052D China plan to built? My feeling at least 12, 4 for each North, South & East sea fleet as appropriate for a regional power

Yes, I think 12 is a minimum.

By the time all is said and done, each fleet will have a destroyer flotilla with the DDG component made up fully of 4 052Ds while ESF will have also have a destroyer flotilla with four 052Cs, and SSF having the original 2 052Cs and 052Bs.

Not too shabby given many smaller navies only have 3 or 4 aegis type ships as their primary capital ships, while PLAN will have that same capability in its own singledestroyer flotilla.

Of course, the USN's destroyer squadrons also tend to have six or so burkes which are very powerful units, but PLAN destroyer flotillas also have four FFGs to complement the primary four DDGs.


The question for PLAN is how much bigger they're looking to expand their destroyer flotilla, either in flotilla size or flotilla number. Because after all the 052Ds are commissioned by about 2020, the PLAN will have 16 052C/Ds, 2 052Bs, 4 Sovremennys, 2 052s, 2 051Cs, 1 051B, (assuming none of the 052s or 051B are replaced given they are still relatively young ships), and that is some 24-25 ships -- enough to fully "modernize" the DDG components of all six of the PLAN's destroyer flotilla without having to build more ships for at least another decade or more.

But obviously the PLAN are looking to build 055, and possibly more 052Ds as well so that inevitably raises the question -- where will they go? Will the PLAN retire older 052s, 051B, 051Cs, and Sovs early? Doubtful. Will the PLAN instead expand their total DDG/surface combatant number? That seems likely to me, but how large will they go?
And also, will they increase their FFG number as well? 24 054As are a very good number and a competent and flexible capability, but are PLAN happy with 054As enough that they won't pursue a new FFG design in the next few years? After all the norm is for new FFGs to have many of the same aegis capabilities as larger DDGs, and the new leaps in technology PLAN have made over the last few years has made 054As a less than optimal design lacking rapid scanning/fixed array APAR, the new common VLS, not to mention lack of newer propulsion systems such as CODLAG or even IEPS.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
A nice pic of 172, undated, and I'm not sure if it's old.

I do like the look of this ship, it's very... balanced and symmetrical.
None of that offset hangar nonsense on 052B or Akizuki, or offset funnels like Horizon, Type 45 or Ticonderoga, and a nice looking superstructure that's not ridiculously tall like Kongo/Atago, ugly and bulbous like 052C, or flat and compressed on Type 45. It has sensible armament in both VLS and a good sized main gun for its weight class as opposed to Kolkata's ridiculous 76mm pea shooter and 32 cell Barak-8, and doesn't skimp on ciws either. It also has what I consider to be an attractive length/beam ratio along with a sensible hull shape -- straight and square at the aft that runs straight and parallel until tapering off sharply at the bow, without that kind of bulbous middle section on burkes and type 45.
Most importantly PLAN has a very good looking paint scheme, with a white-grey outer surface with a dark grey for the ship's decks that contrasts quite attractively I think.

It'll be a day of note when all three PLAN fleets finally each get a destroyer flotilla complete with four ship strong destroyer component of 4 052Ds.

os0lSWA.jpg
 

nemo

Junior Member
But obviously the PLAN are looking to build 055, and possibly more 052Ds as well so that inevitably raises the question -- where will they go? Will the PLAN retire older 052s, 051B, 051Cs, and Sovs early? Doubtful. Will the PLAN instead expand their total DDG/surface combatant number? That seems likely to me, but how large will they go?
And also, will they increase their FFG number as well? 24 054As are a very good number and a competent and flexible capability, but are PLAN happy with 054As enough that they won't pursue a new FFG design in the next few years? After all the norm is for new FFGs to have many of the same aegis capabilities as larger DDGs, and the new leaps in technology PLAN have made over the last few years has made 054As a less than optimal design lacking rapid scanning/fixed array APAR, the new common VLS, not to mention lack of newer propulsion systems such as CODLAG or even IEPS.

I think the building of 052D and 054As will continue at current rate until next classes come along. The current average rate of 2 DD and 3 FFs a year is perfectly sustainable and in fact is necessary to sustain the current number of hulls, assuming average 30 years of time in service. So potentially, there will be 60 DDs and 90 FFs in service -- not an exorbitant number.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
I think the building of 052D and 054As will continue at current rate until next classes come along. The current average rate of 2 DD and 3 FFs a year is perfectly sustainable and in fact is necessary to sustain the current number of hulls, assuming average 30 years of time in service. So potentially, there will be 60 DDs and 90 FFs in service -- not an exorbitant number.

PLAN currently have some 24 DDGs and nearly 30 frontline FFGs with a smaller number of older frigates in dedicated frigate squadrons.
If they were only looking to sustain the current number of hulls they can finish production of FFGs with the last 24th 054A and finish 052D at hull 12 without bothering with 055 or more 052Ds or a next generation frigate for a decade or so if sustaining current surface combatant number was their intention.
If 055 ends up having a large production run, if 052D continues production, and/or if a successor frigate emerges in a few years after 054A, then it will be suggestive of PLAN seeking to expand their primary surface combatant number rather than merely sustaining their current arrangement.

That said I can't see 60 DDGs or 90 FFGs in service, certainly not all modern ones.
If that kind of number does eventuate it'll only be well past 2030.
I also don't know how that would fit in their current orbat.
I use the 48 DDG and 48 FFG number because it would be a logical extrapolation from their current fleet structure where their primary DDGs and FFGs are distributed among six destroyer flotillas each made up of four DDGs and four to five FFGs each, for a total of some 24 DDGs and 30ish FFGs (FFGs are likely to drop as some older hulls may end up getting transferred to second line frigate squadrons).
So the 48 DDG and 48 FFG number is a projection of an effective doubling of either destroyer flotilla number (so 12 destroyer flotillas, four per fleet, each with four DDGs and four FFGs) or doubling the orbat of each destroyer flotilla (so still 6 destroyer flotillas, two per fleet, each with eight DDGs and eight FFGs)
 

Janiz

Senior Member
None of that offset hangar nonsense on 052B or Akizuki, or offset funnels like Horizon, Type 45 or Ticonderoga, and a nice looking superstructure that's not ridiculously tall like Kongo/Atago, ugly and bulbous like 052C, or flat and compressed on Type 45.
Well, that's a matter of taste. But there's no need for making a warship look like an 'invisible' box on the water when you can spot it easily using a satellite. Seems like Japanese and Americans understand that well and the aren't doing that with their big warships like Burkes.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Well, that's a matter of taste. But there's no need for making a warship look like an 'invisible' box on the water when you can spot it easily using a satellite. Seems like Japanese and Americans understand that well and the aren't doing that with their big warships like Burkes.

OTish:

Well, none of the features I listed were particularly conducive to low RCS or even low visual profiles, they were merely what I considered to be aesthetically unappealing.
Symmetry is definitely a preference of mine, which is why the likes of 052B, Ticonderoga, Akizuki, Horizon and Type 45 are in the bin of "meh" for me. A good looking bridge/superstructure is also important; it's the "face" of the ship after all. Then there's the overall shape of the hull.

I think the Sejong class could have been one of the best looking ship classes around if only they'd adopted a square aft hull and straighter overall hull shape rather than a burke-esque curved profile at the water line. It had so many things going for it, like its sleek length, its smooth aft hangar/VLS section, and enclosed RHIB davits.
Zumwalt is also a nice looking design simply on the basis of how sleek it is, but its main superstructure/hangar gives the appearance of top heaviness and blockiness despite how futuristic it is. (amusingly, Zumwalt is the most blatant attempt to develop an invisible "box" of any navy yet, and it is of course American)

Hopefully 055 adopts the same hull philosophy as 052D and that its aft VLS section is relatively high and smooth. Its single long funnel/smoke stack integrated with the main bridge superstructure is quite a unique arrangement and has the potential to look quite appealing.

But of course this is all my taste. Maybe other people like more bulbous hulls, tall superstructures and offset funnels on their DDGs.
 
Top