054/A FFG Thread II

[plawolf]

The Chinese have an amazing capability of reverse engineering, even if they only have pictures and models to begin with...the openly available ll able information on Mk. 41 should've given then a general direction, then they've to figure out material science and system integration...

I am sorry but that is just plain nonsense!

If the Chinese do not have an actual example to study, then by definition it is NOT reverse engineering. There are no 'ifs' 'buts' or 'maybes' about it.

If all China has done is as you say, look at some pictures and used published open source material and figures as a design goal to develop their VLS (or anything actually), then firstly chances are what they come up with will be greatly different from what they based their design on, and secondly, all the solutions to the really difficult engineering and materials science problems will be their own work.

Lockmart studies the Yak141 closely and even bought the blueprints, does that make the F35 a reversed engineered Yak?

The Russians studies the F15 closely and did pretty much everything you suggested such as look and pictures and performance indicators in designing the Su27, does that make the Flanker a reversed engineered Eagle?

Hell, if you just look at the facts, the Americans actually had their hands on a real example of the Mig25 and they studied the crap out of it, and as mentioned above, they bought blueprints for the Yak. So if you were looking at things from a purely objective standpoint, there is far more evidence that the American birds are reversed engineering and improved Russian planes than there is evidence to suggest the likes of the J10, J20, Su27 and the like are reversed engineered examples of anything else.

If it is blatantly obvious something is not a reversed engineered example of something else, how about we just dont call it reserved engineered and do away with all the RE nonsense?

 

[MwRYum]

Is 054A VLS hot-launched system ? ... any proof ?

If to go by what the navy officer I asked that day, it's a hot-launch system just for the SAMs.

 

[Lion]

Is 054A VLS hot-launched system ? ... any proof ?

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/navy/054-series-frigate-thread-2-a-71-4149.html#post155567

If you are familiar with hot launch, from those pictures can conclude missiles are directly launch from the chamber instead of eject it in mid-air and blast off.

 

[antiterror13]

true ... thanks, so it seems Chinese VLS system is far more advanced than the Russian ones. I thought HQ-16 was based on SHTIL which is cold-launched system

 

[tphuang]

13th 054A Is Almost Ready To Go At HP

hmm, it's still got a few months to go before launching. Although, there is a decent probability that it will get launched before the 6th HD 054A

 

[franco-russe]

If Huangpu follows the previous pattern of nine months between launches, then HP 7 will be launched in February 2012.

The Hudong pattern is one-year intervals between launches, so HD 6 should launch in April 2012, after HP 7.

This corresponds to A. Man’s latest list which said Hull 12 HP 572 and Hull 13 HD 547.

Interesting that they are building a second SWATH hull auxiliary, following the one that was launched in mid-June.

 

[no_name]

The catamaran ship beside it got launched.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[no_name]

red circle: modules for the type 054A transported by ship (?)
blue: catamaran launched, another half-finished ship inside. seems it was moved in from elsewhere.

edit: or maybe that ship was behind the catamaran.

 

[delft]

No doubt the ship was building behind the catamaran and has now been moved forward. But do I see modules for a type 54A on a ship in a floating dock? I do not believe it. So where are those "modules"?

 

[duskylim]

true ... thanks, so it seems Chinese VLS system is far more advanced than the Russian ones. I thought HQ-16 was based on SHTIL which is cold-launched system

I have a question - what is the advantage of a hot-launch system over a cold-launched one?

Since a solid-propellant missile's fuel is basically a slowly deflagrating high-explosive (with binders - hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene, energy enhancers like - powdered aluminum, etc) its seems to me a lot safer to ignite the rocket motor OUTSIDE the ship.

That way any explosion from damage or failure wouldn't damage you.

Making a hot-launch system strong enough to resist an accidental explosion would be too heavy and bulky - and packing them together means you're storing a lot of potential explosive alongside.

Now many cold-launch systems use pistons powered by gas-generators to eject the missile from the tube but is that configuration always necessary?

One could easily pack foam-rubber plastic around the missile body, to seal the launch tube, temporarily cap the rocket exhaust nozzle and light-up something like a telescoping air-bag to eject the missile - all without needing the piston and gas-generator unit.

And the seal wouldn't have to be perfect to work - because of the missile rail - like a steam catapult on an aircraft carrier.

Just picking some nits.