10 053H3s, 44 confirmed 056s, 30 054As, 2 054s, and now 20 054Bs. That totals to 106 pennant numbers assuming they retire all their old 053s. I think they are definitely going to expand to the 600-series especially considering that more 056s are likely to be built.
054/A FFG Thread II
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
10 053H3s, 44 confirmed 056s, 30 054As, 2 054s, and now 20 054Bs. That totals to 106 pennant numbers assuming they retire all their old 053s. I think they are definitely going to expand to the 600-series especially considering that more 056s are likely to be built.
Lethe
Captain
PLAN shouldn't have used 5xx series numbers for the 056s in the first place.
In any case, with numbers and timing of 054B nailed down, PLAN's future frigate force is becoming clearer. By 2030 PLAN will have:
20x 054B
30x 054A
2x 054
10x 053H3
Total 62 frigates. Could go as low as 55 if 053H3 retirements are accelerated, or as high as 70 if 054B production is both rapid and either extended or followed immediately by 054C/057 in late 2020s.
In any case, with numbers and timing of 054B nailed down, PLAN's future frigate force is becoming clearer. By 2030 PLAN will have:
20x 054B
30x 054A
2x 054
10x 053H3
Total 62 frigates. Could go as low as 55 if 053H3 retirements are accelerated, or as high as 70 if 054B production is both rapid and either extended or followed immediately by 054C/057 in late 2020s.
Last edited:
It seems less likely to me that the 054 and 053H3 will be used in the frigate role going forward, and more likely that they will be used for coastal patrol in the same manner as the 056. Their lack of area multi-axis air defense is a severe impediment (and therefore liability) to fleet operations in general and to CSG deployments in particular. Unless of course the 054 gets a 32-cell VLS during its refit and is otherwise brought up to 054A standards, though I sense that there may not be enough room at the bow to accommodate the VLS.
Lethe
Captain
This rationale suggests that PLAN didn't have any frigates until 2005, despite building generations of ships that were labelled as such by themselves and others.
Of course PLAN refers to 056 as a 'frigate' and most of us are comfortable using the external designation 'corvette' to emphasise the significant differences between it and the 054 series, so PLAN's internal designations are not necessarily authoritative.
The question is whether it is appropriate to 'back-date' classifications to reflect modern standards and subsequent developments. I don't think it is, not only because doing so opens an enormous can of worms for no clear benefit (a lot of designs around the world would be up for re-evaluation), but because a nation's classification structure often has implications for the future, even if the vessels within those classifications evolve significantly over time. In China's case, the term "frigate" has been used to describe second-line vessels that are smaller than PLAN's first-line combatants, destroyers, but significantly larger than third-line patrol boats, missile craft, etc. Even if their capabilities more closely resemble today's third-line vessels (i.e. the 056 series), as formerly second-line warships, I expect PLAN's current 053s to be replaced with new second-line warships -- i.e. vessels of the 054 series (or subsequent follow-on). And as such it is reasonable to keep the 053s in that category in the meantime, almost as a "watch this space" marker.
Of course PLAN refers to 056 as a 'frigate' and most of us are comfortable using the external designation 'corvette' to emphasise the significant differences between it and the 054 series, so PLAN's internal designations are not necessarily authoritative.
The question is whether it is appropriate to 'back-date' classifications to reflect modern standards and subsequent developments. I don't think it is, not only because doing so opens an enormous can of worms for no clear benefit (a lot of designs around the world would be up for re-evaluation), but because a nation's classification structure often has implications for the future, even if the vessels within those classifications evolve significantly over time. In China's case, the term "frigate" has been used to describe second-line vessels that are smaller than PLAN's first-line combatants, destroyers, but significantly larger than third-line patrol boats, missile craft, etc. Even if their capabilities more closely resemble today's third-line vessels (i.e. the 056 series), as formerly second-line warships, I expect PLAN's current 053s to be replaced with new second-line warships -- i.e. vessels of the 054 series (or subsequent follow-on). And as such it is reasonable to keep the 053s in that category in the meantime, almost as a "watch this space" marker.
Last edited:
No it doesn't. It simply means that the PLAN has evolved from a coastal defense force to a fully modern blue water navy, and as such the roles of its ships and its ship classes have evolved in dramatic ways, and in a relatively short period of time. Its previous frigates were designed for nothing further out than coastal duties; its older destroyers as well. Now this role is starting to be filled by its "light frigates", i.e. the corvettes like the 056. As such, the older frigates will simply be continuing their old role alongside the newer corvettes. New frigates like the 054A and 054B couldn't be dramatically more different from the older frigates, and this difference reflects their blue water roles that older frigates did not and can not fulfill. Note that I did not claim that 053H3s and 054s will somehow be back-classified or re-classified or whatever, only that they will perform the duties associated nowadays with a 056 corvette (exactly as they have been the whole time), while the 054A and 054B will perform the duties associated with the modern classification of "frigate", i.e. ASW and local AAW in blue waters.
Some thought and addressing this allegedly leaked drawing, which Jura posted from an article earlier on this thread. It differs from the other leak by having diagonal funnels, unless it wasn't drawn properly in the other drawing.
The basis for this fan CGI interpretation.
I don't know if the distance relationship between the diagonal side funnels, but putting the ASMs in between in the fan work seems off. The funnels might have a relationship that looks closer to what you have on the Iver Huitfeldt right now, allowing for a mast or two in between the funnels. The ASMs would be between the gap between the leading funnel to the superstructure and the rear of the main mast. The Iver Huitfeldt has an unusual configuration for a frigate though, but we should ignore the remainder for the purposes of focusing on the 054B.
For the purpose of reducing the radar signature, the sides of the funnels could be "X". Or you can angle the two funnels flush with the main hull side. Then across or opposite of each funnel, are these large doors, which is not placed on the sides of the main superstructure like in the CG depiction.
The basis for this fan CGI interpretation.
I don't know if the distance relationship between the diagonal side funnels, but putting the ASMs in between in the fan work seems off. The funnels might have a relationship that looks closer to what you have on the Iver Huitfeldt right now, allowing for a mast or two in between the funnels. The ASMs would be between the gap between the leading funnel to the superstructure and the rear of the main mast. The Iver Huitfeldt has an unusual configuration for a frigate though, but we should ignore the remainder for the purposes of focusing on the 054B.
For the purpose of reducing the radar signature, the sides of the funnels could be "X". Or you can angle the two funnels flush with the main hull side. Then across or opposite of each funnel, are these large doors, which is not placed on the sides of the main superstructure like in the CG depiction.
Lethe
Captain
Of course they won't need external anti-ship missiles if they switch to the new universal VLS.
Do the recent 'leaks' have anything to say about 054B's VLS configuration?
Ok, I thought the unwritten coda of your first post was "and therefore 053H3 shouldn't be in the list of frigates because it isn't one." Glad we have clarified that and I agree with your reasoning about how 053H3 will be used going forward, i.e. in the corvette-type role.
Regarding the 054 though, there are deployments that require the range/endurance/seakeeping qualities of the 054 hull but don't necessarily need the VLS and other advanced systems of 054A. The anti-piracy deployments to the Gulf of Aden are the first example that springs to mind.
Do the recent 'leaks' have anything to say about 054B's VLS configuration?
Ok, I thought the unwritten coda of your first post was "and therefore 053H3 shouldn't be in the list of frigates because it isn't one." Glad we have clarified that and I agree with your reasoning about how 053H3 will be used going forward, i.e. in the corvette-type role.
Regarding the 054 though, there are deployments that require the range/endurance/seakeeping qualities of the 054 hull but don't necessarily need the VLS and other advanced systems of 054A. The anti-piracy deployments to the Gulf of Aden are the first example that springs to mind.
Last edited:
Most likely the same or an improved version of the current H/AJK-16 VLS aboard the 054As. This is due to the 054Bs' retaining the slant launchers as claimed by fzgfzy.
The universal VLS has three standard sizes, large, mid, small. It's not clear if 054B will use the largest size but those anti ship missiles are huge. So the optimal could still be use VLS only for anti air, and keep anti ship missiles mounted in the middle section.