054/A FFG Thread II

[Hendrik_2000]

Not a problem with the PLAN either.

Exactly it is presumptuous to assume all the PLAN personnel are moron good for nothing Remember that out of 160 billion defense budget one third is designated for training
And for all of us who are keen observer of PLAN we see bigger and longer exercise with every year involving navy, air force and rocket force
Like they say train as if you are in real fight and fight as in training
And for all those hubris comment" yea but we have more experience". What experience no one YET fight peer or near peer involving all spectrum of the military. Fighting rag towel head with sandal does not qualify as real fighting experience!

 

[Tam]

I'm not sure, but TBH I wasn't trying to be comprehensive about it either, as I also did not include carriers, DDHs, corvettes, and SSNs. But a more complete list would be:

CHINESE ORBAT

Carriers (1)
Modern (1): 1x CV-16

Destroyers (27 non-obsolete)
Modern (25): 1x 051B, 2x 051C, 2x 052B, 6x 052C, 10x 052D, 4x Sov (after refit)
Semi-modern (2): 2x 052
Obsolete (6): 6x 051

Frigates (38 non-obsolete)
Modern (28): 28x 054A
Semi-modern (10): 8x 053H3, 2x 054
Obsolete (13): 12x 053

Corvettes (41)
Modern (41): 41x 056/A

SSKs (42 non-obsolete)
Modern (28): 18x Yuan, 10x Kilo/636
Semi-modern (14): 12x Song, 2x Kilo/877
Obsolete (15): 15x Ming

SSNs (6? non-obsolete)
Modern (4?): 4?x Type 093A/B
Semi-modern (2): 2x Type 093
Obsolete (3): 3x Type 091


JAPANESE ORBAT

"Helicopter-carrying destroyers" (4)
Modern (4): 2x Hyuga, 2x Izumi

Destroyers (27)
Modern (27): 2x Atago, 4x Kongou, 1x Asahi, 4x Akizuki, 2x Hatakaze, 5x Takanami, 9x Murasame

Frigates/small destroyers (13)
Modern (8): 8x Asagiri
Semi-modern (5): 5x Hatsuyuki

Corvettes (6)
Modern (6): 6x Abukuma

SSKs (18)
Modern (18): 9x Soryu, 9x Oyashio



It's curious that you somehow transmuted "modern warship" into "Aegis destroyer". There is no requirement for a "modern" warship to have to be an Aegis or Aegis-like ship, destroyer or otherwise. Otherwise you would have to invalidate the 051B, 051C, 052B, and all post-refit 4 Sovs as modern warships, along with every last 054A and 056/A, and I don't see you screaming for those to be classified as substandard or obsolete. Second, there is no requirement for an Aegis or Aegis-like warship to have to carry LRSAMs like the SM-2 to be classified as Aegis-type ships. That is only your own definition which nobody else uses. Aegis-like capability doesn't even require the presence of VLS cells; the first 5 Ticos paired the SPY-1 with Mk 26 rail launchers. As long as you have an ESA and a combat data system that can search, track and either attack or direct another friendly ship to attack hundreds to thousands of targets in all three domains (air, surface, and subsurface), you have an Aegis-like capability.

As far as the JMSDF goes, your count of only 6 to 7 Aegis vessels is way off. In addition to Aegis, the JMSDF also uses ATECS, which is the Japanese version of Aegis. Aegis or ATECS is present on all new JMSDF ships, which means all the Atagos, Kongous, Asahis, Akizukis, Hyugas, and Izumus will have Aegis or ATECS. I count 15 such ships. The PLAN (presumably) has 17 such ships, 6x 052C, 10x 052D, and 1x CV-16. I say presumably because there is no official or even semi-official confirmation of any kind that any of these ships have an Aegis-like capability. I think it would be disingenuous of you to discount ATECS as an Aegis-like system (when it is described exactly as such) when you can't even get any confirmation at all that any PLAN warship has any kind of Aegis-like capability.

As for the Hatakaze, Takanami, and Murasame classes, your attempt to invalidate these ship classes as true destroyers does not stand up to scrutiny. Otherwise you would have to invalidate the 051B, the 052, the 052B, and all 4 Sovs as true destroyers, and I don't see you screaming for that to happen either. All 3 of these JMSDF destroyer classes displace greater than 6,000 tons and have modern radars and armaments that would be lethal in any modern day war scenario. None of them are "4,500 tons" if we are talking max displacement.

Lastly, it is grossly intellectually dishonest to classify the Hatsuyuki and Asagiri classes as "obsolete" in the same manner as the Luda and Jianghu classes, especially when their sensors and armaments are no less effective than modern ships designated for ASW warfare. They may have been built in the 1980's, but they are no less modern than any PLAN ships built up until the mid 2000's. I do agree that they should be classified as frigates due to their size, but this has absolutely no disposition on the combat effectiveness of their sensors or their weapons.

Aegis like means little here. You might have Aegis like systems, but what's the point if you can only see, but cannot reach all those targets.

Yes, all ATECS ships are only equipped with ESSM, and not SM-2. Short to medium range is good for defending yourself and ships in the immediate vicinity but it does not stop long range high altitude bombers from firing their long range ordinance against other ships and land targets.

Another is that the Takanami and Murasame class doesn't have 360 degree facing phase array radar. They do have the world's first AESA, but its an L band, which means good only for search, is rather strangely small, which means few elements, and has a forward aspect only. You only need to look at the ships that this radar does not cover the rear aspect and rear quarter aspects properly. Both classes have only two missile target illuminators which also limits simultaneous engagement.

As for the Akizuki, the use of a C band for its search radar reduces its search range. The decision to skip S-band seems rather strange, and the Akizukis lack long band search radar. But then again, they are only equipped with ESSM for their SAM. For an AAW ship, it also strange to limit everything to short to middle range only. Note that these are the ATECS ships.

The 051B, 052B and Sovs are not just primarily destroyers by purpose, they got long range antiship punch or in the case of the 052B, an impressive 16 ASMs. JSMDF ships are focused on AAW and ASW, which was their bet on how the Chinese and Russians are going to focus on their A2/AD strategy, but however the Chinese went through the middle, with their greatest strength on surface ships, which is why the USN is now scrambling for a renewed ASuW focus. The CHN has a long range offensive reach the JSMDF doesn't have, their antiship missiles are the fair equivalent to the Harpoon and the YJ-83. In fact I can go on to say that the ROKN might have better offensive reach than the JSMDF thanks to their Sejong destroyers.

ATECS is a combat management system, but then again, even down to the Type 056 these also have centralized networked combat management systems.

I am not looking for "Aegis like" here. All that matters is the sensory capability, the CMS that can process all the sensor data, and having the OTH and CEC, and then all the punch and the reach to see things through.

 

[Tam]

Exactly it is presumptuous to assume all the PLAN personnel are moron good for nothing Remember that out of 160 billion defense budget one third is designated for training
And for all of us who are keen observer of PLAN we see bigger and longer exercise with every year involving navy, air force and rocket force
Like they say train as if you are in real fight and fight as in training
And for all those hubris comment" yea but we have more experience". What experience no one YET fight peer or near peer involving all spectrum of the military. Fighting rag towel head with sandal does not qualify as real fighting experience!

PLAN exercises seem to involve live firing all the time, and not just with drones, but with live antiship missiles to shoot down. In contrast, being able to fire a few Harpoons on the last RIMPAC was a big event. Surprising, the USN never fired a Harpoon from a sub for more than a decade until this RIMPAC.

 

[Iron Man]

Aegis like means little here. You might have Aegis like systems, but what's the point if you can only see, but cannot reach all those targets.

Yes, all ATECS ships are only equipped with ESSM, and not SM-2. Short to medium range is good for defending yourself and ships in the immediate vicinity but it does not stop long range high altitude bombers from firing their long range ordinance against other ships and land targets.

Once again you have failed to address your moving of the goalposts from "modern warship" to "Aegis destroyer". Who brought this requirement into the conversation other than you? Why are we even talking about Aegis or Aegis-like? I know neither myself nor Hendrick nor anyone else has been classifying "modern" as requiring "Aegis" or even "Aegis-like" capabilities, so why are you injecting irrelevancy into this conversation?

Not only that, what does the 052C and 052D have but nothing other than "Aegis-like" systems since they obviously don't have Aegis itself, not to mention we don't even actually have any evidence that they in fact have such systems in the first place? What we do know is that the JMSDF is equipped with a comprehensive combat management system that is already well-known as the "Japanese Aegis". The ships that it's been on so far have not been tasked with long range air defense, but the dumb thing to do would be to assume that this somehow indicates they are incapable of it if so tasked in the future. The Akizuki and Asahi classes are specifically designed to provide defense for the Atago and Kongou destroyers in the form of medium range air defense and ASW, while the Hyuga and Izumi classes are helicopter carriers. All use the ATECS system, which indicates to me that ATECS is not specific to a class or a mission.

Another is that the Takanami and Murasame class doesn't have 360 degree facing phase array radar. They do have the world's first AESA, but its an L band, which means good only for search, is rather strangely small, which means few elements, and has a forward aspect only. You only need to look at the ships that this radar does not cover the rear aspect and rear quarter aspects properly. Both classes have only two missile target illuminators which also limits simultaneous engagement.

First of all, they do. You are obviously looking at the mast behind the radar and think the radar signals can't go through that, but unless it's a solid mast the transmissions will pass through and return to the radar. Ask yourself also why a ship's radar horizon is greater than its visual horizon. Second, your criticism of the classes having "only" two illuminators betrays a lack of understanding of how ESSM (or SM-2) engagements work. You should read up on it. As a comparison, Arleigh Burkes "only" have 3 and Ticos "only" have 4. Other similar ships also have only a few illuminators, like Kongou/Atago (3), and Alvaro de Bazan/Hobart (2). Since 054As have 4 illuminators, I guess to you that means only the Tico has reached the standard of "054A equivalent" while all the other classes are "limited" LOL

As for the Akizuki, the use of a C band for its search radar reduces its search range. The decision to skip S-band seems rather strange, and the Akizukis lack long band search radar. But then again, they are only equipped with ESSM for their SAM. For an AAW ship, it also strange to limit everything to short to middle range only. Note that these are the ATECS ships.

This means nothing unless you know the exact frequency of the radar. Lower C-band is basically the same as upper S-band, so the range of the search radar can only be guessed at.

The 051B, 052B and Sovs are not just primarily destroyers by purpose, they got long range antiship punch or in the case of the 052B, an impressive 16 ASMs. JSMDF ships are focused on AAW and ASW, which was their bet on how the Chinese and Russians are going to focus on their A2/AD strategy, but however the Chinese went through the middle, with their greatest strength on surface ships, which is why the USN is now scrambling for a renewed ASuW focus. The CHN has a long range offensive reach the JSMDF doesn't have, their antiship missiles are the fair equivalent to the Harpoon and the YJ-83. In fact I can go on to say that the ROKN might have better offensive reach than the JSMDF thanks to their Sejong destroyers.

I like how you are repeatedly inconsistent in applying the same standards to the PLAN as you do to the JMSDF. All the Japanese warships are equipped with the Type 90 SSM which has a greater range than the YJ-83 and almost certainly has a more sophisticated sensor, but somehow that's not "impressive" enough compared to PLAN ships' SSM armaments.

ATECS is a combat management system, but then again, even down to the Type 056 these also have centralized networked combat management systems.

I am not looking for "Aegis like" here. All that matters is the sensory capability, the CMS that can process all the sensor data, and having the OTH and CEC, and then all the punch and the reach to see things through.

First, I think it is pretty ludicrous to think that the 056 has anything resembling either Aegis or ATECS, so ludicrous it is not worth further discussing.

Second, it doesn't matter what you are personally looking for. You are the only person insisting on talking about Aegis in relation to "modern warships", so whatever you are looking for is not something that any of the rest of us have any need to provide.

Third, nobody will ever tell you any of this information even if they knew it. After decades of Aegis we can still only guess at how much "sensor data" it can process or how much "punch" and "reach" it has.

 

[Tam]

No one is saying that the Type 056 has AEGIS or a CMS even similar to a Type 052D in terms of scale, network bandwidth and processing power. But it does have a CMS on its own, according to some of the things I have read or mentioned about it, not to mention illustrations on defense expos. All its sensors are tied to a central network system, and there are workstations inside the ship. Having a CMS does not necessarily mean Aegis scale CMS, just like having a car does not mean you have a Mercedes. It just means a CMS scaled to a small ship.

The ships that it's been on so far have not been tasked with long range air defense, but the dumb thing to do would be to assume that this somehow indicates they are incapable of it if so tasked in the future. The Akizuki and Asahi classes are specifically designed to provide defense for the Atago and Kongou destroyers in the form of medium range air defense and ASW, while the Hyuga and Izumi classes are helicopter carriers. All use the ATECS system, which indicates to me that ATECS is not specific to a class or a mission.

You don't think that I don't know that? ATECS is yet another CMS. By itself, any CMS is malleable like any operating system. Currently ATECS is not used in any long range missile defense system; SM-2 support hasn't been interfaced with it, which is peculiar since there should not be any technological barriers to that except for the US may not be releasing the documentation for the missile to allow you to do it. This can be done as a way to maintain Japanese dependency to the US.

But the point remains ATECS currently doesn't have long range air defense. ATECS ships are not the capability equivalent to the 052D in terms of anti-air, anti-ship and anti-land reach. The Japanese have been developing their own SAMs, but for some reason this project has been suppressed politically. We can revisit this point when they finally do.

First of all, they do. You are obviously looking at the mast behind the radar and think the radar signals can't go through that, but unless it's a solid mast the transmissions will pass through and return to the radar. Ask yourself also why a ship's radar horizon is greater than its visual horizon. Second, your criticism of the classes having "only" two illuminators betrays a lack of understanding of how ESSM (or SM-2) engagements work. You should read up on it. As a comparison, Arleigh Burkes "only" have 3 and Ticos "only" have 4. Other similar ships also have only a few illuminators, like Kongou/Atago (3), and Alvaro de Bazan/Hobart (2). Since 054As have 4 illuminators, I guess to you that means only the Tico has reached the standard of "054A equivalent" while all the other classes are "limited" LOL.

The mast, which has a lot of high voltage cables going up and down, is bound to create interference. Steel both reflects and absorbs radio frequency, ferrite molecules convert radio frequency to electricity, and the mast acts like an antenna of its own. It also does not help that the ship's EW is in the mast locations, and would be in the rear aspect of the OPS-24. Not the EW's fault, the EW is in the right place. The general location where L-band search radars are placed is on a mast high in the aft, and you got good examples of ships with this.

Ship's radar horizon is greater than visual horizon due to surface propagation effects, but it only means that a radar on a greater height will have an even greater radar horizon. Ideally, radar should be at the top of the mast.

I completely understand how ESSM and SM-2 engagements work, including so called time sharing. And you don't think Shtil/HQ-16 doesn't do it too?

I like how you are repeatedly inconsistent in applying the same standards to the PLAN as you do to the JMSDF. All the Japanese warships are equipped with the Type 90 SSM which has a greater range than the YJ-83 and almost certainly has a more sophisticated sensor, but somehow that's not "impressive" enough compared to PLAN ships' SSM armaments.

Type 90 is about 150km on publicly released figures. YJ-83 is 180km. There is no evidence that one seeker is more "advanced" than the other, unless you have access to classified information. Type 90 dates back to 1992, and both missiles could have easily benefited from advances in microprocessor and digital signal processing in all these years. Furthermore, the YJ-83 has EOS versions. But Type 90 is all they have, whereas China has YJ-12 and YJ-18, and is continuing development on even more. I don't know if the Type 90 has datalink control that allows an operator to path the missile through multiple set points, or what kind of evasive maneuvers it has on terminal stage, or what measures does the seeker have against ECM and decoys, and whether the missile can receive updates from aircraft. China, through the Russians, have been exposed to a more focused if not advanced anti ship missile development, compared to the West which dropped the ball on the development of anti ships, and suddenly scrambling to regain it with LRASM and NSM.

This means nothing unless you know the exact frequency of the radar. Lower C-band is basically the same as upper S-band, so the range of the search radar can only be guessed at.

Longer S-band is preferred search and shorter S-band is used for higher res target tracking. Longer bands will still display less attenuation over distance than shorter bands, and something that is stealthy at shorter bands will pop up on the radar. Would have made better sense if they had retained OPS-24 from the Takanami and add that over the C and X band arrays.

 

[asif iqbal]

Off topic

Where’s news on the 28th commissioned unit ?

 

[Tam]

Off topic

Where’s news on the 28th commissioned unit ?

That's already been mentioned some pages back. The ship's pennant is 500 by the way.

 

[asif iqbal]

That's already been mentioned some pages back. The ship's pennant is 500 by the way.

I know I just wanted to get back on topic

Are all 5xx numbers now used ?

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

Question: how hard is it to replace AShM on existing ships, such as the 054A? If the PLAN wanted to, would it be easy to upgrade its ships to use better and newer missiles like YJ-62, YJ-18, YJ-12 (if it can be launched from ships in the future) to replace the YJ-83s?

Also, what type of AShM would the future 054B likely carry?

 

[gelgoog]

There are a lot of things which are unknown about Chinese anti-ship missiles. But assuming they have something similar to the Oniks, a ramjet missile, that would probably be the best long range weapon they could use. In a ship with a VLS all that matters is does the missile fit the container and is there software support for firing it or not. Considering the Type 051B upgrade the Chinese are willing to do extensive upgrades to ships to modernize them. I would basically expect the Type 054B to have something like Oniks at the very least.
On shorter ranges a dual-pulse rocket motor missile might be faster than the ramjet. Supposedly the Chinese have that too.

Aegis missiles can target both air targets and surface ships. I have heard about Soviet SAMs being used in the past in surface-to-surface combat as well. I think it depends on the sensors and the command and control system the Chinese use. Their closest equivalent to an Aegis SM-3 missile is probably their S-300 clone: the HQ-9 and its siblings.