Thats the best yandex could do... You should have translated it earlier..
So that means, no news on 054a follow on?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
054/A FFG Thread II
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
So that means, no news on 054a follow on?
Thats the best yandex could do... You should have translated it earlier..
So that means, no news on 054a follow on?
That's evidence of the follow on. Since they are still working on designing and developing the ship's IT systems, it does not seem close they are ready to build a ship.
The next rumors I'm getting, but this could be conjecture on the part of Chinese observers, is that the new dual band AESA radar you see on the 075 might make it on the 054B. Given that HDZ is also likely designing and building the 054B, the 075 itself can give clues to the 054B.
Last edited:
antiterror13
Brigadier
Will the 054B have an integrated mast?
sure
If they are planning to use the 075's dual band AESA on the Type 054B, you're not going to need an integrated mast on that. But you may still need an integrated mast if you plan on using a new four fixed faced AESA for the fire control, in which case the dual band AESA will be sitting on top of the mast, and the fixed four faced AESA embedded on the mast below the other radar. This is somewhat like you see on the Gorshkov. The second AESA is used as fire control for the HQ-16s. Using AESA for HHQ-16 is not implausible since the land based HQ-16 has recently gotten a new fire control vehicle with a new radar set, which unlike the previous one that consists of dual PESAs, is now a dual AESA. This also means the HQ-16 seeker itself has already been adapted for use with the AESA's waveforms.
Last edited:
How many type 054B will they build, instead of the type 056?
Questions like that you should ask the PLAN leaders.
I doubt the PLAN would go for this combo. There would almost certainly be a duplication of frequencies since the rotating AESA would be S/C or S/X and the fixed-panel AESA would be C or X. I would rather prefer a rotating S on top of a fixed X. Or a mast-top fixed X with a rotating S or L or UHF on a lower secondary mast. In this configuration the X-band would provide horizon/surface search and fire control for guns and missiles while the rotating radar would provide volume search/early warning. Combined with some quad-packed MRSAMs in 2-4 UVLS modules along with VDS/TAS and VL ASW missiles, this ship would slot into a very needed niche for medium range air defense (local anti-air protection for nearby larger ships) and ASW, like what the Akizuki does for the JMSDF.If they are planning to use the 075's dual band AESA on the Type 054B, you're not going to need an integrated mast on that. But you may still need an integrated mast if you plan on using a new four fixed faced AESA for the fire control, in which case the dual band AESA will be sitting on top of the mast, and the fixed four faced AESA embedded on the mast below the other radar. This is somewhat like you see on the Gorshkov. The second AESA is used as fire control for the HQ-16s. Using AESA for HHQ-16 is not implausible since the land based HQ-16 has recently gotten a new fire control vehicle with a new radar set, which unlike the previous one that consists of dual PESAs, is now a dual AESA. This also means the HQ-16 seeker itself has already been adapted for use with the AESA's waveforms.
I doubt the PLAN would go for this combo. There would almost certainly be a duplication of frequencies since the rotating AESA would be S/C or S/X and the fixed-panel AESA would be C or X. I would rather prefer a rotating S on top of a fixed X. Or a mast-top fixed X with a rotating S or L or UHF on a lower secondary mast. In this configuration the X-band would provide horizon/surface search and fire control for guns and missiles while the rotating radar would provide volume search/early warning. Combined with some quad-packed MRSAMs in 2-4 UVLS modules along with VDS/TAS and VL ASW missiles, this ship would slot into a very needed niche for medium range air defense (local anti-air protection for nearby larger ships) and ASW, like what the Akizuki does for the JMSDF.
Type 075 is already a duplication, with Type 382 having the S/C combo, and the new "Type 383" having the S/X combo, assuming the rumors are correct (I still have certain doubts, pieces don't align perfectly) about the second radar.
Its not difficult to create variations of this radar however, to create either an S/S or an X/X for different purposes.
The primary reason for going with a rotating radar is to save money as you only have a single or dual face versus four faces. The radar configuration is going to be shaped by how much you are willing to spend on the ship. A four faced X-band is ideal, but it maybe deemed too costly. I don't know how deep the PLAN's stomach for spending per 054B unit will be. You are confronted with the sliding bar of cost, but you don't know where the 054B and even the 052E maybe placed along these bars. I don't think the PLAN is willing to spend that much on a 054B frigate compared to other nations, where the frigate is their top end and they are more willing to spend on that, as opposed to the PLAN which already has other top end ships.
I would consider the Type 383 to be a question mark in terms of frequency band until something more definitive comes out.Type 075 is already a duplication, with Type 382 having the S/C combo, and the new "Type 383" having the S/X combo, assuming the rumors are correct (I still have certain doubts, pieces don't align perfectly) about the second radar.
Its not difficult to create variations of this radar however, to create either an S/S or an X/X for different purposes.
The primary reason for going with a rotating radar is to save money as you only have a single or dual face versus four faces. The radar configuration is going to be shaped by how much you are willing to spend on the ship. A four faced X-band is ideal, but it maybe deemed too costly. I don't know how deep the PLAN's stomach for spending per 054B unit will be. You are confronted with the sliding bar of cost, but you don't know where the 054B and even the 052E maybe placed along these bars. I don't think the PLAN is willing to spend that much on a 054B frigate compared to other nations, where the frigate is their top end and they are more willing to spend on that, as opposed to the PLAN which already has other top end ships.
In any case, a warship will need 4 faces anyway for fire control, whether it's fixed panel or a traditional FCR (like the MR-90 X-band PESA and its Chinese clone the Type 345), so the increased cost will only be because it's AESA and more modern, or perhaps larger, not because it's a quadruple fixed-panel array. This is what I would consider a wash because money is going to be spent like this anyway, regardless of whether the FCR moves or is fixed. A truly updated/modernized 054B would do away with the Orekh-type FCRs with their mechanically steered single-point failure risks and replace them with flat panel arrays. These arrays would simplify the topside clutter by doing away with separate radars for missile fire control (345 x4), gun fire control (344), and surface search (364). Given how many radars it would be replacing, a quadruple fixed-panel radar's cost may not actually be that much greater if considering saved lifetime costs from simplified maintenance, logistics, and crewing needs. The 345s are unable to cope with large scale ASCM saturation attacks, whereas an AESA would definitely be more capable in this regard. The eurofrigates are another beast entirely, pocket destroyers packed full with extras that the 054B would not be installing, which besides the radar suite would not have to be much different from a 054A. Perhaps more SHP for 30+ knots to chase down subs, and UVLS instead of H/AJK-16, but that's about it. Or not even. 054A+ already has VDS/TAS, so this wouldn't be a cost increase.