054/A FFG Thread II
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
There are somethings that remain open, such as whether instead of HQ-16, we may have a new missile instead. That possibility, although less likely in my opinion, still remains viable until disproven.
It really depends. Unless PLAN will displace 052 family by a new frigate, there is a huge question mark over this idea.
(1)Larger cell is a significant design factor(limitation) for an intermediate-sized warship. And PLAN really doesn't lack big cells anymore to try to fit them anywhere.
(2)HHQ-16 VLS is just as popular in PLAN as UVLS is, and is in active construction (number of ships in PLAN service with it will reach at least ~60 per current plans), and thus will be procured and upgraded regardless of the appearance of the new class.
It healthily fits ASW missiles as well. It's quite likely that quad packs may be made to fit inside as well.
(3)HQ-16 is very much alive and is being actively procured and developed by PLAGF. Furthermore, HHQ-16 itself now has a foreign customer.
(4)HHQ-16 uses a very big, SM-2MR-sized missile (future main armament of the Constellation class). I.e. future potential of this missile is huge, and is probably now more limited by available guidance/radars.
China is reportedly building another batch of Type 054A frigates for the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLA Navy) after it had launched two new ships of this class over the past few months, a move Chinese military observers said on Thursday was aimed at rapidly expanding the country's naval fleet amid the need to boost its combat preparedness.
Citing photographs circulating on social media, UK-based defense weekly Janes reported on Tuesday that the Hudong-Zhonghua shipyard in Shanghai recently launched the 32nd Type 054A frigate for the PLA Navy.
The ship was under construction in the same dock as the third of Type 054A/P frigate for the Pakistan Navy, and the launch for both ships likely took place on July 31, the report said, citing a navigational warning issued by the Maritime Safety Administration of China which announced that two ships would be launched on that day, but did not specify the type.
The report came after Belgium-based news outlet Navy Recognition reported in March that the PLA Navy's 31st Type 054A frigate was about to be launched in the Huangpu Shipyard in Guangzhou, South China's Guangdong Province.
The first ship of the Type 054A, the Zhoushan, entered service in January 2008, according to the Xinhua News Agency. The latest one to be commissioned, the Zaozhuang, joined military service in February 2019, China Central Television reported in March that year.
Having a displacement of about 4,000 tons and capable of conducting anti-air, anti-ship and anti-submarine operations, the Type 054A frigate is a well-balanced warship capable of not only coastal but also far sea operations, Shi Hong, executive chief editor of the Chinese magazine Shipborne Weapons, told the Global Times on Thursday.
It uses mature technologies that have been proven reliable with the previous 30 ships, as they have performed well in tasks including escort missions in the Gulf of Aden and many military exercises, Shi said.
Under the current situation that forces the PLA to enhance its combat preparedness, the Type 054A is a good choice to rapidly expand the PLA Navy's fleet also because of its lower cost compared with larger warships like destroyers, and that it can be mass-produced faster, Shi said, noting that this will also give China time to develop newer warships.
I believe the newest HHQ-16C/HQ-16C only has a range of about 70km, while most of the HHQ-16s in PLAN service only has a 40-45km range. Most anti-ship operations today involve launching anti-ship missiles and other standoff weapons at least 100-160 km away. LRASM can do 900km from an F/A-18. Therefore, should I say that the HHQ-16 will mainly function as incoming standoff weapon interceptors, unlike the HHQ-9?
(1)Missiles are most probably replaceable - at least, it would make sense.
(2)HQ-16a - export one - is a 650 kg, 5.2m long, 0.34m wide missile with a 70kg warhead, with a quoted speed of 1200 m/s.
To compare, SM-2MR is a 707kg, 4.73m long, 0.34m wide missile with a 61kg warhead, with a quoted speed of mach 3(i.e. same or slightly lower), yet it is capable of ranges up to ~160km.
Furthermore, closely related buk/shtil missiles are still heavier than that(up to ~780kg), and, as we know from Russian/Indian Grigorovich class frigates - vertical launchers can handle them just fine.
Thus, I assume similar ranges are perfectly achievable for the HQ-16 system.
This is a very heavy missile with helluva rocket fuel - it's twice as heavy as Barak-8 of Indian destroyers, for example.
(3)Side note on LRASM: the range you've quoted is a JASM-ER range. LRASM is a different missile with a different seeker, different warhead, and, above all, different flight/search/attack profiles. Realistically LRASM is a ~560km class missile, and combat complications will only make it less, not more. This, however, isn't really a concern of the ship - even missiles that potentially can reach that far are unlikely to be effective against attacking aircraft. It's just too far.
But LRASM is a "heavy" anti-ship missile for USN aircraft, which can't be carried internally - and thus places its carrier under significant risk; furthermore, its actual naval carriers are limited as of now(superbugs only for now) There are other weapons that shall be taken into account.
(4)USN also introduces NSM - as the main armament of its frigates, as well as the future main armament of its F-35C fleet. Here the difference between maximum range of the missile and the abovementioned maximum potential range of the interceptor is already becoming reasonable - thus frigates are complicating attackers' calculus. The same is true for Harpoon, which won't go anywhere anytime soon.
Furthermore - while range of the frigate may not be sufficient to protect the frigate itself from the release of the weapon - it'll work nicely if we'll add a 3rd object to the equation. Something more valuable and/or vulnerable than the frigate, which is protected by the said ship.
(5)ASM strikes rarely consist of ASCM alone - such strike is straightforward, and thus is relatively easy to repel. Air ASCM attack is typically supported by ARM strike - and these don't fly anywhere as far. In fact, even shiny new AARGM-ER is quoted as good for "only" 80 nm.
(6)Secondary means of anti-ship attack - for example, SDBs or related British SPEARs with active seekers are capable of even less - and their range is highly dependent on the altitude of their release.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
personally I would like to see a Type 054B
stealth features
Universal VLS 48 cells
dual hanger big enough for 2 x Z9C sized helicopters
also unmanned rotary UAV
larger displacement >5,000 tons
kitted out with plenty of ASW weapons and equipment
stealth features
Universal VLS 48 cells
dual hanger big enough for 2 x Z9C sized helicopters
also unmanned rotary UAV
larger displacement >5,000 tons
kitted out with plenty of ASW weapons and equipment
Yes we need a picture that shows a top down view to verify the exact VLS used.
I view the incoming 20 Type 054A as transitional frigates that would test and validate the technologies on the 054B/057.
HQ-16 ranges might be misleading as they may not reflect the true ballistic or flight potential of the missile, as in you let the missile fly as far as it can go without any terminal guidance using inertial guidance alone. Instead, the ranges are capped by the range of the target illuminator. It doesn't matter if the missile can travel 150km if the illuminator can only light up targets sufficiently up to 70km for example, which means your range is capped at 70km. How far the illuminator can illuminate the target for the missile to lock on also depends on the RCS of the target.
Ranges I have seen for the Buk is also needs some context, and the 50km is said to be a fighter sized target (1 to 3m2 RCS). Against a bomber sized target like say 25m2 RCS, that's going to be a different matter, going to be a longer range and against a sea skimming antiship missile with an RCS between 0.1 to 0.3m RCS, that too is going to be a different matter and a shorter range.
That's why the upgrade on the illuminators is significant. It can allow the HQ-16s to engage much farther, and if the illuminators does multibeam, they can engage multiple objects at closer range.
They can also track targets on their own, and if the ship is using active guided missiles, the panels can give midcourse updates to these missiles.
That for me is why I am curious if there is a new small to midrange SAM is going to be used with these panels. It does not matter if the AJK-16 is quadpacked with this new missile, or if they are quadpacked on a new shortened U-VLS that's made for frigate sizes. It will be two different ways towards the same goal. Which is incidentally why I am curious to see what the VLS on these new frigates are.
It would also be good to see some updates on the 052B refit to see if they already fitted the illuminators.