054/A FFG Thread II

[iantsai]

Huangpu Shipyards:

Weeks ago, #35 in the left, #33 in the right:




Recently, #35 in the left, #37 in the right:

 

[sndef888]

I wonder what is the cost of 052X type hull without the massive air defense radars. IMO, you can recycle the existing hull into a frigate. This takes the position that we no longer class Destroyer vs. Frigate by size and displacement, but rather by role, like the RN does, and also something the other RN (Russian Navy) is increasingly leaning towards to. That is Destroyer for AAW and Frigate for ASW.

Recycling or reusing an existing and proven hull would greatly save development costs, continue to rely on existing machinery, presses, and trained labor to build them.

I assume that a big amount of the 052C/D comes from the radars and its supporting equipment. What if we take those out of the equaltion, and use the 054A equipment instead. This is a return to the 052B but with significant changes, that its more like a 052B refit.

The basic fit would be:

Type 382 radar or its successor (AESA radar taking the same role)
Type 364 radar or its successor
HHQ-16 target illuminators (assuming we still use HHQ-16; since we already have AESA successors to the Front Domes we will go with those.)
Use AJK-16 VLS or U-VLS. The latter retains the same layout we see on the 052D. The changes are that HHQ-16 and YU-8 are adapted to U-VLS using new canister systems. This allows the ship to use ASROCs and quad pack SAMs that are compatible with the 052D/055.
Type 1130 at the front.
HHQ-10 at the rear.
Same proven drive train, you know what I mean.
Helo deck extended like "052DL" for larger ASW helicopters.
Same bow sonar, TAS and VDS.
Same EW and decoy launcher suite as 052D.
YJ-12 or YJ-83 for antiship missiles. It won't be hard to change the canisters and their stands. YJ-12 gives a strong focused role for antishipo warfare, but YJ-83 stands gives the flexibility of the dual targeting YJ-83 variant and the option for YU-11 ASROC.

We will refer to the 052X ASW as a frigate, while 052D+ AAW as destroyer, and both manufactured in parallel. With so many shared parts between the two ships, we can amortize the costs even further.

This is only my brain idea.

Only issue I can think of with this idea is the hull of the 052D is very old and may or may not be optimised for ASW warfare. With how advanced US subs are these days they're going to need every little advantage

Also the 052D uses gas turbines which I'm guessing is a lot more expensive than the diesels on the 054A

 

[blindsight]

Basically you're describing something similar to the Spruance ASW destroyers.
But like the Spruance, the basic 052 hull is oversized for solely the ASW role
You've got spare space with the VLS cells, which could be filled with Antiship or Land-attack missiles

Otherwise you might as well go with a smaller hull size closer to the Type-054A

A larger hull should be more suitable for blue water missions. The spare space can be filled up with more U-VLS cells. So, it can carry all kinds of missiles, including the HHQ-9 and other future long range SAMs. No need to have the electronic systems serving the long range missiles, just as a launching platform.

 

[AndrewS]

A larger hull should be more suitable for blue water missions. The spare space can be filled up with more U-VLS cells. So, it can carry all kinds of missiles, including the HHQ-9 and other future long range SAMs. No need to have the electronic systems serving the long range missiles, just as a launching platform.

It's not about packing more capability just because you can

What is the mission of the ship and how does it fit into the overall battle network comprising carrier groups, SAGs, picket ships, aircraft and land-based missiles?

The requirement you're describing is as a launch platform for SAMs
But there are also long-range strike missiles which do not not require shipborne radars and are dependent on off-board targeting anyway

CSBA actually had a proposal for the ship you're describing, except it only had 32 VLS cells. See below

csbaonline.org/research/publications/taking-back-the-seas-transforming-the-u.s-surface-fleet-for-decision-centric-warfare

Now, the Russian Navy and the US Navy are both working on hypersonic missiles to be launched from shipborne VLS cells
And I can see the Chinese Navy with the same requirement, although they will also have large numbers of land-based missiles which can reach up to 3000-4000km

I could see the Chinese Navy going with a number of ASW destroyers with Strike VLS cells. The Spruance is an prior example, which had a primary ASW mission but also 61 VLS cells with Tomahawks

---

Bringing this back to the Type-054 frigates, I do see a need for a ship which aggressively pursue submarine contacts whilst defending a carrier group operating past the 1st Island Chain. This purpose of this ship would be to detect and to physically block an enemy submarine from getting too close to the carrier.

However, an opposing submarine should be able to get a firing solution first, so the ship has to be made into an unattractive target which is not worth a torpedo attack. Adding capability such as long-range radars and VLS cells to launch big SAMs/antiship/land-attack missiles makes this ship more of a target, which has a higher probability of being lost since the ship is operating aggressively against the submarine. Note that there are already air-defence destroyers in the vicinity, so there's no need for a long-range radars or many VLS cells

So overall, I think that calls for a new Frigate which is 4000tons or so, like the Type-054A
It would have blue-water seakeeping and endurance
But I think a new propulsion setup would be required to keep up with a carrier group
Plus a faster ship means more chance of outrunning an incoming torpedo attack which is highly likely

And if you can keep this the cost of this ship to $400M, a Virginia SSN costs at least $2800M which 7x more expensive
So if the Chinese Navy has to start sacrificing a Frigate to destroy a Virginia, it's a winning strategy from the Chinese perspective

Anyway, if you want to discuss more about future ships and ORBAT, we have separate threads for this

 

[sndef888]

Heck, even a 054A with only the VLS changed to the UVLS+quadpacked sam would be a decent upgrade for minimal cost, assuming it could fit at least ~24 UVLS in the same space

It would mean 32 medium range sams + 16 more cells for the PLA to mix and match depending on the mission


A new frigate with better propulsion would be ideal but may be costly considering the PLA doesn't have any gas turbines small enough

 

[AndrewS]

Heck, even a 054A with only the VLS changed to the UVLS+quadpacked sam would be a decent upgrade for minimal cost, assuming it could fit at least ~24 UVLS in the same space

It would mean 32 medium range sams + 16 more cells for the PLA to mix and match depending on the mission


A new frigate with better propulsion would be ideal but may be costly considering the PLA doesn't have any gas turbines small enough

And what would the PLAN do with an extra 16 VLS cells on a Type-054A?
It would make it a juicier target for a submarine in the ASW role
If you want ASMs or SAMs, you're better off putting them on a Type-052D operating as the radar picket, or closer to the inner screen for last ditch defensive

And is the QC-280 really that big?
Plus in any case, a QC-280 should take up far less space than one of the current diesel engines on the Type-054A

 

[sndef888]

And what would the PLAN do with an extra 16 VLS cells on a Type-054A?
It would make it a juicier target for a submarine in the ASW role
If you want ASMs or SAMs, you're better off putting them on a Type-052D operating as the radar picket, or closer to the inner screen for last ditch defensive

And is the QC-280 really that big?
Plus in any case, a QC-280 should take up far less space than one of the current diesel engines on the Type-054A

At least a couple would be for vl asrocs just like on the 054As currently. The remaining ~8 could be used for better anti ship missiles or land attack missiles or just left FFBNW. Cruise missiles for example barely cost anything anything. I doubt a few extra VLS would change the value of the ship that much.

Besides, there's barely any extra space on 052Ds since they only have 64 unlike Burkes with 96.

 

[Gloire_bb]

I doubt a few extra VLS would change the value of the ship that much.

Then why add them in the first place? Cells are means to an end, not design aim.
For TF defense&ASW, 054A has more than enough.

 

[Tam]

Basically you're describing something similar to the Spruance ASW destroyers.
But like the Spruance, the basic 052 hull is oversized for solely the ASW role
You've got spare space with the VLS cells, which could be filled with Antiship or Land-attack missiles

Otherwise you might as well go with a smaller hull size closer to the Type-054A

Not oversized. The Udaloy class is fairly about the same size and this is optimized for ASW.

Steel is the cheapest component of a warship. An increase in tonnage is the cheapest thing you can add to a warship. More space also means more provisions, fuel and food with more living room for sustained journeys.

Frigates continue to get larger. Type 31 "intermediate frigate" is already about roughly the size of the 051B/C. Germany has contracted frigates that would displace already at over 10,000 tons.

 

[Tam]

Only issue I can think of with this idea is the hull of the 052D is very old and may or may not be optimised for ASW warfare. With how advanced US subs are these days they're going to need every little advantage

Also the 052D uses gas turbines which I'm guessing is a lot more expensive than the diesels on the 054A

Gas turbines are also smoother than diesels which aid in ASW work. So thus its a real advantage, and it enables the ship to "dash" in pursuit of SSNs. The Soviets then the Russians use gas turbines in ships down to corvette size. For example the Krivak class and the Admiral Grigorovich class, which is roughly the size equivalent to the 054A, uses four gas turbines.

The most expensive part of a warship is the weapons and sensor systems.

Reusing the 052X hull makes it cheaper---
Proven platform
Little to no development cost
Leverages existing machinery (presses, molds and so on)
Leverages existing labor skillsets. Little to no retraining.
Leverages existing ship equipment, Weapons, sensors and the like.
Increased volume production lowers cost of the hull as a whole. This also means 052D/E also becomes cheaper to build.
Leverages familiarity. Less training costs,