054/A FFG Thread II

[zoom]

I would like to see 32 Type 054A series.

I think they can achieve that by the time the original 054's are near the end of their service life by constructing them at the same rate as they are doing now. ( 2 launches per year approx.)

 

[tphuang]

This bit says that those ships that are equipt with YJ-62 are considered to be 054A++ type.

There is no mention of what is the difference between 054A and 054A+ though.

The entire thing looks like the work of a fanboy. There is no evidence or need for something in 054A class to carry YJ-62.

I would not take this too seriously. As usual, I preach wait and see approach for plan.

We don't know how many 054 series ships will be produced, but just that a lot wll be. The exact number depends on their needs. For example, they need more firgates to sail out, but the role of patrol could be doine by the ever expanding force of cutters or a new armed light frigate class.

All these things indicate that one to one does not make sense. Plan is undergoing a huge strucural change with possible creation of a new blue water fleet who maybe based in Sanya buthas more active offensive intentions.

So you'd think plan will have to create new flotilla and change the roles of existing ones.

 

[ZTZ99]

The 054A's are mainly for defending coastal cities against cruise missile attacks.

I have no idea where you got that from. These ships are fully capable as blue water ships that escort carriers in distant seas. Using these ships as some strange type of mobile coastal cruise missile defense ships is silly and a waste of talent.

I would like to see 32 Type 054A series. 16 of these can be on patrol while the other 16 are replenished. Each of the Yellow Sea, East China Sea, South China Sea and Indian Ocean will have 4 Type 054A series on patrol at any time. Two of these could be designed for air defense, one designed for ASW and one for ground attack.

You forget ships usually obey the rule of thirds: one third of the time in refit, one third of the time in transit to station, and one third of the time on station. For every 3 054A's there are, only about roughly one third will be available for patrol at any given time. In China's case transit time will be shorter but this will become more similar to the USN's pattern as the PLAN widens its patrols in the world's oceans over the next decades.

 

[Roger604]

I have no idea where you got that from. These ships are fully capable as blue water ships that escort carriers in distant seas. Using these ships as some strange type of mobile coastal cruise missile defense ships is silly and a waste of talent.

I hope you don't intend this as flamebait. The ships are capable enough to give AAW cover to a carrier group, but this is not where China is at right now. China won't be operating a carrier group until at least 5 years from now. The real priority is to defend the Yangtze River delta region and the Pearl River delta region from cruise missiles. In the immediate future, Type 054A series will be a mainstay patrolling the Gulf of Aden to Malacca Strait shipping route.

You forget ships usually obey the rule of thirds: one third of the time in refit, one third of the time in transit to station, and one third of the time on station. For every 3 054A's there are, only about roughly one third will be available for patrol at any given time. In China's case transit time will be shorter but this will become more similar to the USN's pattern as the PLAN widens its patrols in the world's oceans over the next decades.

There is no such rule because China is not operating a carrier battle group on the far side of the Pacific. But it's true China will need to sustain a constant presence in the Yellow Sea, East China Sea and South China Sea (soon adding Indian Ocean too).

 

[ZTZ99]

I hope you don't intend this as flamebait. The ships are capable enough to give AAW cover to a carrier group, but this is not where China is at right now. China won't be operating a carrier group until at least 5 years from now.

Flamebait? Just because I responded to you? A little sensitive, aren't we? Have you ever heard of surface action groups? Look it up. There is no need for 054A's to be part of any carrier group in order to deploy to blue waters. We see this already in the Gulf of Aden. And again, I would like for you to cite any reference which states 054As' main role is 'coastal cruise missile defense'. Perhaps you are unaware the range of the HQ-16 is nowhere near anything that could be considered for such a queer mission, especially if we are talking about enemy cruise missiles with waypoint capabilities that could simply skirt the 054A en route to attacking their land targets.

The real priority is to defend the Yangtze River delta region and the Pearl River delta region from cruise missiles.

Yes, no doubt this is a priority, but that does not mean 054A's would be tasked with this priority just because you think they should. Standard land-based SAM emplacements are, as we speak, already doing this job several times better and several times cheaper, especially when layered like HQ-7/Tor-M1 missile launchers defending HQ-9/S-300PMU2 missile launchers.

There is no such rule because China is not operating a carrier battle group on the far side of the Pacific. But it's true China will need to sustain a constant presence in the Yellow Sea, East China Sea and South China Sea (soon adding Indian Ocean too).

What makes you think that China needs to be operating carrier battle groups in order to require cycles of maintenance, transit and on-station that every other navy in this world has to go through?

 

[EDIATH]

What 538? What 054A+/++?

I seriously doubt 054A will replace all of the old 053H ships fast, the remaining number of which approaches 30 I presume. PLAN also needs to replace a whole bunch of destroyers and submarines in order to keep the balance of the fleet, which means only the urgent replacements (across the fleet) will be carried out. I would be perfectly content to see 2-3 054A got launched/commissioned on average per year in the near future.

Surely the successor of 054A will take over during the latter half of this decade when 053H ships built in 90s start to retire.

 

[Roger604]

Flamebait? Just because I responded to you? A little sensitive, aren't we? Have you ever heard of surface action groups? Look it up. There is no need for 054A's to be part of any carrier group in order to deploy to blue waters. We see this already in the Gulf of Aden.

Is it your intention to sabotage the thread by misconstruing other people's posts? Your attempt is pretty transparent:

You first suggested carrier groups in post #703. I responded to that. Now you are backtracking and saying "forget about carriers"??

I stated that China's intention is to patrol Indian Ocean in post #704. Now you turn around and pretend that you are the one who brought up patrolling Indian Ocean??

What makes you think that China needs to be operating carrier battle groups in order to require cycles of maintenance, transit and on-station that every other navy in this world has to go through?

Now let's continue:

I said in post #700 that China will need to keep ships at dock for replenishment. You said in post #703 that it will need 3 for 1. I replied that it doesn't need that much because it's deploying close-by. Now your turn around and pretend that only you are aware that ships need to go to dock to be replenished??


You just trolling on this forum and I hope the mods will show you the door soon. :nono:

 

[ZTZ99]

Is it your intention to sabotage the thread by misconstruing other people's posts? Your attempt is pretty transparent:

You first suggested carrier groups in post #703. I responded to that. Now you are backtracking and saying "forget about carriers"??

I stated that China's intention is to patrol Indian Ocean in post #704. Now you turn around and pretend that you are the one who brought up patrolling Indian Ocean??

You obviously have absolutely NO idea how to follow a logical argument. You first said it's the 054A's job to provide coastal cruise missile defense, a laughable suggestion at best. I responded by simply saying that the 054's main role will be blue water ships that provide escort for PLAN carriers. You said that PLAN doesn't yet have a carrier and that "the real priority is to defend the Yangtze River delta region and the Pearl River delta region from cruise missiles". I responded by saying that carriers are not needed for 054A's to be blue water ships and to deploy to blue waters (so the lack of a current carrier is irrelevant). I told you to educate yourself and look up the term "surface action group" as an example. So who said anything about "forgetting" carriers? That is your deliberate and dishonest miscontrual of my posts. You are also ridiculously accusing me of "pretending" to bring up the Gulf of Aden first when I did no such thing. I don't care if you said it first, especially since you don't have the first clue what the significance of the Gulf of Aden deployment is in the first place. The Gulf of Aden signifies a BLUE WATER capability that exists within the PLAN right NOW, not "immediate future" as you are trying to misrepresent: "In the immediate future, Type 054A series will be a mainstay patrolling the Gulf of Aden to Malacca Strait shipping route". Blue water carrier battle groups (future) and blue water surface action groups (now) are what the 054A is designed for. Trying to shoot down enemy cruise missiles whose waypoints could easily take them WAY out of the 50-60km range of the HQ-16 is, as I said before, a mission that has been given to the 054A only in your own mind and nobody else's.

I said in post #700 that China will need to keep ships at dock for replenishment. You said in post #703 that it will need 3 for 1. I replied that it doesn't need that much because it's deploying close-by. Now your turn around and pretend that only you are aware that ships need to go to dock to be replenished??

You need to clean up your mind and get your arguments straight, because here is what I said in post #703 before you even replied to anything at all: "In China's case transit time will be shorter but this will become more similar to the USN's pattern as the PLAN widens its patrols in the world's oceans over the next decades." You are the one pretending to be the first to bring up this issue. Clearly that is a lie. I acknowledged this fact in my very FIRST response to you. I also fully accounted for this fact in my next sentence by using the word "roughly": "only about roughly one third will be available for patrol at any given time." If English is not your first language, it may be understandable that you utterly missed this nuance of language. Roughly means "approximately". In the specific case of the 054A's deployment, the transit time will obviously depend on deployment location, for example Gulf of Aden vs South China Sea. This is not any different with the USN. The less time spent in transit, the more time available for on station duty, and vice versa. There will be times that more than one surface group will be available to deploy to a given location out of a given fleet with several rotating surface groups. Other times not. Navies can also "surge" deploy in emergencies but this has negative effects on long term sustainability.

You just trolling on this forum and I hope the mods will show you the door soon. :nono:

Please don't construe your complete inability to follow a logical argument as any kind of evidence that I am trolling. It's rather sad how you ultranationalists take any disagreement with your views as trolling or as some kind of affront to China. Post according to the reasoning within the thread or else stop posting, because that makes YOU the troll. Your statements are deliberating flamebaiting and insulting and you are as of right now being reported to the moderator for review.

 

[SampanViking]

OK you called and I came, but I really can't see what the beef is here??!!

You both have a difference of opinion and you seem unable and unlikely to agree with each other. So what??

Rather than just insult each other how about trying to back up your arguments with some facts, if there are any relevant to subject of the squabble.

Is there anything inherent to the 054's that makes any task attributed by the other impossible?

It would be an absolute travesty to have to close a thread or look at issuing warnings over a squabble that is so petty and frankly pointless.

 

[tphuang]

HP 054As side by side. These are the 4th and 5th units. Looks like the 5th units are getting most of its sensors worked on and proceeding nicely. Also, seems like the number on the fourth unit got wiped out or maybe that is just PS'd off.