Hou do you see the Constellation FFGs, in this regard? Closer to 054A/B (i.e. normal frigates), Akizuki/Asahi (i.e. specific-role fleet escorts), or Type 26/Admiral Gorshkov/Nilgiri (i.e. general-purpose combatants)?
054B/new generation frigate
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
The first batch is in-between 1+2.
Constellations are a global 'trade protection' design, one much cheaper than Burke to procure and run, and good at independent operations.
At the same time, they're certainly capable supplementary fleet escorts.
Price of being both is of course their size. And cost.
Congress tries its best to make them into second-class destroyers, though.
p.s. for the sake of clarity - it's perhaps better to call the 1st group "GP". Those ships are expressly secondary to main combatants of their navies - but can do all the mundane tasks on their own, w/o deploying more expensive assets.
The simplest form of GP frigate - is a ship specifically capable only of basic ASuW and AAW; peacetime/calm rear area "big" enforcer.
The more they're intended to be true "trade protection" ships(in old maritime theory sense) - the better-rounded they are.
The 3rd group, while is also all-purpose, is mostly about the most capable combatants of their respective navies. They are either themselves their core fleet combatants or their dedicated fleet designs have no clear status/price edge over them, being specialized escort designs of some kind - like AA frigates or destroyers in name only(Darings).
Last edited:
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Some of your points are all valid however they remained excuses. As to not making enough helos, that's a not a valid excuse. I'm 10000% sure making Z20s etc. is not a major constraint for China's MIC.
A modern destroyer designed in the late 2000s (052DL) SHOULD have facilities for 2 onboard helos. It's a huge oversight in my opinion.
This comes from decades of experience where 1 unit is simply inadequate.
Unless PLAN intends to never operate outside of the 1st island chain this may potentially cause issues.
When you have 2, you have almost a 100% helo availability.
When you are sub hunting a 2 ship helo working in concert scales up effectiveness in a few order of magnitudes. When you launched torpedoes from 2 diffetent vectors you up the probability hit significantly.
Even if you just use one they can take turns to refuel for continous time on station.. etc.
If one goes down there is another for immediate SAR.
The advantages of having 2 vs 1 in the high seas is a forgone conclusion and an absolute MUST for any vessels over 7k tons intending on operating outside the comfort zone. Even more so for PLAN with very limited FOBs.
A much smaller ROC’s OHP class frigate has 2 helo hangars. For a supposedly ASW focused ship, the lack of a 2nd hangar came as a bit of a surprise to me. The ship has the beam to practically accommodate them.lol dual hangars is a little bit TOO much. it's only a frigate after all
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
What about providing ASW picket for carrier task forces?
For the foreseeable future, there will be sufficient numbers of 054A to carry out the general purpose frigate duties, escort, trade protection / interdiction, etc. With (probable) IEP and higher speeds (fast enough to keep up with carrier groups), wouldn't it make sense to see 054Bs serving as ASW screen/picket for carrier groups?
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
1- so China didnt build twin hangers because they are a fire hazard ? what kind of thinking is it
2- you need to prioritise the requirements
3- yes it is because long on range deployment the salt will kill the chopper not to mention see state
4- no ASW DDG job is to sweep for submarines, it has to have its own assets to do so
051B has 48 VLS cells, 8 missiles per VLS. 052C has 6 missiles per VLS.
Interestingly, the Japanese Kongo class destroyers , built around the same time as type 051B but much bigger at 9500 tons, have no helicopter hangars at all, just helicopter decks.