054B/new generation frigate

kwaigonegin said:

Which would be quite inexcusable for a new class of 6k+ ton warship launched in late 2023 and potentially being the future workhorse of PLAN.

Click to expand...

Or they could simply a two sets of electric generators between the diesel engines and the shafts. Then you could have an IEP powered purely by diesel engines as opposed to US and UK IEPs, which are powered by a combination of diesels and gas turbines. This would make the 054B quieter than the 054A. Ultimately the primary task of the 054B is anti-submarine warfare, so noice reduction would be the key.

ChongqingHotPot92 said:

Ultimately the primary task of the 054B is anti-submarine warfare

Click to expand...

Why? Most information we have points to a general purpose blue water (meaning long range-endurance) frigate.

Gloire_bb said:

Why/why?
As you've just said, we're talking about a workhorse, not about cars bought to impress chicks. Not even a 'frontline' combatant.

Both light ASCM and Diesel p/plant are strong optimizations, and those are exactly 'workhorse' optimizations. For anything first line, there are over 30 052C/D, and their numbers still grow and grow.

Click to expand...

It's not about the perverbial impressing the chicks.
I'm not saying 054B should be a Ferrari if we're going to use a car analogy.
But I expect a 2024 model year Honda Accord to have adaptive cruise control, airbags, carplay and be fuel efficient etc.

ChongqingHotPot92 said:

Or they could simply a two sets of electric generators between the diesel engines and the shafts. Then you could have an IEP powered purely by diesel engines as opposed to US and UK IEPs, which are powered by a combination of diesels and gas turbines. This would make the 054B quieter than the 054A. Ultimately the primary task of the 054B is anti-submarine warfare, so noice reduction would be the key.

Click to expand...

You can't do that. Diesel engine's power density is much lower than GT. There is a technical reason why US and UK did what they have done.

See the 20MWe (GT25000) and 4MWe diesel engine. Both are rated as electrical power 100%, not shaft power, nor emergence power (about 110%).


Now see their size comparison. Blue is diesel, orange is GT.


With 2 times of size and 5 times higher power, GT is at least 2.5 times more power dense. Using full diesel engines, there won't be much space left in the ship. I say at lease 2.5 times is because GT25000 is higher than 20MW. Just secrifice a little life of the GT, you will get another diesel engine in an emergency.

Also remind you, this is Ma Weiming's test setup which is essentially a full power pack module tailored for ships like 054B, in his paper medium sized warship.

ChongqingHotPot92 said:

Or they could simply a two sets of electric generators between the diesel engines and the shafts. Then you could have an IEP powered purely by diesel engines as opposed to US and UK IEPs, which are powered by a combination of diesels and gas turbines. This would make the 054B quieter than the 054A. Ultimately the primary task of the 054B is anti-submarine warfare, so noice reduction would be the key.

Click to expand...

full diesel solution would be noisier. Diesel engine has lower RPM and higher vibration due to the piston going up and down. Both are bad in creating higher noise of low frequency which travels longer distance than high frequency noise by GT.

taxiya said:

You can't do that. Diesel engine's power density is much lower than GT. There is a technical reason why US and UK did what they have done.

See the 20MWe (GT25000) and 4MWe diesel engine. Both are rated as electrical power 100%, not shaft power, nor emergence power (about 110%).
View attachment 121864

Now see their size comparison. Blue is diesel, orange is GT.
View attachment 121865

With 2 times of size and 5 times higher power, GT is at least 2.5 times more power dense. Using full diesel engines, there won't be much space left in the ship. I say at lease 2.5 times is because GT25000 is higher than 20MW. Just secrifice a little life of the GT, you will get another diesel engine in an emergency.

Also remind you, this is Ma Weiming's test setup which is essentially a full power pack module tailored for ships like 054B, in his paper medium sized warship.

Click to expand...

Aha thanks for the clarification.

taxiya said:

You can't do that. Diesel engine's power density is much lower than GT. There is a technical reason why US and UK did what they have done.

See the 20MWe (GT25000) and 4MWe diesel engine. Both are rated as electrical power 100%, not shaft power, nor emergence power (about 110%).
View attachment 121864

Now see their size comparison. Blue is diesel, orange is GT.
View attachment 121865

With 2 times of size and 5 times higher power, GT is at least 2.5 times more power dense. Using full diesel engines, there won't be much space left in the ship. I say at lease 2.5 times is because GT25000 is higher than 20MW. Just secrifice a little life of the GT, you will get another diesel engine in an emergency.

Also remind you, this is Ma Weiming's test setup which is essentially a full power pack module tailored for ships like 054B, in his paper medium sized warship.

Click to expand...

But I see the IEPs in both the US and UK contain a combination of GT (usually 2) and diesel (usually several) for electricity generation. Do you have to have both as part of IEP, or can you have just GT, as diesel has much lower energy density?

kwaigonegin said:

It's not about the perverbial impressing the chicks.
I'm not saying 054B should be a Ferrari if we're going to use a car analogy.
But I expect a 2024 model year Honda Accord to have adaptive cruise control, airbags, carplay and be fuel efficient etc.

Click to expand...

Yep, but for modern surface combatants, those are on the electronic/software side of things. There, 054b checks all the possible boxes.

YJ-83K isn't a weapon below YJ-12. It's newer, more advanced, and is outright higher up on the utility ladder. YJ-12 has its supersonic aura, but de facto it's a weapon of either coastal batteries or those 10 MLUed outdated surface action-oriented destroyers.

Diesel v turbine choice isn't a choice of combat specs - both can go to any speeds achievable by dispacing ship, and both can be silenced down. Diesel is ultimately a cheaper-to-operate, more maneuverable source of power.

There is no cool factor in those choices.

ChongqingHotPot92 said:

But I see the IEPs in both the US and UK contain a combination of GT (usually 2) and diesel (usually several) for electricity generation. Do you have to have both as part of IEP, or can you have just GT, as diesel has much lower energy density?

Click to expand...

Of course you can have just GT, but during times when you need less than 100% power (e.g. cruising) it'll be far less fuel efficient. That's the main reason diesel is used, its fuel efficiency at lower power.

ChongqingHotPot92 said:

But I see the IEPs in both the US and UK contain a combination of GT (usually 2) and diesel (usually several) for electricity generation. Do you have to have both as part of IEP, or can you have just GT, as diesel has much lower energy density?

Click to expand...

GT also has disadvantages. GT runs efficiently at its full power (100%), while diesel is efficient in a wider power range. The ship runs majority of its time in low to medium power range, about up to 8-10MW in case of Type-45 or 054 sized ship. In this range, one want the prime mover being efficient in all power settings from 2MW to 10MW. GT cann't do that.

This is why an IEPS should have some small diesel engines (by power) in this range. GT is only used in full power and in big steps. In case of Typ-45, 25MW then 50MW. These two settings are used only in combat.



In summary, one only use GT for full power in small portion of time, uses diesel most of time in their broad power settings. The very reason that IEPS is advantage over conventional drive train is that it can utilize advantages of both diesel and GT. Neither GT nor diesel is always better than the other.