054B/new generation frigate

DDG181 said:

Just build more 055, why waste your resources on a 9000t potential-exhausted hull? What role can it play when having everything surpassed?

In terms of tonnage,
054A / 052D ≈ 054B / 055
4000 / 7500 ≈ 6000 / 13000

There is no room for a 9000t vessel, 055 is the successor for 052D. The reason 052DL kept building is due to maturity, since PLAN is eager to expand its fleets capacity in the upcoming years.

Click to expand...

It is true if you had limitless resources. 055 need 4× QC-280 gas turbines while 052D only need 2 QC-280. Also, sensor, radar, crew, etc would add up quite a lot

9,000t might only need 3x QC-280, smaller crew, smaller AESA radar, etc

I think there is still room to build 9,000t warship to replace 052C/D. Clean sheet design

052D is modern and advanced ships, but Type 055 is even much better and 055 is arguably the best destroyer/cruiser in the world currently

They will likely design a new destroyer hull once they have the new engines to make it.

Compare the GT-25000 gas turbine, as used in the Type 052D, that has 27 MW of power with the under development GT-25000IC with intercooler with 40 MW of power. Then add the new CS16V27 diesels as used in the Type 054B. You will have a ship with 50% more engine power. So you can make a ship with 50% more displacement.

China will be able to basically make a ship with same displacement as Type 055 but with 2xGT-25000IC gas turbines and 2xCS17V27 diesels.

DDG181 said:

The current situation is, we still know nothing about the mid-ship missile setup, it could either be 8X YJ-83, 8X YJ-12, 16X UVLS, 32X UVLS.

052C/D is an old hull, as one of the most heavily-armed 7000t vessels, the room for further modification is nearly exhausted just like Arleigh Burke Flight 3.

054B is a new hull with a more powerful diesel engine, it is full of possibilities, but still, many things need to be testified. The current situation of 054B is similar to 054 in 2003. Before the massive production of 054A, only two 054 were built, and does not even have a VLS. However, the hull and the propulsion are the same, 054 serves as an experiment.

I expect 054B to be a do-everything ship, if future 054C carries 16 or 32 UVLS in mid-ship, the anti-ship capabilities are also fulfilled.
- 054B is the same width as 052D, which means capable of inserting 16 or 32 mid-ship UVLS.
- If 054B/C carries YJ-18 or YJ-21, it can even play wolfpack tactics against CSG.
- Even so, the production cost is still much less than 052D, it is capable of mass production.

052D (7500t) and 054A (4000t) is the current pairing, 055 (13000t) and 054B (6000t) is the future pairing.
The goal is to set up a suitable pairing with 055, replacing 054/054A/052C/052D for sailing in the east Pacific, so either a 052E will look like a 054C, or a 054C will look like a 052E. The only debate is to adopt which propulsion method.

Click to expand...

This post has way too much wishful thinking and assumptions.

- The mid-ship section is not certain but it not having any extra VLS is more likely at this point. Even if it has 32x UVLS it doesn't mean the ship would equal the 052D in AAW or ASuW. Weapon fit is not everything.

- There is nothing telling us that the 052 couldn't be succeeded. In fact, according to what we know, there is a replacement in development.

- Even with the new diesel, the lack of gas turbines is a big thing if it is true. Gas turbines are way smaller and lighter for the same power output which has significant implications for the layout of a warship. It could even explain why the ship doesn't have more weapons. There is absolutely no reason PLAN would go back to a diesel-only layout for its high-end combatants.

- There is absolutely nothing suggesting us that the 054B is an experiment for another vessel. You just assumed that because it was convenient for your argument. I don't see why PLAN would experiment with weapons layout in 2023 either. VLS is not new for them anymore.

- No ship with the capabilities of the 052D would be significantly less expensive than the 052D. You misunderstand what is expensive. It is not the hull size or even the number of launchers.

- "A pair for the 055" is not a valid procurement reason. Because they don't have to pair anything. What they have to do is bringing a lot of ASW sensor nodes to the West Pacific.

There is a lot to debate. You think there is nothing to debate because you just assumed everything even when they are against the likely events.

Two night shots of the unit at Hudong.

I don't really like the abrupt, almost right angle chop on the back side of the main mast/bridge. Other than that she is fine-looking.

Photo from the top please, please and please

I think wiki is correct that this baby has 32 cells HQ-16FE and 2x 8 YJ-12..... thats quite good. I was hoping there were extra 16 cells HQ-16FE in the middle as well (apart from 16 YJ-12). But happy with 32 cells anyway

no_name said:

I don't really like the abrupt, almost right angle chop on the back side of the main mast/bridge. Other than that she is fine-looking.

Click to expand...

From this photo, the front and back sides of the mast/bridge have almost the same angle, at most 2 degrees different which is likely due to the camera angle. In fact, I suppose they are the same for keeping the angle of radar return from all direcions the same. It is not a cosmetic matter.

They sliced corners in the front but not the back though.
But if those panels behind can be lowered IMO that would look nicer. The lack of a curved transition is what get's me, just me being picky.

no_name said:

They sliced corners in the front but not the back though.
But if those panels behind can be lowered IMO that would look nicer. The lack of a curved transition is what get's me, just me being picky.

Click to expand...

You have a valid point about "sliced corners". It is in the same principle as "clipping the wing tip" of J-20. But that principle is only applicable if the tip or corner is an angle less than or around 90 degrees, it is never applied to angle larger than 90 degrees. If you clip every corner, you create many small facades increasing the radar return to more directions which defeats the stealth effort.

A curve is to be avoided as much as possible because it reflects radar wave to all directions. This is why all stealthy aircraft or ships are made of flat facades than curves.

Enginering is about compromise, there is no one perfect solution. The bottom line is that the shaping has been tested in radio dark room for numorous times and adjusted accordingly, the ship gets its current shape because it is the best shape it can get by balancing interior volume and exterior shape.

antiterror13 said:

It is true if you had limitless resources. 055 need 4× QC-280 gas turbines while 052D only need 2 QC-280. Also, sensor, radar, crew, etc would add up quite a lot

9,000t might only need 3x QC-280, smaller crew, smaller AESA radar, etc

I think there is still room to build 9,000t warship to replace 052C/D. Clean sheet design

052D is modern and advanced ships, but Type 055 is even much better and 055 is arguably the best destroyer/cruiser in the world currently

Click to expand...

What is the job of a surface combatant:
A) Is it nothing more than a ship that plays a "supporting role" (ASW and AAW) in a carrier battle group?
B) Can it also provide some power projection capabilities in sinking enemy ships?

If you believe A) is true then you're probably right, the PLA navy does not need that many Type 055 ships. They should build at most 16 ships and stop right there.
However
If you believe B) is true then PLA navy needs Lots and Lots more Type 055 ships.