054B/new generation frigate
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Still, the fitting-out of the FFG is not yet complete, in particular with those YJ-83/YJ-12 slanted launchers being absent (alongside the Soviet/Russian-style red deck painting that needs to be covered lol). The fitting out progress will continue at the shipyard for some time.
Last edited:
I can’t believe it either… must be a record for PLAN.
antiterror13
Brigadier
I think we can rule UVLS out .... definitely HQ-16 variant, likely the latest HQ-16FE with 160 kms range
This is why it is still called “054”B, meaning there wouldn’t be major changes in propulsion. A change in propulsion would likely lead to a new class of designation. However, it would be interesting to see how they plan to reduce the noice of the new ship’s diesel engines given that the 054B’s primary role is ASW.
Now I think it is pretty safe to say that the PLAN’s ambitions for 054B is pretty limited. The service simply wants a 054A armed with AESA radars and more efficient processors of battlefield information. Thus, the primary role of the new frigate remains short-to-medium air defense (via HHQ-16C/F) and ASB (I will be shocked if the 054B do not have towed sonars). Anti-surface warfare and land attack missions would be reserved for 055s and 052Ds. As for 054B, the only issue is how to reduce CODAD’s noice in order to maximize ASW capabilities. It is still possible that the population is combined-diesel-electric and diesel (a more advanced form of CODAD)
, which would lead to reduce noice and higher fuel efficiency.
, which would lead to reduce noice and higher fuel efficiency.
The concentrated stacking of diesel engine vents decreases the probability of it having IEP: if it did, then we would expect to see a wider dispersal of engine vents as that’s one of the advantages of integrated electric propulsion architectures. Observe how far apart the vents for diesel prime movers on the FREMM/Constellation are.
However, in of itself it is not conclusive evidence against IEP.
Is it not, that the odds are, that it is NOT iep?