054B/new generation frigate

D

Derpy

Junior Member
Registered Member
kickars said:
If having a cheap but modern and capable 6000ton (full displacement) ship is the initial goal of this ship, I wonder wouldn’t just keep on producing and improving 052D be the better choice? I mean yes eventually each unit of 054B will be cheaper than the current cost of each 052D. But considering the development costs of a brand new ship like 054B with its all new electronics and so on, while the more 052D being produced, the cheaper it will get.
Click to expand...
It is not the size that makes a Destroyer more expensive, steel is cheap in comparison to radars and weapons.
To illustrate this a 240 000 ton container ship is roughly $ 250 million while the spy-6 radar on new Arleigh Burke destroyers
cost over $300 million..
 
T

test1979

Junior Member
Registered Member
Derpy said:
It is not the size that makes a Destroyer more expensive, steel is cheap in comparison to radars and weapons.
To illustrate this a 240 000 ton container ship is roughly $ 250 million while the spy-6 radar on new Arleigh Burke destroyers
cost over $300 million..
Click to expand...
This comparison is unfair, you cannot compare cheap merchant shipbuilding standards with warships.
In fact, each "Arleigh Burke III" guided missile destroyer costs approximately US$2 billion, which includes approximately US$1 billion of shipboard equipment provided by the Navy for the ship, while the cost of building the hull, electrical and mechanical components is $1 billion.
 
para80

para80

Junior Member
Registered Member
Size does drive up cost for naval combatants or in fact any naval hull, if performance parameters are to be met/maintained. In addition to that it drives up maintenance costs, as berthing and maintenance facilities also need to support a larger hull. This is non-trivial and one key reason why the German Navy spent a lot of money to limit the draft of their new large oilers, when it would have been more affordable up front to just buy bigger vessels with deeper draft.
 
K

kickars

Junior Member
Derpy said:
It is not the size that makes a Destroyer more expensive, steel is cheap in comparison to radars and weapons.
To illustrate this a 240 000 ton container ship is roughly $ 250 million while the spy-6 radar on new Arleigh Burke destroyers
cost over $300 million.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying steel makes a 6000 ton destroyer more expensive than a 6000 ton frigate or a container ship. What are you on about...

I'm simply trying to explain that 052D series ships have been built for some time now. So its cost per unit would be lower than a brand new class of ship of the same size and abilities as all the design and development costs of a new class of ship will only be share by the first batch of few ships.

Anyway, I'm not here saying PLAN must do this or that, or indeed feel disappointed with 054B's design as we know so far. I'm just sharing my thoughts on two ships of similar size both from PLAN.
 
A

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
kickars said:
I'm simply trying to explain that 052D series ships have been built for some time now. So its cost per unit would be lower than a brand new class of ship of the same size and abilities as all the design and development costs of a new class of ship will only be share by the first batch of few ships.
Click to expand...

That's exactly where you got the 054B versus 052D wrong.

Firstly, just as @MarKoz81 explained previously - Form follows function. The dimension and displacement parameters finalized for any warship during the design stages are mainly because of all the functionalities and responsibilities that they are required to perform have to be supported by certain dimensions and displacements, otherwise they will not work as properly/as well as intended. Needless to say, this factor certainly changes as time goes on due to continuous technological advancement progresses.

Besides, I felt like I have already said this for N-times, but - The 054Bs are incomparable to the 052D/DGs, simply because they are different types of warships (DDGs versus FFGs) with different sets of responsibilities & importance assigned to them.

Wanna know how they differ from each other? Just take a look at their radar systems and begin deducing from there (types, purposes, capabilities, costs etc), for starters.

In the meantime, what makes you believe that the PLAN has decided to stop serial-producing newer FFGs from now on? Once the PLAN is finally satisfied with the 054B (or its follow-up/successive variant/class), they WILL serial-produce the newer FFGs, just like the previous 054A/AG FFGs and the 052D/DG DDGs. Especially, what makes you believe that the unit cost of the 054B/follow-up/successive variant/class will not also be having similar effects as the serial-produced 054As and 052Ds, once they entered serial production as well sometime in the future?

In fact - If the unit cost of newer warships that are still yet to enter serial production is so much of a decisive factor, then we should've kept building more and more Fletchers instead of Flight 3 Burkes today.

Last but not least - The PLAN is already having a follow-up/successor class to the 052D/DG under development right now. So there's that.
 
Last edited:
D

Derpy

Junior Member
Registered Member
kickars said:
I'm not saying steel makes a 6000 ton destroyer more expensive than a 6000 ton frigate or a container ship. What are you on about...

I'm simply trying to explain that 052D series ships have been built for some time now. So its cost per unit would be lower than a brand new class of ship of the same size and abilities as all the design and development costs of a new class of ship will only be share by the first batch of few ships.

Anyway, I'm not here saying PLAN must do this or that, or indeed feel disappointed with 054B's design as we know so far. I'm just sharing my thoughts on two ships of similar size both from PLAN.
Click to expand...
"So its cost per unit would be lower than a brand new class of ship of the same size and abilities"
But it is not intended to have the same abilities. What primarily set the 052D apart to the 054A/B is the ability to perform Air fleet defence which requires radars that are large, heavy, power hungry and expensive as well as full size VLS cells in sufficient number. The 054 is not a competitor/alternative to the 052D and they are substantially cheaper.
 
FriedRiceNSpice

FriedRiceNSpice

Captain
kickars said:
Anyway, I'm not here saying PLAN must do this or that, or indeed feel disappointed with 054B's design as we know so far. I'm just sharing my thoughts on two ships of similar size both from PLAN.
Click to expand...
A 7500t ship represents a 30% increase in displacement over a 5700t ship. They are not similar. Despite also having a current generation AESA, the 054B radar is not comparable to the radar on the 052D. Carrying HQ-16 offers another layer to PLAN's multilayered air defense. Long range antiship strike is not needed on FFGs. The only potential disappointment with regards to the 054B would be the omission of IEP, and even that should not be considered a significant disappointment.
 
Last edited:
K

kickars

Junior Member
ACuriousPLAFan said:
That's exactly where you got the 054B versus 052D wrong.

Firstly, just as @MarKoz81 explained previously - Form follows function. The dimension and displacement parameters finalized for any warship during the design stages are mainly because of all the functionalities and responsibilities that they are required to perform have to be supported by certain dimensions and displacements, otherwise they will not work as properly/as well as intended. Needless to say, this factor certainly changes as time goes on due to continuous technological advancement progresses.

Besides, I felt like I have already said this for N-times, but - The 054Bs are incomparable to the 052D/DGs, simply because they are different types of warships (DDGs versus FFGs) with different sets of responsibilities & importance assigned to them.

Wanna know how they differ from each other? Just take a look at their radar systems and begin deducing from there (types, purposes, capabilities, costs etc), for starters.

In the meantime, what makes you believe that the PLAN has decided to stop serial-producing newer FFGs from now on? Once the PLAN is finally satisfied with the 054B (or its follow-up/successive variant/class), they WILL serial-produce the newer FFGs, just like the previous 054A/AG FFGs and the 052D/DG DDGs. Especially, what makes you believe that the unit cost of the 054B/follow-up/successive variant/class will not also be having similar effects as the serial-produced 054As and 052Ds, once they entered serial production as well sometime in the future?

In fact - If the unit cost of newer warships that are still yet to enter serial production is so much of a decisive factor, then we should've kept building more and more Fletchers instead of Flight 3 Burkes today.

Last but not least - The PLAN is already having a follow-up/successor class to the 052D/DG under development right now. So there's that.
Click to expand...
I understand they aren’t the same. And I know within PLAN frigates and destroyers have very different roles to play. I’ve never said PLAN should stop producing newer frigates from now on either.

Again, what can 054B do that 052D series of ships can’t? Why can’t one day 052D be called a frigate? Why 052D has to be called a destroyer beside that’s what PLAN is doing? I’m simply expressing my own view of a possibility. That’s all. But I respect your different view on this matter.
 
FriedRiceNSpice

FriedRiceNSpice

Captain
kickars said:
I understand they aren’t the same. And I know within PLAN frigates and destroyers have very different roles to play. I’ve never said PLAN should stop producing newer frigates from now on either.

Again, what can 054B do that 052D series of ships can’t? Why can’t one day 052D be called a frigate? Why 052D has to be called a destroyer beside that’s what PLAN is doing? I’m simply expressing my own view of a possibility. That’s all. But I respect your different view on this matter.
Click to expand...
Efficient allocation of resources and numbers. There's been multiple posts describing the differences in role between the two types of ships, perhaps you should read them. They aren't even remotely similar in cost nor are they that similar in size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top