054B/new generation frigate

lcloo said:

Most likely FIFO. i.e. First In First Out. PLAN has to use all existing stocks of the older CIWS 1130 before they use latest version. As for aircraft carrier, they are capital ships that deserve priority to have latest version regardless of the warehouse inventory of CIWS 1130.

CIWS 1130 is a common gun platform for many classes of PLAN ships, thus purchasing them in a few dozens in advance of ship building progress is not unlikely.

Click to expand...

In a world where most navies deploy combatants without a full suite of "bolt-on" capabilities, or shuffle limited numbers of such systems between ships as needed (point defence systems, slant-launched AShMs, even ), PLAN's apparent commitment to ensuring that every combatant that puts to sea is equipped with a full suite of point defence systems is a subtle but nonetheless deeply suggestive point of distinction. For the vast majority of nations, the notion of a "warehouse inventory" of point defence systems is an implausible luxury.

Iron Man said:

The angles of both ships look just about exactly the same. Plus, this is not exactly a small difference:

Click to expand...

Considering the amount of evidence we have for YJ-83s (closeup comparisons, multiple reports), your claim rests on very shaky foundations.

It would be one thing if you presented lots of calculations on how the proportions of hull lengths and widths and VLS cell dimensions and so forth all match up perfectly, except the slant launchers. But you are just pointing at a picture and saying "this doesn't look quite right to me."

Iron Man said:

The angles of both ships look just about exactly the same. Plus, this is not exactly a small difference:

Click to expand...

Did you say that just because you feel like it?

What you have said is not correct because even only a slight difference in angle of view and distances between the camera and measured object can and do yield notable differences in the dimensions of the object being measured. This is further compounded by the lower-than-desirable quality of the photos used for the comparison.

Also, did you just choose to disregard the rest of my post?

ACuriousPLAFan said:

Did you say that just because you feel like it?

What you have said is not correct because even only a slight difference in angle of view and distances between the camera and measured object can and do yield notable differences in the dimensions of the object being measured. This is further compounded by the lower-than-desirable quality of the photos used for the comparison.

Click to expand...

I'm just eyeballing the photo, but note that you have not shown that slight differences yield "notable" differences in length.

ACuriousPLAFan said:

Also, did you just choose to disregard the rest of my post?

Click to expand...

Well the canisters on the 054B certainly look like YJ-83 launchers in shape and form, just not in length (or width for that matter). If you believe the internet, YJ-83 is 6.38m while the YJ-12 is 7m, which makes the YJ-83 about 91% the length of the YJ-12. The red line that I drew looks consistent with this length difference. It just doesn't seem to me that such a notable difference in length can be accounted for by an angle of view difference, especially when I can't tell that there is even a noticeable angle of view difference in the first place. I guess one theory could be that the canister is actually a YJ-83 canister, but lengthened to accommodate additional round types.

Iron Man said:

The angles of both ships look just about exactly the same. Plus, this is not exactly a small difference:

Click to expand...

No the angles are not the same. You can clearly see the 54B is more of an angle because you can see the sides of the forward superstructure. The 54A is more vertical.
The lighter colored square at the end of the launchers of the 54B would the canister doors.

kwaigonegin said:

No the angles are not the same. You can clearly see the 54B is more of an angle because you can see the sides of the forward superstructure. The 54A is more vertical.
The lighter colored square at the end of the launchers of the 54B would the canister doors.

Click to expand...

Hmm, perhaps you're right.

Iron Man said:

I'm just eyeballing the photo, but note that you have not shown that slight differences yield "notable" differences in length.

Click to expand...

And yet you're convinced that the 054B's missile cannisters belong to YJ-12 instead of YJ-83?




After looking at @kwaigonegin's post (and, in addition to what he said) - I have more reasons to believe that the cameras that took both photos are actually closer to the water surface than what I've drawn above (151 meters). Perhaps only about 100-120 meters from the water surface, if not less.

Iron Man said:

Well the canisters on the 054B certainly look like YJ-83 launchers in shape and form, just not in length (or width for that matter). If you believe the internet, YJ-83 is 6.38m while the YJ-12 is 7m, which makes the YJ-83 about 91% the length of the YJ-12. The red line that I drew looks consistent with this length difference. It just doesn't seem to me that such a notable difference in length can be accounted for by an angle of view difference, especially when I can't tell that there is even a noticeable angle of view difference in the first place. I guess one theory could be that the canister is actually a YJ-83 canister, but lengthened to accommodate additional round types.

Click to expand...

That's why I don't fully + resolutely believe the internet when it comes to exact/detailed specifications of military hardware. All of them should be taken as relative references only.

Cant believe we're having this debate but lets just note apart from the canisters being obviously YJ-83 ones, they also have the precise same blast deflectors that are only used with YJ-83, whereas none of the ships carrying YJ-12 use those deflectors.