054B/new generation frigate
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
I don't think they will ever pause the production, especially if they feel the country grows more threatened.
If there is ever a problem they will fix it back in port and off it goes. New inputs will then be applied to the ships still being produced and the blueprints adjusted.
I don't even think the 054A had pauses in its production run. They incorporated refinements batch to batch. The same with the 056/056A.
If the propulsion system has any serious issue, it'll be hard to fix than, say, radar issue. Look at the efficiency they do refitting, compared to their ship-building power, it's not that impressive. There are so many ships waiting in line for Refitting right now. I don't think that's a good idea. Just produce 2-4, and wait for a while, maybe just 1-2 years, and they can safely end the production of 054A (by then the new order should have been all delivered) and start the mass production of 054B. Even if any war breaks out, frigates won't be a determining factor anyway. There's no need to speed it up aggressively.
And if the first batch of 054B proves to be reliable, they could also start the production of 055A and even 052E (if there'll be such a project).
First I don't even think they may go IEPS on this. The designation seems to indicate they will go all diesel. Smaller, mass produced frigates are not the best platforms to introduce such a system. I am looking at the Type 076 if they ever go IEPS. The trend we have seen in later years --- 055, 003, and 075 --- is that they went with conservative and proven powerplants even as they go all out in the electronics and sensor systems. I even think that IEPS may have been cancelled for the revised 054B; the original revision of the 054B, probably intended to be produced around the 2017-18 period, was cancelled, which reset things back to the drawing board. Which means what we heard of the 054B, prior to 2018, rumors and leaked drawings, are effectively null as this point and the 054B as of 2022 is an entirely new beast. Another factor to removing IEPS, not just to reduce risk, but to reduce cost. I expect the ship to be festooned with the newest sensors available; some compensation has to give to lower the invoice cost.
I would expect China's first IEPS surface warship to be a type that is more ambitious, such as having both gas turbines and diesel engines.
Second if they go IEPS, its going to be thoroughly tested, failure is a zero option.
Third, if they go IEPS and had problems, existing ships can still be fixed, modifications added to the ships under production and on the blueprint.
Fourth, historically, it has been shown that even with unfixed propulsion issues, production has gone mass anyway, see Type 45 and LCS. The reason they do this is that they expect issues to be fixed after the ships are made. This isn't uncommon with many projects. Lets call it the "Wing It and Fix it" approach.
Fifth, I feel there are good reasons to speed up aggressively due to the geopolitical landscape. Again, this contributes to the first reason why they would go with easy to produce, conventional and proven power trains.
Sixth, the reason why I think they are building the 054A anyway, isn't as much as a backup for 054B failure, but to build as many ships as possible as they can with the budget available, in order to saturate and dominate the first and second island chain with sheer numbers and presence. I expect modifications to be done on future 054A batch by batch, so this will improve their combat capabilities.
Finally, refitting is not done by the production shipyards but by separate shipyards specific to this purpose. Thus refitting has no effect on production. In fact, refitting might spur it. As older ships go into refit, their crews are transferred to the new ships, and you are able to sustain your presence in the intended seas.
Last edited:
I don't think IEPS has any conflict with the designation of 054X. Think about it: 055 is the benchmark destroyer line of PLAN and it's supposed to use IEPS in the future (maybe 055A?). I don't expect the future version with IEPS will be called anything other than 055X. The same thing here, the 054B designation doesn't prevent it from using IEPS. If it's called something else, say 057, that should be due to a new type of main engines, likely gas turbines.
If PLAN don't want IEPS at all, they wouldn't have mentioned it and Weiming Ma's team so often. Let's assume the several auxiliary ships with IEPS are actually some testbeds. Obviously, the next step, they should start testing it on real combatants soon. And I don't think it's a good idea to test it on some critical warships, such as 055A or 076. 054B is actually a perfect starting point. On the other hand, if 054B wouldn't incorporate IEPS at all, the changes over 054A should be somethings quite mature, such as new radars and missiles. In that case, they wouldn't need the new batch of 054A, at least not as many as 20 of them. Just add a few more till the first 054B gets launched. Then, they can simply focus on 054B after that.
They are also ones to gain the most from IEPS - both due to the typical profile of frigate operations and the need for silent running capability.
Procurement costs v running costs - later typically significantly outweigh the former. It's one of the major IEPS advantages, to begin with.
Not sure if the propulsion scheme is about ambition (when China is known to produce all sorts of them anyways). It has more to do with optimization for the ship in question.
They have not mentioned IEPS as of late, particularly in the last three years or so.
054X indicates an all diesel propulsion, as in diesels are the ones directly connected to the propeller via CODAD. Would you explain to me if there are any advantages of converting diesel power to electricity then back to mechanical power again? This means generators and electric motors between the diesel and the driving shaft. All diesel to electric should be called Diesel Electric transmission. That's what submarines do, and various trains. If its a gas engine to electric then should it be called Petrol Electric? If its gas turbine to electric, should it be called Turbo-Electric?
IEPS implies you need to have a combination of gas turbines and diesel engines, where the output is electrified and integrated to drive a common set of motors. It would make sense that a frigate with a combined diesel and gas turbine, using electric motors would be called IEPS. But an all diesel to electric setup should be called Diesel Electric and which is century old proven technology.
I also disagree with you about using a lower end warship as a starting point. Both the 056 and 054 series are as conservative as heck. Relative to their time periods, PLAN has been most technologically adventurous with high end platforms, starting with the Han class, the Type 052, then the Type 051B, the 052B, the 051C, the 052C and so on. It goes on to the 055 and the 003.
An IEPS with a combined gas turbine and diesel would have merited an all new designation, like 057 and beyond. Or succeed on a designation that has already used gas turbines before, such as 052X and 055X. I am more prone to think that the IEPS ship you are dreaming about is the 052X, perhaps the 052E.
You have to consider the increased weight, complexity, displacement, and lower efficiency for one. Maybe the electric can give you a silent advantage running at low speeds, but for cruising over long distances, which is also a typical profile of frigate operations especially with the 054X series, the diesel excels.
Diesels are simple, its a known and familiar quantity, and you already have a huge ready base of personnel you can rely from that knows how to operate and repair them. If you go IEPS you have to retrain personnel. The PLAN already has a large base of diesel powered ships, not just your 056X and 054X, but 053X, 022, all the replenishment vessels, the 071 and the 075. You have a large base accustomed, if not set in habit to trust the diesel.
Erm. IEP silent running can achieve speeds as high as ~15-18 knots(actually achieved) and potentially way higher than that. The importance of this metric is paramount - this is the only way to erode submarines' inherent advantage in mutual detection.
As for diesels - they aren't going anywhere. IEP can be combined with CODAD just fine - giving even higher economic advantages.
Basically - if IEP can be pursued, it should.
Come on... IEP doesn't specify what types of engines you use. Sure, Diesel-Electric is arguably a type of IEP and it's by no means a new tech. But it's not the same concept as the modern IEP that doesn't merely focus on "propulsion" but is actually more about "integrated". You regulate the main engines for propulsion and the generators all together. Diesels surely have better speed/load characteristics than gas turbine, but still far from perfection. By using IEP, there's still a big margin for diesels to boost overall efficiency. Ma calls their solution with medium-voltage DC distribution the 2nd generation, relative to the current western systems with AC distribution. There's a significant gain brought by the DC distribution. Another factor here is, the modern IEP usually involves energy storage. As far as I know, the Chinese IEP likely incorporates a flywheel energy storage mechanism. Just think about hybrid cars versus traditional cars. IEP optimizes the speed and load for each engine, and therefore boosts its overall efficiency. Gas turbines may gain even more, but it doesn't mean diesels don't have benefits. For surface combatants, future electronic and weapon systems will surely consume a lot more electricity. I do see IEP is a must. As for PLAN's future frigates, it would be good to change to gas turbines for the main propulsion, but all-diesel is also fine. IEP can improve its acoustic characteristics, electricity generation, and average fuel efficiency. Theoretically, it is easier to operate and maintain too.