054B/new generation frigate
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Your posts are often incomplete without full sentences, or otherwise do not follow any comprehensible logic or reason, without any kind of argument that we can follow.
This is your one warning.
Write your posts in a manner that is comprehensible with a semblance of logic that people can understand.
If you do not, then the next time you do this you will be banned.
Do you understand English when I mean *on top* instead of being *in* the integrated mast? These examples have the radar embedded inside the integrated mast. So does the 055, which has a four sided X-band radar on it. These examples are much more like the 055's with the X-band radar embedded into the mast.
The 054B mast as it is purported in the illustration has a radar *on top* of the mast and it *revolves* while various supporting arrays are embedded in the mast. The Thales mast has a similar structure although it is a SATCOM that is placed on top of the mast and revolves within the dome.
I would like to see type 054B be at 5500-6000 tonnage with larger aviation deck and hangar for Z-20 level ASuH and more range to be part of the Carrier Task Forces.
Type 054A is too small to be part of a global carrier based strike force.
MwRYum
Major
The Oliver Hazard Perry class FFG is 1000t less than the rumored 054B.
Though of course we should compare with the contemporaries, such as the upcoming Constellation class FFG which is expected to be 7000t range.
But then again, China is not a global empire like that of the US, for its expected service lifespan the 054B should be sufficient.
What does the OHP's displacement have to do with the potential displacement of 054B?
And no, I wouldn't too casually compare 054B with Constellation class alone.
There are multiple contemporary modern frigates with differing displacements yet similar armaments and sensors, including the European FREMMs, the US FREMMs (constellation), but also Type 26 and its derivatives, and even the Russian Gorshkov, the German Sachsen classes... The full displacements of these aforementioned frigates range from 10,000t, to 5,500t.
I think a comparison of 054B with other modern frigates in the world should do so with consideration of the wide range of displacements and varying priorities of the various designs in service.
In any case, a 5000t + full displacement 054B should very much still be a very blue water capable ship.
@iantsai, the issue with 054A in doing deployments with CSGs is less about range and more about top speed. While greater endurance is of course also desirable, the ability to keep up with a carrier underway is of greater arguable concern.
How would you catagorize an indivisual ship is blue water capable or not ? Shouldn’t bluewater Designation be left for overall naval capability including Assault ships, replishment ships, Ports etc? PLAN has way bigger ships with state of the art Armaments but most people only consider UK, French Navy.
No.
A blue water capable ship is one with sufficient sea keeping, internal crew facilities, and integral endurance, to be able to operate at blue water distances from their home port.
Assault ships (I assume you mean amphibious assault ships) are a type of vessel that enables power projection, including at blue water distances. It also goes without saying that many amphibious assault ships are blue water capable (like much of the world's LPDs, LHDs).
Replenishment ships and ports assist in sustaining a presence at blue water distances by providing refuelling and resupply -- however the ships that they sustain need to be blue water capable to begin with (unless they are homeported at foreign ports).
For example, a 056 corvette is not a blue water capable ship, because it lacks the sea keeping, crew facilities, and integral endurance, to operate at distances that would generally be considered to be blue water. Even if a 056 corvette is resupplied at sea with replenishment ships, it still would not be considered a blue water capable ship, because of its own sea keeping and crew facilities in an open water environment, and frequency for need of refuelling and replenishment.
His CGIs are always quite good and compares favourably with the other Chinese guys who do CGIs.
Some key design choices I disagree with, include retaining the H/AJK-16 VLS.
I would've placed the front mast AESA a bit higher and would've omitted the OTH radar on the deckhouse.
I don't think retaining the same four set of FCR arrays as on the current batch of 054As makes sense, but that's because I would envision 054B to have a more common weapons suite with 052D/055 than 054A.
The S-100 UAV is a questionable choice lol.
But the quality of the CGI of course is always excellent.