054B/new generation frigate

The Observer said:

Is it possible that they'll use U-VLS with the new "3-5" SAM, and possibly its extended range variant to replace HHQ-16 in ships with U-VLS like the Chinese version of the 9M96E/9M96E2 missiles? IMO that will allow quadpack for more missiles, and a triple-tier air defence with 50km Chinese 9M96E/120?km Chinese 9M96E2/200+km HHQ-9B.

Click to expand...

Its likely (hopefully) that 3-5 SAM will be used but it will not replace the HHQ-16. The PLAN already put their homework integrating the new dual sided AESA with the new type AESA target emitters for the HHQ-16. Its likely at least I assume, this new system and the new HHQ-16 version (C?) will have greater range than the previous.

3-5 will be limited to 50km at the most and it isn't like a 9M96E2. The new HHQ-16 version will exceed this range and provide the outer layer of defense.

PLAN going for fast burning speed sprinters for their missiles instead of range, which would call for a slower burning missile. The sprint strategy sacrifices range for higher potential kill probability. 3-5 points to a missile that must attain Mach 5 with a 50km range so that's a sprint.

Unlike the HHQ-16 which is going require SARH illumination, the 3-5 should be active radar homing. Thus they will not need the target illuminator which you can dedicate for the HHQ-16. However they will still need the ship's search radars to find the targets and guide them via datalink until they are in seeker range.

Potentially the new frigate might still have the HHQ-10 launchers, allowing for a third missile layer.

I might also think its possible the ship may only use the HHQ-16 + HHQ-10 combination and forego the 3-5, and still use the AJK-16 VLS. This is because the HHQ-16 works well anywhere within 25km to 70km (with the B) and has a large envelope overlap with the 50km 3-5.

Tam said:

Unlike the HHQ-16 which is going require SARH illumination, the 3-5 should be active radar homing. Thus they will not need the target illuminator which you can dedicate for the HHQ-16. However they will still need the ship's search radars to find the targets and guide them via datalink until they are in seeker range.

Potentially the new frigate might still have the HHQ-10 launchers, allowing for a third missile layer.

I might also think its possible the ship may only use the HHQ-16 + HHQ-10 combination and forego the 3-5, and still use the AJK-16 VLS. This is because the HHQ-16 works well anywhere within 25km to 70km (with the B) and has a large envelope overlap with the 50km 3-5.

Click to expand...

Mixing 3-5 and HHQ-16 is an odd practice. There is no essential difference between 50km and 70km. It is only suitable for intercepting missiles and cannot attack flying platforms. Compared with the U-VLS, the AJK-16 VLS has a launch unit area of 40% and a bomb load of only 25%.
According to POP3's statement, a new 4-in-1 anti-aircraft missile has been integrated on the 055.
It is unlikely that the HHQ-16 will continue to be used on a newly designed frigate.

test1979 said:

Mixing 3-5 and HHQ-16 is an odd practice. There is no essential difference between 50km and 70km. It is only suitable for intercepting missiles and cannot attack flying platforms. Compared with the U-VLS, the AJK-16 VLS has a launch unit area of 40% and a bomb load of only 25%.
According to POP3's statement, a new 4-in-1 anti-aircraft missile has been integrated on the 055.
It is unlikely that the HHQ-16 will continue to be used on a newly designed frigate.

Click to expand...

Can you provide a link or snapshot of where pop3 said that?

test1979 said:

Mixing 3-5 and HHQ-16 is an odd practice. There is no essential difference between 50km and 70km. It is only suitable for intercepting missiles and cannot attack flying platforms. Compared with the U-VLS, the AJK-16 VLS has a launch unit area of 40% and a bomb load of only 25%.

Click to expand...

It doesn't require magic solutions to evolve HHQ-16 to 150+ class though, the missile is large enough; it also is probably way more destructive in ASuW role(there is only so much you can fit in 1/4 of a cell, even if it's a big cell).
It's in the same class as SM-2MR family after all - so at some point in the future, it will be done.

5-5-5 physically won't get there - nor does it needs to.

If china is putting significant investment in uvls and all the associated missiles. It makes no sense for them to keep using old missile series when they could use it for yj18. You could have 8 yj18, 8 yu8 and 64 3-5. If they have 40 cells, they could even hold hq9.

Gloire_bb said:

It doesn't require magic solutions to evolve HHQ-16 to 150+ class though, the missile is large enough; it also is probably way more destructive in ASuW role(there is only so much you can fit in 1/4 of a cell, even if it's a big cell).
It's in the same class as SM-2MR family after all - so at some point in the future, it will be done.

5-5-5 physically won't get there - nor does it needs to.

Click to expand...

The question I have is "can you evolve 3-5 missile into 120km+ class while meeting speed and quadpack requirement?"

Because IMO it's much more important to have more missiles than SAM which has mediocre ASuW capability. The VLS cells saved by quadpacking can just go to dedicated AShM missile like YJ-18. Hell, if they really want semi-dual use SAM, just put HHQ-9. It's even larger than HHQ-16 AND provide a much wider SAM umbrella.

The Observer said:

The question I have is "can you evolve 3-5 missile into 120km+ class while meeting speed and quadpack requirement?"

Because IMO it's much more important to have more missiles than SAM which has mediocre ASuW capability. The VLS cells saved by quadpacking can just go to dedicated AShM missile like YJ-18. Hell, if they really want semi-dual use SAM, just put HHQ-9. It's even larger than HHQ-16 AND provide a much wider SAM umbrella.

Click to expand...

Not without some kind of insane revolution in rocket propellant.

The Observer said:

The question I have is "can you evolve 3-5 missile into 120km+ class while meeting speed and quadpack requirement?"

Because IMO it's much more important to have more missiles than SAM which has mediocre ASuW capability. The VLS cells saved by quadpacking can just go to dedicated AShM missile like YJ-18. Hell, if they really want semi-dual use SAM, just put HHQ-9. It's even larger than HHQ-16 AND provide a much wider SAM umbrella.

Click to expand...

Well, here we basically come down to a balance equation:
within a reasonable frigate hull, you can make more of a balanced multipurpose ship in support of large combatants (medium SAM+light ASCM - 054, Constellation), or you can make a dedicated strike frigate with significant strike capability (lighter SAM+heavy ASCM - Gorshkov, type 26).

Large navies with significant destroyer fleets IMHO get more from the first category. Smaller navies - from the second one (they often don't have the environment to truly realize the potential of destroyers in the first place).

Mixing both(or throwing in heavy SAMs in significant numbers - which are as large as modern heavy ASCMs) basically screams "destroyer" - why not 052d then?
Two similar ships too close is just wasteful.

Gloire_bb said:

Well, here we basically come down to a balance equation:
within a reasonable frigate hull, you can make more of a balanced multipurpose ship in support of large combatants (medium SAM+light ASCM - 054, Constellation), or you can make a dedicated strike frigate with significant strike capability (lighter SAM+heavy ASCM - Gorshkov, type 26).

Large navies with significant destroyer fleets IMHO get more from the first category. Smaller navies - from the second one (they often don't have the environment to truly realize the potential of destroyers in the first place).

Mixing both(or throwing in heavy SAMs in significant numbers - which are as large as modern heavy ASCMs) basically screams "destroyer" - why not 052d then?
Two similar ships too close is just wasteful.

Click to expand...

long term 5t, 8t and 12t is fine. China simply has a 5t class that USN and RAN/RN have basically abandoned going forward. I'm not sure it makes sense to get a fridge as large as Constellation/Type 26 as your smaller work horse ship. All you get is crazily high costs and reduced number of ships. At some point, quantities does count.