Lethe
Captain
If we accept the characterisation of 054B as the new 054A, and the corresponding assertion that it therefore falls short in some respects as a forward-looking combatant for e.g. carrier ASW escort duties, the obvious solution to the latter is 052D and its notional successors, which will assuredly be at least somewhat larger and could, at least in theory, be better optimised for ASW performance. This would mimic how USN currently structures its carrier escorts, i.e. soon to be an all-Burke affair. Of course there are question marks over both the capability and cost-effectiveness of this approach.
One way of threading this particular needle could be to build two different carrier escort designs using a common hull form and machinery, but addressed to ASW or AAW respectively: the AAW ship would have the large AESA radars, more VLS and only one helo (or perhaps even no helos), while the ASW ship would have more modest AESA arrays, fewer VLS, but two helos. The objective of the ASW variant would be to offer improved ASW performance at meaningfully lower cost than the "baseline" AAW variant. I am not strongly attached to this concept and raise it only as a possibility. Ultimately, I think these questions of escort structure depend upon a holistic examination of threat distribution, specifically if there is a mismatch between escort node density required to address anticipated aerial and subsurface threats, and the extent to which design and operating characteristics in one domain are compatible with those in another. Nonetheless, if this structure sounds unnecessarily baroque, I would invite the reader to consider the resemblance to USN CVBG structure in the 1980s. Recall that the Ticonderoga-class AAW "cruisers" were derived from the Spruance ASW destroyer hullform, and were presumptively designated as DDGs throughout most of their development cycle:
054B ~ FFG-51 Oliver Hazard Perry
052E-ASW ~ DD-963 Spruance
052E-AAW ~ DDG-47 Ticonderoga
(By 052E I am referring to any notional next-generation medium destroyer, rather than a further extension of the 052 series specifically.)
One way of threading this particular needle could be to build two different carrier escort designs using a common hull form and machinery, but addressed to ASW or AAW respectively: the AAW ship would have the large AESA radars, more VLS and only one helo (or perhaps even no helos), while the ASW ship would have more modest AESA arrays, fewer VLS, but two helos. The objective of the ASW variant would be to offer improved ASW performance at meaningfully lower cost than the "baseline" AAW variant. I am not strongly attached to this concept and raise it only as a possibility. Ultimately, I think these questions of escort structure depend upon a holistic examination of threat distribution, specifically if there is a mismatch between escort node density required to address anticipated aerial and subsurface threats, and the extent to which design and operating characteristics in one domain are compatible with those in another. Nonetheless, if this structure sounds unnecessarily baroque, I would invite the reader to consider the resemblance to USN CVBG structure in the 1980s. Recall that the Ticonderoga-class AAW "cruisers" were derived from the Spruance ASW destroyer hullform, and were presumptively designated as DDGs throughout most of their development cycle:
054B ~ FFG-51 Oliver Hazard Perry
052E-ASW ~ DD-963 Spruance
052E-AAW ~ DDG-47 Ticonderoga
(By 052E I am referring to any notional next-generation medium destroyer, rather than a further extension of the 052 series specifically.)
Last edited:
