055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[Lethe]

What is up with all these crazy numbers? If they build 4 per fleet, that would be a huge number already.

Consider that there are a dozen destroyers in the production queue at the moment, and only half that number (051Ds and DTs) needing replacement by 2020. And only an additional seven over the next decade (051G1, 051G2, 052s, 956s) to 2030. Going by current production rates, PLAN should have no difficulty increasing destroyer numbers from today's 24 to 30 by 2020 and 40+ by 2030.

Personally I think 48 destroyers / 72 frigates is a good number to aim for 20 years from now. Don't need the huge Burke numbers of USN when you've got capable ocean-going frigates behind them, as opposed to LCS...

 

[Jeff Head]

...as opposed to LCS...

Do not count out the LCS. Although it has had significant birthing pains...of which we all are aware....and I have been more than willing to pint them out, the US Navy will work all of that out.

Ultimately, you have a number of fast, relatively steallthy, 3,000 ton combatant vessels that have great aviation capabilities, and are in essense platforms, and canvases that can be worked on. The US is already making it clear that they intend to do just that.

If they get a Mk-41 VLS with 16 cells on the vessels, they are going to become very capable with a good sensor suite, excellent aviation facilities, and the ability to conduct ASW and ASuW operations very adequately with decent self defense. THey will then be able to be changed over modularly to handle MMS and SpecOps as necessary.

I expect that the 24+ LCS along with the follow-on 28 ship or so FFG program are going to make for 52+ very decent surface combatants that will augment and support the ultimate 96 Burke DDGs very well.

 

[Jura The idiot]

Do not count out the LCS. Although it has had significant birthing pains...of which we all are aware....and I have been more than willing to pint them out, the US Navy will work all of that out.

Ultimately, you have a number of fast, relatively steallthy, 3,000 ton combatant vessels that have great aviation capabilities, and are in essense platforms, and canvases that can be worked on. The US is already making it clear that they intend to do just that.

If they get a Mk-41 VLS with 16 cells on the vessels, they are going to become very capable with a good sensor suite, excellent aviation facilities, and the ability to conduct ASW and ASuW operations very adequately with decent self defense. THey will then be able to be changed over modularly to handle MMS and SpecOps as necessary.

I expect that the 24+ LCS along with the follow-on 28 ship or so FFG program are going to make for 52+ very decent surface combatants that will augment and support the ultimate 96 Burke DDGs very well.

Jeff, feel free to move the following question to
'Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)' thread
where a new poster noticed (http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/world-armed-forces/littoral-combat-ships-lcs-38-3993.html#post305567) a USN LCS doesn't have means to kill a sub other than by using helicopter/VTUAV ... I just checked,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

says
NO torpedo tubes or VL-ASROC
under Anti-Submarine Modules ... will you please comment?

 

[asif iqbal]

I can't see PLAN stopping frigate construction they are too good

I can envisage

2 x DDG flotillas (Type 052C and Type 052D)
3 x FFG flotillas (Type 054A/B)
1 x CG flotilla (Type 055)

24 warships pet fleets that's 72 warships in total more than enough

Add to that a carrier to each fleet and a LHD/LPD combination

This will give a carrier strike group and a amphibious ready group for each fleet

 

[no_name]

Noticed that the different band of colour was originally the part where the 'hull' did not extend all the way down.

Not sure if it is wide enough to be a walkway or intends to be in the final design. They also removed railing in the mid section where the panels now extends down all the way to the platform.

 

[Blitzo]

I agree the lighter white band may reflect a load bearing structure that won't be on the ship

Not sure what you mean by a flatter PAR, everyone expects 346A and all pictures so far are indicative

 

[Blitzo]

I can't see PLAN stopping frigate construction they are too good

I can envisage

2 x DDG flotillas (Type 052C and Type 052D)
3 x FFG flotillas (Type 054A/B)
1 x CG flotilla (Type 055)

24 warships pet fleets that's 72 warships in total more than enough

Add to that a carrier to each fleet and a LHD/LPD combination

This will give a carrier strike group and a amphibious ready group for each fleet

I feel they will include 055s within existing DDG flotillas rather than create new flotillas especially for them.

ATM both DDGs and FFGs are included in so called destroyer flotillas: I can foresee future "destroyer flotillas" to have an FFG, DDG, and CG component, so they can act as independent and self contained escort forces or SAGs without having to draw from multiple different flotillas for their own FFG, DDG and CG component

 

[Jeff Head]

Do you have a link to higher res versions of these?

Great pics!

 

[no_name]

I agree the lighter white band may reflect a load bearing structure that won't be on the ship

Not sure what you mean by a flatter PAR, everyone expects 346A and all pictures so far are indicative

Never mind I edited my comments after taking a second look at the pics.

 

[no_name]

Do you have a link to higher res versions of these?

Great pics!

Thanks. Those pics were posted by others so I don't own them and have no high res versions.