055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[by78]

Nice depiction, however I think a few details are wrong such as size of its 's hangar structure, exaggerates the length of the smoke stack, underestimates the length of its bow, not to mention overall length as well.

Good drawing, but imo the real thing will be at least a little bit different.

Just realized the page seems to have been taken on an angle, making the parts at the bottom seem bigger than the top. Regardless, some proportion issues remain present on their 055

Also, I'd imagine the bow sonar ought to be larger than what is on the 052C/D.

 

[no_name]

11. 9

Not much have changed it seems.

 

[Ultra]

Given the diverse threat environment (i.e. need to balance against not only ~65% of US Navy, but Japan, Russia, India, and sundry other nations as well) it is unlikely PLAN will desire to stop short of parity with the US Navy (but with a different composition)......

That's exactly what my thought on this too - PLAN's requirement is not merely to come to parity with USN - US has military alliance with NATO, ANZAC (Australia & New Zealand), Japan, South Korea, and they are now working to get India and ASEAN nations into the fold too. China will have to be able to defeat the alliance of ALL OF THEM COMBINED! Or else, it will just be history repeating itself - Eight-Nation Alliance ("八國聯軍") where China came up short.

42 major combatants for PLAN is simply not enough. USN is said to be "pivoting east" with 60% of the total forces which means if there are currently about 84 Burkes & Ticos in total, that's about 50 in the pacific; adding in JMSDF's 10 modern Burke class destroyers (Atago, Kongō, Akizuki), 6 from ROKN (Sejong the Great-class), 3 from RAN (Hobart-class) and 3 from IN (Kolkata-class), and that's 106 highly advanced major combatants that China will have to deal with; and I havn't even count the rest of ASEAN or NATO.

The only course of action for China right now would be to pursue asymmetrical means as much as possible. ASBMs would even the number a little (how effective they are, are largely unknown) but they would be quite cost effective as it is far cheaper to mass produce ASBMs than to build major surface combatants like the 055 DDG. Let's assume 055 DDG's price tag is 60% (things being cheaper in China) of the Burke which is $1.84 billion USD - that means 055 DDG would roughly cost $1.1 billion USD per ship. To bring up to parity with only USN would cost $84 billion for the major surface combatant alone - that's more than half of the current PLA budget. On the other hand, an ASBM would cost far less - if we take the cost of Trident D4 (that's the closest in capability with known cost published - if anyone know the cost of DF-25D I am all ears)'s cost of $37 million per missile as baseline - you can have almost 30 ASBMs for the cost of every 055 DDG (with the assumed guesstimate cost of $1.1 billion). If you factor in cheaper manufacturing cost in China (again, rough guesstimate) of 60% of comparable cost base in US - then PLAN can get 50 ASBM for every 055 DDG. A barrage of 50 ASBMs combine with even large number of far cheaper long range subsonic ASMs would be far more cost effective to PLAN to pursue IMO.

I think the real strategy would be the mix of the two - bolster a credible high tech naval force with large number of ASMs and ASBMs.

 

[plawolf]

That's exactly what my thought on this too - PLAN's requirement is not merely to come to parity with USN - US has military alliance with NATO, ANZAC (Australia & New Zealand), Japan, South Korea, and they are now working to get India and ASEAN nations into the fold too. China will have to be able to defeat the alliance of ALL OF THEM COMBINED! Or else, it will just be history repeating itself - Eight-Nation Alliance ("八國聯軍") where China came up short.

42 major combatants for PLAN is simply not enough. USN is said to be "pivoting east" with 60% of the total forces which means if there are currently about 84 Burkes & Ticos in total, that's about 50 in the pacific; adding in JMSDF's 10 modern Burke class destroyers (Atago, Kongō, Akizuki), 6 from ROKN (Sejong the Great-class), 3 from RAN (Hobart-class) and 3 from IN (Kolkata-class), and that's 106 highly advanced major combatants that China will have to deal with; and I havn't even count the rest of ASEAN or NATO.

The only course of action for China right now would be to pursue asymmetrical means as much as possible. ASBMs would even the number a little (how effective they are, are largely unknown) but they would be quite cost effective as it is far cheaper to mass produce ASBMs than to build major surface combatants like the 055 DDG. Let's assume 055 DDG's price tag is 60% (things being cheaper in China) of the Burke which is $1.84 billion USD - that means 055 DDG would roughly cost $1.1 billion USD per ship. To bring up to parity with only USN would cost $84 billion for the major surface combatant alone - that's more than half of the current PLA budget. On the other hand, an ASBM would cost far less - if we take the cost of Trident D4 (that's the closest in capability with known cost published - if anyone know the cost of DF-25D I am all ears)'s cost of $37 million per missile as baseline - you can have almost 30 ASBMs for the cost of every 055 DDG (with the assumed guesstimate cost of $1.1 billion). If you factor in cheaper manufacturing cost in China (again, rough guesstimate) of 60% of comparable cost base in US - then PLAN can get 50 ASBM for every 055 DDG. A barrage of 50 ASBMs combine with even large number of far cheaper long range subsonic ASMs would be far more cost effective to PLAN to pursue IMO.

I think the real strategy would be the mix of the two - bolster a credible high tech naval force with large number of ASMs and ASBMs.

To try and match the military might of the US and allies combined would be to fall for the same trick that did the soviets in.

Hell, not even America can afford America's defence expenditure.

China's goal is not to be able to match, never mind defeat the US military. Rather, China's goal is maintain enough military might to be able to hold off an attack by America and allies.

The minimal requirement is to be able to deny America a quick, knock-out blow and force it into a long, bloody and costly drawn out war of attrition and break its people's will to continue fighting. Preferably without too much damage to China's industrial and economic centres.

The ideal solution is to not have to fight at all. China will keep growing its economy as a priority while systematically developing its military. By the time China's economy is bigger than America's, it will be able to outspend America without putting undue strains and drains on its economy by maintaining current levels of military expenditure as a percentage of GDP.

Failing that, if a fight is unavoidable, China would aim to deliver a knock-out blow of its own, to damage the US military so much so that it is unable to effectively continue offensive operations against China. Add to that the huge domestic pressure on the US from such military reversals, especially if the conflict was over fringe issues that most Americans couldn't care less about. There is a reasonable chance America might accept a climb down if China was mature enough to give them a face saving way out.

Asymmetric systems like ASBMs are aimed to deliver the knock-out blow.

Conventional assets like the Type55 are meant to further China's industrial military industry so that when the Chinese economy does match and surpass that of the US, it has top quality kit to buy.

In essence, the Type 55 represents China's future, of where China wants to be in 10-15 years time. The DF21 ASBM and others are the insurance policy in case conflict cannot be avoided and comes at a time before China's long term plans have come to fruition.

As such, it would be unwise to overspend on insurance at the expense of investments towards the ultimate goal.

 

[Ultra]

To try and match the military might of the US and allies combined would be to fall for the same trick that did the soviets in.

Hell, not even America can afford America's defence expenditure.

China's goal is not to be able to match, never mind defeat the US military. Rather, China's goal is maintain enough military might to be able to hold off an attack by America and allies.

The minimal requirement is to be able to deny America a quick, knock-out blow and force it into a long, bloody and costly drawn out war of attrition and break its people's will to continue fighting. Preferably without too much damage to China's industrial and economic centres.

The ideal solution is to not have to fight at all. China will keep growing its economy as a priority while systematically developing its military. By the time China's economy is bigger than America's, it will be able to outspend America without putting undue strains and drains on its economy by maintaining current levels of military expenditure as a percentage of GDP.

Failing that, if a fight is unavoidable, China would aim to deliver a knock-out blow of its own, to damage the US military so much so that it is unable to effectively continue offensive operations against China. Add to that the huge domestic pressure on the US from such military reversals, especially if the conflict was over fringe issues that most Americans couldn't care less about. There is a reasonable chance America might accept a climb down if China was mature enough to give them a face saving way out.

Asymmetric systems like ASBMs are aimed to deliver the knock-out blow.

Conventional assets like the Type55 are meant to further China's industrial military industry so that when the Chinese economy does match and surpass that of the US, it has top quality kit to buy.

In essence, the Type 55 represents China's future, of where China wants to be in 10-15 years time. The DF21 ASBM and others are the insurance policy in case conflict cannot be avoided and comes at a time before China's long term plans have come to fruition.

As such, it would be unwise to overspend on insurance at the expense of investments towards the ultimate goal.

I disagree. Growing economy is important, but putting too much focus on economy would be disasterous. History has taught us lessons on this - CHINA WAS THE RICHEST COUNTRY ON EARTH for thousands of years - taking up almost 33% of the world's total output and it took British Empire which won the Opium war against China another 100 years to finally surpass China on GDP term. China was defeated and humiliated by a economically inferior country - China was a rich guy who got robbed and stabbed because it ignored its defence thinking being rich guarantee security. It didn't. Military might is what really matters. America can continue to exerts its influence around the world purely because of its military might - even though economically it is a guy living off credit card.

But I agree that going purely for military parity like the Soviet did is suicidal. But looking it this way - Russian was not invaded and subjugated like Iraqis or the Afghans - because America couldn't risk a war against Russia. Because Russia military wise is still the second most powerful country on earth. Had Russian been weak like the Iraqis, America would have attacked and subjugated the russians already. It was what happened to China hundred years ago when China was rich but weak, and the Anglo colonial powers took advantage of it.

You rather be strong but poor, than rich but weak. Because you will just look like a fat lamb waiting to be slaughtered.

Russians understand this - that's why even when they were completely broke back in 90s - they still hold on to their massive military force. They didn't downsize (or downsize that much).



Anyway, back to Type 055 DDG - what I am curious about right now - is the construction cost. Just how expensive is it? And how many can China afford? I remember there was an article I read years ago about how China was not able to produce APAR MMIC-based T/R module at the same cost base as the american counterpart - the American GaAs MMIC T/R module cost about $500 each while for China it cost a whopping $15,000! That's 30 times! I think that's the reason why they only produced two 052c and delayed serial production and took many many years to finally get on 052D serial production once they are able to bring the cost down to affordable level.

EDIT: I found the paragraph from google - it came from someone's quote here, but I was sure I read it in an article :

"However, the Chinese phased array radar differs considerably from the American AN/SPY-1 in that instead of having separate dedicated transmitting and receiving elements, each element of the antenna array of the Chinese radar is capable of both transmitting and receiving, a function similar to the SAMPSON active phased array radar, and just like the SAMPSON system, each transmitting/receiving module of Type 346 radar has separate transmitter and receiver, thus enabling it to continuously receive signals. The radar has designation of H/LJG-346. Its operational frequency band is not yet known to have been published. According to Chinese sources, the biggest difficulty Chinese faced in the early 2000's was to reduce the unit cost of the indigenously produced MMIC used for the radar, because the Chinese MMIC cost is 25 times of its American counterparts, around $ 12,500 in comparison to the $ 500 of American MMIC."

 

[Blitzo]

I disagree. Growing economy is important, but putting too much focus on economy would be disasterous. History has taught us lessons on this - CHINA WAS THE RICHEST COUNTRY ON EARTH for thousands of years - taking up almost 33% of the world's total output and it took British Empire which won the Opium war against China another 100 years to finally surpass China on GDP term. China was defeated and humiliated by a economically inferior country - China was a rich guy who got robbed and stabbed because it ignored its defence thinking being rich guarantee security. It didn't. Military might is what really matters. America can continue to exerts its influence around the world purely because of its military might - even though economically it is a guy living off credit card.

But I agree that going purely for military parity like the Soviet did is suicidal. But looking it this way - Russian was not invaded and subjugated like Iraqis or the Afghans - because America couldn't risk a war against Russia. Because Russia military wise is still the second most powerful country on earth. Had Russian been weak like the Iraqis, America would have attacked and subjugated the russians already. It was what happened to China hundred years ago when China was rich but weak, and the Anglo colonial powers took advantage of it.

You rather be strong but poor, than rich but weak. Because you will just look like a fat lamb waiting to be slaughtered.

Russians understand this - that's why even when they were completely broke back in 90s - they still hold on to their massive military force. They didn't downsize (or downsize that much).



Anyway, back to Type 055 DDG - what I am curious about right now - is the construction cost. Just how expensive is it? And how many can China afford? I remember there was an article I read years ago about how China was not able to produce APAR MMIC-based T/R module at the same cost base as the american counterpart - the American GaAs MMIC T/R module cost about $500 each while for China it cost a whopping $15,000! That's 30 times! I think that's the reason why they only produced two 052c and delayed serial production and took many many years to finally get on 052D serial production once they are able to bring the cost down to affordable level.

EDIT: I found the paragraph from google - it came from someone's quote here, but I was sure I read it in an article :

"However, the Chinese phased array radar differs considerably from the American AN/SPY-1 in that instead of having separate dedicated transmitting and receiving elements, each element of the antenna array of the Chinese radar is capable of both transmitting and receiving, a function similar to the SAMPSON active phased array radar, and just like the SAMPSON system, each transmitting/receiving module of Type 346 radar has separate transmitter and receiver, thus enabling it to continuously receive signals. The radar has designation of H/LJG-346. Its operational frequency band is not yet known to have been published. According to Chinese sources, the biggest difficulty Chinese faced in the early 2000's was to reduce the unit cost of the indigenously produced MMIC used for the radar, because the Chinese MMIC cost is 25 times of its American counterparts, around $ 12,500 in comparison to the $ 500 of American MMIC."

I'm not sure where that source originally came from, and I'm not sure if the figures were ever true. I expect production costs to have reduced substantially. China is a world leader in MMIC production.
Can you give a link for that quote?
And I don't think only two 052Cs were built due to high MMIC cost, but operational assessment/hull and subsystem validation, and also JN moving its shipyard.

Anyway, they are now building 052C/Ds at fast rates so clearly they are at a cost which is affordable for the PLA.



As for deterrence; nuclear is key. A large navy is not essential, but a credible second strike capability is. Up to 8 modern SSBNs will be required, optimally IMO. But they don't need a massive conventional navy

Edit, found the original post http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/str...-radar-theory-operation-2-3956.html#post82880
Crobato gives a succint account of the likely situation at time of posting (made in 2008 remember). So I wouldn't worry about MMIC cost

 

[no_name]

There are different types of deterrence. Against threat of all out war with other major powers there is nuclear deterrence. Against smaller and non-nuclear states conventional deterrence is more manageable and flexible. Moreover if China wants to be a balanced major world player capable of responding to wide range of situations thrown at her she'd need a comprehensive toolbox to do so.

 

[asif iqbal]

Can someone translate this I think it's the commencement ceremony for start of Type 055 construction at JN shipyard

What a finish to 2014 a Big Bang

 

[superdog]

Can someone translate this I think it's the commencement ceremony for start of Type 055 construction at JN shipyard

What a finish to 2014 a Big Bang

"Construction initiation ceremony for 055 destroyer number 1"

 

[JayBird]

But are we sure those words are not just PS job? It seems a little too early to start building 055 DDG now. I hope it's true anyway.