055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[Skywatcher]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Skywatcher and his partner's articles seem to be the goto source these days in the media. I'm seeing everyone reference their articles. This one The National Interest had an article out less than 19 mins from Popsci releasing theirs.

We couldn't do it without you guys!

The Keck one did see a bit rushed.

 

[Blitzo]

We couldn't do it without you guys!

The Keck one did see a bit rushed.

Good write up, a few bits to quibble:

• I'm not sure if the helicopter landing pad is large enough to simulate any kind of landing operations.
• Also, in the fan photo with the VLS and missiles I think it's a CJ-10 not a CJ-1000.
• Worth noting that 052D is generally said to have type 346A rather than 346 (which is 052C's radar), and despite operating on the same band as SPY-1 they're active phased array rather than passive, and is more similar to the upcoming SPY-6 AMDR-S for the flight iii burkes.

 

[Skywatcher]

Good write up, a few bits to quibble:

• I'm not sure if the helicopter landing pad is large enough to simulate any kind of landing operations.
• Also, in the fan photo with the VLS and missiles I think it's a CJ-10 not a CJ-1000.
• Worth noting that 052D is generally said to have type 346A rather than 346 (which is 052C's radar), and despite operating on the same band as SPY-1 they're active phased array rather than passive, and is more similar to the upcoming SPY-6 AMDR-S for the flight iii burkes.

I put the helicopter pad because it would have some training relevance simply by being there, but it doesn't have a hangar door, so I'm actually at a loss for why it was installed in the first place. It might be only enough for the crew to wander around and get used to having a wider deck.

Thanks for the CJ-10 correct (I wish that everyone had stuck to the DH-10 designation back in 2009)!

As for the Type 346, I left it as SPY-1 since it's something I think most of the readers would be familiar with (hence mentioning only "electronically scanned). Thought about pointing out that the Type 346 family is more advanced than the SPY-1, but that might be a little too alarmist in tone.

Use "Type 346 family" instead of "Type 346A" because honestly, I think that the 055 mockup's Type 346 radar could feature internal improvements over the Type 346A.

 

[nemo]

As for the Type 346, I left it as SPY-1 since it's something I think most of the readers would be familiar with (hence mentioning only "electronically scanned). Thought about pointing out that the Type 346 family is more advanced than the SPY-1, but that might be a little too alarmist in tone.

It's actually worse than that. One of the reason the size of 055 go up is so it can have larger arrays -- 20 ft diameter or larger, which is the original specification of AMDR. This is the size needed to reasonably engage stealth aircraft. But this is too large to fit on existing destroyers, and USN does not have the money to develop new hulls, so the AMDR intended for Burke 3s has only 14 foot diameter -- which is actually slightly smaller than the arrays fitted to 052D.

 

[Blitzo]

It's actually worse than that. One of the reason the size of 055 go up is so it can have larger arrays -- 20 ft diameter or larger, which is the original specification of AMDR. This is the size needed to reasonably engage stealth aircraft. But this is too large to fit on existing destroyers, and USN does not have the money to develop new hulls, so the AMDR intended for Burke 3s has only 14 foot diameter -- which is actually slightly smaller than the arrays fitted to 052D.

Actually the oft stated supposedly undersized arrays for Burke IIIs is more related to

And at present it doesn't seem like 055 will feature larger fixed arrays than the same 346As. Then again it should have another set of X band APARs and a longer band APAR as well for volume search and anti stealth duties.

 

[Blitzo]

I put the helicopter pad because it would have some training relevance simply by being there, but it doesn't have a hangar door, so I'm actually at a loss for why it was installed in the first place. It might be only enough for the crew to wander around and get used to having a wider deck.

My suspicion is just that the PLA has poor taste in landscape and structural design for buildings and compounds. There's a PLA submarine training campus or something where they have a freaking small sized submarine shaped statue near a sports field... it looks tacky as heck. Thankfully that doesn't seem to have translated into the design of their ships, but IMO a lot of PLA (and indeed many Chinese) buildings and compounds feature many unnecessary bits and bobs due to poor understanding of what looks good, what they think looks good, and what is actually needed to perform a job.

Thanks for the CJ-10 correct (I wish that everyone had stuck to the DH-10 designation back in 2009)!

As for the Type 346, I left it as SPY-1 since it's something I think most of the readers would be familiar with (hence mentioning only "electronically scanned). Thought about pointing out that the Type 346 family is more advanced than the SPY-1, but that might be a little too alarmist in tone.

IMHO, I think that as eastern arsenal gains a larger readership and as people like david axe, bill gertz, rick fisher etc start citing eastern arsenal I think being accurate is as important as being easy to read, at least on points which have practical significance, such as 346A being more similar to SPY-6 than SPY-1.
I can say that as a reader myself, an article that compares weapons or products which I've never heard before will typically elicit me to do a quick google search, so I don't think one needs to pamper to their readers too much. The way Tyler Rogoway on Foxtrot Alpha writes fairly long and detailed write-ups on some military subjects is quite a good way of distributing knowledge, I think, compared to say warisboring where everything is condensed down to a minute's worth of reading. Eastern Arsenal is definitely more of a shorter-entry-per-post kind of blog, but I think it's worth considering keeping things as accurate as possible.

OTOH, unintentionally half-accurate info may cause individuals new to military watching (such as casual readers of the blog) will use the initial information they read as the basis of their knowledge, while more readers knowledgeable of military things might make the observation that you deliberately pointed out SPY-1 rather than newer radars like the DBR on Ford or SPY-6 of AMDR. Sometimes simplification can lead to unintentional misinformation.

Use "Type 346 family" instead of "Type 346A" because honestly, I think that the 055 mockup's Type 346 radar could feature internal improvements over the Type 346A.

Oh okay fair enough, that's a reasonable guess.

 

[Skywatcher]

IMHO, I think that as eastern arsenal gains a larger readership and as people like david axe, bill gertz, rick fisher etc start citing eastern arsenal I think being accurate is as important as being easy to read, at least on points which have practical significance, such as 346A being more similar to SPY-6 than SPY-1.
I can say that as a reader myself, an article that compares weapons or products which I've never heard before will typically elicit me to do a quick google search, so I don't think one needs to pamper to their readers too much. The way Tyler Rogoway on Foxtrot Alpha writes fairly long and detailed write-ups on some military subjects is quite a good way of distributing knowledge, I think, compared to say warisboring where everything is condensed down to a minute's worth of reading. Eastern Arsenal is definitely more of a shorter-entry-per-post kind of blog, but I think it's worth considering keeping things as accurate as possible.

OTOH, unintentionally half-accurate info may cause individuals new to military watching (such as casual readers of the blog) will use the initial information they read as the basis of their knowledge, while more readers knowledgeable of military things might make the observation that you deliberately pointed out SPY-1 rather than newer radars like the DBR on Ford or SPY-6 of AMDR. Sometimes simplification can lead to unintentional misinformation.

Point very well taken.

 

[Blitzo]

Point very well taken.

Cheers -- as an aside, I hope I'm not coming off as too imposing or forward on your posts; it is your blog after all. That said I have great fondness and hope for Eastern Arsenal as a more cited source of PLA news, that might be able to influence mass media discourse of PLA matters in time to come.

Lately I've been pondering if I should start my own blog on PLA matters, given the internet still doesn't really have a comprehensive, easy to read go-to source for up to date info on compiled PLA weapons and news. Wikipedia is only useful for a few entries, sinodefence.com is a mess and not up to date, huitong's site is limited to aircraft and some missiles and is difficult to navigate for newcomers, and there's too much noise on western news sites peddling off incorrect information.
Maybe a youtube channel would work better... sometimes I wish I could take a half year break from med school and get something like this going.

 

[no_name]

Actually we could have a sticky encyclopedic thread in each army, navy, and airforce subforums (maybe also one for strategic weapon systems/missiles) where members can compile and edit articles describing each individual weapon platforms. A development history and new updates can also be added.

 

[Blitzo]

Actually we could have a sticky encyclopedic thread in each army, navy, and airforce subforums (maybe also one for strategic weapon systems/missiles) where members can compile and edit articles describing each individual weapon platforms. A development history and new updates can also be added.

I like that idea, but restrictions on editing time are a pain. Also, the post-by-post nature of forums make it difficult for certain topics to be accessed. Finally, anything we write here would never really be taken seriously by outsiders, let alone media in search of PLA information and news, given we are "only" a forum.

The best way is if we could have a dedicated "PLA wikipedia" website that certain SDF members can add or contribute to (members willing to invest the time, and also members deemed by mods and the community to have a good grasp of PLA matters and logical reasoning)... and on SDF we could have a dedicated sub forum to could discuss new changes to new weapons and topics before applying them on a website.

The most important part of any kind of "PLA wikipedia" is to first acknowledge that all kinds of PLA news written by mainstream media are often derived from Chinese BBS and discussed on sites like SDF are often the first english speaking bridge for greater mainstream exposure... and that the posts made on such a site are made by individuals knowledgeable and experienced in PLA watching, not just any old fellow.


... Alas this would take time, and more importantly money to design, host, and run such a site. Making content is easy enough, but hosting it and getting exposure is difficult.