That USN foolishly chose not to develop and field a new general purpose frigate in the 1990s (something which is really quite bizarre, leaving it with Burkes as far as they eye can see is not what I was suggesting China emulate. by the comparison. Of course there should be a new ~5000-6000 ton frigate design built in large numbers to succeed 054/A and complement 055.
I would not be opposed to a 5000-6000 ton frigate built en masse alongside 055 and both would thus completely replace all current frigates and destroyers eventually, but an alternative for me is to develop a 4500-5000 ton frigate instead that is more cleanly relegated to a less capable frigate capability and which leaves room left for 052D production as well as 055 production via three tiers rather than two tiers. [I expand on this in the last part of this post]
It is widely acknowledged that systems are the major cost drivers in a modern warship, not hull size. 052D can therefore only be *significantly* cheaper than 055 by omitting or downgrading capabilities such as L-band radar. Given that the environment is saturated with high-end threats (submarines, aircraft, surface ships) such downgrades make little sense. In terms of operating cost 055 as a new design will likely incorporate significant improvements in automation and personnel management meaning that crew load and cost will be similar.
I agree, but we should also remember that 055 is far greater size (up to 13,500 tons at full displacement potentially, given some big shrimps have recently put the standard displacement at 12,000 tons) compared to 052D (7,500 tons full displacement, and that is somewhat pushing it -- it may be even lower, at only slightly in excess of 7,000 tons, depending on how one extrapolates official displacement numbers). In other words, an 055 may ultimately displace nearly
twice as much as an 052D.
The costs that this will incur is not directly through the larger displacement of 055, rather it is via the far greater number, complexity and variety of
systems that an 055 will be able to accommodate compared to an 052D.
Systems include sensors/combat management, weapons, propulsion, among others.
There are sensors and combat management to consider: everything from the L band radar, S band radar to the combat management system (and associated CIC and possible flag bridge for a flag officer and their staff), datalinks and processing unique to 055 by virtue of its size, additional active sensors (X band radar) as well as passive sensors (ESM and EOIRST) and ECM arrays, not to mention sonar... all of these sensors and combat management related systems individually will likely be more capable than their 052D equivalent and in some cases there may also be more of them (such as more consoles in the CIC of an 055 vs an 052D). That all adds up to more cost.
Weapons work the same way in a more obvious manner: 055 will have possibly up to twice as many VLS as an 052D, but initially will have similar armament in other domains (same main gun, same/similar ciws). Higher cost of armament is not as big of a factor for 055's potentially greater cost in such a configuration, but if an IEPS equipped 055A emerges with a railgun and/or DEW CIWS, then that would likely hike up 055A's cost versus 052D [of course, it is possible that 052D may eventually find itself having an 052E in the second batch of 12 ships, and also be able to field a railgun or DEW laser CIWS if they are able to squeeze in a new propulsion type into the 052D's hull, such as CODLOG... but an 055A will still have the benefits of being a far larger hull and thus be able to generate more power via IEPS as well as carry a larger railgun, etc, which will still add up to more costs for an 055 equivalent of the era]
Propulsion: 055 is expected to use four QC-280s versus the 2 QC-280s and two diesels onboard an 052D. Initially 055 is expected to only operate QC-280s via a COGAG configuration, but there is enough space in the ship to put the QC-280s in an IEPS arrangement, which further adds complexity and cost compared to the propulsion of 052D.
Others: the larger size of 055 also means a larger crew (meaning more costs) which can be offset by automation technology, but even assuming both 055 and 052D eventually adopt certain automation technologies, 055 will still likely be more expensive in this regard (especially if 055 adopts even greater crew comforts into its design than current generation surface combatants); 055 may also adopt certain new technologies such as for damage control, or even additional facilities that 052D cannot have the volume for such as a secondary CIC.
All in all, I believe that the larger size of 055 (potentially up to nearly twice as large as an 052D) means it will be significantly more costly than the 052D, not because of sheer size but because the size allows for much more capable technologies and systems to be integrated into the hull and in greater number compared to an 052D. And even assuming an 052D is developed into an 052E hull with similar advancements that an 055 will have via an 055A, the absolute larger size of the 055 hull means it will always be able to accommodate a greater number of equivalent systems as well as a greater variety of systems some of which that an 052D may simply lack.
In other words, of the
equivalent capabilities that 055 and 052D will share (such as both using a common VLS but 055 carrying double the number, or 055 using four QC280s vs 052Ds two), 055 will be able to have an equivalent capability in greater quantity. 055's larger size also means it can adopt
additional capabilities that 052D simply does not have the size for (such as an L band and X band MFR AESA in addition to an S band MFR AESA, or 055's potential to adopt full IEPS).
It is the greater quantity of
equivalent capabilities as well as the potentially large number of
additional capabilities that 055 can host vis-a-vis 052D which (in my mind) will cause 055 to have a substantially greater cost than 052D. I'm not suggesting it will be so much greater in cost that only a few 055s can be produced, but I am saying that we should consider the variety of potential very high end capabilities the 055 can offer and whether we want that to be complemented by a high-medium end capability ship as well.
I fully agree that China should pursue a balanced array of low, medium, and high-end capabilities. I do not see how this leads to the conclusion that more 052Ds should be built once 055 is online. The low-end capability is 056/successor, the medium is 054A/successor, and the high-end is 052D succeeded by 055.
Sorry, by lower/medium/high end I was referring to blue water capable ships.
I would consider 056 and 022 to be unique as green water/coastal defence ships.
I would define the roles of each of the low/medium/high end blue water capable ships as such...
Lower end (054A/B): ASW as one of its primary missions (sonar sensor fit and propulsion are important in this regard -- but also very important is that such a ship would still be substantially less expensive and smaller than a medium end combatant thus can be more willing to be risked against a submarine, which could be anything from a high end heavy SSN to a low end, small SSK); medium range/self defense AAW; medium range surveillance; picket missions in a task force (combining the ASW and AAW role aforementioned); limited anti surface and land attack capability (via common VLS); convoy protection; escorting shuttling replenishment ships; command of a task force of coastal defence ships (056s) for defense of home or local waters (for ASW mostly but also medium range AAW against any "leaked" cruise missiles); and operating independently or in small groups in low intensity regions.
Medium end (052D/E): long range AAW as supplement to higher end ships (but less capable due to much less VLS cells); long range surveillance; command of a small or medium sized task force (including ARGs or a small SAG); land attack and anti surface missions; operating in groups alongside other medium end combatants possibly with some high end combatants; operating independently or in small groups in medium risk environments;
High end (055/A): long range AAW and acting as the "shield" of a task group via its large number of VLS cells; very long range and comprehensive surveillance; command of a large task force or fleet (including CSGs, a large SAG or a large combined taskforce); potential BMD and ASAT missions; large scale land strike and anti surface; operating independently (in medium-high risk environments) or in conjunction with other high end ships or medium end ships as part of a SAG.
[note 1: many low end capabilities would also be present on medium and high end ships, and medium end capabilities also present on high end ships... but vice versa not true]
[note 2: the rise of CeC will likely mean a lower end frigate can potentially carry a LR SAM and successfully engage a target at very long range if supported by an 055 or 052D or fixed wing AEW&C via CeC, however I also believe that despite this possibility, most ships of various displacements will still carry payload compositions which are mostly oriented towards their organic sensor capabilities with only some VLS left over for other roles that may not be its primary mission or which can be supported by CeC]
