055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
I think omni-purpose and multi-purpose are more or less used synonymously by Totoro?

I don't think anyone doubts the zumwalts will be very potent multirole vessels -- their undersea, surface, and air battle capabilities are all cutting edge, however I think many people feel the USN are sacrificing VLS space for a two hulking sets of AGS, and that practically, in a combat scenario, the few zumwalts of the USN will be relegated for land attack rather than used for every purpose.

Like totoro said, using them for area air defence would negate its excellent and much emphasized stealth shaping. Using a mixed VLS load would make the zumwalt basically a burke but in a bigger, stealthy hull with better sensors and 16 fewer cells (in effect making zumwalt a glorified burke). The most sensible, and I would argue the only sensible way to use Zumwalt, is as a self contained, self defending, survivable naval gunfire support vessel, leveraging the two AGS they've given up so much for.


There is a certain appeal big gun toting ships emanate, though. I wonder if PLAN would consider developing a "zumwalt style" 055, possibly carrying two PJ-38s, or even two dual PJ-38s much like the original AK-130 mount it was based on, ala sovremenny.
If we recall that a single AK-130 gun had an equivalent firing rate to the US Mk-45, the two dual AK-130s aboard Sovremenny provided the equivalent of two ticonderogas/spruances worth of naval gunfire support. Two dual PJ-38s on a modified 055 with IPS, can send ERGM style rounds at a faster rate than AGS (albeit of smaller calibre and probably slightly smaller range) while waiting for railguns to mature.
But that's just a pie in the sky, I suppose.
 

shen

Senior Member
what better air defense sensor? the S-band half of the radar has been cut.

ok, i agree Zumwalt discussion belong in the Zumwalt thread.

lesson for PLAN future,
1) don't spend good money to develop systems you can't afford to build
2) flexibility is better than specialization. better to have more VLS tubes that can launch SY-400 type cheap missiles for shore bombardment duty.
 

joshuatree

Captain
...I agree that the Type 055, if it is built, will definitely be a multi-role vessel. But as I have shown with the Zumwalt, you can have a very effective multi-role vessel, even if you build them in relative small numbers.

My own personal feeling is that the PLAN is going to serial build a number of Type 52D vessel before going on to a larger vessel in any case.

The Type 052D is going to represnt a very strong multi-role escort vessel for the PLAN carriers and large amphibious assault vessels, as well as a very effective general addition to each DDG flotilla. They will need enough of them to serve those flotilla needs for all three fleets and still have enough to meet the escort needs as required with combined fleet operations and/or woith the carrier(s).

I expect the Type 055, if it is built, to end up being used as the centerpiece for those types of task forces. The lead escort, if you will, helping coordinate and provide strength in depth to such task forces.

I also expect them to operate as task force leaders for larger SAGs as required.

But, the Type 052D I expect will also be able to fill this role pretty effectively until such time as the PLAN decides they need more. That's when we will see the Type 055 come along. Who knows, perhaps they have already made that decision, but I expect not yet. They need to get the Type 052D integrated with its new weapons and systems first IMHO.

But all of that is just my opinion on the matter.


The 052D with an 055 of higher displacement really seems to be a solid nucleus for a strong navy. Your comment of serial building 052Ds makes me wonder.

If there are sufficient number of 055s built like the number of Ticos and then serial building 052Ds similar to the Burke programe (let's assume with newer sensors and future armaments it becomes 052E), what need is there for any 054Bs at that point? Once you have sufficient number of vessels capable of operating in waters close to home, the rest need to be oriented for long distance. So in that case, a destroyer would be better suited than a frigate.
 

franco-russe

Senior Member
If 12,000 tons isn't a real cruiser, then what is the 10,000 tons of tico and flight 3 Burke?

I also agree that 052D successor shouldn't be larger than 8000. But I think there is a niche (albeit small) for a super high end surface combatant to lead the bread and butter of 052D

They are of course destroyers. TICONDEROGA class is but the SPRUANCE class DD + Aegis.

ZUMWALT is evidently a cruiser, not too far from being a latter-day SLAVA.
 

rhino123

Pencil Pusher
VIP Professional
They are of course destroyers. TICONDEROGA class is but the SPRUANCE class DD + Aegis.

ZUMWALT is evidently a cruiser, not too far from being a latter-day SLAVA.

Huh? Can you explain where is the similarity between a Zumwalt and a latter day Slava, and Ticonderoga to a spruance class DD? Really confusing coming from a layman.
 
I'm joining in on this thread late and a lot of things have already been said so let's see if I can avoid rehashing too much.

The PLAN knows it is not at the technological level of the USN, JMSDF, or the world's other top navies. Yet the PLAN has to plan (hey!) for scenarios where it may have to face off with some of these top navies. This calls for not putting all the PLAN's eggs in too few baskets.

The PLAN also knows that several revolutionary technologies are on the cusp of being deployed by at least the USN, railguns, hard-kill lasers, and full-size ship-borne UAVs come to mind. Even if the PLAN has parallel programs for equivalent technologies or their counters it is highly unlikely that they are as far along in development. This calls for equipment amenable to future upgrades to some of today's cutting edge revolutionary technologies.

Therefore I think the PLAN's primary developmental objectives for the 055 are an improved stealth hull with integrated mast, improved powerplant, and improved propulsion amenable to future weapons and sensors upgrades. It would make sense for the 055 to be modular a la USN LCS to be capable of being a multirole ship as well as a specialist.

The standardized VLS would at most be a refinement of what's on the 052D if not exactly the same. The VLS count may also stay the same as the 052D, if increased it will have more to do with being a space, powerplant, and propulsion burden 'placeholder' for future equipment rather than the PLAN wanting a higher VLS count per se.

Because of the reasons I stated above, the PLAN would prefer more ships to larger ships and there is no reason to doubt that there will probably only be one or two 055 before moving on to a 055A.

The 055 will probably have 2x gun CIWS and 2x missile CIWS to provide better coverage and reaction time. Hangar for 2 helicopters as the space will also allow for deployment of larger UAVs as well when they are available. Torpedo tubes and sonar are a given.

I don't know what displacement this would equate to but I think the PLAN intends the 055 hull to serve as the basis for the next generation of ships just as the 052 hull did for this generation. It may well test the PLAN's budgetary as well as technological limits though.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Huh? Can you explain where is the similarity between a Zumwalt and a latter day Slava, and Ticonderoga to a spruance class DD? Really confusing coming from a layman.
The Spruance destroyers were built on a particular hull design. when they decided to start building the Ticonderoga AEGIS vessels, they used exactly the same hull, and ended up with a completely different superstructure to house the AEGIS APARs.

The SLAVA cruisers IMHO, are completely different thn the Zumwalts. The only thing I would call the same about them is that they are both non-nuclear, they are both larger vessels, and they are both guided-missile vessels.

The guns on the Zumwalt are completely new, the PVLS (Vetrical Launch System) are completely new technology vetical launch tubes, the radar on the Zumwalt is completely new. The entire hull design is radically different.

So, the fact that the Zumwalt is clearly a cruiser and not a destroyer, it uses guided missiles, it has a non-nuclear propulsion plant, and it's displacement is in excess of 12,000 tons is really all that they have in common IMHO.
 

franco-russe

Senior Member
The Spruance destroyers were built on a particular hull design. when they decided to start building the Ticonderoga AEGIS vessels, they used exactly the same hull, and ended up with a completely different superstructure to house the AEGIS APARs.

The SLAVA cruisers IMHO, are completely different thn the Zumwalts. The only thing I would call the same about them is that they are both non-nuclear, they are both larger vessels, and they are both guided-missile vessels.

The guns on the Zumwalt are completely new, the PVLS (Vetrical Launch System) are completely new technology vetical launch tubes, the radar on the Zumwalt is completely new. The entire hull design is radically different.

So, the fact that the Zumwalt is clearly a cruiser and not a destroyer, it uses guided missiles, it has a non-nuclear propulsion plant, and it's displacement is in excess of 12,000 tons is really all that they have in common IMHO.

My meaning was that they are both missile strike cruisers, anti-surface in the case of the SLAVA and land attack in the case of the ZUMWALT.

I define cruisers as large surface ships intended for independent operations, destroyers as large surface ships intended for fleet escort duties.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
My meaning was that they are both missile strike cruisers, anti-surface in the case of the SLAVA and land attack in the case of the ZUMWALT.

I define cruisers as large surface ships intended for independent operations, destroyers as large surface ships intended for fleet escort duties.

In that sense, would ticonderogas and burkes not also qualify to be called cruisers, depending on their VLS loadout?


Fill them up with tomahawks and a couple of ESSM, and you have yourself a land attack missile strike cruiser...

Of course this is semantics, for instance we all know Zumwalt can just as easily be called a cruiser, but I'm surprised to hear burkes and ticos referred to not as cruisers but "mere" destroyers.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
My meaning was that they are both missile strike cruisers, anti-surface in the case of the SLAVA and land attack in the case of the ZUMWALT.

I define cruisers as large surface ships intended for independent operations, destroyers as large surface ships intended for fleet escort duties.
I see. And I agree in this thing they are similar...as I stated, they are both guided missile vessels. And they are both large vessels.

But thy are also from different eras. the SLAVA is a Cold War, heavy duty puncher from the Soviet era. The Zumwalt is a leading edge, new design (including its hull for modern day use) design of the next generation, 2-3 generations beyond the Slava.

No doubt however, IMHO, that they are both guided missile cruisers.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top