055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[delft]

care to comment on this one:

?
(it's

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I know you know, the link is for delft

Does patrol ship imply that it is less than a frigate?
The building height amidships is particularly low which I find structurally ugly. I have little ideas about radar reflection but suspect that the extra surfaces in that area are detrimental.
Altogether an ugly ship.

 

[Jura The idiot]

Does patrol ship imply that it is less than a frigate?
The building height amidships is particularly low which I find structurally ugly. I have little ideas about radar reflection but suspect that the extra surfaces in that area are detrimental.
Altogether an ugly ship.

this time I took it to
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/european-military-news-reports-data-etc.t4395/
European Military News, Reports, Data, etc. https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/european-military-news-reports-data-etc.t4395/page-94#post-425786

 

[Blitzo]

a nice little speculative comparison CGI, though I think some of the details on the 055 are a bit off... but we'll see.

the dimensions of the 055 are probably off as well -- I don't think the beam is 21m based on satellite imagery, probably more like 20.5m or even a little smaller, and I think the total length of 055 will probably be 180m rather than 174m.

the atago ddg is also missing its forward phalanx for some reason

but other than that it's a good quality CGI from an artist who has a record of god quality drawings..

 

[Lethe]

So with all these recent CGI images and drawings, we are no longer anticipating that 055 will feature an analogue of S1850M/SMART-L?

 

[Blitzo]

So with all these recent CGI images and drawings, we are no longer anticipating that 055 will feature an analogue of S1850M/SMART-L?

I personally do still expect it feature an aft VSR.

I think that a substantial number of these artists a (while very talented) are deriving too much of their drawings and CGIs based on a combination of what we see from the constructed hull so far (which is sensible) with what they directly see on the Wuhan mock up (which may not be as sensible).

It would be assuming that the arrangement of the relevant structures at the Wuhan mock up are a perfectly 1:1 display of what the real ship's topside structural and sensor arrangement will look like. I've expressed my opinion over the last few years (since late 2014, really -- almost exactly two years ago on the dot

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) that such an assumption may not be entirely sensible.

 

[Lethe]

Ok, thanks -- just checking there wasn't some development I had missed.

 

[Iron Man]

care to comment on this one:

?
(it's

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I know you know, the link is for delft

I've never seen this ship before. It's a standard modern warship with a mix of stealth and non-stealth features. Nothing special IMO.

So with all these recent CGI images and drawings, we are no longer anticipating that 055 will feature an analogue of S1850M/SMART-L?

On the Wuhan mockup there is already a radar sitting on top of the helicopter deckhouse, and it is not a VSR; it looks like a datalink or a SATCOM. There are also a pair of whips very close to this radar, which if replaced with a SMART-L sized VSR would make the rotation of the radar impossible. The alleged location of the VSR is also perilously close to the rear VLS bank and would possibly be damaged by launching missiles. AFAIK we have never seen any sign of a VSR on the Wuhan mockup that was specifically purpose-built to test such hardware. That's 3 to 4 pieces of evidence against a VSR in the back. As far as anyone can demonstrate, a 055 VSR is vaporware, an aspiration turned into an expectation. If we see a separate X or C-band radar mounted high on the main mast, that IMO will be the sure sign of no VSR in the back (assuming the main mast is fitted out first), as the larger S-band flat panel arrays on the main deckhouse would serve in this function. This would be analogous to the dual band radar of the USN.

 

[delft]

your kidding reminded me of an interesting question, which I posed where it would be on topic
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/modern-ciws-anti-missile-systems-deployed-and-in-development.t4350/
Modern CIWS & Anti-Missile Systems (Deployed and in development)

I did remember this post and I also remember reading in a book about the growth of the fighting distances of battleships in the late 19th century an anecdote of an army artillery officer being amazed at distance a coastal gun was able to hit a target at the first shot. This had needed correcting the targeting for atmospheric pressure, temperatures, wind direction and strength, matters outside the experience of the army man. I also remember hearing that during WWII German soldiers nearing the front in Russia couldn't light a fire because it was likely to be blown out, and they too, by a Russian artillery shelled targeted on the smoke.
I can imagine using a close in gun of larger calibre firing sub calibre shots at much higher muzzle velocity, i.e. a smooth bore tank gun firing armour piercing shot, at a large very high speed anti ship missile with very high precision.

 

[Jura The idiot]

I did remember this post and I also remember reading in a book about the growth of the fighting distances of battleships in the late 19th century an anecdote of an army artillery officer being amazed at distance a coastal gun was able to hit a target at the first shot. This had needed correcting the targeting for atmospheric pressure, temperatures, wind direction and strength, matters outside the experience of the army man. I also remember hearing that during WWII German soldiers nearing the front in Russia couldn't light a fire because it was likely to be blown out, and they too, by a Russian artillery shelled targeted on the smoke.
I can imagine using a close in gun of larger calibre firing sub calibre shots at much higher muzzle velocity, i.e. a smooth bore tank gun firing armour piercing shot, at a large very high speed anti ship missile with very high precision.

delft please post about it in

https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/modern-ciws-anti-missile-systems-deployed-and-in-development.t4350/
Modern CIWS & Anti-Missile Systems (Deployed and in development)

though, don't worry I'll read it and am going to respond (I took the day off from work today and tomorrow) but we need to take our artillery stories out of
Type 055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

 

[joshuatree]

First 055 on right, second 055 on left.