055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[Iron Man]

The platform is definitely usable as a slanted ASCM launcher pad, though I personally think 128 cells is more than enough to keep all of them in VL cells, to maximize flexibility (remember that slant launchers are not omnidirectional but VL cells are) and possibly to improve RCS a little bit. If the YJ-12 is as big as the internet depicts, there is no way one of these missiles is going to fit inside a VL cell. Basically it is the size (especially diameter) of a Moskit (Sunburn), meaning it could only be housed inside large diameter slant launchers like what we see on the Sovremennys. Far more likely it will use the YJ-18 instead, which I believe was probably purpose built for VL cells.

 

[Mirabo]

Well, why not both? Like the Sejong the Great, the 055 might as well equip sixteen YJ-12 slanted canisters, as well as 128 VLS cells... The 13.5k tonne hull would allow it, and the "mystery platform" would also have a purpose.

Ideally, it'd have both. All I'm saying is that we can't expect everything to be perfect, and that even if the Type 055 does end up with "only" 112 cells, it won't be a major issue. Especially if the new YJ-18A (subsonic cruise, supersonic pop-up terminal) vertically-launched missiles work as advertised.

That would give the Type 055 greater firepower than any existing destroyer in its tonnage, surpassing even the Sejong the Great-class because the Koreans only have supersonic ground attack cruise missiles, and not ship-launched, terminal-phase supersonic pop-up missile like the 055s will have at least 112 of.

 

[Iron Man]

IMO the mystery step platform could barely hold 8 YJ-12 launchers, if even. That would be an optimistic projection. I think more likely it could support 8 YJ-83-sized launchers (2 quadruple launchers facing port/starboard). Then again, the step platform far more likely has other (internal) uses that we are simply not privy to.

 

[Blitzo]

Again, YOU are missing the point. Which of these advancements are you "hypothesizing"? How advanced are these advancements over the 052D version? Yes, if "XYZ" advancements are on the 055, then MAYBE together they will represent a significant increase in warfighting capability; then again maybe not. But since you don't know how advanced these systems are and how many advancements are possibly alleged to be in the 055, you can't even vaguely concretize on even a theoretical level whether and how much more advanced a theoretical 055 would be if at all compared to a 052D. In other words you don't even know what COULD be on the 055 and how much more advanced any of your theoretical subsystems WOULD be compared to those on the 052D. Bottom line is you don't even have a basis for comparison, so how could you possibly come to the conclusion that if one, two or twenty "more advanced" systems are on the 055, that this would represent a significant increase in warfighting capability? The answer of course is that you simply don't.

Sigh, look for this part of the conversation just ignore 055 and 052D and consider hypothetical warship fuses instead.

The reason for my argument is to make the case that non weapons/radar/propulsion advancements in any ship vs a previous ship can still field non-meh advancements in warfighting capabilities.

Whether 055 fields those advancements is immaterial to the foundation of my argument.


Or putting it another way, I'm arguing about the logic that software/combat management/command advancements in ANY warship can contribute a non-meh advancements in a warship even if there are no advancements in weapons/sensors/propulsion relative to a previous class of older ship.

"Far more compelling demonstration that such advances had been made"??? What's the blooming point of even arguing something so entirely inconsequential, if that is in fact what you were arguing this whole time? The whole point that I wanted to make was that the 055's rapid production was not an indication of advancing design and production technologies due to the relatively non-revolutionary nature of the 055 design compared to the 052D as well as the relatively short period of time between the appearance of these two designs, and your response this whole time was that the 055's rapid production is a more compelling demonstration of existing design/production technologies? How would that be any kind of consequential response to what I said? I just don't even understand your train of thought anymore.

I don't know what the "reason" for arguing it is because no one goes out of their way to argue over silly details deliberately. But this contention has been reflected in the more surface level disagreements preceding this discussion, from everything about eyebrow raising, to discussion about the 055s production number vs initial rate and the meaning of it.

And the only reason we reached this level of detail underpinning the disagreement is because of those earlier more symptomatic disagreements resulting from the fundamental cause.

 

[Iron Man]

Sigh, look for this part of the conversation just ignore 055 and 052D and consider hypothetical warship fuses instead.

The reason for my argument is to make the case that non weapons/radar/propulsion advancements in any ship vs a previous ship can still field non-meh advancements in warfighting capabilities.

Whether 055 fields those advancements is immaterial to the foundation of my argument.


Or putting it another way, I'm arguing about the logic that software/combat management/command advancements in ANY warship can contribute a non-meh advancements in a warship even if there are no advancements in weapons/sensors/propulsion relative to a previous class of older ship.

Sure, but this is a self-evident statement that is no different from saying 5 is greater than 4 and 7 is greater than 6. Yes, if XYZABCDEFGHIJK unspecified "advancements" are aboard the 055 oops I mean a random ship class compared to its predecessor, then maybe there will be a significant improvement in warfighting capability over the predecessor. Why not. But have you really given any new information or insight here?

I don't know what the "reason" for arguing it is because no one goes out of their way to argue over silly details deliberately. But this contention has been reflected in the more surface level disagreements preceding this discussion, from everything about eyebrow raising, to discussion about the 055s production number vs initial rate and the meaning of it.

And the only reason we reached this level of detail underpinning the disagreement is because of those earlier more symptomatic disagreements resulting from the fundamental cause.

Ok I have literally no idea what you just said here. Honestly.

 

[Blitzo]

Sure, but this is a self-evident statement that is no different from saying 5 is greater than 4 and 7 is greater than 6. Yes, if XYZABCDEFGHIJK unspecified "advancements" are aboard the 055 oops I mean a random ship class compared to its predecessor, then maybe there will be a significant improvement in warfighting capability over the predecessor. Why not. But have you really given any new information or insight here?

Of course I haven't given any new information, I wanted to confirm that you understand the logic that I've put forward over the course of this strain of discussion.

"Why not" is basically just the answer I wanted this whole time for this part of the discussion, so long as XYZABCDEFGHIJK advancements are in the pre-specified subsystems that I've brought up before (those same subsystems whose advancements you once associated with "meh").

Ok I have literally no idea what you just said here. Honestly.

You asked me what the point of arguing over something so inconsequential was.

My answer was that I was not deliberately entering this discussion knowing we would end up talking about something so inconsequential, but we were led here due to disagreements in certain other opinions.


As for this: "The whole point that I wanted to make was that the 055's rapid production was not an indication of advancing design and production technologies due to the relatively non-revolutionary nature of the 055 design compared to the 052D as well as the relatively short period of time between the appearance of these two designs, and your response this whole time was that the 055's rapid production is a more compelling demonstration of existing design/production technologies? How would that be any kind of consequential response to what I said? I just don't even understand your train of thought anymore."

My response is consequential, because it does two things:

1: on one hand, it agrees with your point, in that it acknowledges that 055 and 052D likely had access to similar/same advancements in design/computing/etc, which likely assisted both of their development and production process. (The phrase "more compelling" part of my response acknowledges that 052D's manner of production was also an example that those advancements likely existed and played a role in its production, but that 055's manner of production is a more compelling display for those advancements, see below)

2: on the other hand, it disagrees with your point, by emphasizing that 055's manner of production right now was quite different to 052D's at a similar stage of its production (in terms of 055 having a higher initial rate of production vs 052D's initial rate of production, and also emphasizing that 055 is a clean sheet hull design whereas 052D was a derivative of an existing proven hull), and that 055's manner of production is therefore more compelling proof that those advancements took place compared to 052D's manner of production.


And I think it's important to clarify this as well -- the advancements I'm referring to that assisted both 055 and 052D's production, are advances relative to an earlier era when those technologies were very immature, which I believe is also what subotai is referring to. I don't believe that anyone is suggesting that advancements occurred in the intervening few years between 052D's production/development and 055's production/development, and in previous posts I have also expressed this as well.


So, when you say "055's rapid production was not an indication of advancing design and production technologies due to the relatively non-revolutionary nature of the 055 design compared to the 052D as well as the relatively short period of time between the appearance of these two designs"....

... My response is that 055's rapid production (or using my term, "manner of production") is indeed not any meaningful indication of advancement in design/production technology relative to when 052D was produced... but I am also saying 055's manner of production is an indication of advancement in design/production technology relative to the earlier era where those technologies (specifically in modelling/computing) were likely far less mature (pre 2010 years, at the very least), and 055s manner of production is also the most compelling evidence of those advancementd we have seen compared to the manner of production of other Chinese Navy ships in the last few years (including but not limited to 052D).

 

[Jura The idiot]

here:

...


So, when you say "055's rapid production was not an indication of advancing design and production technologies due to the relatively non-revolutionary nature of the 055 design compared to the 052D as well as the relatively short period of time between the appearance of these two designs"....

... My response is that 055's rapid production (or using my term, "manner of production") is indeed not any meaningful indication of advancement in design/production technology relative to when 052D was produced... but I am also saying 055's manner of production is an indication of advancement in design/production technology relative to the earlier era where those technologies (specifically in modelling/computing) were likely far less mature (pre 2010 years, at the very least), and 055s manner of production is also the most compelling evidence of those advancementd we have seen compared to the manner of production of other Chinese Navy ships in the last few years (including but not limited to 052D).

it seems to me you in fact ARE assuming, based on one line in a Chinese forum I've previously quoted, Type 055 will be mass produced in the way described by said one line in a Chinese forum, despite what sounded like some sort of a denial Sunday at 9:30 AM

... no, it's based on pictures, where we can see that at least three 055s are in various stages of construction before the first 055 has even been launched.
What we are talking about right now is based on the initial pace of production as it already is, probably with a degree of acceptance that the initial pace of production will likely be sustained.

The post by fzgfzy just to add further weight to the case that there will likely be a sustained high pace of production. And yes, his one line is very much important. It would be wise of you to pay attention to lines from certain people on the Chinese BBS.

anyway, I now read the next rounds here

 

[Blitzo]

here:
it seems to me you in fact ARE assuming, based on one line in a Chinese forum I've previously quoted, Type 055 will be mass produced in the way described by said one line in a Chinese forum, despite what sounded like some sort of a denial Sunday at 9:30 AM
anyway, I now read the next rounds here

fzgfzy's statement is not what I mean when I refer to 055's manner of production. I am instead referring to 055's initial rate of production (which we can confirm via photos), and 055's nature as a clean sheet design.

It's been consensus for a while that the first batch of 055 will be 4-8, and him implying that 055 will have more than 8 in its first batch doesn't change the course of the discussion very much, because even the consensus of a 4-8 first batch was accompanied by the relative understanding those 4-8 first batch ships would be followed by a second batch of ships.

 

[Jura The idiot]

fzgfzy's statement is not what I mean when I refer to 055's manner of production. I am instead referring to 055's initial rate of production (which we can confirm via photos), and 055's nature as a clean sheet design.

It's been consensus for a while that the first batch of 055 will be 4-8, and him implying that 055 will have more than 8 in its first batch doesn't change the course of the discussion very much, because even the consensus of a 4-8 first batch was accompanied by the relative understanding those 4-8 first batch ships would be followed by a second batch of ships.

I read it twice and probably know what you meant (which is iffy, but it's how it is)
I mean it amazes me here it's info from forums only plus looking at satellite imagery (I've been watching the Western; Russian naval programs for several years now: they're announced by naval officials, then often changed anyway)

 

[Blitzo]

I read it twice and probably know what you meant (which is iffy, but it's how it is)
I mean it amazes me here it's info from forums only plus looking at satellite imagery (I've been watching the Western; Russian naval programs for several years now: they're announced by naval officials, then often changed anyway)

Err don't be so amazed, you've been on this forum for a while now.

Chinese military watching is highly dependent on credible rumours from forums, satellite imagery, and lots of inference, logic and common sense.
Western and Russian naval and military projects and announcements do not have an equivalent for most big ticket Chinese military projects. It's just the way it is.