055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[asif iqbal]

Some claims that the module on the dock is that of Type 052E? What is the truth and is there even such a thing as Type 052E?

Notice 4 x Type 726 LCAC

Type 055 CG

 

[Dizasta1]

Finally 112 confirmed

They could easily have slipped in another 16

Should have been 128 for that size and tonnage it would have been real heavy hitter

Like the South Korean giant Sejong the great class

Not necessarily, it depends, if China builds a substantial number of Type-055s. Then such a case PLAN would essentially have a greater punch in deploying a combo of Type-055s and Type-052C/Ds. It's about applying tactics and formulating the eight strategy that turns the advantage in your direction. If China uses the correct strategy, then a few less cells on its destroyers than the Sejong Destroyer would not matter. It's probable, if not likely, that if a confrontation ever were to occur (God forbid). Then it would be up against a combined force of Japanese, South Korean and American navies. Taking this into account, PLAN has to make sure that it calculates the appropriate force deployment to counter such a large force.

 

[taxiya]

Not necessarily, it depends, if China builds a substantial number of Type-055s. Then such a case PLAN would essentially have a greater punch in deploying a combo of Type-055s and Type-052C/Ds. It's about applying tactics and formulating the eight strategy that turns the advantage in your direction. If China uses the correct strategy, then a few less cells on its destroyers than the Sejong Destroyer would not matter. It's probable, if not likely, that if a confrontation ever were to occur (God forbid). Then it would be up against a combined force of Japanese, South Korean and American navies. Taking this into account, PLAN has to make sure that it calculates the appropriate force deployment to counter such a large force.

exactly, I recall someone in this thread said that "no destroyers in the world can shoot all its 96, 112 or 128 missiles before either being sunk or mission accomplished". I must add that no destroyers in the world have the radar and control capacity that can launch all its missiles simultaneously. The only advantage of a bigger load is (besides pride competition) less reload from homeport. That advantage is because of the disadvantage of lack of replenish ship to load on the sea in a big battle group in a prolonged fight. That advantage is also a disadvantage of putting all eggs in one basket, a reason why Flight III Burke continue to hold ?96? The reason that 055 has 112 is because it is slightly larger, surely not to compete with somebody's pride.

 

[Blitzo]

i quite like this aerial shot from the video, it's a perspective that we haven't quite had yet.

 

[Figaro]

 

[Iron Man]

exactly, I recall someone in this thread said that "no destroyers in the world can shoot all its 96, 112 or 128 missiles before either being sunk or mission accomplished".

Just because somebody said that doesn't make it true.

 

[fatfreddy]

exactly, I recall someone in this thread said that "no destroyers in the world can shoot all its 96, 112 or 128 missiles before either being sunk or mission accomplished". I must add that no destroyers in the world have the radar and control capacity that can launch all its missiles simultaneously. The only advantage of a bigger load is (besides pride competition) less reload from homeport. That advantage is because of the disadvantage of lack of replenish ship to load on the sea in a big battle group in a prolonged fight. That advantage is also a disadvantage of putting all eggs in one basket, a reason why Flight III Burke continue to hold ?96? The reason that 055 has 112 is because it is slightly larger, surely not to compete with somebody's pride.

Makes you wonder if there is a case for some of those massive guns battleships used to have.Otherwise once the missiles are expended, you have a useless boat.

 

[AndrewS]

exactly, I recall someone in this thread said that "no destroyers in the world can shoot all its 96, 112 or 128 missiles before either being sunk or mission accomplished". I must add that no destroyers in the world have the radar and control capacity that can launch all its missiles simultaneously. The only advantage of a bigger load is (besides pride competition) less reload from homeport. That advantage is because of the disadvantage of lack of replenish ship to load on the sea in a big battle group in a prolonged fight. That advantage is also a disadvantage of putting all eggs in one basket, a reason why Flight III Burke continue to hold ?96? The reason that 055 has 112 is because it is slightly larger, surely not to compete with somebody's pride.

The other trend is a shift in defensive SAM doctrine from large, expensive and long-range SAMs to medium-range SAMs which are cheaper, shorter-ranged and can be quad-packed.

So a Type-55 could load 48 cells with a 192 quad packed MR-SAMs. That would still leave 64 cells for LR-SAMs, ASMs, etc

 

[FORBIN]

The more powerful combattants after Burke variants have 96 - 104 "tubes", Slava/Zumwalt 80 and Europeans and last Chinese DDGs 48 - 64.

 

[FORBIN]

The other trend is a shift in defensive SAM doctrine from large, expensive and long-range SAMs to medium-range SAMs which are cheaper, shorter-ranged and can be quad-packed.

So a Type-55 could load 48 cells with a 192 quad packed MR-SAMs. That would still leave 64 cells for LR-SAMs, ASMs, etc

Average here 60/70 % SAMs dépends class and countries also