I don't see how packing it 2 into a cell is possible if 4 is not possible.
There is the matter of a larger HHQ-10 launcher being orders of magnitude less expensive than designing a bank of VLS modules into a 056.
LOL more voodoo tea leaf-reading math, and now you want to try and throw in 052C/D production and attempt to merge it into 055 production to get some kind of "Aegis" production. Can you even find any shred of evidence that PLAN planners think in terms of "Aegis" production rather than "052D" and "055" production? And why did you NOT include 2011? Is it because it also doesn't fit into your scheme of 3 "Aegis" per year? Only 2 052Cs were launched that year. And why did you NOT included 2017? A total of 3 052Ds are expected to be launched along with 1 055 already launched; that makes 4. So in actuality, out of a 7 year period that "Aegis" ships are being produced from 2011 to 2017, THREE years do not match up with your "3 Aegis per year" "new normal". That's 2-3-1-3-3-3-4, or almost HALF the time that according to you establishes some kind of track record of "Aegis" production. That's a ridiculous "trend", or rather not any kind of trend.
Second, even if true, a second shipyard says NOTHING about "at least" 3 ships per year. What happened to the possibility of two, or 1 per shipyard? This is especially useful for keeping two shipyards trained on 055 production instead of giving both contracts to one shipyard, which in turn is good for ramping up production if necessary to say 4 ships/year, 2 per shipyard. 2 per shipyard is actually what is happening with the first round of 055 production. In any case 2 shipyards =/= 3 ships/year no matter how you try to spin it. Even worse for you will be if 052D production continues at current rates. Your theory will be shot straight to hell when we see 4 052Ds launched next year along with 1 to 3 055s. That's 5-7 of your "Aegis" ships in 2018. A few more than three. Maybe it's the new normal. LOL
It's perfectly valid to group Type-52C and Type-52D. There was a significant overlap in their construction, and they do both fulfill the same function of air defence destroyer in the same hull and cost roughly the same.
I left out 2010 and 2011, because that was the initial ramp up of Type-52C after a long pause in construction, partially due to the shipyard moving location.
As per a naval shipbuilding analysis, doubling ship production typically results in a 20% decrease in unit cost. That argues against only 1 ship per year for 2 shipyards, particularly since we saw a period when Jiangnan was the sole shipbuilder assembling a ship every 6months.
And my words are at
least 3 Type-55 per year up to 2019.
If you look at previous posts from a while ago, I do consider that 2 shipyards could produce 4 per year, and that China could theoretically sustain this indefinitely. If that becomes the new normal, its no skin off my back as it backs up my projection of 50-60 AEGIS-type destroyers in the next 20 years.
Also, all the Type-52D have already been launched, and we see no evidence of any more being constructed. We only see the 3x Type-55 which are still to be launched in 2017-2018. So how can we see another 4x Type-52D being launched in 2018 afterwards?
And if you disagree with my "voodoo economics", then you will have to also argue with the commandant of the US Naval Academy at Annapolis. A few years ago, the graduating of midshipmen were addressed by Niall Ferguson, who said that by the time those midshipmen became admirals, the US Navy would almost certainly no longer be the world's largest.
Plus I do find your choice of Voodoo and LOL as not being the spirit of a professional discussion.