055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[AndrewS]

here:

I'm wondering if you backed down from Jul 29, 2017
perhaps?

Whoops, that was a typo.

3 destroyers per year is

60 over 20 years
Or
90 over 30 years

 

[Jura The idiot]

Whoops, that was a typo.

3 destroyers per year is

60 over 20 years
Or
90 over 30 years

did you mistype Today at 5:38 PM
and meant to say perhaps something like 90 (ninety) in the sentence:

... 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.

...

?

it would probably be consistent with these claims:

Tuesday at 12:41 PM

...

And in the next 20 years, I reckon China will build 50-60 Type-55 destroyers with 2 helicopters. It is those ships which will be the primary vessels for global presence.

...

and
Jul 29, 2017

"... So after another 20 years, it will end up something like this

...
90+ Large DDG Type-55/52 (3 per year)
..."

 

[Blitzo]

"A bit much" is more charitable than is needed for such a dramatic claim. Even 3 destroyers a year for 10 years says nothing about "90+ destroyers" as the ultimate end point.

Well I prefer to write something more subdued like that than "LOL" with multiple question marks or something.

 

[Blitzo]

We usually have a pretty good idea of what is coming up a few years ahead. If PLAN sustains three destroyer inductions per year for three years, and there are no indications or credible rumours of a future deceleration, gap, or halt, such as a shortage of hulls in the production pipeline, or a future class transition, I think one would have to be fairly brave to bet against the idea that this is the new normal, and by year five I think you would be entering "head in the sand" territory.

Sure, but to reach 90+ destroyers means you'd be expecting the 3 destroyers/year rate to have to continue for 30 years.

Trying to argue what the next 25 years will be like the first 5 years, is imo rather hard to defend.

 

[Blitzo]

The first image is of the new submarine construction hall.

Are you sure? Are you talking about the new supposed SSN/SSBN construction hall at Bohai? Because this is what that hall supposedly looks like:

They look somewhat similar to the hall in the video (especially the second photo), but not identical as far as I can see. And keep in mind the configuration of these sort of fabrication halls often look very similar to each other as well.

 

[AndrewS]

Sure, but to reach 90+ destroyers means you'd be expecting the 3 destroyers/year rate to have to continue for 30 years.

Trying to argue what the next 25 years will be like the first 5 years, is imo rather hard to defend.

That's why we have to look at a) China's strategic requirements versus b) China's capacity to easily build and support a balanced fleet that happens to have 90+ destroyers over the next 30 years.

So I'm comfortable with forecasting at least 3 destroyers per year for the next 30 years.

I reckon the current plan is 3 per year, based on what we see China's economic performance is today and what can be reasonably expected in the next 8 years to 2025.

At that point, they will probably revise the shipbuilding plan upwards, based on how much larger China's economy and military budget will be from 2025-2035.

So at 2025, I expect China's end fleet plan to be larger than 90 destroyers, and therefore China will be building more than 3 per year.

 

[timepass]

Don't know why you guys emphasizing on 3 units per year...

We all know Chinese have all (resources/capacity/capability/manpower/shipyards/finance/technology) enough to churn out 7 - 10 in a year, maybe more & it applies to CGs/DDGs/FFGs/OPVs/FACs/SSKs/LPDs except SSBNs/SSNs/LHDs & carriers.

Therefore, its all depends on them i.e.

• How many they want in a year.
• What they want.
• When they want.
• From where they want.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Are you sure? Are you talking about the new supposed SSN/SSBN construction hall at Bohai? Because this is what that hall supposedly looks like:

They look somewhat similar to the hall in the video (especially the second photo), but not identical as far as I can see. And keep in mind the configuration of these sort of fabrication halls often look very similar to each other as well.

You are right. The differences are not exactly conspicuous but there nonetheless.

 

[FORBIN]

One CDF member :

One UVLS cell : 0.85m X 0.85m = 0.7225m²
One MK-41cell : 0.63m X 0.63m = 0.3969m²

ratio UVLS cell /MK-41 cell : 0.7225/0.3969 = 1.82

Why Chinese need also big cell's ... ?

 

[latenlazy]

One CDF member :



Why Chinese need also big cell's ... ?

A mix of less efficient missiles and capacity for future growth?