055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[Jeff Head]

IMHO, the Type 055 is and should be classified as a cruiser (CG), just like the Ticos are. I believe the Se Jong the Great KDX-III should be classified similarly, and I beleive the Zumwalt a cruiser.

Then the Type 052D, the Burkes, the KDX-IIs, the Kongos and the Atagos, Hobarts,Alvaro de Bazan, etc should all be DDGs.

The US really has CGs, DDGs, FFGs, and then lighter frigates, and even corvettes.

Here's how I would classify those in the US:

Tico and Zumwalts - CGs
Burkes - DDGs
Uparmed Freeedom/Indepedence and New Frigate - FFGs
Non-Uparmed LCS - Light FFGs
Corvette/Patrol Boat - Cyclone

For the PLAN that would be:

Type 055 - CG
Type 052D/c, Type 052B. Type 052, Sovs, Type 051B/C m- All DDGs
Type 054, Type 054A/B, Type 053H3, Type 053H2G - FFGs
Type 056 - Light FFG
Type 037II and Type 037IG - Corvettes

But that is just my opinion...I believe calling the Type 055, the ZUmwalt, the KDX-III DDgs are all politically motivated nomenclatures...but again, that is just my opinion.

 

[kwaigonegin]

Ships classification and designation is more an exercise in academics than for any real life application. Regardless of what 'we' call it, more importantly what does the country of origin designate a particular class?

Does China have for example something similar to the Russians?

A helo carrier for sample is called a aircraft carrying cruiser while an aircraft carrier is called a tactical aircraft carrying cruiser.

Sov for sample is referred to as a squadron mine vessel!

Of course then we have Japan who classifies helo carriers as destroyers.

Below is what the Russkis call their ships. Some would not make sense if translate literally.

Abbrev. Classification Translation
===== ============== ===============
AK Avianosnyy Kreyser Aircraft Carrying Cruiser
AKA Artilleriyskiy Kater Artillery Cutter
AKVP Amfibiynyy Kater Na Vozdushnoy Air Cushion Amphibious Craft
Rechnoyy
AKVP Amfibiynyy Kater Na Vozdushnoy Air Cushion Amphibious Craft
Podushke Rechnoyy
BDK Bol'shoy Desantnyy Korabl' Large Landing Ship
BPK Bol'shoy Protivolodochnyy Korabl' Large Antisubmarine Ship
BPKR Bol'shoy Protivolodochnyy Kreyer Large Antisubmarine Cruiser
BRK Bol'shoy Raketnyy Korabl' Large Missile Ship
BT Bazovyy Tral'shchik Base Minesweeper
BTK Bol'shoy Torpednyy Kater Large Torpedo Cutter (craft)
DK Desantnyy Korabl' Landing Ship
DKA Desantnyy Kater Landing Cutter (craft)
DKVP Desantnyy Korabl' Na
Vozdushnoy Podushke Air Cushion Landing Ship
DS Desantnyy Sudno Landing Vessel
EHOS Expeditsionnoye
Okeanograficheskoye Sudno Expeditionary Oceanographic Vessel
EM Eskadrenny Minonosets Destroyer (literally: squadron
mine vessel)
ENS Elektrostanttsiye Nalivatel'noye
Sudno Electric Power Station Vessel
GKS Gidroakusticheskoye
Kontrol'noye Sudno Hydroacoustic Monitoring Vessel
GP Gidrografichekoye Pribrezhnyy Bot Inshore Survey Craft
GS Gidrograficheskoye Sudno Hydrographic Vessel
KIL Kilektor Lift Ship
KR Kreyser Cruiser
KRZ Korabl' Razvedyvatel'nyy Intelligence Ship
KS Kabel'noye Sudno Cable Vessel
KSV Korabl' Svyazey Communications Ship
KT Kater Tral'shchik Minesweeping Cutter (craft)
KTs Kontrol'naya Tsel' Controlled target
KVN Korabl' Vozdushnogo
Nablyudeniya Radar Surveillance Ship
LDK Ledokol Icebreaker
MB Morskoy Buksir Seagoing Tug
MPK Malyy Protivolodochnyy Korabl' Small Antisubmarine Ship
MRK Malyy Raketnyy Korabl' Small Missile Ship
MT Morskoy Tral'shchik Seagoing Minesweeper
MVT Morskoy Vodnyy Tanker Seagoing Water Tanker
OS Opitnoye Sudno Experimental Vessel
PB Plavuchaya Baza Floating Base
PKA Protivolodochnyy Kater Antisubmarine Cutter
PKR Protivolodochnyy Kreyser Antisubmarine Cruiser
PL Podvodnaya Lodka Submarine
PLA Podvodnaya Lodka Atomnaya Submarine (nuclear)
PLARB Podvodnaya Lodka Atomnaya
Raketnaya Ballistecheskaya Ballistic Missile Submarine (nuclear)
PLARK Podvodnaya Lodka Atomnaya
Raketnaya Krylataya Cruise Missile Submarine (nuclear)
PLRB Podvodnaya Lodka Raketnaya
Ballistecheskaya Ballistic Missile Submarine
PLRK Podvodnaya Lodka Raketnaya
Krylataya Cruise Missile Submarine
PLK Protivolodochnyy Korabl' Antisubmarine Ship
PM Plavuchaya Masterskaya Floating Workshop
PSKR Pogranichniy Storoshevoy
Korabl' Border Patrol Ship
PZHK Pozharnyy Kater Firefighting Cutter (craft)
PZHS Pozharnoye Sudno Firefighting Vessel
RKA Raketnyy Kater Missile Cutter
RKR Raketnyy Kreyser Missile Cruiser
RT Reydovoy Tral'shchik Roadstead Minesweeper
SB Spasatel'nyy Buksir Rescue Tug
SBR Sudno Bol'shogo
Razmagnichivanya Large Deperming Vessel
SDK Srednyy Desantnyy Korabl' Medium Landing Ship
SKA Storozhevoy Kater Patrol Cutter (craft)
SKR Storoshevoy Korabl' Patrol Ship
SR Sudno Razmagnichivanya Deperming Vessel
SS Spasatel'noye Sudno Salvage Vessel
SSV Sudno Svyazey Communications Vessel
TAKR Takticheskoye Avianosnyy
Kreyser Tactical Aircraft Carrying Cruiser
TKA Torpednyy Kater Torpedo Cutter
TPKR Tyazholyi Protivolodochnyy Heavy Antisubmarine Cruiser
Kreyser
US Uchebnoye Sudno Training Vessel
VT Voyenyy Tanker Military Tanker
VT Vspomagatek'byy Tral'shchik Auxiliary Minesweeper
VTR Voyenyy Transport Military Transport
ZM Zaggraditel' Minnyy Minelayer

 

[Jura The idiot]

just having fun when drinking early morning coffee

...

Abbrev. Classification Translation
===== ============== ===============

am curious where did you get these, it looks as if you typed them in because of obvious typos as in

Vspomagatek'byy Tral'shchik

but there's a funny mistake in

Opitnoye Sudno

so it could be some botched manual LOL

 

[Jura The idiot]

another funny post:

...

Note the Chinese Navy is much less influenced by political decisions because it operates as an independent fiefdom with comparatively little civilian oversight.

LOL you may want to check what I highlighted:

(original picture comes from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

dated 09 September 2015, but I haven't heard of a system change since then, and I think I would have)

additional links:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

which says Membership (2017) 89.45 million

just giving
AndrewS
the eastern perspective LOL!

 

[Iron Man]

another funny post:


LOL you may want to check what I highlighted:

(original picture comes from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

dated 09 September 2015, but I haven't heard of a system change since then, and I think I would have)

additional links:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

which says Membership (2017) 89.45 million

just giving
AndrewS
the eastern perspective LOL!

Imagine the Joint Chiefs being directly headed by the President of the US whose will is enforced by thousands of political commissars at all levels of the military hierarchy. That's how tightly the civilian Chinese government controls its military.

 

[Jura The idiot]

Imagine the Joint Chiefs being directly headed by the President of the US whose will is enforced by thousands of political commissars at all levels of the military hierarchy. That's how tightly the civilian Chinese government controls its military.

I now facepalmed while reading again the sentence:

Note the Chinese Navy is much less influenced by political decisions because it operates as an independent fiefdom with comparatively little civilian oversight.

#4673 AndrewS, Friday at 10:21 PM

 

[delft]

IMHO, the Type 055 is and should be classified as a cruiser (CG), just like the Ticos are. I believe the Se Jong the Great KDX-III should be classified similarly, and I beleive the Zumwalt a cruiser.

Then the Type 052D, the Burkes, the KDX-IIs, the Kongos and the Atagos, Hobarts,Alvaro de Bazan, etc should all be DDGs.

The US really has CGs, DDGs, FFGs, and then lighter frigates, and even corvettes.

Here's how I would classify those in the US:

Tico and Zumwalts - CGs
Burkes - DDGs
Uparmed Freeedom/Indepedence and New Frigate - FFGs
Non-Uparmed LCS - Light FFGs
Corvette/Patrol Boat - Cyclone

For the PLAN that would be:

Type 055 - CG
Type 052D/c, Type 052B. Type 052, Sovs, Type 051B/C m- All DDGs
Type 054, Type 054A/B, Type 053H3, Type 053H2G - FFGs
Type 056 - Light FFG
Type 037II and Type 037IG - Corvettes

But that is just my opinion...I believe calling the Type 055, the ZUmwalt, the KDX-III DDgs are all politically motivated nomenclatures...but again, that is just my opinion.

There are two ways to classify ships: the systematic Russian way and using names from tradition. Destroyer of course is derived in the Russian way. Originally they were called torpedo boat destroyers. Cruiser and Aircraft Carrier too are such function names. And Kater in the Russian system is derived from the English Cutter. But Frigate was borrowed from tradition when the Destroyers became too large and expensive for some work. My own inclination - not rationally chosen - is to use tradition names and I wouldn't be sorry to see the designations Destroyer and Cruiser disappear and be replaced by Frigate. Bur Zumwalt with its interest in artillery fire against land targets should be called Monitor after the use of such ships in WWI and WWII.

 

[Jura The idiot]

... Bur Zumwalt with its interest in artillery fire against land targets should be called Monitor after the use of such ships in WWI and WWII.

LOL! the Zumwalt = the fastest monitor ever
I'm having plenty of fun following
Type 055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

 

[Lethe]

IMHO, the Type 055 is and should be classified as a cruiser (CG), just like the Ticos are. I believe the Se Jong the Great KDX-III should be classified similarly, and I beleive the Zumwalt a cruiser.

There's a difference between massaging an outlier to fit an otherwise workable model, and discarding most of the actual data in favour of one's own preferred reality.

Instead of reclassifying three types across three navies (while leaving the problem of Burke II/III destroyers being the same size as cruisers serving in the same navy), why not reclassify the more obvious outlier, i.e. the Ticonderoga-class 'cruisers' which, on both a comparative and historical basis (regarding the latter, see Richard Santos' excellent post here), should really be called destroyers?

 

[Jeff Head]

There's a difference between massaging an outlier to fit an otherwise workable model, and discarding most of the actual data in favour of one's own preferred reality.

Instead of reclassifying three types across three navies (while leaving the problem of Burke II/III destroyers being the same size as cruisers serving in the same navy), why not reclassify the more obvious outlier, i.e. the Ticonderoga-class 'cruisers' which, on both a comparative and historical basis (regarding the latter, see Richard Santos' excellent post here), should really be called destroyers?

As I said...it was my opinion...but one that has been dealing with the US Navy, from an engineering perspective and a research and analysis perspective for the last 35 y+ years.

People are free to call them whatever they want.

The Ticos are cruisers because of their displacement and particularly their fire power.

The Burkes are smaller with less firepower, and all of that class from Flight I through Flight III will remain DDGs.

I believe the Zumwalt is more appropriately a cruiser in todays world with its two 155mm guns, and the types of other weapons it will ultimately carry along with the 80 PVLS which will also allow for an ultimate carrying of varying munitions.

I give the same reasoning for the Type 055 and Se Jong when compared to the other classes of their own navies that are DDGs.

But again, as I say...this is simply my own opinion. You clearly have a differing opinion and I respect it and you have every right to it.