055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

kurutoga

Junior Member
Registered Member
I think you should consider squares, not circles. If they don't need to be squares, you can place more circle silos in the same area (or the same number of circle silos in a smaller area compared to square silos) so apparently there is a reason they need to be squares. My speculation (my guess, I have no info to support it) is the square shape is better for fin arrangement/placement, providing extra clearance for the fins during launch.
 
Last edited:

cunnilingist

New Member
Registered Member
I would not agree, not after I saw the generator setup on the 055. If the various pictorials and design videos we have seen in the aftermath of the 055's rollout are correct, then the 055 has SIX GT generators. Even if each of them only output 3MW of power, that would still make 18MW total available generator power. By comparison the Flight IIA Burke has 9MW available power and the Flight III has 12MW available power. This says to me that the 055 is very likely using GaN technology in its AESA(s), which improves power density by several dozen times and effectively more than doubles the range and sensitivity of radars using the older GaAs MMIC technology. If the big rectangular plate on the mast is an X-band AESA like many of us think it is, that means the 055 has a powerful X/S-band GaN AESA combo. By comparison the Flight IIA uses the older GaAs S-band PESA (AN/SPY-1D), while the Flight III will use a GaN S-band AESA (AN/SPY-6), eventually coupled also with a fixed X-band AESA.

Now all this does not automatically make the 055 superior to the Flight IIA, but the 055 also has the benefit of additional (U)VLS cells that in addition to that could also theoretically pack more missiles per tube than the Mk 41 cells. If the depictions of the 055's stern are correct, then the 055 will have a VDS in addition to its TAS, which combined with the dual helicopters will make the 055 definitively superior to the Flight IIA in ASW; the Flight IIA in case you didn't know not only does not have VDS, it does not even have TAS (TACTAS was deleted from all Burkes starting with Flight IIA).

The intangibles unfortunately are things we have no ability to gauge on the internet as military enthusiasts, and by that I am referring to software and overall crew effectiveness. I would have to give the edge to the USN in both of these areas given their significantly longer history of operating modern ships and designing radars and combat systems. Then again, nobody really knows how much the PLAN has been able to catch up in these areas. I would have to say from a purely military enthusiast's mostly uninformed opinion, the 055 is almost certainly superior to the Flight IIA and at least the equal if not superior to the Flight III, when viewed in the context of only the ships themselves. When you add in crew effectiveness, software, weapons, and fleet coordination (e.g. CEC, Link 16, ISR, etc), the ignorance on our part grows to the point of utter useless speculation.

Chinese forums and news articles say that the 346B AESA radar on the 055 is indeed GaN. Thoughts?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I asked a friend to search Chinese websites for anything on the 055's radar and this is what he sent me. Wish I can read Chinese.
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
I think you should consider squares, not circles. If they don't need to be squares, you can place more circle silos in the same area (or the same number of circle silos in a smaller area compared to square silos) so apparently there is a reason they need to be squares. My speculation (my guess, I have no info to support it) is the square shape is better for fin arrangement/placement, providing extra clearance for the fins during launch.
It’s not like we haven’t seen circular silos before...
 

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
I think you should consider squares, not circles. If they don't need to be squares, you can place more circle silos in the same area (or the same number of circle silos in a smaller area compared to square silos) so apparently there is a reason they need to be squares. My speculation (my guess, I have no info to support it) is the square shape is better for fin arrangement/placement, providing extra clearance for the fins during launch.
I'm not sure you're understanding the graphics people have been drawing. Those circles are not "silos", they represent the actual missile bodies within their square silos.
 

kurutoga

Junior Member
Registered Member
I'm not sure you're understanding the graphics people have been drawing. Those circles are not "silos", they represent the actual missile bodies within their square silos.

I am trying to argue having round areas to host the missile is not enough, (otherwise the designer, by using round silos slightly larger than the missile's circles, will be able to pack more silos in the same area), the square shapes offer extra clearance at the corners for the fins.

The rotary round silos were not ideally arranged. The alternating rows should be 60 degrees apart (like bee hives) for better area utilization.
 

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
I am trying to argue having round areas to host the missile is not enough, (otherwise the designer, by using round silos slightly larger than the missile's circles, will be able to pack more silos in the same area), the square shapes offer extra clearance at the corners for the fins.

The rotary round silos were not ideally arranged. The alternating rows should be 60 degrees apart (like bee hives) for better area utilization.
Nobody is talking about or drawing "round areas to host the missile" in any of their posts, nor has anyone been talking about round silos.
 

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
If anyone can translate this for us that would be great.
Chinese forums and news articles say that the 346B AESA radar on the 055 is indeed GaN. Thoughts?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I asked a friend to search Chinese websites for anything on the 055's radar and this is what he sent me. Wish I can read Chinese.
Sina is totally untrustworthy. The thread on CJDBY is started with a question which only received ridicules and no real answer
 
I think you should consider squares, not circles. If they don't need to be squares, you can place more circle silos in the same area (or the same number of circle silos in a smaller area compared to square silos) so apparently there is a reason they need to be squares. My speculation (my guess, I have no info to support it) is the square shape is better for fin arrangement/placement, providing extra clearance for the fins during launch.
LOL I gave you five more minutes:
6251d2e658bc6b99b8749a7db9862728.jpg

now "r" is 90% of the maximum Yesterday at 10:11 PM
reconstructs "45 cm" from inside of
Here you go:
View attachment 43985
Each pixel in this graphic is 0.5cm.
almost fully:
0.9*0.58*0.85 is about 0.44

Nobody is talking about or drawing "round areas to host the missile" in any of their posts, nor has anyone been talking about round silos.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top