055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread
- Thread starter FarkTypeSoldier
- Start date
- Status
Exactly, something like that!
Hmm but hard to tell if it's two 055s or one 055 and one 052D..
That is correct.
In case of AESA (346), the overall external size is only one thing to judge the range and number of simultaneous targets. The unit power output and unit size of T/R module are two other things that determines. If the unit power is higher and size is smaller, same external size will yield longer range and more targets. Without knowing any data of the T/R module, it is pointless to talk about the capability of the radar. Assuming anything is just wild.
Interesting how even after 3 days I made the original post, the discussion is still ongoing. I admit that saying the 052D is significantly more capable than the Burkes was a stretch. It's also imperative, however, that we're able to make reasoned comparisons without our judgment being clouded by existing biases.
As far as this discussion is concerned, I think Iron Man hit the nail on the head with his examination, though there are a couple of key points I'd like to contest.
For one, we know with a high degree of confidence that the 346A's volume search array is roughly the same size as the SPY-1D, as there are pictures of the 346 with the front panel off. In that regard, it's a toss-up between the two, but I believe the FCR makes the crucial difference. While the 052D's FCR for its medium-range SAMs is a C-band AESA, the Burke still relies on three SPG-62 illuminators for the SM-2s. I believe that difference is enough to give the 052D's sensors a small, but clear advantage.
The other point is with regards to 'magazine size'. Yes, the Burke has 96 cells versus the 052D's 64, but the Chinese VLS are much larger in terms of volume. At best, the larger Chinese missiles currently might only be on par with the smaller American ones, so the Burke wins out in this department by virtue of having better missiles, not more cells. Yet, the fact remains that a 55cm diameter, 7.7m deep cell can only hold so much weight, while a 85cm, 9m deep cell can hold a missile almost three times larger by volume. In this sense, are the 052D's 64x 85cm VLS really inferior to the Burkes' 96x 55cm VLS?
All of that being said, I honestly believe it's not far-fetched to suggest that the 052D's capabilities already exceed the Burkes' - perhaps only in a few ways now (specifically FC sensors, ASuW, missile load in weight, and point defense). What the 052D can't do as well as the Burkes is AAW, missile load in numbers, and the lack of ABM capabilities. In all other areas, the 052D is arguably slightly superior at best, and on par with the Burke at worst.
.
Of course, I didn't write this post just to bore and annoy everyone with my stubborn arguments. Rumor has it that there is evidence of the 7th 055 being constructed at Dalian.
Image courtesy of fzgfzy from CD forums.
I am curious about why was the new ship perceived as the 7th 055.
I personally don't think it is, because we've only heard about a new 052D so far.
Whether or not it's true, it's best to keep with the times.
Guys; I really don´t know what's up and why no-one notices !??
No more discussion on VLS on the Zumwalt, history of Ticonderoga is irrelevant and all other post related to speculations on missiles and radar and so on if not related to the 055 is off topic.
Take this as a warning.
No more discussion on VLS on the Zumwalt, history of Ticonderoga is irrelevant and all other post related to speculations on missiles and radar and so on if not related to the 055 is off topic.
Take this as a warning.
Looks like two 052D (stretched?) and two 055. No. 3 and 4 055 from Dalian.
I don't mean no. 3 and no. 4 overall, I meant the third and the fourth -->from<-- Dalian.
- Status