... pulled out of your keister
So?
It's an illustrative example.
Is the analysis and conclusion actually wrong?
... pulled out of your keister
Yes, a Type-52D is less capable than the Type-55, but it would be extremely surprising if a Type-52D had higher operating costs than a Type-55.
Yes, I did consider operating costs, but still judged upfront costs as indicative of operating costs. In the PPP discussion, I broke down the cost elements, and labour was immaterial. And that upfront construction costs were correlated with ongoing maintenance costs.
It's a similar argument to having a less capable arsenal ship or DDC to complement a larger high-end destroyer.
Anyway, we'll just have to see what gets built in the future
what China needs is the formation of a Surface Action Group (SAG)
4 x Type 055 with 8 x naval Z20 with a fast Tanker Type 901 with Type 095 SSN as escort total VLS count 448
such a formation can sustain 30 knots anywhere anytime against anyone
very powerful formation very strong deterrence just short of a full strength carrier battle group
imagine 2 of the SAG roaming the Pacific on a 24/7 basis, one North and one South
China would need 6 x SAG to make that possible around the clock 365 presence which mean 24 x Type 055 are the minimum
So?
It's an illustrative example.
Is the analysis and conclusion actually wrong?
Wouldn't you get even cheaper "cost per missile launch" or even more "missiles per fixed cost" by taking a container ship and loading it up with 200 missiles? Then you only need one salvo / no reloads!
what China needs is the formation of a Surface Action Group (SAG)
4 x Type 055 with 8 x naval Z20 with a fast Tanker Type 901 with Type 095 SSN as escort total VLS count 448
such a formation can sustain 30 knots anywhere anytime against anyone
very powerful formation very strong deterrence just short of a full strength carrier battle group
imagine 2 of the SAG roaming the Pacific on a 24/7 basis, one North and one South
China would need 6 x SAG to make that possible around the clock 365 presence which mean 24 x Type 055 are the minimum
You would yes.
But any ship carrying 200 missiles is a high-priority target.
Especially a container ship which has few defences.
It's just too risky.
If you have 200 LRASMs for example, that comes to $600M worth of missiles.
---
If you really want to use a container ship, you could buy a second hand 500box container ship for about $4M.
Then load it up with as many missiles as you deem prudent.
I guess it would be viable even at 8 missiles, given how cheap the ship is.
So how about instead of building destroyers, just buy a few dozen $4M cargo ships and put 16 missiles on each?