055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[Solaris]

Nice, but going from the mock up, i think the "blocks" on the flank sides of the main smokestack will remain on the real thing, so amy hypothetical intake configuration will have to account for their presence.

I see 5 holes cut into these blocks, so here you go:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Blitzo]

I imagine such an arrangement could allow the HQ-10 to return to their original location if one so desired.

However I will caution the holes we see on the mock up on the sides may not be indicative of what will be on the final ship, because the land based mock up usually features more doors and windows, if the liaoning mock up is anything to go by.

 

[Solaris]

I imagine such an arrangement could allow the HQ-10 to return to their original location if one so desired.

However I will caution the holes we see on the mock up on the sides may not be indicative of what will be on the final ship, because the land based mock up usually features more doors and windows, if the liaoning mock up is anything to go by.

The HQ-10's in the further back location actually have a wider field of fire since they are less obstructed by the "blocks". And we'll just have to see about those square holes cut out of the sides.

 

[by78]

Fast progress on the test apparatus. Note the APAR opening on the port side below the bridge, whereas the starboard side has no such opening, which means this won't be a 'complete' mockup.

(1555x1037)

 

[ludasmatyi]

Fast progress on the test apparatus. Note the APAR opening on the port side below the bridge, whereas the starboard side has no such opening, which means this won't be a 'complete' mockup.

(1555x1037)

Now it looks not that large, more like 8000t, I would say.

 

[by78]

Some more (low-resolution) photos of the test apparatus:

 

[Engineer]

Now it looks not that large, more like 8000t, I would say.

It seems to have the same width as 052C/052D. Perhaps this isn't 055, but a further modification of 052D?

 

[Solaris]

Maybe not even 8,000 tons. "052E"?

 

[Totoro]

luckily we have the GE image of the foundations, with visible holes for the steel columns supporting the whole mockup. That image clearly shows both the width and is also indicative of length. And the image scale is quite correct and calibrated as one can measure the liaoning deck mockup that's right next to cruiser mockup and get very correct dimensions of it.

I just can't wait for another GE update of that area for more up to date info.

 

[Engineer]

.......................Stack...............Stack
................Intake...|...................|...Intake
.................\|/..../|\................./|\....\|/
..................|......|...................|.....|
.................[TURBINE3]->[R]->|G|<-[R]<-[TURBINE1]
X<-----------prop shaft<----------|B|

X<-----------prop shaft<----------|G|
.................[TURBINE4]->[R]->|B|<-[R]<-[TURBINE2]
..................|......|...................|.....|
................./|\....\|/.................\|/..../|\
................Intake...|...................|...Intake
.......................Stack...............Stack

.................[TURBINE4]->[G]
X<-----------prop shaft<-----|B|
.................[TURBINE3]->|X|
..................................|G|<-[TURBINE2]
X<-----------prop shaft<----------|B|
..................................|X|<-[TURBINE1]

I have been thinking about your diagrams a lot. I have to say, the second configuration makes a lot more sense from the view of survivability. A missile that penetrates the hull would knock out two turbines in either case. In the first configuration, both turbines being hit are connected to two different shafts, so both shafts would get adversely affected. In the second configuration, the two turbines being hit are connected to the same shaft, so the other shaft wouldn't be affected at all.