055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Anyone else notice that they seem to have moved the main electro-optic turret on the top of the bridge superstructure onto a higher platform compared to its previous position at the beginning of sea trials?

In the past, it was at a level where it could peek over the arrays mounted atop the bridge superstructure, but they've obviously changed it and moved it on top of a dedicated slim platform that's higher up now. Makes a lot of sense, and is probably one of those things picked up on during navy trials that they would've asked the shipyard to change and likely alter for future ships as well.

Past:

49374191851_3544bddd8d_k.jpg



Current:

49373761738_ffd5a79b37_k.jpg


49374414757_53f56544cd_k.jpg
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Yes, and they took out the navigation radar that used to be in that position. Over time, they also added a small SATCOM on top of the deckhouse, quite possibly for satellite TV and internet, something that has become a fixture with larger Chinese warships.
 

Tiberium

Junior Member
Registered Member
The upfront cost of the 055 might be higher due to all the solid state parts, but the operating cost of the 052D in the longer run may end up higher, due to the needed overhaul of all the mechanical and rotating radars that requires a cathode ray tube for an amp. This is the advantage of having your radar sensors in fixed panels and in solid state. You don't have to take down an entire radar set --- we have seen this happen in some 054A during their maintenance --- repairing, and more likely replacing the whole set. In an AESA solid state radar, diagnostics will check for the whole panel, identify broken or failing elements, then you have the technician go to that section of the array, pull out the broken module set on a tray from the cabinet, then insert a new one. The array will then be recalibrated. The cool part about this is this can be done on sea, so the ship doesn't have to return to port. All it needs is to keep a sufficient number of spare modules.

While this can be said of the 052D's main AESA, the Type 346, the 052D is still full of secondary radars that are old school and mechanical, such as the Type 364 surface search radar, the Type 344 gunnery radar and the Type 366 antiship radar. If any of these fail, the ship will likely head back to port, and the repairs of these radars won't be easy as they are on top of the deck house and one is on top of the mast, requiring you to open their radomes.

Another thing is that once more 055s are made, the price curve of all these solid state parts will drop like a stone, which means it will eventually take down the upfront cost of the 055. We are talking of things that are fabbed, then inserted into printed circuit boards, not things that have to be precision machined, requires hardened bearings, lubrication, requires periodic inspection and replacement.

When it comes to a midlife upgrade, all you need to do to improve the sensor performance is to switch out all the modules for a new set. Its not unlike switching out older server blades for new blades on a data center. The only limits you have is the number of modules you can insert with your housing predetermined by what's already on place. I suspect the older 052C has already gone through this process.

Of course all these are arguments for an all solid state sensor 052X and XX4B.

In such IShips, which are more like floating data centers with arrays of fixed panel sensors, there is hardly a moving part above the machinery citadel of the ship other than the hatches of the VLS, air conditioning and ventilation. Future upgrades to these IShips are done by changing circuit boards and blades off the cabinets, installing new software, training the officers for those upgrades.


The funnier part, is that the next-gen 5G base station would all be AESA. And China would make most of them. Considering the current number of 4G base stations (6m in the whole world and 4.5m of them in China), the 5G base stations would be manufactured in the number of more than 10m.

What does this whole thing mean? It means China's AESA module would be cheaper then dirt in the future.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
The funnier part, is that the next-gen 5G base station would all be AESA. And China would make most of them. Considering the current number of 4G base stations (6m in the whole world and 4.5m of them in China), the 5G base stations would be manufactured in the number of more than 10m.

What does this whole thing mean? It means China's AESA module would be cheaper then dirt in the future.

AESA modules are different from antenna to antenna. AESA module for YLC-20 isn't the same as the ones used on Type 346 radar on destroyers and different from the modules used on the radar of the FC-1 Block 3. They vary in power, in frequency, hence in size and the antenna design. What's developed for the radar of the J-20 isn't going to affect that on the Type 055. What's developed for the J-20 radar can however, benefit the J-10C's radar, the J-11D's radar, the J-16's radars, should all aircraft use a common module. That greatly lowers the cost of the modules and therefore the radar itself. Logistics is simplified because an airbase only needs to stock one module type for maintenance.

Because the module in the J-20 is an X-band, it won't do anything on the Type 055's main radars which are S-band, and which are much larger modules with different circuitry and antenna design. The other potential benefit would be instead on the Type 055's smaller X-band radar set, which may end up using a similar design with common parts.

China's large use of AESA across its radars may see a bigger impact on the components used for these modules. If you have a low production volume, you maybe forced to use FPGA, which is large, expensive, gives off lots of heat and often imported like Xilinx. If you have a high production volume however, SoC inside the module can be mass produced as an ASIC, which is smaller, cheaper, cooler and faster, and can be domestically fabbed.

AESA on telecom has been around since 4G, or even 3.5G. But this AESA is different from radar with things like MIMO, Adaptive Array or Smart Antenna technologies. They are far more relevant in high speed data communication, like CEC, and in ESM. These antennas also include things you don't see in radar like interleaving elements that allow the antenna to send and receive in low and high frequency at the same time. What an adaptive or smart array does is it takes an emitter somewhere, then the array uses techniques like TDOA to determine its location and range based receiving the emitter's signal, then digitally beamforms its reply towards the emitter. It needs to do this with hundreds of emitters (the cellphones) simultaneously in great speed.

The volume impact on China's AESA radar modules already happened long before when planes like J-10B/C and ships like 052C/D were mass produced. It didn't need the mass production of telecom phase arrays, or the arrays used in its vast fleet of satellites. What the telecom phase arrays do demonstrate is a very high level of RF engineering talent present in the country that can be dual use into the defense industry.

NRIET or Institute 14, is to the radar industry what Huawei is to telecom. Same institute is responsible for the development of both air and naval AESA.
 

Bhurki

Junior Member
Registered Member
The funnier part, is that the next-gen 5G base station would all be AESA. And China would make most of them. Considering the current number of 4G base stations (6m in the whole world and 4.5m of them in China), the 5G base stations would be manufactured in the number of more than 10m.

What does this whole thing mean? It means China's AESA module would be cheaper then dirt in the future.
I dont think you can compare the two..
5g is divided into two freq ranges, FR1 and FR2.
FR1 is basically 4g with new software based network technology like SDR etc.
FR2, otoh, although being related to nominal X band Aesa, would use low power density base stations with reach less than a km and power less than 50w.
Compared to this, the military grade radar requires high power density for long range lookout and lock on.
Mass producing Toyota doesnt make Ferrari any cheaper.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
I dont think you can compare the two..
5g is divided into two freq ranges, FR1 and FR2.
FR1 is basically 4g with new software based network technology like SDR etc.
FR2, otoh, although being related to nominal X band Aesa, would use low power density base stations with reach less than a km and power less than 50w.
Compared to this, the military grade radar requires high power density for long range lookout and lock on.
Mass producing Toyota doesnt make Ferrari any cheaper.

FR1 extends from the C-band to the L-band. That means around 6Ghz to 700Mhz.
FR2 is way way shorter than X-band. X-band is only 8 to 12Ghz, MM starts around 30Ghz to 300Ghz.

I like to call FR2 or MM 5G as DOA or Dead on Arrival. But that's another topic for elsewhere.
 

Dante80

Junior Member
Registered Member
Here is an article by minnie chen saying that the Nanchang is not outfitted with weapons
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
WRONG

It is completely plausible that the first major item of a new weapon class is commissioned without reaching full capability status over its whole sensor and weapons suite.
Actually, it is not only plausible but probable too that the destroyer was inducted in an IOC state. Especially if you think of the time taken for sea trials as well as the leap in capability and new items that have to be brought to a high TRL.

This is how things just work, in all major navies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top