055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[Tam]

Well, we do know that for quite some time now there has been a development of both ARH and IRH versions/variants/upgrades of the HQ-9. For example, it's literally been 20 years since we heard of the HQ9-A having an ARH seeker. I'd guess that it would be actually counter-intuitive to even assume that PLAN has been stuck to SARH/TVM guidance for its long range SAMs.

I believe they already did for a long time now, but its a composite kind of guidance that combines command guidance all the way then active and autonomous at the terminal.

 

[Dante80]

Yeah, FD-2000 also came to mind. But this is par for the course really, most long range SAMs use a different guidance scheme for mid-flight and terminal.

 

[AndrewS]

the planned number is not known (it's a secret) all you hear is pure speculation (including my own numbers) also it's still not guaranteed wether there will be a type 052E or not or wether the type 052D will continue production or not, so we will have to wait like max 3 years just to know what kind of warships will be built, is it gonna be a combination of different DDGs or may be nothing but type 055 DDGs, that is why as I always say in general the safest bet for us now is to say that the number of DDGs that China will have will be comparable to that of the US (ie: any where between 70-140% of the USN) ,in general the size of a navy is directly tied to economic development, usually most of the members here who speculate on the PLAN tend to take the most pessimistic possibilites either because they simply follow the saying "prepare for the worst", they don't want to be optimistic for fear their optimism may be misplaced so they don't want to be disapointed if China doesn't aquire as many DDGs as they thought, or they are China haters (at least in secret) & always hope that China will remain bellow the US , needless to say that kind of thinking is flawed because that's what led them (around 8 years ago) to say that China will make do with 12 type 052D.

Just a few points

The size of Navy needed is also determined by its maritime interests. Eg.
1. China is the world's largest trading nation, and relies on ships to import raw materials and export manufactured goods.
2. China is essentially secure on land, but does have major territorial disputes (eg. Taiwan) at sea.

I reckon there will be at least 30 Type-55 over the next 15 years.

But this won't be a top-heavy fleet structure, given the much larger numbers of smaller ships.

 

[Xizor]

What is the Bow mounted sonar of Type 055? Who produces it?
If one reads the latest documents and warfare simulations released by foreign adversaries of China, a refocus on undersea warfare suited to littoral is seen. The picking up of pace with new systems getting tested and launched (Submarines, submersibles, XLUUVs and LUUVs) points to exploitation of relatively weak ASW limb of PLAN.

 

[AndrewS]

What is the Bow mounted sonar of Type 055? Who produces it?
If one reads the latest documents and warfare simulations released by foreign adversaries of China, a refocus on undersea warfare suited to littoral is seen. The picking up of pace with new systems getting tested and launched (Submarines, submersibles, XLUUVs and LUUVs) points to exploitation of relatively weak ASW limb of PLAN.

If anything, the introduction of these new undersea systems will be to the advantage of the PLAN, which lags in the traditional measure of large quiet submarines.

Those new systems don't use large noisy nuclear reactors. They frequently rely on silent batteries and have few moving parts. It's a lot easier for Chinese industry to develop and deploy such systems.

And if such systems make the waters of the Western Pacific no-go areas, that suits China just fine.

China is a large continental-sized country which can be broadly self sufficient, and has significant trade along its land borders. So China can still get by without seaborne shipping.

In comparison, the rest of the Western Pacific is comprised of small densely populated islands that need seaborne shipping to survive. That includes even Japan, which has to import literally all its raw materials.

 

[Xizor]

If anything, the introduction of these new undersea systems will be to the advantage of the PLAN, which lags in the traditional measure of large quiet submarines.

Those new systems don't use large noisy nuclear reactors. They frequently rely on silent batteries and have few moving parts. It's a lot easier for Chinese industry to develop and deploy such systems.

And if such systems make the waters of the Western Pacific no-go areas, that suits China just fine.

China is a large continental-sized country which can be broadly self sufficient, and has significant trade along its land borders. So China can still get by without seaborne shipping.

In comparison, the rest of the Western Pacific is comprised of small densely populated islands that need seaborne shipping to survive. That includes even Japan, which has to import literally all its raw materials.

But you didn't answer the question (not being passive aggressive, just that the main question is left hanging there).
What's the sonar type of 055?
Who manufactures them? Any technical documents that charts China's progress in Sonars (active and passive)?
Edit : I have found there are SQZ-262 and CS-1 and such types. But the original question stands.

 

[AndrewS]

But you didn't answer the question (not being passive aggressive, just that the main question is left hanging there).
What's the sonar type of 055?
Who manufactures them? Any technical documents that charts China's progress in Sonars (active and passive)?
Edit : I have found there are SQZ-262 and CS-1 and such types. But the original question stands.

I didn't answer because I have no idea.

 

[Xizor]

Does the Type 055 indeed use the H/SJD-9 Sonars ?

 

[Max Demian]

China is a large continental-sized country which can be broadly self sufficient, and has significant trade along its land borders. So China can still get by without seaborne shipping.

That's a very naive viewpoint. Present day China is quite far from the self-sufficiency level of countries like Russia or USA.

Yes, China has huge land borders, but there is woefully insufficient infrastructure in place along those borders and within neighboring countries to offset the loss of trade it would suffer from its sea ports, not to mention that it's biggest economic centers would find themselves thousand of kilometers apart from its ersatz land ports. With sea, you essentially get a free railway to any other port in the world. Similar, on a smaller scale with navigable rivers.

Present day China needs a strong navy, there is no way around it, except submission and dependency.

 

[AndrewS]

That's a very naive viewpoint. Present day China is quite far from the self-sufficiency level of countries like Russia or USA.

That's not accurate

Trade/GDP ratio:

Russia: 51%
China: 38%
USA: 28%

So China is overall, more self-sufficient than Russia. But somewhat less so than the USA.
Remember that China is geographically the same size as the USA.

And when you consider half of China's trade is re-export processing, the China figure becomes 19%.

The key word is *broadly* self sufficient in a Wartime scenario.

Yes, China has huge land borders, but there is woefully insufficient infrastructure in place along those borders and within neighboring countries to offset the loss of trade it would suffer from its sea ports, not to mention that it's biggest economic centers would find themselves thousand of kilometers apart from its ersatz land ports. With sea, you essentially get a free railway to any other port in the world. Similar, on a smaller scale with navigable rivers.

Present day China needs a strong navy, there is no way around it, except submission and dependency.

I agree completely.
China needs a strong Navy to protect its trade.

But until China has its own fleet of carriers which can control the seas past the 2nd Island Chain, this is the situation.