055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[Blitzo]

I think many artists are misinterpreting those "panels" on the mast as placement for an array when it is really just welded metal panels that have not been painted the same colour yet

(The artist didn't have to decrease the VLS count, otherwise it would've been a nice design)

 

[no_name]

That could be the case. It may be that they found it easier to move large stuff inside the mast through that opening, using a crane or something, than going up from the inside, and welded the panel shut later.

Personally I like the flat bow of the arleigh burke or european ship more. I realised for me having those two side arrow-like pieces makes the 052 ships looks even smaller and thinner than they already are. Just a personal taste.

I'm hoping 055 having two hangars big enough for one Z-8 each with folded tail, and whether you can squeeze two z-9 in one hangar. Maybe one Z-8 and 2 z-9/kamov would be nice.

 

[Blitzo]

One Z-8 might be able to fit two Z-9s but can't fit two Ka-28s in width of one Z-8.

I prefer a flat bow too, but more for RCS reasons. I hope for a featureless bow akin to type 45


And as for the mast, the key point is that the darker areas we see are probably not indicative of future array placement

 

[Solaris]

So according to this artist the crew size of the 055 must be somewhere around 550ish.....

One Z-8 might be able to fit two Z-9s but can't fit two Ka-28s in width of one Z-8.

I prefer this hangar setup, enough for 2 Ka-28's and a UAV:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Blitzo]

Ew, Ka-28. Z-18 is where it is at for future ASW work.

I prefer one large central hangar (without a division) for two Z-18s, or for potentially three Z-20s, or 6 UAVs, or a mix. No need for a separate hangar for UAVs IMO.

That is assuming the width of two folded Z-18s are enough to fit three folded Z-20s

Edit: width of a super frelon folded is apparently 5.2m, while width of a folded seahawk is 3.3m.
5.2m x 2= 10.4m
3.3m x 3= 9.9m

With clearance space for both set ups, you could potentially fit three Z-20s in the space of a Z-8, assuming their folded widths are the same as for seahawk and super frelon respectively.

---

So according to this artist the crew size of the 055 must be somewhere around 550ish.....

Did he say that? It would be an excessive number, considering the similar sized slava has 480 and 055 is a far more modern ship.

 

[Solaris]

Ew, Ka-28. Z-18 is where it is at for future ASW work.

I prefer one large central hangar (without a division) for two Z-18s, or for potentially three Z-20s, or 6 UAVs, or a mix. No need for a separate hangar for UAVs IMO.

That is assuming the width of two folded Z-18s are enough to fit three folded Z-20s

Edit: width of a super frelon folded is apparently 5.2m, while width of a folded seahawk is 3.3m.
5.2m x 2= 10.4m
3.3m x 3= 9.9m

With clearance space for both set ups, you could potentially fit three Z-20s in the space of a Z-8, assuming their folded widths are the same as for seahawk and super frelon respectively.

2 Z-18's are way too and clunky, even for a cruiser. If you want to talk the future, then I'd rather be talking Z-20ASW than Z-18, which IMO will be relegated to ships like carriers, LPD's, and LHD/A's. And you still need clearance height for any Ka-28's that might land on the ship. That means at least 2.5 decks high hangar. And not any wider since Z-20 is narrower than Ka-28. So basically I predict Ka-28-sized hangars remaining on future surface combatants like FFG's, DDG's, and CG's.

Did he say that? It would be an excessive number, considering the similar sized slava has 480 and 055 is a far more modern ship.

Well he didn't say it so much as drew it. Guess what I'm referring to.

 

[Blitzo]

2 Z-18's are way too and clunky, even for a cruiser. If you want to talk the future, then I'd rather be talking Z-20ASW than Z-18, which IMO will be relegated to ships like carriers, LPD's, and LHD/A's. And you still need clearance height for any Ka-28's that might land on the ship. That means at least 2.5 decks high hangar. And not any wider since Z-20 is narrower than Ka-28. So basically I predict Ka-28-sized hangars remaining on future surface combatants like FFG's, DDG's, and CG's.

Well the rumours are saying Z-8s.
More importantly, Z-8s/Z-18s are no more "clunky" than AW101 or CH-148, which are also present aboard many nations surface combatants in the ASW role.
In fact, I'd argue that it would make sense for all large PLAN surface combatants from 052D onwards to carry Z-18s in the ASW role. PLAN are seeking to boost their ASW capability, so it makes sense to go the full nine yards with a heavier 13 ton helicopter. (I also hope the next generation frigate, which is expected to be larger than 054A and approach DDG displacement, will feature Z-18 as well if it is intended for a more ASW role, but that is still a nascent dream)
ASW Z-20s can be developed for older ships with hangars that can only presently carry a Z-9 or Ka-28, as well as any future small combatants, and to act as a cheaper lower end helicopter.

Well he didn't say it so much as drew it. Guess what I'm referring to.

... What?

 

[Solaris]

Well the rumours are saying Z-8s.
More importantly, Z-8s/Z-18s are no more "clunky" than AW101 or CH-148, which are also present aboard many nations surface combatants in the ASW role.

In fact, I'd argue that it would make sense for all large PLAN surface combatants from 052D onwards to carry Z-18s in the ASW role. PLAN are seeking to boost their ASW capability, so it makes sense to go the full nine yards with a heavier 13 ton helicopter. (I also hope the next generation frigate, which is expected to be larger than 054A and approach DDG displacement, will feature Z-18 as well if it is intended for a more ASW role, but that is still a nascent dream)
ASW Z-20s can be developed for older ships with hangars that can only presently carry a Z-9 or Ka-28, as well as any future small combatants, and to act as a cheaper lower end helicopter.

It doesn't make sense if you can't or don't want to devote the space to 2 large helicopters with a marginal gain in performance over medium helicopters. The Type 45 class carries 2 Lynx or 1 Merlin. I'd rather have 2 Lynx on board, personally. If larger helos were a trend, the Type 45 would have had a large enough hangar for 2 Merlins.

As for other navies:
The US Zumwalt will carry 2 MH/SH-60's.
The US Flight III Burkes obviously will still be carrying 2 MH/SH-60's.
The US LCS-1 carries 1 MH-60 and 1 Fire Scout UAV.
The US LCS-2 carries 2 MH-60's and 1 Fire Scout.
The German F125's will carry 2 NH-90's.
The Dutch De Zeven Provicien carries 1 NH-90.
The Spanish F100 carries 1 SH-60.
The Australian Hobarts will carry 1 MH-60.
The Danish Iver Huitfeldt carries 1 Sea Lynx; will instead carry 1 MH-60 starting 2016.
The Russian Project 21956 DDG will carry 2 Ka-28/31's.
The French La Fayette carries 1 Panther or 1 NH-90.
The French FREMM carries 1 NH-90.
The Italian FREMM will carry 2 NH-90's or 1 NH-90 and 1 Merlin.

You can see that the overwhelming majority of the latest modern and future surface combatants embark or will embark helicopters in the 10-11 ton class, or 4-5 tons in the case of the Lynx or Panther, rather than the 14 ton Merlins. It seems to be the consensus that medium helos are doing just fine for shipborne ASW. The USN itself seems to feel that the MH-60 is doing just fine for shipborne, even carrierborne, ASW. The Z-20 is a (very) close relative of the MH-60 by way of common ancestry, so IMO this platform will also suit the PLAN's ASW needs, and can easily be adapted for many other roles. Just as the Blackhawk/Seahawk has done for the US military.

... What?

The 600 person capacity inflatable life raft canisters. If you look at most modern ships they signal externally how many crew they embark (roughly) by the number of life rafts they carry, plus a small margin for safety. I would expect that most people guesstimate the 055's crew to be far less than 600 (probably more like <300) so clearly the artist took some liberties with the topside 'decorations'. Or he just wasn't thinking clearly.

 

[delft]

I would expect a large margin between the number of crew and the capacity of the rafts because you might want to carry the crew in only half the rafts if you happen to loose the rafts on one side of the ship

 

[Blitzo]

It doesn't make sense if you can't or don't want to devote the space to 2 large helicopters with a marginal gain in performance over medium helicopters. The Type 45 class carries 2 Lynx or 1 Merlin. I'd rather have 2 Lynx on board, personally. If larger helos were a trend, the Type 45 would have had a large enough hangar for 2 Merlins.

What other navies do is a result of their requirements and (more likely) cost rather than necessarily what is the most high performance. Certainly what other navies choose may not be what is the best for PLAN.
Also, beware of generalizing. I can say that if ship mounted ASHMs were a trend, then Type 45 would have made having harpoons a necessity. Navies make many decisions, many budget related, and many of which may otherwise be seen as almost foolish.

Furthermore, I quite strongly disagree with the notion that a 13 ton helicopter would only have a marginal gain in performance to medium helicopters. Especially in the ASW role, where range, payload and endurance are important to allow a ship to prosecute a helicopter at range. Assuming for equal subsystem quality, I would prefer a 13 ton helicopter for ASW over a 10 ton helicopter every day of the year. More weapons, more sonobuoys, more fuel, more range, more in-helicopter operators, more time on station.
10 ton helicopters might be enough for many navies for a variety of reasons (I go into more detail below), however I do not think we can say that its acceptance and service in a large number of navies means it is somehow equal to heavier helicopters.
That would be like saying F-16s are in service with many air forces therefore F-15s must only offer a marginal gain in capability, if lower weight fighters are so much more successful.

As for other navies:
The US Zumwalt will carry 2 MH/SH-60's.
The US Flight III Burkes obviously will still be carrying 2 MH/SH-60's.
The US LCS-1 carries 1 MH-60 and 1 Fire Scout UAV.
The US LCS-2 carries 2 MH-60's and 1 Fire Scout.
The German F125's will carry 2 NH-90's.
The Dutch De Zeven Provicien carries 1 NH-90.
The Spanish F100 carries 1 SH-60.
The Australian Hobarts will carry 1 MH-60.
The Danish Iver Huitfeldt carries 1 Sea Lynx; will instead carry 1 MH-60 starting 2016.
The Russian Project 21956 DDG will carry 2 Ka-28/31's.
The French La Fayette carries 1 Panther or 1 NH-90.
The French FREMM carries 1 NH-90.
The Italian FREMM will carry 2 NH-90's or 1 NH-90 and 1 Merlin.

You can see that the overwhelming majority of the latest modern and future surface combatants embark or will embark helicopters in the 10-11 ton class, or 4-5 tons in the case of the Lynx or Panther, rather than the 14 ton Merlins. It seems to be the consensus that medium helos are doing just fine for shipborne ASW. The USN itself seems to feel that the MH-60 is doing just fine for shipborne, even carrierborne, ASW. The Z-20 is a (very) close relative of the MH-60 by way of common ancestry, so IMO this platform will also suit the PLAN's ASW needs, and can easily be adapted for many other roles. Just as the Blackhawk/Seahawk has done for the US military.

I think it is worth mentioning that there are not that many nations equipped with ASW helicopters in the 13 ton class in the first place, so listing the different types of ships not carrying merlin is not a wholly representative count. A more representative count is think would consider the navies that have merlins and seeing whether those navies are equipping their ships with the helicopters or not.

The fact that many navies have chosen medium weight helicopters over heavier helicopters certainly does indicate that those helicopters must be enough for their ASW needs. Or it may be reflective of their budgets. Or, in the case of the USN, it may just be a case of having no heavier weight helicopter to build a cost effective ASW chopper from. Also consider that the success of the SH-60 platform may be as much a result of its wide production run for the USN that makes procurement by other navies both more affordable and proven, rather than its weight range being sufficient enough for its tasks. An interesting thought experiment is what if the USN had decided to go for a mass production 13 ton helicopter instead of the 10 ton seahawk. Would many navies now be fielding 13 ton ASW helicopters instead? I.e.: is the popularity of 10 ton helicopters today a result of SH-60s design (and weight specifically) or a result of its sheer proliferation?

I think we are looking at this the wrong way.
If we are discussing the merits of a 13 ton versus 10 ton helicopter for ASW roles, I think the 13 ton will win everyday. However, it comes at a cost of, well greater cost, along with requirements for a bigger deck, bigger hangar (so a bigger ship is needed), and the knock on effects of needing a bigger ship. What other nations have chosen as their ASW choppers does not mean they are the most capable. They might be more cost efficient for a slightly smaller variety of roles, or maybe they might be considered more reliable due to greater production, or have greater product support, better subsystems, or maybe they just have smaller surface combatants, etc.

If we are talking about what kind of ASW helicopters 055 will carry, credible rumours are saying two Z-8s (assumed to be the modernized ASW Z-18FQs, cautiously named). Beyond that, any discussion on the points for or against Z-18 will be dependent on the above, and consider the cons which may hamstring the idea of 055 hauling 2 Z-18s:

Q: Is it too expensive for PLAN?
A: Well, in the scheme of things it probably isn't. They're buying so many large ships, submarines, aircraft, choosing 13 ton helicopters over 10 ton probably won't add that much onto their existing bill. Especially for a domain as important as ASW.
Q: Does 055 have the space for two 13 ton helos?
A: If 055 is as large as rumoured then space shouldn't be a problem.

Those are the only two typical costs I see for a larger ASW helicopter versus a smaller one.
The benefits are many, as I've already stated.

The 600 person capacity inflatable life raft canisters. If you look at most modern ships they signal externally how many crew they embark (roughly) by the number of life rafts they carry, plus a small margin for safety. I would expect that most people guesstimate the 055's crew to be far less than 600 (probably more like <300) so clearly the artist took some liberties with the topside 'decorations'. Or he just wasn't thinking clearly.

I think the artist was taking some liberties or simply didn't consider that point, or maybe intended some of the life rafts to be concealed.
Anyway, I see some 24 life rafts. How many people do a typical naval inflatable liferaft hold?