055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[Solaris]

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.

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.

Well, it could be this, it could be that, but the fact is that most Western navies choose the 10 ton class medium helo for their ASW needs. I think you have offered a lot of theories to try and explain the plain fact of 10 ton helicopter dominance on board so many modern and future warships, which is pretty obvious even at a casual glance, but I don't judge any or even the sum of these potential explanations to be as convincing as seeing a mass of navies around the world all using the same size helicopter for their ASW needs. Why should the PLAN have such vastly different ASW helo requirements? As you have pointed out yourself, nobody would disagree that a larger helo gives you more performance, but is the tradeoff in cost and space worthwhile? I submit that one must look at the scoreboard for the answer to this question.

As for the USN specifically, Sikorsky has been developing the CH-148 Cyclone, a 13 ton class ASW helicopter, for the Canadian Navy, who incidentally is now looking at other platforms because the US ITAR has been dragging its feet. It is basically a militarized Sikorsky S-92. If the USN truly believed that a 13 ton helicopter was the 'best' size for ASW, it could easily have jumped on board that bandwagon. Or it could have just bought the Merlin. Same thing with the European navies. The French actually had a variant of the Super Frelon itself that was specifically an ASW variant (SA 321G) which BTW interested nobody else, and they have since ditched that helo and gone with the NH-90. So there are available platforms. It's just that almost nobody feels the need.

As for the alleged PLAN Z-18's on board the 055, rumor is just rumor, and deserves no more credibility than any other rumor at this point. We'll be able to see the size of the hangar doors soon enough, I'll bet.

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?

25 or 50 are the standard capacities. As for reserve, I think typically around 10% extra is factored in. Certainly not double.

 

[Totoro]

it's just guesswork right now but i'd guess hangar will be sized to house a z18 if necessary, but its organic airgroup will be two z20 sized helos. Helopad will be sized for z18, of course, so we might expect a 25 by 20ish meter helopad. Certainly under 30 meters in length.

If type 45 has enough room to waste on hangar's height housing a merlin, even though its usual airgroup are lynxes, then a larger 055 should certainly be able to afford that extra ceiling height. (and height difference between lynx and merlin is even more than between z20 and z18)

 

[Solaris]

If type 45 has enough room to waste on hangar's height housing a merlin, even though its usual airgroup are lynxes, then a larger 055 should certainly be able to afford that extra ceiling height. (and height difference between lynx and merlin is even more than between z20 and z18)

It should be noted that the Royal Navy is hampered by the same problem as the PLAN, namely that there are significant differences in the sizes and shapes of the various helicopters it uses. I think that until the PLAN retires the Ka-27/28/31, the hangars of any ships coming out in the near future will have to be built with its particular height requirements in mind. The Type 45 similarly might have been designed with the capability to at least fit one Merlin into its hangar if the need arises, but not necessarily two, which is in fact what we see. And don't forget the new NATO 'standard' NH-90 which is also significantly larger than the Lynx. As for the Z-8, the PLAN may have the desire to be able to land this large helicopter on warships to refuel but not necessarily to be able to house it, much like how the LCS-1 ships can land Ospreys but not house them inside the hangars.

 

[Blitzo]

Well, it could be this, it could be that, but the fact is that most Western navies choose the 10 ton class medium helo for their ASW needs. I think you have offered a lot of theories to try and explain the plain fact of 10 ton helicopter dominance on board so many modern and future warships, which is pretty obvious even at a casual glance, but I don't judge any or even the sum of these potential explanations to be as convincing as seeing a mass of navies around the world all using the same size helicopter for their ASW needs. Why should the PLAN have such vastly different ASW helo requirements? As you have pointed out yourself, nobody would disagree that a larger helo gives you more performance. But I submit that one must look at the scoreboard.

They can afford to have different ASW helo requirements, at least in the case of 055, because:
-They have a big ship to work with, so they don't have to limit themselves to a smaller helicopter like seahawk. Many of the ships you listed were on the medium side, with traditionally sized hangars, limiting them to smaller helicopters as well.
-They have no access to an existing user base of 10 ton helicopters that may be cheaper, have logistics benefits, and better product support. International customers of seahawk are enticed by the wide service of the platform in USN and internationally, which both attests to the platform's reliability but more importantly, means it has a wide (and thus easily accessible and cheaper) support base. Mass production of course, drives down unit price too. USN has similar motivations for pursuing their modernized MH-60R/S versions of the legacy SH-60 over developing a clean sheet larger helicopter, despite the improvement in capability the latter would bring. But for the PLAN, a notional Z-20FQ and Z-18FQ will be equally new and unsupported in the fleet. If anything Z-18 might be a little more widely supported by existing infrastructure, due to PLANs induction of the Z-8YJ, a VIP Z-18 and of course the civil AC313.
-The PLAN are not quite as strapped for cash as some of the other navies mentioned, and that interacts with the notion that a Z-20FQ may not be cheaper by that much compared to Z-18FQ.

In my last post I went into decent depth about the pros and cons of having a larger helicopter versus a smaller one.
To consider why many nations field a smaller helicopter versus a larger one, the answer lies in the pros and cons of having a larger helicopter that is less supported with limited numbers in service, versus a smaller helicopter that is highly supported, highly proliferate, and based on a platform with literally thousands in service.

Economies of scale, common and existing support base, ease of logistics, training, having others to share costs with, are as important if not more so than actually having the top 20% of capability.
Thing is for PLAN, they have no existing, widely used helicopter to develop an ASW helo from and no one to share costs with. So they have the choice to either choose Z-18FQ or Z-20FQ for wide service, and neither particularly holds a logistics or user base advantage over the other. So in this case, what is the logic for them choosing the smaller Z-20FQ instead of Z-18FQ for 055? I only see slightly lower unit cost and operating costs based on it being a smaller helicopter, compared to Z-18FQ. Z-18FQ might even have a slight logistics and user base advantage as variants of it are already in service. And of course Z-18FQ has an advantage in every domain of performance. Deck footprint isn't a limitation for Z-18FQ either, given 055 is a massive ship that can accommodate such a chopper.

(Personally I suspect the PLAN will end up developing naval Z-20 for older ships and as a medium weight complement for the already flown Z-18FQ, but that is a different topic).

As for the USN specifically, Sikorsky has been developing the CH-148 Cyclone, a 13 ton class ASW helicopter, for the Canadian Navy, who incidentally is now looking at other platforms because the US ITAR has been dragging its feet. It is basically a militarized Sikorsky S-92. If the USN truly believed that a 13 ton helicopter was the 'best' size for ASW, it could easily have jumped on board that bandwaggon. Or it could just have bought the Merlin. Same thing with the European navies. The French actually had a variant of the Super Frelon itself that was specifically an ASW variant (SA 321G), but they have since ditched that helo and gone with the NH-90. So there are available platforms. It's just that almost nobody feels the need.

My whole position revolved around the idea that it isn't only capability alone that determines whether something is chosen, but cost, logistics.. In the case of ship borne helicopters, the size of the ship is important too, and that opens up a whole new can of worms.
It makes no sense for USN to go for a militarised S-92. Yes, of course an ASW S-92 with similar mission equipment to SH-60/MH-60 is better than the latter, but they already have a vast fleet of Seahawks, and it almost definitely isn't worth the money to develop, qualify, and then produce en masse a hypothetical SH-92 where they can get a modernized MH-60R for much cheaper, with greater commonality with their existing fleet, and which can perform the majority of the missions an SH-92 can do at a fraction of the cost. Switching from SH-60 to SH-92 would involve much greater changes in training (maintenance, pilots, crew) compared to switching from SH-60 to MH-60R/S as well, which means money, time.

As for the super frelon WRT the French, they actually didn't build that many super frelons to begin with. It was a rather abortive project, and they went with dauphins for most of their ASW duties until NH90 came along, I believe.

It was unfortunate the French never continued producing super frelon, it was an excellent large chopper and I think the largest that Europe could independently produce at the time. Not sure why they stopped. Probably cost reasons.

As for the alleged PLAN Z-18's on board the 055, rumor is just rumor, and deserves no more credibility than any other rumor at this point. We'll be able to see the size of the hangar doors soon enough, I'll bet.

Actually, the Z-8 claim was by pop3, part of his 055 write up meant specifically to elucidate some ideas held by the community about 055, and it certainly deserves more credibility than other rumours.

---

Again, I use the analogy of F-16 vs F-15 for 10 ton vs 13 ton helicopters.
F-16 is much more popular than F-15 internationally, but it would be incorrect to say that is because F-15 is only marginally more capable than F-16, but rather that F-16s lower cost, greater support base, logistics, yada yada, all endear it to smaller air forces with less cash to throw around. It is a similar case for lower weight ASW helicopters, only that USN has never developed an "F-15" ASW chopper equivalent for itself, but rather used lower cost and lower weight "F-16s" (Seahawks) for themselves only, thus setting the tone for the rest of the world.
Imagine if the USAF never bought F-15s and only bought F-16s. I hazard we would see an even greater dominance of F-16 today in that alternate universe, possibly with the same degree of single weight class unit saturation as for 10 ton helicopters today.

ASW helicopters and fighter aircraft are of course not a wholly accurate analogy, but it is close in the dimensions where it counts: it illustrates the importance of cost and mass production, and also the impact of the class of platform of which the US military chooses, on the subsequent proliferation and popularity of high technology, difficult to manufacture products of said class.

25 or 50 are the standard capacities. As for reserve, I think typically around 10% extra is factored in. Certainly not double.

well in that case, the artist probably didn't pay attention or simply didn't know.

 

[Solaris]

They can afford to have different ASW helo requirements, at least in the case of 055, because:
-They have a big ship to work with, so they don't have to limit themselves to a smaller helicopter like seahawk. Many of the ships you listed were on the medium side, with traditionally sized hangars, limiting them to smaller helicopters as well.
-They have no access to an existing user base of 10 ton helicopters that may be cheaper, have logistics benefits, and better product support. International customers of seahawk are enticed by the wide service of the platform in USN and internationally, which both attests to the platform's reliability but more importantly, means it has a wide (and thus easily accessible and cheaper) support base. Mass production of course, drives down unit price too. USN has similar motivations for pursuing their modernized MH-60R/S versions of the legacy SH-60 over developing a clean sheet larger helicopter, despite the improvement in capability the latter would bring. But for the PLAN, a notional Z-20FQ and Z-18FQ will be equally new and unsupported in the fleet. If anything Z-18 might be a little more widely supported by existing infrastructure, due to PLANs induction of the Z-8YJ, a VIP Z-18 and of course the civil AC313.
-The PLAN are not quite as strapped for cash as some of the other navies mentioned, and that interacts with the notion that a Z-20FQ may not be cheaper by that much compared to Z-18FQ.

In my last post I went into decent depth about the pros and cons of having a larger helicopter versus a smaller one.
To consider why many nations field a smaller helicopter versus a larger one, the answer lies in the pros and cons of having a larger helicopter that is less supported with limited numbers in service, versus a smaller helicopter that is highly supported, highly proliferate, and based on a platform with literally thousands in service.

Economies of scale, common and existing support base, ease of logistics, training, having others to share costs with, are as important if not more so than actually having the top 20% of capability.
Thing is for PLAN, they have no existing, widely used helicopter to develop an ASW helo from and no one to share costs with. So they have the choice to either choose Z-18FQ or Z-20FQ for wide service, and neither particularly holds a logistics or user base advantage over the other. So in this case, what is the logic for them choosing the smaller Z-20FQ instead of Z-18FQ for 055? I only see slightly lower unit cost and operating costs based on it being a smaller helicopter, compared to Z-18FQ. Z-18FQ might even have a slight logistics and user base advantage as variants of it are already in service. And of course Z-18FQ has an advantage in every domain of performance. Deck footprint isn't a limitation for Z-18FQ either, given 055 is a massive ship that can accommodate such a chopper.

My whole position revolved around the idea that it isn't only capability alone that determines whether something is chosen, but cost, logistics.. In the case of ship borne helicopters, the size of the ship is important too, and that opens up a whole new can of worms.
It makes no sense for USN to go for a militarised S-92. Yes, of course an ASW S-92 with similar mission equipment to SH-60/MH-60 is better than the latter, but they already have a vast fleet of Seahawks, and it almost definitely isn't worth the money to develop, qualify, and then produce en masse a hypothetical SH-92 where they can get a modernized MH-60R for much cheaper, with greater commonality with their existing fleet, and which can perform the majority of the missions an SH-92 can do at a fraction of the cost. Switching from SH-60 to SH-92 would involve much greater changes in training (maintenance, pilots, crew) compared to switching from SH-60 to MH-60R/S as well, which means less cost, less time.

The NH-90 is not part of any Blackhawk/Seahawk supply chain. Neither is the Ka-28. Or the Lynx. Or the Panther. They have pretty much nothing in common except that they are all less than 11 tons. Your argument that it all boils down to money for ALL of these navies not mainly using 13 ton class ASW helos is unconvincing, especially since we are talking about pre-2008 times; you don't get the luxury of viewing that time with the lens of the present day. I could just as easily make the blanket claim that it all boils down to 13 ton helos being simply less worthwhile when tradeoffs are assessed without any further quantification needed.

You have also yet to quantify exactly how much better the Z-18 would be compared to the Z-20. This is understandable since nobody here yet knows, but your enthusiasm alone is not enough to make the case that the Z-18 offers pound for pound greater overall performance. Even in a ship as big as allegedly the 055 is, you're not going to waste space that you don't need to, so I also don't buy the '055 has more than enough space' argument. If the PLAN feels Z-18 is the better choice, it will make room. Otherwise it will not, regardless of whether or not it could.

Again, I use the analogy of F-16 vs F-15 for 10 ton vs 13 ton helicopters.
F-16 is much more popular than F-15 internationally, but it would be incorrect to say that is because F-15 is only marginally more capable than F-16, but rather that F-16s lower cost, greater support base, logistics, yada yada, all endear it to smaller air forces with less cash to throw around. It is a similar case for lower weight ASW helicopters, only that USN has never developed an "F-15" ASW chopper equivalent for itself, but rather used lower cost and lower weight "F-16s" (Seahawks) for themselves only, thus setting the tone for the rest of the world.
Imagine if the USAF never bought F-15s and only bought F-16s. I hazard we would see an even greater dominance of F-16 today in that alternate universe, possibly with the same degree of single weight class unit saturation as for 10 ton helicopters today.

ASW helicopters and fighter aircraft are of course not a wholly accurate analogy, but it is close in the dimensions where it counts: it illustrates the importance of cost and mass production, and also the impact of the class of platform of which the US military chooses, on the subsequent proliferation and popularity of high technology, difficult to manufacture products of said class.

You are right that the US never developed "F-15" ASW choppers, and for this reason alone the fighter plane analogy falls apart immediately.

Actually, the Z-8 claim was by pop3, part of his 055 write up meant specifically to elucidate some ideas held by the community about 055, and it certainly deserves more credibility than other rumours.

Nah. I'll wait for the photos.

 

[PanAsian]

Artists' impressions of the Type 055 all put FL-3000 in the back and Type 730 in the front. I guess they are basing that on the Type 052D. It would seem to me that the 055 is large enough to accommodate 2x FL-3000s front and back, and 2x 730s on the sides.

 

[Blitzo]

The NH-90 is not part of any Blackhawk/Seahawk supply chain. Neither is the Ka-28. Or the Lynx. Or the Panther. They have pretty much nothing in common except that they are all less than 11 tons. Your argument that it all boils down to money for ALL of these navies not mainly using 13 ton class ASW helos is unconvincing, especially since we are talking about pre-2008 times; you don't get the luxury of viewing that time with the lens of the present day. I could just as easily make the blanket claim that it all boils down to 13 ton helos being simply less worthwhile when tradeoffs are assessed without any further quantification needed.

Lynx and panther are more in the 6 ton range, and are not known for being the most effective ASW helicopters. PLAN operate Z-9, and its poor performance due to small size is often criticised.

NH-90 is a more recent helicopter, clearly meant to compete in the Blackhawk/seahawk weight class and in the same cost category.

As to the reasons for the proliferation of smaller and medium helicopters over large helicopters.
I do believe cost is the main reason, along with the greater common user base, logistics benefits etc etc of many planes for seahawk, which had almost single handedly created a market for helicopters of its weight class and capability.
However I also agree that 13 ton helicopters may deliver additional capability which many navies do not need and/or are not willing to pay for. Perhaps the top 10% or 20% of performance they've found are not needed for most missions, and perhaps there are additional costs for a 13 ton helicopter versus a 10 ton helicopter (even accounting for any differences in benefits of a large user base, in case of the seahawk family)

This is why I brought up the fighter aircraft analogy, because it shows that most nations are perfectly content with a fleet of lighter weight, lower range fighters and only a few countries maintain fleets of heavier weight fighters.

So no, I do not think only cost is a factor in why medium helicopters are more popular than heavy weights, but I do think it accounts for a majority of the reasoning, which interacts with the probable reality that heavier helicopters deliver capabilities which many navies do not need/and or where the extra capability is not worth the extra cost (cost efficiency, which I suppose can technically go back to the umbrella of cost, again)

You have also yet to quantify exactly how much better the Z-18 would be compared to the Z-20. This is understandable since nobody here yet knows, but your enthusiasm alone is not enough to make the case that the Z-18 offers pound for pound greater overall performance. Even in a ship as big as allegedly the 055 is, you're not going to waste space that you don't need to, so I also don't buy the '055 has more than enough space' argument. If the PLAN feels Z-18 is the better choice, it will make room. Otherwise it will not, regardless of whether or not it could.[/Aquote]

I'm not saying Z-18 absolutely will be fitted onboard 055., but I've stated why I think it could be, why i think it could make sense to.
You could reply with similar reasons for why you think it couldn't or shouldn't. In the paragraph above I see the possibility of 055 not being large enough and Z-18 potentially not providing pound for pound greater overall performance as reasons.

My overall position is that the Z-18 is a possible contender for 055s helicopter complement, with a respectable likelihood as much as Z-20 or any other helicopter. I'm not overwhelmingly sure it will be, but personally I hope it will. That doesn't erase the fact that I know there are some factors going against Z-18,.
What I disagree with is any idea that Z-18 absolutely will not be fitted on 055, with zero chance, because I do not think we have enough evidence for that position.

You are right that the US never developed "F-15" ASW choppers, and for this reason alone the fighter plane analogy falls apart immediately.

I was talking more about the respective real capability gap between a 10 ton and 13 ton helo and that between F-16 and F-15. I believe there is a greater difference in capability between a lighter weight fighter and a heavier one, compared to a medium versus heavy Weight fighter, but this is all details.

If the US had developed a heavier weight ASW chopper in addition to seahawk, would we be seeing more of them around? That is the question we need answering and which we won't get, but is enough as piquing of thought.

Nah. I'll wait for the photos.

You'll be waiting a while.
And keeping an awareness of credible rumours is always important for PLA watching.

 

[nemo]

Artists' impressions of the Type 055 all put FL-3000 in the back and Type 730 in the front. I guess they are basing that on the Type 052D. It would seem to me that the 055 is large enough to accommodate 2x FL-3000s front and back, and 2x 730s on the sides.

personally, I would put 1130 on front and back center line, and FL-3000 on each side but staggered (so they can both fire on broadside and front/back as well).

 

[plawolf]

Which opening were you referring to, because the big one is at a similar layout to the 052D abet raised at the back like the flight IIA Burkes.

My bad, the angles confused me.

 

[Solaris]

Lynx and panther are more in the 6 ton range, and are not known for being the most effective ASW helicopters. PLAN operate Z-9, and its poor performance due to small size is often criticised.

NH-90 is a more recent helicopter, clearly meant to compete in the Blackhawk/seahawk weight class and in the same cost category.

The point is that Lynx, Panther and NH-90 are not part of the Seahawk supply chain, not whether they are good enough ASW platforms or are or not effectively competing against the Seahawk. This belies the 'Seahawk supply chain' financial argument. Also, the NH-90 was chosen for naval ASW over the Seahawk and over the Merlin and the Super Frelon, all of whom were already available and had supply chains in place. This to me speaks both against the supply chain argument and against the bigger is better argument.

As to the reasons for the proliferation of smaller and medium helicopters over large helicopters.
I do believe cost is the main reason, along with the greater common user base, logistics benefits etc etc of many planes for seahawk, which had almost single handedly created a market for helicopters of its weight class and capability.
However I also agree that 13 ton helicopters may deliver additional capability which many navies do not need and/or are not willing to pay for. Perhaps the top 10% or 20% of performance they've found are not needed for most missions, and perhaps there are additional costs for a 13 ton helicopter versus a 10 ton helicopter (even accounting for any differences in benefits of a large user base, in case of the seahawk family)

Given that available 13 to 14 ton platforms with available supply chains already existed at the time most of these navies started looking for new ASW helos, I would think that unneeded capability is the greatest share of the correct answer. Back in the days of big budget military spending during the Cold War, the US and the West were still using helos like the Seaprite, Sea King and later the MH/UH-60 and NH-90. The Merlin and Super Frelon's lack of significant penetration into the ASW helo market is very telling IMO; even as legacy platforms were becoming obsolete and navies started looking for replacements, they in general eschewed these larger helos and overwhelming looked to 10 ton platforms like the Seahawk and NH-90. There is no sign of any significant changes going into the future as pretty much all warships that we know of are being designed with these medium helos primarily in mind.

I'm not saying Z-18 absolutely will be fitted onboard 055., but I've stated why I think it could be, why i think it could make sense to.
You could reply with similar reasons for why you think it couldn't or shouldn't. In the paragraph above I see the possibility of 055 not being large enough and Z-18 potentially not providing pound for pound greater overall performance as reasons.

Or that the additional capabilities provided by 13 ton platforms are seen as unnecessary to effective ASW.

My overall position is that the Z-18 is a possible contender for 055s helicopter complement, with a respectable likelihood as much as Z-20 or any other helicopter. I'm not overwhelmingly sure it will be, but personally I hope it will. That doesn't erase the fact that I know there are some factors going against Z-18,.
What I disagree with is any idea that Z-18 absolutely will not be fitted on 055, with zero chance, because I do not think we have enough evidence for that position.

I don't think anyone has been making claims to the effect that there is zero chance the Z-18 will appear on the 055. And if it does appear on the 055, I don't think 'because it's better' would be the obvious and necessary conclusion, either. 'Because it's available' would be my first inclination in such a case.

If the US had developed a heavier weight ASW chopper in addition to seahawk, would we be seeing more of them around? That is the question we need answering and which we won't get, but is enough as piquing of thought.

IMO the more interesting question is why didn't the USN feel the need to develop a heavier weight ASW helo.