055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[Blitzo]

I think the main gun could still take out your pirate engines at close range no problem. I think the CIWS could take out your pirate engines no problem.

Yeah, probably. But I thought it was worth bringing up.

--

Another reason I just thought of for why I think the platform isn't representative of the bow deck, is how most ships (as well as most PLAN ships) tend to have their helipad as part of the hull's deck, at the same level. If the bow deck of the ship is at platform height, then the helipad will have to be noticeably if not substantially lower than the bow deck, given the aft mockup structure looks a meter or two too short to even house a Z-20.

Of course, the burke class and its derivatives all feature a helipad which is lower than the rest of the ship's deck, so we definitely can't count out 055 following that choice.
Or maybe, the deck height will curve down enough as it travels from bow to aft, enough so the helipad is still seamless with the rest of the deck.

 

[Solaris]

Another reason I just thought of for why I think the platform isn't representative of the bow deck, is how most ships (as well as most PLAN ships) tend to have their helipad as part of the hull's deck, at the same level. If the bow deck of the ship is at platform height, then the helipad will have to be noticeably if not substantially lower than the bow deck, given the aft mockup structure looks a meter or two too short to even house a Z-20.

Of course, the burke class and its derivatives all feature a helipad which is lower than the rest of the ship's deck, so we definitely can't count out 055 following that choice.
Or maybe, the deck height will curve down enough as it travels from bow to aft, enough so the helipad is still seamless with the rest of the deck.

Regarding that, the platform ends right at the edge of the hangar, so there is no platform at that location to represent anything. The helipad is definitely going to be a full deck lower than the platform. Assuming this is the case, you achieve a ~2.5 deck high hangar, perfectly suited for any helicopter height up to and including the double-rotor Ka-28's.

 

[Blitzo]

Regarding that, the platform ends right at the edge of the hangar, so there is no platform at that location to represent anything. The helipad is definitely going to be a full deck lower than the platform. Assuming this is the case, you achieve a ~2.5 deck high hangar, perfectly suited for any helicopter height up to and including the double-rotor Ka-28's.

Yeah, well the question is whether the PLAN have designed a ship with a helipad that is a full deck lower than the rest of the ship's deck height.
I think 056 is the only PLAN ship that has deviated from this trend in recent years. Going even back to the first PLAN helicopter capable ships, all have had seamless helipads with decks.

Now, I'm not saying that is necessarily indicative of a design choice that seeks to achieve any sort of specific requirement (after all, there are also many ships with helipads that sit lower than their decks), it may well just be coincidence that most major surface combatants have followed that trend, or it may be a superficial PLAN preference.

In any case, either the helipad is going to sit discontinuous/lower with the deck, where the platform may well be deck height.
Or, the helipad and deck will be continuous, and the deck will be below deck height.

Whether either scenario necessarily means both ships will have different displacements... who knows.
If both cases have a similar main deck to waterline distance, then the first offering will likely displace less than the second, given its lower overall volume resulting from less topside volume.
If the first case has a higher main deck to waterline distance than the second, then it's open season for speculation.

 

[Solaris]

Yeah, well the question is whether the PLAN have designed a ship with a helipad that is a full deck lower than the rest of the ship's deck height.
I think 056 is the only PLAN ship that has deviated from this trend in recent years. Going even back to the first PLAN helicopter capable ships, all have had seamless helipads with decks.

Now, I'm not saying that is necessarily indicative of a design choice that seeks to achieve any sort of specific requirement (after all, there are also many ships with helipads that sit lower than their decks), it may well just be coincidence that most major surface combatants have followed that trend, or it may be a superficial PLAN preference.

Your argument sounds like it's being made from an aesthetics point of view rather than a pragmatic point of view. I'm not sure that helipads sitting higher, equal to or lower than any other deck is part of any kind of "specific requirement" on any ship or navy, since we see all three examples on various naval ships.

I actually think there is only a low chance the 055 is going to have a clean foredeck personally, but I wanted to demonstrate that my thought experiment was viable with what we currently know, and I think I've demonstrated that.


BTW, here is another CG illustrating what I'm talking about:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Unless the current rear end of the hangar does not represent the intended end of the hangar, the length of this rear hangar section seems to be just barely long enough to house a couple helos with folded tails and nothing else. I thought maybe the RHIB garages would be nestled back in this section, but unless there is only one helo hangar right in the centerline, there will not be enough room for 2 helo hangars and 2 RHIB garages in this section. We will have to look elsewhere for those garages.

 

[Blitzo]

Your argument sounds like it's being made from an aesthetics point of view rather than a pragmatic point of view. I'm not sure that helipads sitting higher, equal to or lower than any other deck is part of any kind of "specific requirement" on any ship or navy, since we see all three examples on various naval ships.

Err I never said that was a specific requirement, if anything my statement was the contrary.

Now, I'm not saying that is necessarily indicative of a design choice that seeks to achieve any sort of specific requirement (after all, there are also many ships with helipads that sit lower than their decks), it may well just be coincidence that most major surface combatants have followed that trend, or it may be a superficial PLAN preference.

I wasn't really arguing that the 055 should have a continuous helipad-deck level either, I'm just noting a visible trend, and saying there is nothing to suggest the PLAN won't follow that trend for 055, and that it should be kept open as a likely possibility for the ship's configuration along with other possibilities.

 

[Solaris]

Here is a potential candidate location for the RHIB garages:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

There is already some kind of indentation there from the photos, and if continued to the deck below it, makes it the right height (almost two decks high) for an RHIB garage. Though the length of this indentation is difficult to estimate IMO. The other potential location is the two structures flanking the stacks. If that is the case, then the locations of the air intakes for the GT's becomes a problem.

 

[no_name]

Assuming that the 055 uses the same AESA radar as the 052D and that the hole is indication of the size of the panel on the outside, I feel that the 055 bridge windows are much larger than the 052D's. The bridge base and therefore the deck is probably quite a bid wider too.

 

[Blitzo]

Here are the two deck height/helipad height proposals we've been discussing.
Helicopter hangar length is only notional, and its aft line is drawn for convenience's sake to join the helipad with a structure

Obviously, the first proposal would have far more topside volume for whatever we'd expect, RHIB davits included.

 

[Solaris]

A few more lines filled in:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[A.Man]

This is not a landmark. Where should they put it?