055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[LCR34]

You are confused. Between two posts and lines of conversation - a YouTube video commenting on type 055 and another post talking about some US naval officer commenting on PLAN in general.

The US naval officer said the 052D is a "fancy boat". Probably thinks highly if the equipment but thinks poorly of experience and operational competence.

Anyway point is you're confused and conflated two things.

Iirc in the honeymoon years, PLAN officers got to visit aegis destroyers. They know how they work. Aegis is the shield and carrier the sword.

 

[Tam]

Iirc in the honeymoon years, PLAN officers got to visit aegis destroyers. They know how they work. Aegis is the shield and carrier the sword.

In order for these radars to start appearing in the early to mid 2000s, the groundwork would have begun in the early 1990s. That is consistent to the Chinese article. In order to lay such groundwork and requirements, planners would have already conceived the kind of warfare and the need for a longer ranged air defense bubble even earlier, although back then this was more of a dream than achievable reality. People were thinking far ahead.

I read somewhere but I forgot where I did, that the genesis for the Type 055 goes back earlier, even as early as the '60s. Back then, there were ideas and concepts for a large destroyer, but being economically and technologically unachievable, those concepts were no better than a fanboy's ideas. Those ideas died and resurrected over the coming years, but at some point, "055" has been reserved for a possible large destroyer, although those earlier concepts won't be anywhere close to the ship it is now. What became the real 055 would begin much later, and is now altogether a very different ship, but it inherited the designation reserved for those large concept destroyer.

If I think about it, designations like 057, 058 and 059 may already be reserved as part of some long term planning.

 

[SanWenYu]

You are confused. Between two posts and lines of conversation - a YouTube video commenting on type 055 and another post talking about some US naval officer commenting on PLAN in general.

The US naval officer said the 052D is a "fancy boat". Probably thinks highly if the equipment but thinks poorly of experience and operational competence.

Anyway point is you're confused and conflated two things.

I don't think so. I was commenting on post #9372. There is a logical fallacy in what that "ex USN official" claimed.

It was the PLAN that define the requirements on the warships. All branches of PLA have officers (驻厂/所军代表) participating in design and manufacturing of their equipments from start to end. Not to mention that 052D is the third iteration of the 052 series. PLAN provided feedbacks to the designers and shipbuilders for the improvements.

The 052 series are PLAN's own babies. No one knows them better than the PLAN. It's ridiculous to say that PLAN do not have experience and operational competence in its own warships.

If it were about the Kilo class or the Sovremenny class in PLAN, he might have a point.

 

[Jason_]

I spoke to an ex US Navy officer during a grad student event in the UK many years ago. He used to be stationed on the USS Antietam (CG-54) and had many encounters with PLA Navy. He argued that while the PLA Navy's 052Ds were "fancy boats, the Chinese sailors and officers simply have no experience operating Aegis type destroyers, nor do they have systematic understanding of the ships' roles in modern naval combat." In other words, he strongly believed that even if you give the best ships to the PLAN, they would not know how to operate them in conjunction with other service branches to effectively win a naval engagement.

Said the officer from the navy that built the Zumwalt and the LCS. "Nor do they have systematic understanding of the ships' roles in modern naval combat" indeed.

 

[lunlunqq]

That may well have been true then. We simply don't know how well PLAN have integrated such technology now but they have had enough units so quipped for long enough by now to have learned how to use it properly.

I wonder what

Said the officer from the navy that built the Zumwalt and the LCS. "Nor do they have systematic understanding of the ships' roles in modern naval combat" indeed.

Exactly! I mean it's just a destroyer. For a small country, a modern DDG may change the strategic balance between the neighboring countries and itself. But for China, that's hardly the case. It's just an area air defense platform, no more, no less. Its tactical use may be summarized as "Come here. Turn your radar. Detect any flying object that does not answer your IFF right. Shoot your boom boom sticks until it disappears from your radar screen... " Not sure what other "systematic understandings" a navy would need for their DDGs.

Also, the US Navy may not be as experienced as they think they are. They have been sailing their DDGs and CGs around the world for decades now; but what have they really done. They've shot down an airliner, being bombed by terrorists, and bumped into a few cargo ships... Do they really have any battle experience against a near-peer foe?

 

[Michaelsinodef]

Also, the US Navy may not be as experienced as they think they are. They have been sailing their DDGs and CGs around the world for decades now; but what have they really done. They've shot down an airliner, being bombed by terrorists, and bumped into a few cargo ships... Do they really have any battle experience against a near-peer foe?

Honestly wondering if their 'experience' (fighting foes that couldn't threaten their ships) might just get them killed if they went up with China (sailing too close lol).

With that said I suppose they do have a lot of experience with aircraft carriers and getting aircrafts to fly off them to bomb targets, although this time it's quite a big question if the carrier is gonna be able to get in range before getting sunk (not to mention, when did US pilots last have to fight air battles? Or well they have, but not against an enemy that is techwise about par with them and also have ground support + big number of airplanes).

 

[clockwork]

The US naval officer said the 052D is a "fancy boat". Probably thinks highly if the equipment but thinks poorly of experience and operational competence.

I don't get the constant gloating about "more experience" from them when it comes to China, especially laughable from the navy. How does constantly sailing the oceans during peacetime (and occasionally lobbing a few Tomahawks at a country that can't even fire an AShM back) count as any more peer combat experience than China has?

They literally have no meaningful warfare experience either. Unless maybe if they count bumper ships against hostile merchant vessels I guess.

 

[Maikeru]

I don't get the constant gloating about "more experience" from them when it comes to China, especially laughable from the navy. How does constantly sailing the oceans during peacetime (and occasionally lobbing a few Tomahawks at a country that can't even fire an AShM back) count as any more peer combat experience than China has?

They literally have no meaningful warfare experience either. Unless maybe if they count bumper ships against hostile merchant vessels I guess.

All true, but applies equally to PLAN which has even less relevant experience than the USN does.

 

[AndrewS]

All true, but applies equally to PLAN which has even less relevant experience than the USN does.

I'd say the PLAN and USN are equal in terms of relevant experience against a peer Navy.

 

[by78]

Comparison 055 v DDG51

Has anybody seen this? Just wondering how people would react.

Please stop posting so-called 'analysis' or opinions from Youtube. The vast majority of them are done by crackpots and do not meet SDF's standards for information dissemination.

Also, comparison posts, videos, and threads are expressly forbidden by forum rules.