055 Large Destroyer Thread II

[tamsen_ikard]

It is a matter of requirements and needs. You procure based on what you need. US faces a ballistic missile threat from their adversaries, so it makes sense for them to have missiles such as the SM-3 and SM-6 for BMD defense. All these platforms already exists in China bar an SM-6 all-in-one like missile, which really isn't needed anyway. China doesn't face any ballistic missile threat so there's no need for an SM-3 or SM-6 like missile. It's not unlikely that they may make a naval BMD missile in the future, but it isn't currently needed or a priority.

What about defeating supersonic or hypersonic cruise missile strike against ships in the high seas? Are Chinese type 055 ships only expected to fight within the first island chain?

In a war, US is most likely to saturate First island chain choke points into Gibralter like fortresses with enough shore based firepower that chinese ships cannot get outside without significant damage. Just breaking that blockade needs very strong defense against missiles.

 

[totenchan]

What about defeating supersonic or hypersonic cruise missile strike against ships in the high seas? Are Chinese type 055 ships only expected to fight within the first island chain?

Excepting notional or not-yet-in-service systems, what supersonic or hypersonic cruise missile strikes could they possible face? Have you thought these problems through? Its not a particularly novel statement to suggest that the PLA and USN have taken very different focuses in the anti-ship role, and if you can't see why that would affect how this would effect what munitions these ships would have, no one can help you.

In a war, US is most likely to saturate First island chain choke points into Gibralter like fortresses with enough shore based firepower that chinese ships cannot get outside without significant damage. Just breaking that blockade needs very strong defense against missiles.

Since when has the approach to shore based firepower to sail ships into them?

 

[Gloire_bb]

In a war, US is most likely to saturate First island chain choke points into Gibralter like fortresses with enough shore based firepower that chinese ships cannot get outside without significant damage. Just breaking that blockade needs very strong defense against missiles.

They would. That's what amphibious capability is for.

 

[siegecrossbow]

 

[Inque]

Again, consider which munitions are fielded by the US—overwhelmingly subsonic and/or stealthy cruise missiles—which are far more easily intercepted in transit by say, land-based air cover, than ballistic or hypersonic equivalents. Maybe, just maybe, you would see greater emphasis on land-based AEW&C to detect such threats (wow, I wonder why KJ-700 was spotted in PLAN colours) instead of VLS interceptors.

USN procures systems to counter the threats it faces. Which are emphatically not the same threats PLAN faces.

Is the HQ series all the PLAN needs in terms of missile defense, then?

 

[iewgnem]

What about defeating supersonic or hypersonic cruise missile strike against ships in the high seas? Are Chinese type 055 ships only expected to fight within the first island chain?

In a war, US is most likely to saturate First island chain choke points into Gibralter like fortresses with enough shore based firepower that chinese ships cannot get outside without significant damage. Just breaking that blockade needs very strong defense against missiles.

PLAN has Type 054A/B with HHQ-16 for short range intercepts, not to mention HHQ-9 is fully capable of intercepting supersonic threats, infact simultaneous interception of multiple incoming LO supersonic threat is literally part of every new hull's commissioning process

It's also moot because all island chain islands are within strike range of PLA's land based missiles and stealth drones, and they just need to take out any Patriots batteries on the island so PLA can put a MALE drone orbit over it to wipe out everything else. All is fair in love and war, when an island become contested, its ownership is entirely based on one's ability to contest it.

 

[leonzzzz]

The USN will shoot at the PLAN with missiles and jets, too. The PLAN would be smart to invest in missile defense like the quad-packed Seasparrow.

The PLAN does invest in SAM, just different types of SAM compared to USN. Pointed out by others, this simply reflects the difference in munitions threats deployed by the US, which consists of mostly sea level subsonic LO munitions and no mature hypersonic ASM in the near future. The current multilayer defense from HHQ16, HHQ9 and HHQ10 are more than capable to deal with these current threats. Not to mention that the subsonic non LO launching platforms can be interdicted by air cover easily, before offloading their payloads

Is the HQ series all the PLAN needs in terms of missile defense, then?

What are you implying? That HQ is just one type of SAM? No wonder you think PLAN was not investing in missile defense.
This sounds like if you are asking: Is the SM series all the USN needs in terms of missile defense?
You should spend more time in this below thread.
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/t/pla-anti-air-missile-sam-systems.7266/

 

[leonzzzz]

What about defeating supersonic or hypersonic cruise missile strike against ships in the high seas? Are Chinese type 055 ships only expected to fight within the first island chain?

In a war, US is most likely to saturate First island chain choke points into Gibralter like fortresses with enough shore based firepower that chinese ships cannot get outside without significant damage. Just breaking that blockade needs very strong defense against missiles.

Just name one type of hypersonic cruise missile currently deployed by the US navy please? Please don't say NSM, ARRW or LRHW or I will effing lose it.

And to your second point, I am assuming you are referencing to the new USMC Force Design transformation, basically abandoning all land fighting heavy equipments and become amphibious missile shooting platoons in random islands around the island chains. I would call it meat skulls against evil Chinese missiles.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Just one tiny problem, with what ships? Answers brought to you from the Cope Zone.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Even if the LSM finalizes its design, I don't wanna mind you again the laughable US ship building capability these days. Without numbers these suicide squads are just shooting practice for PLAN submarines, 056A and 054 squadrons anywhere near meaningful range.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[SlothmanAllen]

One thing to consider is what threat does the SM-6 pose in an anti-ship role? That missile is a relative recently development and its anti-ship functionality was only recently revealed. As far as I am aware, the US Navy still posses SM-2 and SM-6 so using SM-6 in an anti-ship role is totally viable and they have a large stock of those weapons. SM-6 gives them a high supersonic long range anti-ship missile while is deployed across the fleet. The US Navy is not just limited to Harpoons and Naval Strike Missiles.

 

[Wrought]

One thing to consider is what threat does the SM-6 pose in an anti-ship role? That missile is a relative recently development and its anti-ship functionality was only recently revealed. As far as I am aware, the US Navy still posses SM-2 and SM-6 so using SM-6 in an anti-ship role is totally viable and they have a large stock of those weapons. SM-6 gives them a high supersonic long range anti-ship missile while is deployed across the fleet. The US Navy is not just limited to Harpoons and Naval Strike Missiles.

SM-6 can indeed service strike roles, but you are using an exquisite and limited munition for a mission it is not optimized for. Of course sometimes you have to make do with whatever you have on hand, but I very much doubt USN would set out from port loaded up with SM-6s to attack ships. There's a difference between could and should.

I'd imagine PLAN would be quite happy to see SM-6s being commonly used like that; it would probably make their job easier on balance.