055 Large Destroyer Thread II

[ChongqingHotPot92]

Any good city name candidates for the 2nd batch 055?

My guess is -
Qingdao (青岛) - Inherit from the decommissioned 052, the largest city of Shandong Province.
Harbin (哈尔滨) - Inherit from the decommissioned 052, capital of Heilongjiang Province.
Jiaxing (嘉兴) - where CPC born
Baoding (保定) - name freed from 056, former capital of Hebei Province, it means protect and secure.
Quanzhou (泉州) - name freed from 056, 2nd largest city of Fujian Province

Previously, each name of 055 has quite a meaning -
Nanchang (101, 南昌) - where PLA born
Lhasa (102, 拉萨) - capital of Tibet, has the meaning of liberation and anti-slavery
Anshan (103, 鞍山) - name inherited from one of the first four destroyers bought from USSR
Wuxi (104, 无锡) - one of the richest cities, shuangyong model city, the name means "no more weapons (since the world is peace)"
Dalian (105, 大连) - 2nd largest city in Liaoning province, the city which built 055.
Yan'an (106, 延安) - CPC headquarters during WW2
Zunyi (107, 遵义) - city where Mao Zedong became the leader of CPC during the long march, the name means "follow the order of the previous king".
Xianyang (108, 咸阳) - capital of Qin dynasty, which is the first dynasty to unify China, has the meaning of unifying Taiwan.

How about Anyang (another ancient capital), Kashgar (symbol of Chinese defeat of the East Turkistan identity), Ili (another symbol of Chinese pacification of Xinjiang), Jiuquan (city great importance to the PLAAF, nuclear industry, and space industry)?

 

[DDG181]

How about Anyang (another ancient capital), Kashgar (symbol of Chinese defeat of the East Turkistan identity), Ili (another symbol of Chinese pacification of Xinjiang), Jiuquan (city great importance to the PLAAF, nuclear industry, and space industry)?

Anyang is already a 054A, Luoyang where currently an old 053H3 has a better chance.
Kashgar and Jiuquan are good candidates for 052DG or 054B.
Yli might have a chance for a 055 due to its similar status as Baoding.
Notice that cities like Urumqi are already sufficient for 055, but it got into a 052D too early.
Therefore a city / future city from XPCC might also apply, since XPCC is a provincial-level administration.

 

[by78]

Self-explanatory.

 

[zhangjim]

What an astonishing statement! Describing 055 as a new age dreadnought is a bit exaggerated for me.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Is it really suitable to compare with Japan's new warships? The new large Aegis ship of Japan is a very extreme design.

 

[DDG181]

What an astonishing statement! Describing 055 as a new age dreadnought is a bit exaggerated for me.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Is it really suitable to compare with Japan's new warships? The new large Aegis ship of Japan is a very extreme design.

055 is unparalleled, the Mk.41 on ASEV is too small to launch decent anti-ship missiles.
Missiles like Harpoon or BGM-109 are too slow, they are easy to intercept.
If talking in battleship language,
055 is the real Yamato with 112X 850mm naval guns.
ASEV is just a Yamato copy with 128X 650mm naval guns.

 

[ChongqingHotPot92]

055 is unparalleled, the Mk.41 on ASEV is too small to launch decent anti-ship missiles.
Missiles like Harpoon or BGM-109 are too slow, they are easy to intercept.
If talking in battleship language,
055 is the real Yamato with 112X 850mm naval guns.
ASEV is just a Yamato copy with 128X 650mm naval guns.
View attachment 118566

I think 055’s land-attack role is fulfilled by YJ-21, which can attack both land and ships like the DF-21/26, but with much shorter range. It is not that difficult for China to fill the CJ-10 into the PLAN’s universal VLS, but just like the BGM-109, CJ-10 is slow and vulnerable to interception. This, I hypothesise that future land strike missions by the PLAN would be fulfilled by hypersonic missiles instead of subsonic cruise missiles, unless if such subsonic cruise could be stealthier than JASSM while still be more affordable.

 

[Michaelsinodef]

What an astonishing statement! Describing 055 as a new age dreadnought is a bit exaggerated for me.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Is it really suitable to compare with Japan's new warships? The new large Aegis ship of Japan is a very extreme design.

I think the his core argument was:

What truly made the dreadnought usher in a new 'dreadnought era', was its big guns, in other words it's 'attack capabilities' were a step above other ships back then, and it led to other nations going for something similar (big guns to attack from a distance).

And his argument is, that it is kind of the same with 055 and its big VLS cells that can fire hypersonic missiles, and it has kinda become something that other nations now want (bigger VLS to fire hypersonic missiles).

 

[DDG181]

I think 055’s land-attack role is fulfilled by YJ-21, which can attack both land and ships like the DF-21/26, but with much shorter range. It is not that difficult for China to fill the CJ-10 into the PLAN’s universal VLS, but just like the BGM-109, CJ-10 is slow and vulnerable to interception. This, I hypothesise that future land strike missions by the PLAN would be fulfilled by hypersonic missiles instead of subsonic cruise missiles, unless if such subsonic cruise could be stealthier than JASSM while still be more affordable.

YJ-21 might be too expensive for land attack, it is used for decisive naval battle when destroying a US CVN or this ASEV outside the 1st island chain.

Since wiki's CJ-10 has range over 1500km long, it might be unnecessary to operate this missile on 055, as rocket force are able to fire them from the mainland.

Missles like CJ-10 or BGM-109 or any missiles under 1 mach are not suitable for anti-ship missions, as it might takes over 10 minutes to reach the ship and ship also maneuvers. But it might be decent for cheap-cost land attack, since the target is static and CIWS aren't installed everywhere.

But even so, up to today none of JMSDF vessels' Mk41 are able to launch such missiles. The development of Japan's hypersonic missile is also doubtful, it will remain a PPT status for a long time, since even US - its main technology supplyer - has troubles operating such weapons.

 

[ChongqingHotPot92]

YJ-21 might be too expensive for land attack, it is used for decisive naval battle when destroying a US CVN or this ASEV outside the 1st island chain.

Since wiki's CJ-10 has range over 1500km long, it might be unnecessary to operate this missile on 055, as rocket force are able to fire them from the mainland.

Missles like CJ-10 or BGM-109 or any missiles under 1 mach are not suitable for anti-ship missions, as it might takes over 10 minutes to reach the ship and ship also maneuvers. But it might be decent for cheap-cost land attack, since the target is static and CIWS aren't installed everywhere.

But even so, up to today none of JMSDF vessels' Mk41 are able to launch such missiles. The development of Japan's hypersonic missile is also doubtful, it will remain a PPT status for a long time, since even US - its main technology supplyer - has troubles operating such weapons.

The problem with CJ-10 is that it is unlike to penetrate a PAC-3 or S-400 network. In fact, even older Short-range SAMs would have no problems downing non-stealth subsonic cruise missiles, as we have seen in Ukraine. If there is one thing that the Ukraine War has shown us, it is that missiles like the BGM-109, CJ-10, Kh-101, etc. are simply fat juicy targets for SAMs. They reason why BGM-109s worked against Iraq in 1991/2003 and Serbia in 1999 was because NATO was able to conduct multiple SEAD operations alongside adversaries’ weak air defense systems.

 

[TK3600]

The problem with CJ-10 is that it is unlike to penetrate a PAC-3 or S-400 network. In fact, even older Short-range SAMs would have no problems downing non-stealth subsonic cruise missiles, as we have seen in Ukraine. If there is one thing that the Ukraine War has shown us, it is that missiles like the BGM-109, CJ-10, Kh-101, etc. are simply fat juicy targets for SAMs. They reason why BGM-109s worked against Iraq in 1991/2003 and Serbia in 1999 was because NATO was able to conduct multiple SEAD operations alongside adversaries’ weak air defense systems.

If Ukraine War taught us anything, that is cruise missile saturation strike makes quick work of good air defense networks. That said, land attack is very low priority of PLAN, so don't be expected if there is nothing geared for it. If there ever needs to ground strike saturation is more important.