055 Large Destroyer Thread II

[Andy1974]

Nah.

The SPY-3 panel on Zumwalt was moved up because having the bridge up high uses alot of internal space. Crew quarters are big.
In CW bridges are so high because of the infancy of panoramic digital electro-optics. So a wide window was to be preferred.
SPEIR and its equivalent permits multispectral viewing without having to use the Mk1 eyeball. Like how EO/IR turrets linked to HMCS helped A-10 and F-35 pilots. Or tankers you could say.
Realistically moving the mast up for a couple of metres increase in radar horizon is not worth the challenge of building one in the first place. The sensors on Zumwalt had a lot of problems related to maintenance. Food for though.
The primary driver is space usage reduction really. Maintenance-wise its much easier to have a high bridge as the crew gets constant access to the sensors than a low bridge.

We have seen a few articles suggesting that some issues have been solved with respect to interference, I think the masts on 054B could be a good example.

Personally I like the proposed design because it puts all the radars and electronics in one mast which sits on top of a platform, the bridge. I think from a construction, or even mass manufacturing point of view this could be a simplification and be a faster way to build, lower costs, as well as have a higher radar horizon for the mega S band radars.

A GT article recently speculated that the next actual 055, I.e the one under construction, would have a new type of weapon system, I hope we don’t have to wait to long to find out what it is!

 

[yeetmyboi]

We have seen a few articles suggesting that some issues have been solved with respect to interference, I think the masts on 054B could be a good example.

Should not be a debate imo. The PLAN got 20 years to fix whatever problem Zumwalt had.

Personally I like the proposed design because it puts all the radars and electronics in one mast which sits on top of a platform, the bridge. I think from a construction, or even mass manufacturing point of view this could e a simplification and be a faster way to build, lower costs, as well as have a higher radar horizon for the mega S band radars.

Not "personally" in any way.
This method of manufacturing is preferred by both the USN, PLAN and most Western navies. Bar Russia who is too bankrupted.
Lower cost is subjective. Steel masts are literally, steel masts. But simplicity, as in its design, yes cuz the intergrated ones get alot more space internally.
Simplicity as in regards to the whole ship is arguable tho, but that's a debate for another day.
Regardless the whole reason why USN didnt have composite masts on San Antonio Flight II, FFG-62 and AB Flight 3 is because the company that made them went bankrupt. So they couldnt made them anymore. Otherwise we would have seen an AB-Zumwalt hybrid rn.

 

[TK3600]

We have seen a few articles suggesting that some issues have been solved with respect to interference, I think the masts on 054B could be a good example.

Personally I like the proposed design because it puts all the radars and electronics in one mast which sits on top of a platform, the bridge. I think from a construction, or even mass manufacturing point of view this could be a simplification and be a faster way to build, lower costs, as well as have a higher radar horizon for the mega S band radars.

A GT article recently speculated that the next actual 055, I.e the one under construction, would have a new type of weapon system, I hope we don’t have to wait to long to find out what it is!

Seems a bit too early for a rail gun 055. Maybe a better HQ-10 system?

 

[Tam]

That's it? no interference or other technical advantage?

Having a better radar horizon is one but not all of it. Increased space Maintainability, since the entire deck can be dedicated to the back access of the radar's panels, giving you more than enough room to exchange broken modules with spare ones.

However it has its disdvantages such as a higher C/G which can potentially affect the ship's roll. To restore stability you might have to do things to the ship which may end up with the ship being a new class.

Another issue is the huge cooling systems used in the ship. The cooling systems, with refrigerant compressors and such, need to be located at the bottom of the ship due to its weight, with the circulation tubes headed up through the bridge and this would reduce the bridge space. Putting the radars below the bridge meant the shortest possible route between the circulation plumbing between the compressors and the arrays. The heat removed from the radars need to be exchanged with air and the heated air has to be released through the ship's exhausts to reduce thermal signature.

This might ultimately depend on how big and powerful the radars you want to put, and what they would require for cooling.

 

[snake65]

It wouldn't. It would be more like 16-18k tons.

Fan art of course. Called "National Missile Defence Ship"

Specs:

China's future sea-based anti-missile ship, a 20,000-ton national anti-missile defense ship. Power: 4 CGT30 30MW, each unit outputs 50,000 horsepower, all-electric recommended system. New 346PULS version 7*7 meter s-band phased array radar. Integrated RF system. 3 high-power diesel generator auxiliary engines. It is 203 meters long, 25 meters wide and has a draft of 8.5 meters. Equipped with an electromagnetic railgun. 2030 close-in anti-aircraft gun, with two Hongqi 10-18 anti-aircraft missiles on both sides. 2 Z20F anti-submarine aircraft + UAV drone

 

[Tam]

7m x 7m is a true king Kong sized phased array. The current arrays on the 052D is about 5.3m x 5.3m. Truly a fan ship, as an array that big comes with tremendous cost, weight, and cooling requirements which you have to thoroughly justify the mission for it. This needs to be an anti ballistic missile ship to be justify it.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

7m x 7m is a true king Kong sized phased array. The current arrays on the 052D is about 5.3m x 5.3m. Truly a fan ship, as an array that big comes with tremendous cost, weight, and cooling requirements which you have to thoroughly justify the mission for it. This needs to be an anti ballistic missile ship to be justify it.

What is the size of the current 346B arrays on the 055s?

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

(For note: SM = Supersonic missile, HM = Hypersonic missile, BM = Ballistic missile)

A GT article recently speculated that the next actual 055, I.e the one under construction, would have a new type of weapon system, I hope we don’t have to wait to long to find out what it is!

Seems a bit too early for a rail gun 055. Maybe a better HQ-10 system?

Publicly-available information on China's seaborne railgun development at present listed the capability of hitting a sea-based target from ~200 kilometers away. However, ~200 kilometers of strike range is way lower than the effective strike ranges of AShMs (YJ-12, YJ-18, YJ-21) and LAtMs (CJ-10) in the current PLAN arsenal.

Thus, unless/until China has managed to develop a shipborne railgun that can effectively intercept AShSMs, AShBMs and AShHMs, and/or China has managed to develop a shipborne railgun capable of hitting mobile land/sea-based targets in the high-100s or low-1000s of kilometers away, then I don't really see any point to put a railgun on any PLAN warships.

In the meantime, there are indeed more viable new type/next-gen weapon systems for successors to the current 055 DDGs that are more viable based on information which we do know thus far:
1. Full-suite shipborne ABM and AHM capabilities, armed with HQ-26, i.e. SM-3-equivalent (and perhaps HHQ-9C(?), potential SM-6(?)-equivalent); and/or
2. Electromagnetic UVLS cells for launching AShMs, LAtMs and SAMs; and/or
3. Large-diameter LVLS cells for hosting bigger missiles and multi-packing smaller missiles; and/or
4. Coilgun launchers for launching torpedoes; and/or
5. Laser-based DEW for VSHORAD to fill the coverage gap between HHQ-10 and Type 1130 CIWS.

 

[Andy1974]

Having a better radar horizon is one but not all of it. Increased space Maintainability, since the entire deck can be dedicated to the back access of the radar's panels, giving you more than enough room to exchange broken modules with spare ones.

However it has its disdvantages such as a higher C/G which can potentially affect the ship's roll. To restore stability you might have to do things to the ship which may end up with the ship being a new class.

Another issue is the huge cooling systems used in the ship. The cooling systems, with refrigerant compressors and such, need to be located at the bottom of the ship due to its weight, with the circulation tubes headed up through the bridge and this would reduce the bridge space. Putting the radars below the bridge meant the shortest possible route between the circulation plumbing between the compressors and the arrays. The heat removed from the radars need to be exchanged with air and the heated air has to be released through the ship's exhausts to reduce thermal signature.

This might ultimately depend on how big and powerful the radars you want to put, and what they would require for cooling.

What do you think about this @Tam? It’s a GaN module, with Aluminum added.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

If true, this could mean much lower cooling requirements…

the new chip can stay at a temperature far below the safety threshold, even when working at maximum power

…
@ACuriousPLAFan, I would love to see this as the new weapon on the next 055..

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

..can generate pulse electromagnetic signals as powerful as 30 megawatts – enough to wreck the electrics of any warship in existence.

It’s low power too.

It is also surprisingly efficient, according to the researchers. Even at full capacity, the radar would only impose a constant load of 235 kilowatts on the ship’s power supply network

 

[yeetmyboi]

Thus, unless/until China has managed to develop a shipborne railgun that can effectively intercept AShSMs, AShBMs and AShHMs, and/or China has managed to develop a shipborne railgun capable of hitting mobile land/sea-based targets in the high-100s or low-1000s of kilometers away, then I don't really see any point to put a railgun on any PLAN warships.

H/PJ-38 is a large 130mm gun with deep hull penetration yet the PLAN still put it onto their 055.
High-capcity electric generators, maybe even nuclear, coupled to EM guns would mean removal of gun propellant.
Which is one of the most dangerous type of munitions onboard, since propellants aren't capable of reaching the same level of IM as standard explosives.
A notional 130mm railgun that has the same footprint of the H/PJ-38 but uses compact guided KE interceptors could provide a low-medium level air defense/surface strike capability. GMLRS-AW demonstrated the feasibility of pure-KE warheads for surface strike already. KE interceptors also means HTK which means 1-shot kill burst. So lets say 600 stowed kills on a single gun mount vs maybe 100-esqe of quadpacks in VLS. That's a whole world of difference right there. Unless you jump to minature multi-pack missiles or staggered multi-layer magazines.
Also KE rounds are considerable easier to replenish than entire VLS rounds. Plus, theyre much cheaper.