If they aren't that well built how come they last that long . Isn't that contradictory. It show your bias
No it's not bias or contradiction, it just shows what PLAN is willing to put up to, and how much they probably suffer for it in maintenance costs. The pre-1990s build quality isn't good, and it is something
This is the a picture I took of Yingtang FFG in Qingdao, though the ship rotted a bit since it turned into museum ship, but you can tell it's build quality isn't too good to begin with. It is constructed at the height of the Cultural revolution in 1970, probably why it retires in 1992, with far shorter service life than those commissioned just 5 or 6 years later. However, it is one of ships in PLAN with actual . Perhaps this also though, that PLAN treats it's ship procurements as 30+ year assets, if it retires before that, some is wrong with it. They will not (and sometimes ).
Btw, the ship on the far side is Anshan DD, it was commissioned in 1954 and only decommissioned in 1992... The same time as Yintan, which is built 16 years later. And Fit and Finish wise, Anshan actually looked better. If you go to Qingdao, I highly recommend you to visit this place.
You can a similar museum ship for 037 here
and recent decommissioned Jianghu don't look much better
Now compare that with 053G2, built in 1991
The ship we visited was a missile-launching frigate, the Anqing which entered service in December 1991. It was so clean and spick-and-span that we could have eaten off the floor. The brass had been polished to within an inch of its life. We were told it spent 180 days at sea but Western military observers who've also seen the ship say that, given its extremely good state, that is impossible. “This ship is a showcase,” they told me.
Last edited: