056 class FFL/corvette

Iron Man said:

The more stuff you put on a 056A successor, the more it starts looking (and costing) like a 054A. Of the 3 upgrades you mentioned the hangar is the only reasonable one, and one that should have already been part of the original design rather than part of some upgrade.

Click to expand...

Well the main difference between the Type 54A and the Type 56A is that the 54A is expected to perform air defence for other ships whilst the Type 56A is expected to look to its own only. A better radar and self defense suit that does not consist of anything more than a HQQ-10 or CIWS would not change anything drastically.
But other than that, one can argue that the Type 54A's duties largely overlaps with those of the Type 56A (ASW, patrols, etc,etc)

Viktor Jav said:

Well the main difference between the Type 54A and the Type 56A is that the 54A is expected to perform air defence for other ships whilst the Type 56A is expected to look to its own only. A better radar and self defense suit that does not consist of anything more than a HQQ-10 or CIWS would not change anything drastically.
But other than that, one can argue that the Type 54A's duties largely overlaps with those of the Type 56A (ASW, patrols, etc,etc)

Click to expand...

Yes, it actually would change things drastically, namely the cost would skyrocket. Adding a hangar is just metal. Helicopters are not intrinsic to the ship and thus have their own value. Adding a new radar and new weapons however would most definitely significantly increase the cost of a corvette. On such a small ship it is almost certain that the vast majority of the cost is in the form of electronics and weapons, not in the hull or construction costs. You supe it up with a new AESA and fancier weapons and you could easily more than double or triple the cost of the corvette instantly. And as you admit to, the more stuff you put on a 056A successor, the more it looks like a 054A, in which the case the more reason to just build another 054A instead of sinking useless R&D money into a new super-corvette design.

Viktor Jav said:

If the PLAN wants to go with the "good enough" concept, then maybe the Type 56A would be suitable, but considering the fact that what it considers to be "good enough" still somewhat dated, then one really must wonder whether its money can be better spent on making the Typ56A better than just its current iteration of a 1990s boat with a radar/sensor suit that is better stored in a museum.

Click to expand...

The baseline 056 is absolutely overkill for its role as 037 replacement. Instead of shitting on it, you should be astounded that it's so well-armed. The 056A is an ASW-focused vessel meant to free up 054A from littoral ASW duties and in that role, it performs far better than any of the Russian corvettes. The old Type 206 TAS already has a 60km range so imagine what the new Type 311 TAS and new VDS on the 056As can achieve. You cannot ask for more from a vessel of that size and cost. Any more and you might as well get a 054A instead.

The Type 22 FAC is not really comparable to the Steregushchy class, as the capability for both ships are really different. The Type 22 was built with one purpose in mind only, which is to attack surface ships. The Steregushchy class is built with also ASW and littoral patrol in mind.

Click to expand...

The PLAN has their own version of the Steregushchiy; it's called the 054A, and it is superior in every metric important to the PLAN. The other Russian corvettes like the Buyan whose land-attack capabilities you so love is exactly like the Type 22 in that it is a single-purpose design, lacking loitering and multi-role potential, exactly the reasons that led to the Type 22's sidelining within the PLAN. If you want the PLAN to strip out everything the 056 is good at in favour of land-attack, you're essentially asking them to regress back to the early-2000s.

Larger crew quarters is not going to solve the fatigue problem, not only it makes the ship even more redundant by having 2 persons for a job, which would cut into the pool of recruits. It would also mean alot of useless people consuming vital provisions on board the ship when not working and all the while enduring the hard sea environment, hardly a worth the point of a vessel of increased sizes. Only a very foolish navy would even consider such a prospect. Not to mention the extra strain it puts on the hardware as well.

Click to expand...

Do you not know what rotations mean? One set of crew sleeps, one is on rest, and the other works. Only a foolish navy would expect a crew to function effectively without being relieved by other sailors.

As for the issue of the anti ship missile, bringing up the map shows that China shows that it has a considerably dragged coastline with all the nooks and cranny in which a small sized ship can hide in. And searching for a corvette among the coastline is much harder than picking out a fighter from the sky with all the radar refraction going on.

Click to expand...

You mustn't be keeping up with the latest footage of the PLANAF's routine training, which involves low-altitude strikes by JH-7As. A ships has no advantage over planes when it comes to being a missile truck as a plane, when sea-skimming, essentially turns into a boat that travels at 800km/h. I'd like to see the Buyan sail at 800km/h.

Of course in the prospect of a tripwire, the PLAN's best hope would be if a 3rd rate nation like Vietnam tries something funny. But what if the opposing force is a nation like Japan, or worse the US strikes the first blow. No amount of justification can justify the fact that if the Type 56A was deployed en masses during the first few hours, they are gonna be wrecked. And if even they are not, it might see little active service beyond submarine picket on the coast line which in light of China's increasingly maturing underwater hearing complex really does calls into question the Type 56A's current existence. I never did understand why is it so justifiable to send good men and women to a mission on which they are guaranteed to meet near certain death, just because the US does it does not mean that China has to jump on the bandwagon without a thought.

Click to expand...

What are you even concerned about? How is Japan going to destroy 056s en masse when they are mostly in port and only some of them are on patrol at any given time? Once war starts, no 056 will be deployed alone but will be consolidated into groups, possibly led by a 054A as patrol flotilla leader and have constant PLANAF cover.

If Japan tries a sneak attack (their standard MO), then bad luck to the few 056s on patrol right now, they're gone, RIP. But most of the fleet will remain intact as they're not on patrol at this very moment.

In the end of all things, China might not ever build a Buyan or Steregushchy class of corvette true. But that does not mean that the Type 56A can be expected to serve in its current form for the next 30 years or so regardless of the newness of the hulls. My point was always this

1) That the Type 56A should be brought up with the current times and possibly the future.
2) That the PLAN can also refer to how other nations build their corvettes to get a better understanding of what they would want of their next generation frigates, while it was safe to do things conventionally in the past. The PLAN cannot expect to adopt a "wait and see" approach to future ship building.

Even if removing the land attack option from the list, there is a whole lot of improvement that the Type 56A could have or its next successor. That includes a better radar, better self-defense options than just a 8 cell launcher and finally a hangar for a helo or UAV.

Click to expand...

The current air-defence suite is sufficient for anything that a 056 can be expected to face within the next decade. Unless Japan starts fielding hypersonic AShMs, the HQ-10 is more than good enough for self-defence against any sea-skimmers that might sneak through the air-defence umbrella. Long-range air-defence will be provided by larger vessels within the fleet as well as PLANAF and PLAAF aircraft on CAP. Remember, the 056 will not be deployed alone during a war. It will be protected within a fleet like the Liaoning is. I don't see you demanding the Liaoning be equipped with a full battery of HQ-16s and HQ-9s because you understand that's not the Liaoning's job, so why can't you understand that long-range air-defence is not the 056's job?

And since when is a boat comparable to a soldier there buddy ? As far as I am concerned I don't see a boat with lungs, heart and all the like. But if you must make that comparison then the Type 56A is more like a 1970's Vietnam War soldier in terms of armament whereas the majority of world is currently more like the first Iraqi War level.
This is as far away from a dick comparison contest as it can be, rather it is looking at the current situation and the future prospects and seeing what the Type 56A would be facing. And one has to draw a 5 outta 10 score card from that observation, good enough for now but not for the future.

Click to expand...

I give the vanilla 056 a 9/10 and the 056A a 10/10 for armament. The 056 would be expected to face whatever the 037s were expected to face, which is mostly coast guard vessels of countries that push their luck with Chinese fishermen and their YJ-83s are amazing in that role. In close range, the 76mm might be lacking in first-shot kill probability but given its fast-firing nature, I'm sure it wouldn't be that big of a problem.

The 056A would be expected to face Soryus and Kilos, and its Type 311 TAS, VDS, and ASROC perform admirably to that end. As admirably as the PLAN could possibly allow since those are literally the newest and most advanced ASW equipment developed by the PLAN. Occasionally, if the 052Ds and 054As slip up, they would be expected to intercept the odd HF-3 or Kalibr that manages to get through the defence screen and its HQ-10 is more than good enough for that. See for yourself below. If China's enemies develop next-gen missiles like hypersonic sea-skimmers, I'm sure the PLAN will introduce an HQ-10A upgrade or something.



I don't know why you're complaining about the 056. The vanilla version is literally a 037 on steroids and the ASW version is already equipped with the most advanced equipment the PLAN has at their disposal. There's nothing more you can ask from a 1,400t ship that only costs 700 million yuan and is not venturing beyond 200nm of the Chinese coastline.

Iron Man said:

Yes, it actually would change things drastically, namely the cost would skyrocket. Adding a hangar is just metal. Helicopters are not intrinsic to the ship and thus have their own value. Adding a new radar and new weapons however would most definitely significantly increase the cost of a corvette. On such a small ship it is almost certain that the vast majority of the cost is in the form of electronics and weapons, not in the hull or construction costs. You supe it up with a new AESA and fancier weapons and you could easily more than double or triple the cost of the corvette instantly. And as you admit to, the more stuff you put on a 056A successor, the more it looks like a 054A, in which the case the more reason to just build another 054A instead of sinking useless R&D money into a new super-corvette design.

Click to expand...

And we aren't talking about putting an AESA on the type 56A now are we ? Just because the Type 56A is in need of a upgrade does not mean that we must pull out the very best for it. Most of the corvettes out there have sensors and weapons that are not the top of the line and definitely is not gold plated, yet they are considerably better then what the Type 56A has.
There is no hard evidence that a new corvette design must cost more then a current Type 54A. And even if it does, it does not mean that it should be shelved away. If penny pinching was all so important, maybe the PLAN should have just stick with the Type 037 corvette instead. Now I am all for cost saving an the such, but there is a time whereby such savings has to be viewed as somewhat ludicrous. If the PLAN is keen on having the Type 65A as a main stream patrol vessel for the foreseeable future, then it should invest in them accordingly.

jobjed said:

The baseline 056 is absolutely overkill for its role as 037 replacement. Instead of shitting on it, you should be astounded that it's so well-armed. The 056A is an ASW-focused vessel meant to free up 054A from littoral ASW duties and in that role, it performs far better than any of the Russian corvettes. The old Type 206 TAS already has a 60km range so imagine what the new Type 311 TAS and new VDS on the 056As can achieve. You cannot ask for more from a vessel of that size and cost. Any more and you might as well get a 054A instead.



The PLAN has their own version of the Steregushchiy; it's called the 054A, and it is superior in every metric important to the PLAN. The other Russian corvettes like the Buyan whose land-attack capabilities you so love is exactly like the Type 22 in that it is a single-purpose design, lacking loitering and multi-role potential, exactly the reasons that led to the Type 22's sidelining within the PLAN. If you want the PLAN to strip out everything the 056 is good at in favour of land-attack, you're essentially asking them to regress back to the early-2000s.



Do you not know what rotations mean? One set of crew sleeps, one is on rest, and the other works. Only a foolish navy would expect a crew to function effectively without being relieved by other sailors.



You mustn't be keeping up with the latest footage of the PLANAF's routine training, which involves low-altitude strikes by JH-7As. A ships has no advantage over planes when it comes to being a missile truck as a plane, when sea-skimming, essentially turns into a boat that travels at 800km/h. I'd like to see the Buyan sail at 800km/h.



What are you even concerned about? How is Japan going to destroy 056s en masse when they are mostly in port and only some of them are on patrol at any given time? Once war starts, no 056 will be deployed alone but will be consolidated into groups, possibly led by a 054A as patrol flotilla leader and have constant PLANAF cover.

If Japan tries a sneak attack (their standard MO), then bad luck to the few 056s on patrol right now, they're gone, RIP. But most of the fleet will remain intact as they're not on patrol at this very moment.



The current air-defence suite is sufficient for anything that a 056 can be expected to face within the next decade. Unless Japan starts fielding hypersonic AShMs, the HQ-10 is more than good enough for self-defence against any sea-skimmers that might sneak through the air-defence umbrella. Long-range air-defence will be provided by larger vessels within the fleet as well as PLANAF and PLAAF aircraft on CAP. Remember, the 056 will not be deployed alone during a war. It will be protected within a fleet like the Liaoning is. I don't see you demanding the Liaoning be equipped with a full battery of HQ-16s and HQ-9s because you understand that's not the Liaoning's job, so why can't you understand that long-range air-defence is not the 056's job?

I give the vanilla 056 a 9/10 and the 056A a 10/10 for armament. The 056 would be expected to face whatever the 037s were expected to face, which is mostly coast guard vessels of countries that push their luck with Chinese fishermen and their YJ-83s are amazing in that role. In close range, the 76mm might be lacking in first-shot kill probability but given its fast-firing nature, I'm sure it wouldn't be that big of a problem.

The 056A would be expected to face Soryus and Kilos, and its Type 311 TAS, VDS, and ASROC perform admirably to that end. As admirably as the PLAN could possibly allow since those are literally the newest and most advanced ASW equipment developed by the PLAN. Occasionally, if the 052Ds and 054As slip up, they would be expected to intercept the odd HF-3 or Kalibr that manages to get through the defence screen and its HQ-10 is more than good enough for that. See for yourself below. If China's enemies develop next-gen missiles like hypersonic sea-skimmers, I'm sure the PLAN will introduce an HQ-10A upgrade or something.

I don't know why you're complaining about the 056. The vanilla version is literally a 037 on steroids and the ASW version is already equipped with the most advanced equipment the PLAN has at their disposal. There's nothing more you can ask from a 1,400t ship that only costs 700 million yuan and is not venturing beyond 200nm of the Chinese coastline.

Click to expand...

Well forgive me if I don't share your boundless optimism on the matter, but it is particularly hard to be astounded by a ship that only just cut it for what is passable for current mainstream corvette designs, and even then has the draw back of using sensors that are almost at the end of their usefulness in this time period.
And to be frank it is not challenging for the Type 56A to eclipse the Type 037 design, which might not look out of place in a WW2 naval battle.
I would say it is you who does not have a clear understanding of how you are advocating an extra crew to solve the crew fatigue problem. Every single modern navy nowadays has on every ship a crew rotation already. But that does not remove the fact that these crews are still deployed at sea in cramped quarters and are expected to be up at the moments notice. If a navy can have that many sailors to lavish on a single ship, those sailors can be put to better use on another ship to allow the existing ship to return to port for a full R&R and service. Putting so many men on a single ship also means that the men who are resting and not working would be consuming vital provisions, hardly better trade off, plus there is also the maintenance of the ship to be considered. It did be far more preferable to just replace the crew at port or by helo at sea.
Having more crew members on board will not solve the problems the US 7th fleet is facing if they are all expected to live aboard for the entire duration of their deployment. What they need is more ships.

And in the same breath I did like to see the JH-7A hugs the ground like a cruise missile can which is 10-20 meters at minimum. While the Buyan may not be able to move at 800km/h, with 1500km range cruise missiles that flies at 0.9 mach speed it won't have to. A ship does have certain advantages over a fighters, mainly longer loiter time and the ability to hug the coastline until otherwise.

And Japan is actually developing hypersonic missiles, which is the XASM-3 which is progressing quite smoothly.

I never stated that the Type 56A must perform long range air defense duties with HQ-16 missiles (and I don't know how you ever got that crazy thought from), but it is clear that if the Type 56A expected to serve beyond the next decade or so, it will be needing more than just a 8 cell HHQ-10 and the Type360 radar.

The Kilos, Soryus and the other subs that the Type 56A would be facing are also armed with some pretty capable anti ship missiles as well. And they are also expected to face off with other corvettes from other nations that are no less capable that it is and not just coast guard vessels.

If you think that I am really having it in for the Type 56A then that is your problem. For my opinion, the Type 56A is good, but it is certainly going to be needing some touch ups if it is to remain relevant in the brewing Asian arms race.

@Viktor Jav

with your propose improvements on 056/A .. do you think PLAN could have 80 of them? good luck with that

you forget something important .... MONEY and BUDGET! ... that is always a limiting factor no matter how rich you are!

if PLAN had extra $50B laying around to spend freely for anything fancy and flash ... they might do what you have been proposing, unfortunately it is not the case and will never be

Also .... do you think PLAN didn't know what they were doing? and you knew better? dude .. good luck with that

Viktor Jav said:

And we aren't talking about putting an AESA on the type 56A now are we ? Just because the Type 56A is in need of a upgrade does not mean that we must pull out the very best for it. Most of the corvettes out there have sensors and weapons that are not the top of the line and definitely is not gold plated, yet they are considerably better then what the Type 56A has.

Click to expand...

That's because they're supposed to be frigates. Stop thinking of them as well-armed corvettes and start thinking of them as underweight frigates. If Russia and Israel could build 3000-4000t hulls cheaply, they would have. But they can't so they're relegating themselves to corvette-sized hulls.

The 056 is a light frigate in a light frigate hull. The Sa'ar V and Russian corvettes are full-blown frigates packed into a corvette's hull with compromises in so many critical areas that no other navy deems it acceptable to do what they did.

There is no hard evidence that a new corvette design must cost more then a current Type 54A. And even if it does, it does not mean that it should be shelved away. If penny pinching was all so important, maybe the PLAN should have just stick with the Type 037 corvette instead. Now I am all for cost saving an the such, but there is a time whereby such savings has to be viewed as somewhat ludicrous. If the PLAN is keen on having the Type 65A as a main stream patrol vessel for the foreseeable future, then it should invest in them accordingly.

Click to expand...

If the next-gen light frigate costs more than a full-size frigate, the naval architect responsible needs to be fired and forced to redo a course on cost-benefit analysis.

There's nothing more the PLAN can shove inside the 056 without compromising other areas. The Russians and Israelis are willing to compromise, the PLAN is not. It's that simple.

Well forgive me if I don't share your boundless optimism on the matter, but it is particularly hard to be astounded by a ship that only just cut it for what is passable for current mainstream corvette designs, and even then has the draw back of using sensors that are almost at the end of their usefulness in this time period.
And to be frank it is not challenging for the Type 56A to eclipse the Type 037 design, which might not look out of place in a WW2 naval battle.

Click to expand...

Most of what you think are current mainstream corvette designs are actually downsized frigates. I've told you this already, multiple times. Those corvettes are not "good" corvettes, they're substandard frigates. If Russia could build frigates properly, they would much rather have those than the compromised cramped "corvettes' they currently have.

I would say it is you who does not have a clear understanding of how you are advocating an extra crew to solve the crew fatigue problem. Every single modern navy nowadays has on every ship a crew rotation already. But that does not remove the fact that these crews are still deployed at sea in cramped quarters and are expected to be up at the moments notice. If a navy can have that many sailors to lavish on a single ship, those sailors can be put to better use on another ship to allow the existing ship to return to port for a full R&R and service. Putting so many men on a single ship also means that the men who are resting and not working would be consuming vital provisions, hardly better trade off, plus there is also the maintenance of the ship to be considered. It did be far more preferable to just replace the crew at port or by helo at sea.
Having more crew members on board will not solve the problems the US 7th fleet is facing if they are all expected to live aboard for the entire duration of their deployment. What they need is more ships.

Click to expand...

Why don't you read about the of USN 7th Fleet sailors yourself? Here, let me quote it for you: "Sailors in Mims’s engineering department reported 'extreme work hours,' with one telling investigators they slept about three hours a night."

How do you solve sleep deprivation on a ship? You let the sailors go to sleep, which means you need other sailors to replace them, which means you need more bunks for those other sailors, which means your ship cannot be corvette-sized if you want a frigate's weapons suite, unless you are willing to compromise your crew's comfort and combat effectiveness by forcing them to be awake for 21 hours a day.

And in the same breath I did like to see the JH-7A hugs the ground like a cruise missile can which is 10-20 meters at minimum. While the Buyan may not be able to move at 800km/h, with 1500km range cruise missiles that flies at 0.9 mach speed it won't have to. A ship does have certain advantages over a fighters, mainly longer loiter time and the ability to hug the coastline until otherwise.

Click to expand...

What does the flight altitude of JH-7s have to do with your argument? How are they even related to each other?

I also don't follow your logic with the Buyan. Why do you think China needs the Buyan again? They have DF-15Bs and DF-16s, and JH-7As with YJ-83Ks, YJ-91s, and YJ-12s. What use could China possibly have for a non-versatile and loitering-incapable missile truck? What does a "1500km range cruise missile with Mach 0.9 speed" have to do with whether or not China should introduce their version of a Buyan?

And Japan is actually developing hypersonic missiles, which is the XASM-3 which is progressing quite smoothly.

Click to expand...

That's supersonic. And they're late. Russia and China already had air-launched supersonic AShMs decades ago with the Kh-31 and YJ-12. Get back to me when it becomes hypersonic.

I never stated that the Type 56A must perform long range air defense duties with HQ-16 missiles (and I don't know how you ever got that crazy thought from), but it is clear that if the Type 56A expected to serve beyond the next decade or so, it will be needing more than just a 8 cell HHQ-10 and the Type360 radar.

Click to expand...

You implied the 056 should possess additional capabilities even though that's not their job. That's exactly like forcing them to possess HQ-16s for air-defence when their job isn't air-defence.

They'll get an 8-cell HQ-10A when the time for upgrades come. That's sufficient for self-defence which is the only thing they need during a war as medium to long-range air-defence will be handled by 054As, 052Ds and 055s.

The Kilos, Soryus and the other subs that the Type 56A would be facing are also armed with some pretty capable anti ship missiles as well. And they are also expected to face off with other corvettes from other nations that are no less capable that it is and not just coast guard vessels.

If you think that I am really having it in for the Type 56A then that is your problem. For my opinion, the Type 56A is good, but it is certainly going to be needing some touch ups if it is to remain relevant in the brewing Asian arms race.

Click to expand...

The Kilos and Soryus would have a hard time penetrating the 056's defences given the advanced capabilities of the HQ-10. They also won't be alive for long after the 056A rams an ASROC up their behind.

And no, 056s will not be expected to face "corvettes" (not real corvettes but undersized frigates) from other countries as that's the 054A and 052D's job. If the 056s find themselves in the unlikely situation where they need to take on an enemy pseudo-frigate, their YJ-83Ks are decent enough and their HQ-10s will hold off anything the enemy can throw at them. Also, 056s will not be deployed alone in a war, they will be in groups so it won't just be one 8-cell HQ-10 but multiple sets.

Just for clarity's sake, why don't you list the extra capabilities that you want the PLAN to shove inside the 056 hull? Here, let me start if off for you:

1. Land-attack cruise missile launch capability
2. ???

Please continue.

@Viktor Jav

Just a few points to add

There is no need for the Type-56 to have a VLS for land attack cruise missiles like the CJ-10 or Tomahawk. These missiles have a range of 1500km, so $1M trucks are way cheaper than the $100M Type-56 corvette, and those trucks are way more survivable than an easily identified ship.

As for your criticisms of the Type-56, note that it is expected to operate with other vessels like the Type-54 and also within 200nm of China's coastline, which is well within range of land-based AWACs, fighters, ASW aircraft and truck-launched missiles.

The land-based assets provide better cost and capability effectiveness in terms of air defence/superiority and anti-surface warfare. Up-arming the Type-56 merely treats the symptom of losing air and maritime superiority within 200nm of China's coast, rather than addressing the root cause.

But that still leaves ASW work, where the Type-56 will be accompanied by another Type-56 or Type-54. So the Type-56 becomes a cheap expendable sensor node or conducts dangerous close-in work against a submarine. And that submarine would be loathe to give away its position by firing against a Type-56 Corvette , whereas a Type-54 Frigate would be deemed worthwhile to attack.

Also, am I correct in thinking that the cost for latest Type-54A Frigate is only $240M?

I am on the side that the 056 needs to be upgraded a little bit, using the P18 as a base. That's not going to much, if Nigeria can afford surely China can. The P18 only raises displacement up to 1800 ton displacement (the Pattani class weighs around 1440 tons).

I don't see the need of adding U-VLS, which may raise the ship displacement. U-VLS is too big for Yu-8 ASROCs. That's like a size medium person trying to fit extra large pants. The new Russian corvettes, which I am quite impressed with, doesn't also seem to have any ASROCs between the Reduts and the Kalibrs. If you want to use VLS, its better to use the H/AJK-16 from the Type 054, though solely for the use of Yu-8 only, as the corvette won't be shooting HQ-16s. Probably only for 8 cels. But if I want to have eight Yu-8s, I might as well go for the P18 configuration, rather than redesign the corvette for H/AJK-16. The P18 won't require new design and research, its been made and proven.



Even without XASM-3, Type 056s already face supersonic missile threats, namely from Taiwan with its Hsiung Feng III missile, which is also fitted on their frigates and their new stealthy corvettes which is more FAC to me.

Viktor Jav said:

And we aren't talking about putting an AESA on the type 56A now are we ? Just because the Type 56A is in need of a upgrade does not mean that we must pull out the very best for it. Most of the corvettes out there have sensors and weapons that are not the top of the line and definitely is not gold plated, yet they are considerably better then what the Type 56A has.
There is no hard evidence that a new corvette design must cost more then a current Type 54A. And even if it does, it does not mean that it should be shelved away. If penny pinching was all so important, maybe the PLAN should have just stick with the Type 037 corvette instead. Now I am all for cost saving an the such, but there is a time whereby such savings has to be viewed as somewhat ludicrous. If the PLAN is keen on having the Type 65A as a main stream patrol vessel for the foreseeable future, then it should invest in them accordingly.

Click to expand...

I think turning a corvette into a frigate and still calling it a corvette is what's ludicrous.

If not an AESA, what radar are you thinking of? Top Plate? Why would the 056A successor even need such a radar? It has no weapons capable of needing the range or resolution provided by such a radar. And if you stick better weapons onto this hypercorvette that would need a Top Plate, you would also need to include the VL modules and FCRs for those weapons (and of course the extra space/weight), and instantly you have a ridiculous steroid-injected corvette that has absolutely no place in a navy that is already turning out 054As like pencils in a pencil factory. As far as I can tell you have made no tactical or strategic case for such a large corvette design that fits into the PLAN's current fleet structure. Again, for a small warship the relative cost burdens come mostly from the weapons and sensors; upgrading from an HHQ-10 launcher and a Type 360 air/surface search radar into essentially anything else will totally wreck any cost benefit that a small corvette design confers. I'm not talking about "penny-pinching" (as I have already been advocating a slightly larger 056 design that incorporates a hangar). This is not penny-pinching, this is just expressing some common sense about the total lack of need to turn the 056A into a 054A.

Is that really a Type 360 radar on top of the Type 056? The entire Type 36X family of radars look similar from a distance with the rotating curved eye shaped array, but the frequencies they use vary widely: Type 360, S band; Type 362, X band; Type 363, S band; Type 364, C band.