056 class FFL/corvette

hmmwv said:

Easy, because our discussion about 052C was about whether they can engineer a second hangar from the current hull, in this case I think an A variant 056 will certainly have larger displacement (longer hull) so equipment can be rearranged.

Click to expand...

This is essentially a deus ex machina type of answer, at least as far as us civilian fan-types are concerned. If you lengthen the hull enough you could hypothesize almost anything to fit in to that ship. I'm sure if you stretch the ship out like a stretched Hummer limo you could fit a hangar in there. Hell, you could stretch it out enough to fit 10 hangars front to back, each with its own helipad. Before wolfie chimes in and accuses me of hyperbole again, the point is, how do you know how much stretching this design can take? All I can say is that looking at its current design and displacement, I'd rate the odds of it being able to accommodate a hangar into its design as slightly worse than the odds of me being able to score with Kate Upton. Whether its powerplant and structure can accommodate the increased displacement necessary to add a hangar or even how much more displacement would be required to add a hangar, are two brand new variables to which neither you nor I have the answer to or could even reasonably guess at. And since this is the case, saying that a hangar could be shoehorned in if you stretch the design out doesn't provide any reasonable or verifiable answers to debate with and raises more questions that nobody can answer. And yes, I know the Flight IIA Arleigh Burkes were stretched out to add the hangars, but presumably the designers could answers the questions of whether and how much (and we are talking about a 9,000ton ship versus a 1,000ton ship). Can YOU answer these questions?

Mysterre said:

You clearly did not read his post nor mine clearly. When HE said "impractical" he meant "not feasible" because he started describing physical dimensions. How hard is that to understand, seriously?

Click to expand...

You're telling us what "he" meant. Why not let him say what he meant...and then when he does, take it at face value. Most people will tell you what they think. You may not agree with them and that is fine...in fact its a good thing for discussion boards like this. But when you suppose to know what another person means to the point of changing their terminology...well, IMHO, that's a bridge too far.

But that's just my opinion...for you at this point, it's probably worth exactly what you paid for it.

As to what is actually on the 056 and what they will use in operations, yet to be definitively determined. It's still dockside and outfitting for pity's sake.

Mysterre said:

...

Click to expand...

When I read your first reply, my experience and instincts all told me it was pointless trying to have a discussion with you. I have tried to give you a second chance, but thus far everything you have said to myself and everyone else who have replied to you have only re-enforced my initial appraisal of you.

I am done wasting time trying to have a discussion with someone who only listens enough to parrot words back to me.

Jeff Head said:

You're telling us what "he" meant. Why not let him say what he meant...and then when he does, take it at face value.

Click to expand...

He did say what he meant. That's what I've been telling you this whole time. You just didn't bother to read it carefully enough

plawolf said:

I am done having my senseless rationalizations get taken apart piece by piece with no good response for any of them.

Click to expand...

Fixed it for you.

---------- Post added at 09:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:54 AM ----------

Methinks I spy a couple TAS lines coming out the back of the 056.

Maybe A.Man can definitively confirm beyond a shadow of a doubt how wrong I've been this whole time.

Mysterre said:

He did say what he meant. That's what I've been telling you this whole time. You just didn't bother to read it carefully enough

Click to expand...

Oh...so now you question my "reading comrehension" because I dared question your ability to "channel" someone else's intent where "impratical" must become "unfeasible" in your mind...and simply asked you to ask the other person what they meant straight-up and give them a chance to explain.

Fine. No sense in any further dialog between us. Anyone trying to give you any advise or even a gentle suggestion becomes the enemy in your world. Well, here's one last little suggestion...unless you grow out of this method of engaging people and show others some degree of respect, even if you disagree with them, soon you'll be talking into a circular echo chamber all by yourself because know one is going to want to have a conversation with you.

No disrespect intended, but based on the history so far, my guess is you'll simply have another, condescending, know-it-all retort...though I hope you prove me wrong. But if not, have fun in there. If you get tired of it, come on out anytime and have a reasoned discussion...the rest of us will still be here.

Jeff Head said:

Oh...so now you question my "reading comrehension" because I dared question your ability to "channel" someone else's intent where "impratical" must become "unfeasible" in your mind...and simply asked you to ask the other person what they meant straight-up and give them a chance to explain.

Fine. No sense in any further dialog between us. Anyone trying to give you any advise or even a gentle suggestion becomes the enemy in your world. Well, here's one last little suggestion...unless you grow out of this method of engaging people and show others some degree of respect, even if you disagree with them, soon you'll be talking into a circular echo chamber all by yourself because know one is going to want to have a conversation with you.

My guess is you'll simply have another, condescending, know-it-all retort...though I hope you prove me wrong. But if not, have fun in there. If you get tired of arguing with yourself, come on out and have a reasoned discussion ...the rest of us will still be here.

Click to expand...

umadbro?

Let me help you be unmad:

joshuatree said:

But I don't believe modifications to the 056 hull is as impractical the way Mysterre believes. The upgrade pics shown for the Luhu clearly demonstrate adding a TAS isn't that hard of a modification.

Click to expand...

Here, when he says "impractical" he CLEARLY refers to the claim that I somehow think it's unfeasible, as in not physically doable. Why? Because, as I said, he describes the removal of the Luhu's VDS and replacement with a TAS as something that sounds possible and easy to do, physically, mechanically. The 056 can easily do it because the Luhu easily did it. He does NOT refer to whether I think it's a "good idea" or whether it's "reasonable" or "tactically or strategically sound" to even modify the 056 in the first place, irrespective of the ability to physically install it. Read his words again for pete's sake! You owe me an apology in my view for all this silliness, to be honest.

Jeff Head said:

My guess is you'll simply have another, condescending, know-it-all retort...though I hope you prove me wrong. But if not, have fun in there. If you get tired of arguing with yourself, come on out and have a reasoned discussion ...the rest of us will still be here.

Click to expand...

Thanks for trying to be a voice of reason but it's just all downhill from my experience.

My comment still remains valid, "Where did I specifically say 'not feasible'?" Looking for a direct quote or post number with me saying those specific words. Anything else is cognitive dissonance. I'm not mad nor do I have a problem rotfl.


Back on topic, does PLAN have an ASROC system? If so, curious to see where they can place it on this vessel.

joshuatree said:

Thanks for trying to be a voice of reason but it's just all downhill from my experience.

My comment still remains valid, "Where did I specifically say 'not feasible'?" Looking for a direct quote or post number with me saying those specific words. Anything else is cognitive dissonance. I'm not mad nor do I have a problem rotfl.


Back on topic, does PLAN have an ASROC system? If so, curious to see where they can place it on this vessel.

Click to expand...

You've already just been quoted. Your willful refusal to accept the plain intention of your own words is sheer dishonesty in my view. Why don't you try responding to this, if you even can:

joshuatree said:

But I don't believe modifications to the 056 hull is as impractical the way Mysterre believes. The upgrade pics shown for the Luhu clearly demonstrate adding a TAS isn't that hard of a modification.

Click to expand...

Here, when he says "impractical" he CLEARLY refers to the claim that I somehow think it's unfeasible, as in not physically doable. Why? Because, as I said, he describes the removal of the Luhu's VDS and replacement with a TAS as something that sounds possible and easy to do, physically, mechanically. The 056 can easily do it because the Luhu easily did it. He does NOT refer to whether I think it's a "good idea" or whether it's "reasonable" or "tactically or strategically sound" to even modify the 056 in the first place, irrespective of the ability to physically install it.

joshuatree said:

Back on topic, does PLAN have an ASROC system? If so, curious to see where they can place it on this vessel.

Click to expand...

Here's a pretty good article from last August on Chinese ASW capabilities:



In it they talk about the Chinese "qianshe fanqian daodan" rocket launched ASW weapon for the Song Class SS vessels.

I am not aware of the specs for this weapon, but apparently there is something for the subs which would beg the questionas to whether they have developed a surface vessel launched version.

The reference for the discussion regarding that weapon is this:

Chen Guangwen, “Bu sheng zhuo ying: zhongguo haijun fanqian zhanli de fazhan” [Catching a Sound to Seize a Shadow: Development of China's ASW Combat Power] Jianzai wuqi [Shipborne Weapons], December 2010, p. 25

Which I have not been able to get and read in English yet.

Jeff Head said:

Here's a pretty good article from last August on Chinese ASW capabilities:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

In it they talk about the Chinese "qianshe fanqian daodan" rocket launched ASW weapon for the Song Class SS vessels.

I am not aware of the specs for this weapon, but apparently there is something for the subs which would beg the questionas to whether they have developed a surface vessel launched version.

The reference for the discussion regarding that weapon is this:

Chen Guangwen, “Bu sheng zhuo ying: zhongguo haijun fanqian zhanli de fazhan” [Catching a Sound to Seize a Shadow: Development of China's ASW Combat Power] Jianzai wuqi [Shipborne Weapons], December 2010, p. 25

Which I have not been able to get and read in English yet.

Click to expand...

Interesting read, that would be a crucial piece if they were to build an ASW dedicated 056.