056 class FFL/corvette

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mysterre

Banned Idiot
First I don’t think a few Type 056s can just “bang” away and wait for an active sonar to pick up a submarine, that simply just doesn’t happen, because when using active sonar you also get lots of background noise, your signal to noise ratio is critical, are you aware of the underwater features and landmarks, can you tell when you over deep canyons etc etc , and it takes a very talent operator to recognise what he is looking at
Who said it would have to try and pick up any submarine tracks? You should read it again carefully: the 056's purpose in that scenario is to drive a submarine into a trap, not necessarily to localize a sub's coordinates for the purpose of attack. Also, "bang" is a word you are taking literally which in practice doesn't happen regardless and therefore has no reason to be nitpicked about. In this case "banging" a sonar signifies the intent of the action rather than what actually comes out of the sonar emitter.

The best and only way to submarine hunt is to deploy your own hunter killer submarine
Clearly that is not true in all circumstances, most especially if your own H-K submarine is significantly inferior to your prey, such as is the case with USN and PLAN submarines. In this case it would be like a wolf hunting a tiger: stupid, dead wolf; full, happy tiger.

failing that there are one other solution, that is ASW helicopter, and that’s where the Z9C comes in, Pakistan Navy has acquired this type and it is a pretty good helo for searching for submarines with relatively good sensors, if nothing else any SSNs nightmare is when a ASW helo is detected, then all the disadvantage lie with the submarine, the helo can either engage or rely the info to a surface ship which can then attack
There are other solutions that are far superior to an ASW helicopter using dipping sonar or sonobuoys for the detection of submarines, namely fixed wing ASW planes and SURTASS/LFA sonar ships. In the case of sonar ships, they would certainly be part of a surface fleet in wartime and would be able to utilize the fleet's armament if a sub were detected. Also, many subs carry air defense missiles, so the disadvantage is not always with the sub. If the sub captain feels that detection and subsequent attack is imminent, he may very well just take that helo out.

And lastly a UAV can be used for ASW, when your only Z9C comes into re-fuel, or re-arm or new crews take over you lose your greatest ASW asset for that period of time, that’s when a rotor blade UAV or UACV can take over keeping eyes and hears in the water, it does not mean it will necessarily be an attack platform
Did someone argue that UAV's cannot be used for ASW?

the fact that Type 056 even has a helo platform is good enough asset for ASW, obviously depending on what helo it will carry
Yeah, in the same way a BB gun is good enough asset for boar hunting. After all, you COULD kill a boar with a BB gun.

the general point I am really trying to make here is that the 056 is hardly ever going to be operating in areas and under conditions, where; as a platform, it is on its own. I have always seen it as a piece in the network and to be honest, the pawns of this chess board.

I hoped I had made clear that it would always be working in conjunction with other more sophisticated platforms, which will provide better situation awareness and execute the final coup de grace. My basic point is that a ship of this type could participate is something like ASW in China's littorals without itself needing to be outfitted with the latest and best detection systems or weapons.

The scenario of my previous post was one where the general position of a sub was known and something big and nasty was moving in to finish it off. The 056's were there to shrink the Ocean and cause distraction and uncertainly. In a similar vein I was not thinking of a UACV with sonar bouys, but something potentially fatal it could drop onto a known target, detected and designated by a larger and more capable ship etc etc. I could believe that such a ship could be used as bait if there were other platforms staying silent or above the water, able to give them support.

I have no doubt that the low cost "dumb terminal" approach is the one that best describes the envisaged operations doctrine of the class of ship and I am just trying to illustrate what that could mean. If a specific illustration is not feasible, it just means that the PLAN would not try and do it that particular way.
I hear what you are saying, but my point is that in order for the 056 to have any real use as part of a networked ASW operation it needs to have some capability to either detect or attack a submarine at long range, if not both. In other words, it would either be a remoting sensing platform to help designate targets for other ASW platforms, or it would be a mini-arsenal ship to help provide firepower for remote sensing platforms. Since it lacks both a long range sensor and a long range weapon, its usefulness to an ASW operation is extremely limited. As a remote sensing platform, a 056 armed with a TAS would have to be closely paired with a ship that can prosecute an immediate attack on a track. Well why not just put a TAS on that ship in the first place (assuming it didn't have one already)? Add to that the fact that the 056 is not designed to keep up with a blue water fleet and your options for offboard weapons launchers decreases dramatically. As for mini-arsenal ships, a Type 022 loaded with 8 CY-X missiles would be a far more potent (and cheaper) mini-arsenal ship for littoral ASW, though I should note again that rocket-boosted torpedoes don't have nearly the reach of a torpedo-armed helicopter. Pairing a 056 stringing TAS with a 022 carrying CY-X missiles is a possibility that sounds more like a Rube Goldberg contraption than a viable solution to ASW.

But then this all gets back to my whole point about us fanboys asking this ship to do more than its designers intended for it to do.
 

Schumacher

Senior Member
..........

Clearly that is not true in all circumstances, most especially if your own H-K submarine is significantly inferior to your prey, such as is the case with USN and PLAN submarines. In this case it would be like a wolf hunting a tiger: stupid, dead wolf; full, happy tiger.
..............

Elaborate on how much you know of these 'significantly inferior' PLAN vs USN subs.
 

Mysterre

Banned Idiot
Elaborate on how much you know of these 'significantly inferior' PLAN vs USN subs.
It's an assumption, IMO more than bourne out by the fact that even as 093 rolled off the docks the PLAN was already trying to work on a 095 due to their dissatisfaction with the 093. Problem? Now let's have you elaborate on how much you know of PLAN and USN subs.
 

Mysterre

Banned Idiot
do submarines really carry airdefence missiles? thats new to me, which ones and which missiles?
Several older submarine types carry submerged VL and/or encapsulated SAM's, I forget which ones. I'll have to bust out my Naval Institute Guide when I have more time. Newer generation submarine-launched SAM's include the German IDUS and the US AIM-9X adapted for submarine launch, which IIRC finished testing with two different capsule types a few years ago. It may or may not already be in service, I have no idea.
 

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
Aim-9X is a air-to-air missile, how does it achieve a lock when a submarine is submerged? is it not easier to use something like the Stinger missile which uses a non-reprogrammable processor and can lock after launch, even then do USN SSN carry these

i do not think modern active submarines routinely carry such missiles unless someone has a link or list of ones that actually do
 

Mysterre

Banned Idiot
Aim-9X is a air-to-air missile, how does it achieve a lock when a submarine is submerged? is it not easier to use something like the Stinger missile which uses a non-reprogrammable processor and can lock after launch, even then do USN SSN carry these

i do not think modern active submarines routinely carry such missiles unless someone has a link or list of ones that actually do
You not knowing something is not the same thing as something not being possible. You could also help yourself by using Google:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
do you even read your own links?

u said originally quote "that many submarines carry air defence missiles", i asked which ones, and now you posted links to experimental trials!? and it clearly says in the last paragraph of the first link that IDAS is going to be "probably" operational until 2014 and even then it has a big disadvantage as it gives away the submarines position which is oen reason it hasnt really taken off

also in ur own link it says Aim-9X isnt going operational until 2015-2017 and again these are demonstration tests showing proof of concept and not deployed on operational submarines and do not pose a practical solution, so yeah infact since i didnt know it doesnt really exist

seems to me your just having a blether here so im done!
 

Mysterre

Banned Idiot
do you even read your own links?

u said originally quote "that many submarines carry air defence missiles", i asked which ones, and now you posted links to experimental trials!? and it clearly says in the last paragraph of the first link that IDAS is going to be "probably" operational until 2014 and even then it has a big disadvantage as it gives away the submarines position which is oen reason it hasnt really taken off

also in ur own link it says Aim-9X isnt going operational until 2015-2017 and again these are demonstration tests showing proof of concept and not deployed on operational submarines and do not pose a practical solution, so yeah infact since i didnt know it doesnt really exist

seems to me your just having a blether here so im done!
And I also said I would have to look through the Naval Institute Guide to find the current and older SAM's which have been adapted to sub-launch in the past. Unfortunately this section is something like a couple hundred pages without any separate "sub-launched" category and I would have to flip through each page individually, which is why I said I would have do it when I have enough time for something like that. I also did not say either the IDAS or the AIM-9X are currently in service, and I specifically mentioned that the AIM-9X had just recently been tested with two capsules, and that I didn't know whether it was currently in service. And that was going off memory, before I helped you out by googling for you. Regardless, my links clearly demonstrate something possible that you thought was not, because these missiles are stated to have acquired and struck targets after popup.

Speaking of anti submarine UAV, maybe China can reverse engineer / improve on the DASH design.
Perhaps this one:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


This would probably fit inside a single deck UAV hangar on the 056. It looks like it has a speed of 161km/hr, payload capacity of 80kg and a range of 150+km. Enough for several sonobuoys or a dipping sonar, but definitely not a torpedo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top