Future PLAN Forecast Thread: Number, disposition, etc.

[plawolf]

I don't think the PLAN has any set-in-stone long term goals.

They will of course base their future procurement decisions on what others do, most especially the USN, but I don't think the PLAN has any set goal like being 1/3, 1/2 or whatever percentage of the USN.

They will develop and deploy assets, in the numbers they deem necessary for their needs. Potential rival fleet size and composition will obviously feed into it, but it won't be the sole or even primary consideration.

China is very mindful of what happened to the Soviets, and will not get drawn into an arms race and spend itself into extinction. As such, the primary determination of China's future fleet size will be what the Chinese economy can afford.

Based on economic performance, I think China could easily afford a fleet 1/3 to even just under a half the cost of the USN fleet (which may well translate to more in terms of tonnage and ships since China gets a little more bang out of its bucks than America), with more focus fleet to fleet combat capabilities and less on amphibious assault and naval strike capabilities compared to the USN.

 

[joshuatree]

I see the need for an ocean going modern frigate which is smaller than 052D and more expendable, while also retaining the same class of ASW capability and near 052D AAW capability but lesser VLS capacity. 054A is good as an ASW platform, but there is room for improvement. Bigger bow sonar, space for UUVs to complement the TAS and VDS, two helicopters rather than one, more modern and quieter propulsion such as IEPS... combined with demands for newer AAW including active radar homing SAMs, quad packed SAMs, a new radar (whether it be fast rotating APAR or fixed face APAR), using the larger and more volume heavy CCL VLS. Then there's also need for greater crew comfort and room for future upgrades that will necessitate greater room too.

Yes, all this can fit on a 7000+ ton hull like 052D but will likely cost more than a frigate should, while installing all these systems on the same 054A hull is probably impossible or at least will leave little room for future upgrades and crew comfort. So I'm proposing a 5000+ ton hull slightly larger than 054A but still smaller than 052C/D.

This is probably more of personal preferences but to play devil's advocate, why not simply a stripped down destroyer, 052E? I can't see how an existing hull in production would cost more than a new frigate hull designed from scratch. It won't be 7000+ tons when packing half the number of VLS cells and smaller APARs than the destroyers. But it can have larger hangar space due to smaller VLS with plenty of volume for crew comfort and future refit. IEPS can replace the existing propeller shafts. Whatever advances in automation can reduce crew size as you say. Light destroyer designation.

 

[Blitzo]

This is probably more of personal preferences but to play devil's advocate, why not simply a stripped down destroyer, 052E? I can't see how an existing hull in production would cost more than a new frigate hull designed from scratch. It won't be 7000+ tons when packing half the number of VLS cells and smaller APARs than the destroyers. But it can have larger hangar space due to smaller VLS with plenty of volume for crew comfort and future refit. IEPS can replace the existing propeller shafts. Whatever advances in automation can reduce crew size as you say. Light destroyer designation.

A larger hull (say an 052E) even if it only has the same subsystems as a notional 054B, will still require more powerful propulsion (even if it has a similar displacement to 054B, on the basis of dimensions as larger hulls have more drag) which increases cost, not to mention a larger hull with more materials needed to build it will cost more off the shelf and also to maintain. The increased volume will also have to be filled with something whether it be stores, crew comfort, or whatever, otherwise you are wasting space on a ship for nothing... and filling in that space will likely increase the displacement of such a ship to a destroyer displacement (7000 tons) anyway.

I'm not saying a larger hull isn't better, but one has to consider how much larger the hull needs to be to do its job most efficiently at lowest cost and best performance. The difference in cost between an 052E and an 054B/057 might be relatively small in terms of single unit cost, but if PLAN wants to buy 24 of them over a decade and if they want to operate and maintain them for 20-30 years, the numbers start to add up and the disadvantages of a notional 052E will start to pile up versus a slightly smaller 054B/057.