Ideal Cruiser thread

[tphuang]

Just a thought but the HQ-9 is about the same size as the S-300 and uses similar cold-launch revolving launchers. So it's compariatively heavy, takes up a lot of space etc compared to more contemporary VLS modules such as the Mk 41, SA-N-9, Barak, Aster etc etc.

The S-400 launch system could be much more compact so you could either carry more SAMs or have more extra space.

We know that four S-400s take up the same diameter as a single S-300 tube, and are shorter to boot! So at the very minimum 48 HQ-9s = 192 S-400s.... even without accounting for the more compact launch system.

HQ-9 takes less space than S-300. Just take a look at 051C and 052C for example. S-400 is not going to be more compact at all. The Russians are not known for having compact VLS, look at the VLU shtil for example. What S-400 has with the large missile and medium range missile can be replicated with HQ-9/16 combination.

 

[adeptitus]

Sure Maybe..But you guys need to consider that actual humans operate these ships now and into the future. There are no UAV ships yet. The Crew needs room to live on the ship...

I would not want to be on that ship if it got hit by any type of ordance. It just may go up like a firecracker.

It's actually just an enlarged 052C with more weapons. The 052C is armed wtih:
8x6 HQ-9
2x4 YJ-62
2x Type 730 CIWS
1x 100mm gun
4x 18 MLRS
1x Helicopter + hanger

The CG is +50% in displacement and adds the following:
1x 8-cel Club-N VLS
2x additional Type 730 CIWS, upgraded to ADGMS variant
2x Quad 533mm torpedo tubes
2x Quad 324mm Rotary PAKET-E/NK rocket
4x KT-154E MLR + reloader/magazine
+1 helicopter
+1 UAV


If it's too much stuff, we could take out some stuff:
* Reduce 2x quad 533mm torpedos to 2x twin 533mm torpedos, or remove it completely
* Reduce Type 730 ADGMS from 4 units to 2 units
* Reduce 4x KT-154E MLR to 2x KT-154E MLR
etc.


The 8-cel Club-N VLS system is critical, as it provides ASW missile or LACM option. The PAKET-E/NK and KT-154E MLRS provides anti-torpedo protection, which is very lacking in PLAN ships.

I'd like to see the UAV module added, and eventually replace manned helicopters except in S&R missions. So in the future the ship could carry 3 x UAV's and 1 x general purpose manned helicopter. The UAV's could be used for patrol or ASW missions. But that's far into the future.

I'm trying to make the weapon systems as realistic as possible. For the Type 730 CIWS we've already seen photos of it with 6 SAM TLC's, so we assume that is the first generation Chinese ADGMS. The S-400 is nice but I have yet to see a naval version, though if the S-300 can be converted for ship installation, there's no reason why the S-400 cannot.

 

[bd popeye]

I sometimes wonder just what the Russians were thinking when they built their ships to counter the USN. Did they think the more weapons the merrier? Did the consider these vessels expendable as long as their mission was accomplished. That's what it seems to me.

Not to mention crew comforts were probally and after thought.

 

[Sea Dog]

I sometimes wonder just what the Russians were thinking when they built their ships to counter the USN. Did they think the more weapons the merrier? Did the consider these vessels expendable as long as their mission was accomplished. That's what it seems to me.

Not to mention crew comforts were probally and after thought.

Right. This is a total balancing act. It's nice to assume you can put all this stuff on a ship of reasonable size (9,000t?), but the more equipment, weapons, sensors, etc. you put on a vessel, the more specialists you need to operate them. The more specialists/technicians/operators you have, the more human logistics you require. Human logistics take alot of space, organization, and planning. For those of you who've been crammed onto a naval warship, you can relate. Any former supply guys here? In other words, this can directly translate into less endurance from a human side of things. This may actually give your great and capable warship small operating legs and range. MAking it not so Ideal after all. The Russians were very poor planners when it came to this aspect of ship design.

 

[IDonT]

I sometimes wonder just what the Russians were thinking when they built their ships to counter the USN. Did they think the more weapons the merrier? Did the consider these vessels expendable as long as their mission was accomplished. That's what it seems to me.

Not to mention crew comforts were probally and after thought.

The Russians built their ships base on their "Battle of the First Salvo doctrine". That is to throw as much ordinance at the enemy, then go home. Furthermore, Russian weapons are not very reliable, so putting in a lot of them in a single hull you minimized this threat.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

At a Feb. 1973 Soviet officers' briefing on anti-carrier warfare, Rear Adm. Yevgenii Semenov, then 5th Eskadra Chief of Staff, encapsulated this "battle of the first salvo" doctrine by saying, "[Soviet] ship attack groups need to use all weaponry for assaults on [U.S.] aerial attack groups: missiles, artillery, torpedoes, jet-propelled rockets--the whole lot!--since it is unlikely that anything will remain afloat after an air strike. We are kamikazes."

As for crew comforts, as long as you don't operate your ships like the USN does (long duration deployments) that would be okay for moral. I think PLAN ships do not routinely go out on deployment for more than a month or two.

 

[adeptitus]

Here's another concept based on existing designs.

Take the 071 LHD/LPD design and militarize it into a CGH with extended aft deck. Instead of landing craft, the below-deck space will be used for other stuff. In the aft section, the helicopter deck can be lifted, or use reduced-size rear door to swap out mission modules below-deck. In forward section, the below deck space will be used for equipment and crew quarters.

The "071 CGH" will use existing, proven systems, both domestic and Russian imports. It'd be deployed for ASW, S&R, and disaster-relief missions. Because the ship's main purpose is not AAW, it'd not be equipped with expensive phased array radar system. Instead it'd use systems found on the 052B.

071 CGH (Guided Missile/Helicopter Cruiser)

Length: ~170 m
Beam: ~30 m
Draught: ~6m
Displacement: ~14,000 tons loaded

Sensors: (similiar to 052B)
MAE-5 "Top Plate" 3-D radar
2-3 MR-90 Orekh "Front Dome" fire control directors
Band Strand Radar (SSM & Gun)
ZJK-5G (Gai = improved) combat management system
Zarya-ME hull-mounted sonar, plus towed array & decoy sonar

Weapons:
1 x 76mm dual-purpose gun
3 x Type 730 CIWS guns
1 x Shtil SAM system with 9K-90 Urgan launcher + 24 missiles
2 x 8-cel Club-N VLS
1 x 8-cel Paket-E/NK ASW & anti-torpedo missile rotary turret
UDAV-1/RKPTZ-1E ASW system with 2-4 x KT-153E MLRS + reloader/magazine
4 x 18-barrel domsetic MLRS (chaff, flare, decoy, etc.)

Aviation:
Aft helicopter deck with 2-3 landing spots, elevator, above-deck hanger option, below-deck hanger space

The ship can accomodate 2 large/heavy helicopters or 3 med/light helos/UAVs on aft deck at same time. The size of aft deck would depend on the above-deck hanger structure option. There's an elevator to below-deck area where UAV mission modules can be installed. It's also possible to store additional light/medium helicopters below-deck via elevator. The ship has theorical max capacity of 8-10 medium helicopters (less operationally), while handling the take-off/landing of 3 at one time (like FS Jeanne d'Arc)

The ship will also be equipped with full emergency hospital facilities below-deck. One CIWS gun is installed in the front, and 2 in mid or aft section. The Shtil launcher is installed forward position behind main gun (like 052B) with option to upgrade to VLS version in the future. The Paket-E/NK 8-cel launcher is mounted in aft section, above helicopter hanger. It's elevated on rotary mount when in use. The Club-N VLS cels are stored somewhere near the center section of the ship, and usually fitted with a mix of ASW missiles and SSM's.

===============

After ~5 years of service, the ship is brought back to the ship yard in ~2012 for overhaul and upgrades. The Type 730 CIWS will be replaced by Chinese-made ADGMS system, and the Shtil replaced with 24-32 cel VLS SAM with new fire control radar.

During most operational cruises, the ship will carry 3 helicopters + UAV module, or 4 helicopters. If used as helicopter transport/ferry, the ship could potentially carry 8 or more helicopters, but prolly not with a large inventory of parts, fuel, munitons, etc.

 

[bd popeye]

As for crew comforts, as long as you don't operate your ships like the USN does (long duration deployments) that would be okay for moral. I think PLAN ships do not routinely go out on deployment for more than a month or two.

Too bad..I wouldn't want to be those fellas.. As a spoiled rotten USN sailor I need my TV, DVD & VCR...gyms, ice cream, ship stores, video games and computers with internet...All for crew comfort..Not to mention the barber shop..When I was on the Nimitz in '91 we had limited satellite Tv...Not to mention 80 aircraft and it's assoicated equipment. Of course the USN has all that stuff because they have the money and USN ships spend a lot of time out to sea.

Take the 071 LHD/LPD design and militarize it into a CGH with extended aft deck

Intresting. That would be an intresting design. Did you know that the USN had an LPD the USS Coronado that it converted into a command ship? The ship is now decomissioned.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[planeman]

HQ-9 takes less space than S-300. Just take a look at 051C and 052C for example. S-400 is not going to be more compact at all. The Russians are not known for having compact VLS, look at the VLU shtil for example. What S-400 has with the large missile and medium range missile can be replicated with HQ-9/16 combination.

? The HQ-9 VLS is about the same as the Rif in terms of compactness:

And as for the russians not being known for compactness, the Shtil is reasonably compact, not disimilar to comparable western VLSs, as is the Club.

The S-400 consists of 3 missile types:
* 40N6 "Big missile" - pretty much the same size as the S-300/HQ-9 but with a 400km range compared to 200km for the HQ-9.
* 9M96E - 330kg, about half the weight of the SA-N-9 Shtil, 1>40km (4 missile tubes = same/smaller diameter as single normal S-300 tube)
* 9M96E2 - 240kg, same diameter as 9M96E but longer motor, 120km range.

Like the S-300 and HQ-9 the S-400 is cold launched which itself takes up space, but not much more than the fume extraction systems of hot-launch systems. Rember that the shipboard S-300 launcher is a 1970s design concept - modern Russian VLS' are much more compact. The S-400 would presumably be more compact, or at least could be.

 

[tphuang]

? The HQ-9 VLS is about the same as the Rif in terms of compactness:

And as for the russians not being known for compactness, the Shtil is reasonably compact, not disimilar to comparable western VLSs, as is the Club.

There is also the height factor. Look at 051C and 052C. 051C is larger than 52C, but doesn't have space for a hangar. It can only carry 8 YJ-83s instead of 8 YJ-62s. It does not have the full set of sensors that 052C has. And it has that humongous radar aka the tombstone, which frankly just takes up too much space.

The S-400 consists of 3 missile types:
* 40N6 "Big missile" - pretty much the same size as the S-300/HQ-9 but with a 400km range compared to 200km for the HQ-9.
* 9M96E - 330kg, about half the weight of the SA-N-9 Shtil, 1>40km (4 missile tubes = same/smaller diameter as single normal S-300 tube)
* 9M96E2 - 240kg, same diameter as 9M96E but longer motor, 120km range.

yes, you can fit 4 in 1. Same idea as 4 ESSM in one MK-41 cell. And same as I propose with 4 HQ-16 in a common VLS cell for PLAN. Again, a lot of S-400 like 40N6 has not finished development. One experience of PLA to not trust in Russian brochures.

Like the S-300 and HQ-9 the S-400 is cold launched which itself takes up space, but not much more than the fume extraction systems of hot-launch systems. Rember that the shipboard S-300 launcher is a 1970s design concept - modern Russian VLS' are much more compact. The S-400 would presumably be more compact, or at least could be.

051C got the upgraded system. Which is what rif-m should be. Doesn't seem to be that compact to me.

 

[Shulin Jiang]

I heard the type 171 and 170 are very advanced ships using AEGIS system. But when will they be ready for mass production?? And how many of these ships do China currently have????