Ideal of DDG 167 improvement

guitarjeff

New Member
Is the SS-N-27 even on Russia's export list?
Even if it is available, mounting 8 of them may cause the ship to be overweight. Let's assume it is, how about 8 SS-N-27 and 8 YJ-83. Having 16 antiship missiles is overkill.
 

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
I don't believe the 051 is a bad design, other than using boilers. Overall this is the first warship the PLAN made that has a modern appearance with consideration to lower radar signature. I think the shipyards were pushing their design and construction limits with this ship, which I think was the main goal, the armament fitting being only secondary.

Well outward looks is bit smaller factor than propulsion arragments which are in effect the seccond most important feature in every ships after hull design. So in the light of that these ships were completely outdated when designed. But all this must be seen in the context which is the chinese overall ability to developt modern naval vessels in those days. The need of new and modern looking ships seemed to be so urgent that this sort of desperate move was made. In fact I'm more confused of the decision to build two additional units after 052B/C series. Few reasons brought PLAN to this IMO: Firstly the ships were most likely ordered before the 052b/C but those ships got the priority and the chinese were either not able to purchase additional gas turbines or that the turbine deal (which is more likely) came directly alongside the ships. As the Rif system become availble no other existing shipdesign which could accomodate this system was availble other than the 051C.

This tell alot of the chinese shipbuilding capabilities. Its shipdesign capability is quite narrow, only to redesign the 50 year old Neustrashimyy concept or the newer 052 which IMO is streched to its limits with the new 052B/C series. Its quite understandable as the past negelence of the shipdevelopment has left its marks. Basicly china is now in the situation looking form its ability standpoint where small, quite outdated and non-experienced shipdesign sector is given huge task to awnser the demands of the growing needs of new superpower. Results are seen and are quite easy to predict. Inadequate ships with illbalanced abilities. But none learns to run before walk and as there isen't any bigger nations guidance, the only option is to try, fail, learn and try again....

Is the SS-N-27 even on Russia's export list?
Even if it is available, mounting 8 of them may cause the ship to be overweight. Let's assume it is, how about 8 SS-N-27 and 8 YJ-83. Having 16 antiship missiles is overkill.

Well if its been introduced first in India and then in China before the russian armed forces, yeah I think it is. But I agree with you, there's no idea to mount 8 of them on top of the hanger. Aside overweight, they would create topweight also. IMO you don't need yj83 if you have Club so fit 16 Club-Ns inplace of the Yj83 if you are about to field them.
 

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
The PLAN does several goodwill visits abroad every year. Why not just use DDG 167? The longer oversea voyages can serve as training for a rotating crew too.

There's a couple of inexpensive upgrade options.

The EFR-1/Type 347G "Rice Lamp" fire control radars can be used with AK-630 CIWS guns (as seen on 054). So you could upgrade the Type 76A dual-37mm AAA with AK-630 30mm CIWS guns, assuming the weight difference isn't too large.

To upgrade the HQ-7 to newer VLS system would require major structural work, as well as new fire control radar and system integration... so I don't think that's going to happen. To date I haven't seen a VLS version of HQ-7 either.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Well if its been introduced first in India and then in China before the russian armed forces, yeah I think it is. But I agree with you, there's no idea to mount 8 of them on top of the hanger. Aside overweight, they would create topweight also. IMO you don't need yj83 if you have Club so fit 16 Club-Ns inplace of the Yj83 if you are about to field them.
I don't think PLAN is actually that satisfied with the performance of Club, since they are not attempting to put it on any of their surface ships.

Also, I'm not sure if you can actually fit 16 Club-N in there, since they are about 3 times the weight of YJ-83s.
 

challenge

Banned Idiot
what the 167 really need to improve was her radar sensor .her radar and ESM sensor belong to the 70's era ,in the age of stealth aircraft and missile,AESA is "must-have",conventional mechanical radar will encounter difficulty trying to detect stealth missile or aircraft,(just ask the iraqi or the serb).
 

planeman

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Latest pictures show that her main radar has been removed. AAA and HQ-7 remains.

Re my SS-N-27 illustration, I was thinking the ASW version which is the smallest and lightest of that family. a better choice would probably be SS-N-29 ASW missiles which are smaller still.
 

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
I don't think PLAN is actually that satisfied with the performance of Club, since they are not attempting to put it on any of their surface ships.

Also, I'm not sure if you can actually fit 16 Club-N in there, since they are about 3 times the weight of YJ-83s.

the choice migth be political...currently chinese sole advantage in martime aspects are fairly modern SSM arsenal and to purchase superficially better SSM from russia would only ruin that field of expertice...where as in sub launched ssm field, China hasent devolped statisfactoring element, so there werent competition and thus the club capacity follows similar policy than the 956EM purchase, to urgnetly improve todays PLAN fighting potential without the concerns to devolp continutional heritage to the future needs of PLAN...
 

ldwnt

Just Hatched
Registered Member
I'm actually hoping to see a more ASW optimised refit, such as addition of SS-N-27 Ascroc missiles:
[qimg]http://img78.imageshack.us/img78/3075/luhaimod2hi7.jpg[/qimg]

I don't think it is wise to put HHQ-7 on 167, only to change it to VLS.
 

FugitiveVisions

Junior Member
Interestingly enough, China is probably quite pissed off that the version of rif they got does not have anti-missile capability.

Anti-missile capability means anti-ballistic missile capability, which can be found on later versions of the system. It doesn't mean the ship can't shoot down an incoming AshM.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Anti-missile capability means anti-ballistic missile capability, which can be found on later versions of the system. It doesn't mean the ship can't shoot down an incoming AshM.

no anti-missile capability means no anti-missile capability. Which version of S-300PMU series do you think have anti-ballistic missile capability? Actually, I had this argument a while back on AFM, basically the conclusion was that China just got jacked on the deal and didn't get the software upgrade needed for anti-missile.
 
Top