Ideal of DDG 167 improvement

I still have questions whether 115 and 116 are best suited for the NSF. With their current capabilities, they do not make good defensive weapons. Because the ships move a whole lot slower than the planes that they are intended to shootdown, there are a whole lot of manuvering room and a variety of tactics for the fighters to attack. However, if you put a couple of these ships in certain spots around Taiwan, and with a range of 150km, these missiles would effectively deny airspace to the ROCAF. Because of its range, it should be used in an offensive strategy.

Gollevainen said:

well I would think it as a miracle, HHQ7 is a 60's generation of missiles where as 9M96E is 2000 era generation. Thecnology goes foward you know...

But Of what I have heard, 9M96E migth be more of Buk M1 size...

Click to expand...

The outside doesn't matter. Missiles in the sixties and in the 21st century has not changed much externally. In fact, 9M96 does not offer anything better in kinematics over the 48N6E2, which is already 20 years old. What matters is the electronics that you put inside the missile. Suffice to say, it appears that the PRC has been giving it a few makeovers.

There are two 9M96 that were shown, a bigger and a smaller one. The small missile can fit four inside the same cannister used as the 48N6E, and is mainly intended to cover the short to medium range.

FugitiveVisions said:

I still have questions whether 115 and 116 are best suited for the NSF. With their current capabilities, they do not make good defensive weapons. Because the ships move a whole lot slower than the planes that they are intended to shootdown, there are a whole lot of manuvering room and a variety of tactics for the fighters to attack. However, if you put a couple of these ships in certain spots around Taiwan, and with a range of 150km, these missiles would effectively deny airspace to the ROCAF. Because of its range, it should be used in an offensive strategy.

Click to expand...

The missiles are still very effective for what it does. Just remember the 48N6E2 is still longer ranged and faster than even the SM-2. And all it needs is the upgrade to make the ships use the 9M96 which wasn't available when the RIF-M sets were purchased back in 2002. If the upgrades were ever performed, I don't know if Russia and China would be transparent about it though, and would prefer to keep it in the dark. When China starts importing 9M96, then its a sign that something may have been done.

But without the 9M96, they would have to rely on ships using the HH-7 and the HH-16 for antimissile cover.

Using the ships to deny air space over Taiwan has its risks, the ships may be left vulnerable to antiship missiles fired from the shore, especially if supersonic HF-3 is used.

FugitiveVisions said:

I still have questions whether 115 and 116 are best suited for the NSF. With their current capabilities, they do not make good defensive weapons. Because the ships move a whole lot slower than the planes that they are intended to shootdown, there are a whole lot of manuvering room and a variety of tactics for the fighters to attack. However, if you put a couple of these ships in certain spots around Taiwan, and with a range of 150km, these missiles would effectively deny airspace to the ROCAF. Because of its range, it should be used in an offensive strategy.

Click to expand...

I think the issue here is that PLAN's realignment plan hasn't finished yet. Over the next 5 years, I'm sure you will see area defense ships in ESF. Only SSF has any semblance of a semi-complete fleet. But as of now, they have S-300 units across from Taiwan.

My game can only simulate some broad principles. It does not have anything like the Strike Eagle. Are you sure F-15K can use Harpoons and AGM-88s?

Click to expand...

this is what I saw on some of the Internet pages.

so 9M96E1's size is about the same as HHQ7 (may be longer) but has a range of HQ16? That sounds too good to be true.

Click to expand...

most likely, they have comparable weight. From what I read before, HH-16 is much lighter than shtil, closer to HH-7. HH-7 is at the typical weight class like the other SAM of its range like Barak and RAM.

There are two 9M96 that were shown, a bigger and a smaller one. The small missile can fit four inside the same cannister used as the 48N6E, and is mainly intended to cover the short to medium range.

Click to expand...

yeah, taking a page from from SM-2/ESSM. I'm waiting for the PLAN version of that to come out.

Any news on the HQ-7 yet?
Really curious if my educated guess was correct.

I think that replacing the HQ-7 launcher with a LY-60, fitting a Shtil launcher on the Helo Hangar as on the 052b and replacing the 37mm with two type 730 in the same position on the 051c, the 051b could have an AAW armament comparable with the De La Penne DDGs. Also the 052s could be updated.
I think to LY-60 and not to HQ-16 because 051b and 052s are outdated ships and I think too expensive and complicated fitting with VLS. So the LY-60 could be a less radical and expensive update but enough advanced to a limited air defence role for these ships, for the time that new more advanced vessels will be commissioned.

su-27 said:

I think that replacing the HQ-7 launcher with a LY-60, fitting a Shtil launcher on the Helo Hangar as on the 052b and replacing the 37mm with two type 730 in the same position on the 051c, the 051b could have an AAW armament comparable with the De La Penne DDGs. Also the 052s could be updated.
I think to LY-60 and not to HQ-16 because 051b and 052s are outdated ships and I think too expensive and complicated fitting with VLS. So the LY-60 could be a less radical and expensive update but enough advanced to a limited air defence role for these ships, for the time that new more advanced vessels will be commissioned.

Click to expand...

What gave you the impression that LY-60 is better than HH-7?

And why would you put Type 730 at the sam position as on 051C? If you do that, you are going to have to remove that weird looking sensor already there. I have no idea what it does, but I'm sure it's not just there to amuse at.

From Global Security:

"The 9M96E2 missile can intercept all types of aircraft, including tactical ballistic and medium-range theater missiles flying at altitudes from 5 meters to 30 kilometers. Their exceptionally high accuracy is ensured by the missile's main secret, the so-called transverse control engine, which rules out misses during the final approach trajectory. The transverse control engine is still without parallel in the world. Russia's top-of-the-line 9M96E2 guided air defense missile is being marketed by Russia's state-owned arms trader Rosvooruzhenye. A mockup of the missile was set up at an Athens arms exhibition in October 1998."



It would be really interesting to see whether the Chinese will get their hands on this missile.

I think better LY-60 only because it's a medium range missile, so it could give a limited air coverage that HQ-7 couldn't. It's based on Aspide missile wich is now the principal air defence missile in the Italian Navy and it's still condidered a capable weapon. And LY-60 is improved than Aspide. My fonts are Wikipedia and Sinodefence.com .
NB I think LY-60 only a "pro tempore" solution to have a limited air coverage by the less capable ships of PLAN now fitted with HQ-7, for the time that will be commissioned more capables ships

su-27 said:

I think better LY-60 only because it's a medium range missile, so it could give a limited air coverage that HQ-7 couldn't. It's based on Aspide missile wich is now the principal air defence missile in the Italian Navy and it's still condidered a capable weapon. And LY-60 is improved than Aspide. My fonts are Wikipedia and Sinodefence.com .
NB I think LY-60 only a "pro tempore" solution to have a limited air coverage by the less capable ships of PLAN now fitted with HQ-7, for the time that will be commissioned more capables ships

Click to expand...

It does not give limited air coverage, it's range is 18km. What would you call Kinzhal then? long range?

The real issue here is that HH-7 is extremely reliable at shooting down anti-ship missiles, which is something that I'm guessing up until HH-16, no other Chinese naval SAM was capable of. So, if PLAN adopted LY-60N, it would be a total disaster, because it would loose the anti-missile capability.

Now, if we really brought in a medium range SAM like ESSM and compared it to RAM. Does that make ESSM better than RAM? No, it's just used for a different purpose.