Ideal PLAN Frigate
- Thread starter adeptitus
- Start date
The MBDA Aster-15 weights 310 kg and has interception range up to 30km, while the Aster-30 weights 450-510 kg, is longer than the Aster-15, and has interception range up to 120km.
The Exocet AShM is 670 kg. So I think if the Frigate can carry Exocets, it should be able to carry Aster-30's in raised VLS platform or launch tubes.
If I were making the "dream Frigate", I'd prolly put a large 8-cel "common VLS" system near the center of the ship, and give it option to load AShM, LACM, ASW Missile, or large SAMs. That'd make the ship rather flexible in the type of mission required. In the front, I'd install a short-range SAM system, and a gun if there's space. In the back, a helicopter deck and space for ASW gear. Then add 2 x CIWS guns to complete the fitting.
CIWS guns are great as last-line defense. If all else fails, you can still send a stream of hot metal slugs at whatever that's coming at you. But it shouldn't be the sole/main missile-defense system either. 30mm CIWS guns will overheat with use, not to mention the limited amount of ammo carried. So your first line of defense should be SAMs.
A good multi-layered air defense ship would have medium-range SAM, short-range SAM, and CIWS system for triple-layered protection. Missile interception is not perfect and you should always have back-ups. I'd also add that no navy today has true anti-saturation attack capabiltiy, because you require multiple SAMs to ensure higher hit % rate, and you only carry limited # of missiles/ammo. If someone sends a SSG/SSGN and launch 100-200 missiles at you, you're dead. I think true (missile) saturation attack will come only when optical weapons mature, sometime far in the future.
=======
p.s. Has anyone ever seen pictures or articles on VLs version of HQ-7? I have yet to see any pic or promotion material for it, yet so many people suggest there'll be a VLS version?
The Exocet AShM is 670 kg. So I think if the Frigate can carry Exocets, it should be able to carry Aster-30's in raised VLS platform or launch tubes.
If I were making the "dream Frigate", I'd prolly put a large 8-cel "common VLS" system near the center of the ship, and give it option to load AShM, LACM, ASW Missile, or large SAMs. That'd make the ship rather flexible in the type of mission required. In the front, I'd install a short-range SAM system, and a gun if there's space. In the back, a helicopter deck and space for ASW gear. Then add 2 x CIWS guns to complete the fitting.
CIWS guns are great as last-line defense. If all else fails, you can still send a stream of hot metal slugs at whatever that's coming at you. But it shouldn't be the sole/main missile-defense system either. 30mm CIWS guns will overheat with use, not to mention the limited amount of ammo carried. So your first line of defense should be SAMs.
A good multi-layered air defense ship would have medium-range SAM, short-range SAM, and CIWS system for triple-layered protection. Missile interception is not perfect and you should always have back-ups. I'd also add that no navy today has true anti-saturation attack capabiltiy, because you require multiple SAMs to ensure higher hit % rate, and you only carry limited # of missiles/ammo. If someone sends a SSG/SSGN and launch 100-200 missiles at you, you're dead. I think true (missile) saturation attack will come only when optical weapons mature, sometime far in the future.
=======
p.s. Has anyone ever seen pictures or articles on VLs version of HQ-7? I have yet to see any pic or promotion material for it, yet so many people suggest there'll be a VLS version?
Last edited:
China already has towed array sonar, if this current 054A does not have TAS, future ones will if China intends this as a ASW platform.
hmm, I didn't realize Formidable had 8 missiles.
Crobato already commented on OTH. 054A uses a Chinese radar called the Sea Soal. Now, in terms of operation, 054A is normally expected to operate in part of a group with air assets giving it targetting data. But if it operates by itself, it probably will get a Ka-31 to help it with targetting. And btw, does it make sense to put such a huge radar there if it can only provide guidance for OTH?
Part of the importance of having 054A is that it will likely form this AD network with 052D, so it has the capability to share data on different aerial target, allowing it to engage targets that it can't detect.
I told you, each CIWS can handle at least 3 concurrent AShM. 2 CIWS can easily handle 6 concurrent strikes. As for 054A, it uses HH-16, we don't know what kind of guidance it uses, but more likely something similar to 9M317, which means that it doesn't have to illuminate until close to target. So 4 illuminators can handle more than 4 targets.
As for Sea Eagle's performance, I guess seeing Top Plate stats give a good indication? We do know that Sea Eagle uses electronic scan in both azimuth and elevation like Herakles.
As for the 15 km, it's stated here
Actually, it seems like 054A is much harder to find out.
As for HH-7, no picture, but it was mentionned to be in development. I think if PLAN is going for a common VLS, that's a pretty logical path.
So I know next to nothing about warship design, but I can draw pretty pictures, so this is my contribution:
Obviously I've taken inspiration from the Type-022 FACs, with the fast ferry style wave-piercing catamaran hull. On the bow is a stealthized 100mm gun - mechanically would be almost identical to currently in service PLAN 100mm ones. Note how the barrel his hidden when not in use like the Bofors 57mm on the swedish Visby class boats. This makes it more stealthy and better able to withstand wave impact.
Behind that you have a 24~32 cell SA-N-12 verical launch system. I think we all agree that the SA-N-12 is the optimum air-defence missile currently available to the PLAN, that could be fitted into a frigate.
In order to make it look more Chinese, I've put the SSMs in stealthy angled boxes very similar to those on the Type-022. Like other Chinese warships it has 16 SSM tubes rather than the more common 8. The missile would be the YJ-62, and 16 tubes allows for a mix of anti-ship and land-attack variants.
The ship's two Type-730 CIWS are mounted 'over' the edge of the ship to give excellent arcs of fire - note that the sloping sides mean that these are still inboard of the waterline. I've contrived a stealthy pimp-kit for them also.
The hanger accomodates two Helix or Panther helicopters ~ or one helicopter and three VTOL UAVs. The flight deck is slightly raised above the hanger deck to increase space below it for a spacious "boat shed" for towed decoy, towed sonar and ship's launch position (all at the stern).
Ok,ok, so if it had a VLS for SS-N-27 instead of the box launchers it'd have a better ASW potential, but come on, those box launchers look more intimidating.
Obviously I've taken inspiration from the Type-022 FACs, with the fast ferry style wave-piercing catamaran hull. On the bow is a stealthized 100mm gun - mechanically would be almost identical to currently in service PLAN 100mm ones. Note how the barrel his hidden when not in use like the Bofors 57mm on the swedish Visby class boats. This makes it more stealthy and better able to withstand wave impact.
Behind that you have a 24~32 cell SA-N-12 verical launch system. I think we all agree that the SA-N-12 is the optimum air-defence missile currently available to the PLAN, that could be fitted into a frigate.
In order to make it look more Chinese, I've put the SSMs in stealthy angled boxes very similar to those on the Type-022. Like other Chinese warships it has 16 SSM tubes rather than the more common 8. The missile would be the YJ-62, and 16 tubes allows for a mix of anti-ship and land-attack variants.
The ship's two Type-730 CIWS are mounted 'over' the edge of the ship to give excellent arcs of fire - note that the sloping sides mean that these are still inboard of the waterline. I've contrived a stealthy pimp-kit for them also.
The hanger accomodates two Helix or Panther helicopters ~ or one helicopter and three VTOL UAVs. The flight deck is slightly raised above the hanger deck to increase space below it for a spacious "boat shed" for towed decoy, towed sonar and ship's launch position (all at the stern).
Ok,ok, so if it had a VLS for SS-N-27 instead of the box launchers it'd have a better ASW potential, but come on, those box launchers look more intimidating.
Last edited:
I forgot to mention that Fregat also tracks targets.
If you are referring to OTH identification by sonar, then there is a possibility the same can be done on the 054A. Most likely both ships will be assisted by aerial assets or have data passed along by other ships.
ISAR target identification would have to come from direct LOS.
"In anti-missile mode the Aster 15 has a range of 15km. Aster also provides protection against manned and unmanned aircraft to a range of 30km. "
By the way, this same thing works for the Sea Sparrow/ESSM.
Not necessarily. There is time sharing as used by the SN-2s, and the Shtil-1s share this feature. Since the missiles are midphase updated by datalinks, the illuminators only need to assist illuminate missiles that are in the terminal stage of flight. Of course this is still not as good as pure ARH means, but you can still launch more missiles than your illuminators can directly handle.
Last edited:
China already has towed array sonar, if this current 054A does not have TAS, future ones will if China intends this as a ASW platform.
But there is no information that they are to be mounted on the 054A, there is no physical indication (whether a winch or anything) that suggests such an installation, and finally there is no TAS on the 054. So I think it would be safer to assume there is no TAS on the 054A until confirmation otherwise.
If you are referring to OTH identification by sonar, then there is a possibility the same can be done on the 054A. Most likely both ships will be assisted by aerial assets or have data passed along by other ships.
But a hull sonar will not be able to vary its depth. This matters because long range detection depends on the sound 'bouncing' off thermal layers of the water or the seabed. What this results in is that detection only occurs in concentric circles or what is known as 'convergence zones'. (incidently this affects OTH radars relying on troposcatter phenomenon, like the Mineral radar) The VDS gets around this problem by varying the depth of the sonar thus allowing for uninterrupted coverage.
And btw, does it make sense to put such a huge radar there if it can only provide guidance for OTH?
I'm sorry, I do not understand. A radar does what it does - it cannot do what it cannot. Your words make as little sense to me as the following sentence: "Does it make sense to buy a destroyer if it can only float on the water but not fly or submerge?"
As for HH-7, no picture, but it was mentionned to be in development. I think if PLAN is going for a common VLS, that's a pretty logical path.
You are making many assumptions here:
1. The PLAN is going for a common VLS
2. The VLS is going on the 054A
3. The common VLS can hold HHQ-7s
Why make so many assumptions?
I told you, each CIWS can handle at least 3 concurrent AShM. 2 CIWS can easily handle 6 concurrent strikes. As for 054A, it uses HH-16, we don't know what kind of guidance it uses, but more likely something similar to 9M317, which means that it doesn't have to illuminate until close to target. So 4 illuminators can handle more than 4 targets.
More illusionary than you think. If the ASMs are arriving on one bearing , then only 2 illuminators and 1 CIWS can be brought to bear. Add in the fact that when missiles have entered the final 5~10km, the SARH is at a severe drawback with the need to provide end-game illumination, whereas for the Asters it is equivalent to all the missiles having end game illumination simultaneously. For taht reason athe CIWS is needed to boost the number of simultaneous engagements in the close in zone. Finally, the Formidable being a stealth design will have a higher chance of effectiveness when using soft kill measures. This also affects its ability in ASuW, because it is harder to find. Couple that with a better helicopter (the SH-60), and I thinkt he Formidable is a clear winner.
But there is no information that they are to be mounted on the 054A, there is no physical indication (whether a winch or anything) that suggests such an installation, and finally there is no TAS on the 054. So I think it would be safer to assume there is no TAS on the 054A until confirmation otherwise.
If you are referring to OTH identification by sonar, then there is a possibility the same can be done on the 054A. Most likely both ships will be assisted by aerial assets or have data passed along by other ships.
But a hull sonar will not be able to vary its depth. This matters because long range detection depends on the sound 'bouncing' off thermal layers of the water or the seabed. What this results in is that detection only occurs in concentric circles or what is known as 'convergence zones'. (incidently this affects OTH radars relying on troposcatter phenomenon, like the Mineral radar) The VDS gets around this problem by varying the depth of the sonar thus allowing for uninterrupted coverage.
And btw, does it make sense to put such a huge radar there if it can only provide guidance for OTH?
I'm sorry, I do not understand. A radar does what it does - it cannot do what it cannot. Your words make as little sense to me as the following sentence: "Does it make sense to buy a destroyer if it can only float on the water but not fly or submerge?"
As for HH-7, no picture, but it was mentionned to be in development. I think if PLAN is going for a common VLS, that's a pretty logical path.
You are making many assumptions here:
1. The PLAN is going for a common VLS
2. The VLS is going on the 054A
3. The common VLS can hold HHQ-7s
Why make so many assumptions?
I told you, each CIWS can handle at least 3 concurrent AShM. 2 CIWS can easily handle 6 concurrent strikes. As for 054A, it uses HH-16, we don't know what kind of guidance it uses, but more likely something similar to 9M317, which means that it doesn't have to illuminate until close to target. So 4 illuminators can handle more than 4 targets.
More illusionary than you think. If the ASMs are arriving on one bearing , then only 2 illuminators and 1 CIWS can be brought to bear. Add in the fact that when missiles have entered the final 5~10km, the SARH is at a severe drawback with the need to provide end-game illumination, whereas for the Asters it is equivalent to all the missiles having end game illumination simultaneously. For taht reason athe CIWS is needed to boost the number of simultaneous engagements in the close in zone. Finally, the Formidable being a stealth design will have a higher chance of effectiveness when using soft kill measures. This also affects its ability in ASuW, because it is harder to find. Couple that with a better helicopter (the SH-60), and I thinkt he Formidable is a clear winner.
The PLAN currently only operates 2 modern ships (052) with towed VDS sonar of French origin. There has been no other modern PLAN ships with towed sonar that I'm aware of, except for Jianghu-IV with SJD-7 VDS. From the photos avail, I don't think the 054A has aft deck space allocated for ASW equipment. But that's just my unprofessional opinion.
To improve its ASW capability, the PLAN could reverse-engineer the DUBV-43 (ESS-1), or import towed sonar from Russia. If we look at the latest 1,900 ton Russian ASW Corvette, Project 20380 Stereguschyy, the ship is equipped with 2x4 P-800 Yakhont AshM, hull mounted sonar, towed sonar array, "anti-diver sonar system", ASW helicopter, and a 6-cel Medvedka-VE (RPK-9) system:
If you look at the aft photo of the ship, there's a big hole where towed sonar equipment will go. The Russian navy has ordered 4 of these ships. The PLAN could import the same Russian towed sonar equipment.
The Medvedka-VE is an improved, VLS version of the old RPK-9:
The older system resemble quad-tube torpedo launchers. I don't have specs for the new system, but the old one is listed as 12,000 kg for 4-tube and 19,400 kg for 8-tube system. Each missile weights 800kg and is 5.5 meters long and 400mm in diameter. The RPK-9 (SS-N-29) ASW missile has range to 20km, which is a bit short, but the system can be easily bolted onto existing ship's deck. The newer VLS system might have improved range and performance.
The primary Russian navy long-range ASW missile is still the RPK-6 Vodopod (SS-N-16), with claimed range up to 100km-120km:
This is a much larger and heavier missile, said to be 6.5 meters in length, 650mm diameter, and 2,150 kg weight. Heavier than the Chinese C-803 or YJ-62, but still lighter than the P-800 Oniks/Yakhont (3,000 kg) AShM. The latest 91RE2 (Klub-N) ASW missile is lighter at 1,300 kg, but with shorter range at 40km.
=====================
If I were modernizing PLAN's fleet for better ASW capability, I'd import the following systems from Russia:
* UDAV-1 ASW system
* RPK-9 short-range ASW missile
* 91RE2 (Klub-N) medium-range ASW Missile
* RPK-6 long-range ASW missile
* Bow/hull/towed/VDS sonar & technology
The UDAV-1 ASW system includes dept charge rockets, anti-torpedo proximity mine rockets (torpedo defense), and acoustic decoy rockets. If the PLAN already has something just as good, then imports is not necessary. This system is used as a last-ditch defense against submarines and torpedos.
The RPK-9 short-range ASW missile can be equipped on small sub chasers, or refit to existing ships to add better ASW capability.
The 91RE2 ASW missile will be the standard ASW missile on ASW Frigates. They could also be added as a refit on existing ships, replacing some AShM's.
The RPK-6 is quite large and would prolly only be used on a new class of ASW Destroyers, should the PLAN decide to build them.
To improve its ASW capability, the PLAN could reverse-engineer the DUBV-43 (ESS-1), or import towed sonar from Russia. If we look at the latest 1,900 ton Russian ASW Corvette, Project 20380 Stereguschyy, the ship is equipped with 2x4 P-800 Yakhont AshM, hull mounted sonar, towed sonar array, "anti-diver sonar system", ASW helicopter, and a 6-cel Medvedka-VE (RPK-9) system:
If you look at the aft photo of the ship, there's a big hole where towed sonar equipment will go. The Russian navy has ordered 4 of these ships. The PLAN could import the same Russian towed sonar equipment.
The Medvedka-VE is an improved, VLS version of the old RPK-9:
The older system resemble quad-tube torpedo launchers. I don't have specs for the new system, but the old one is listed as 12,000 kg for 4-tube and 19,400 kg for 8-tube system. Each missile weights 800kg and is 5.5 meters long and 400mm in diameter. The RPK-9 (SS-N-29) ASW missile has range to 20km, which is a bit short, but the system can be easily bolted onto existing ship's deck. The newer VLS system might have improved range and performance.
The primary Russian navy long-range ASW missile is still the RPK-6 Vodopod (SS-N-16), with claimed range up to 100km-120km:
This is a much larger and heavier missile, said to be 6.5 meters in length, 650mm diameter, and 2,150 kg weight. Heavier than the Chinese C-803 or YJ-62, but still lighter than the P-800 Oniks/Yakhont (3,000 kg) AShM. The latest 91RE2 (Klub-N) ASW missile is lighter at 1,300 kg, but with shorter range at 40km.
=====================
If I were modernizing PLAN's fleet for better ASW capability, I'd import the following systems from Russia:
* UDAV-1 ASW system
* RPK-9 short-range ASW missile
* 91RE2 (Klub-N) medium-range ASW Missile
* RPK-6 long-range ASW missile
* Bow/hull/towed/VDS sonar & technology
The UDAV-1 ASW system includes dept charge rockets, anti-torpedo proximity mine rockets (torpedo defense), and acoustic decoy rockets. If the PLAN already has something just as good, then imports is not necessary. This system is used as a last-ditch defense against submarines and torpedos.
The RPK-9 short-range ASW missile can be equipped on small sub chasers, or refit to existing ships to add better ASW capability.
The 91RE2 ASW missile will be the standard ASW missile on ASW Frigates. They could also be added as a refit on existing ships, replacing some AShM's.
The RPK-6 is quite large and would prolly only be used on a new class of ASW Destroyers, should the PLAN decide to build them.
Last edited:
Well the Russians have been spared for the almoust 50 years negelent that have plagued chinese ship development. In many cases, china is in the phase where soviets where in 1930's and if soviets grew out to be ok (in naval issues) why not china? We just need to give her time and as the world seems to spin faster and faster, the time for china to reach the rest of the world wont take as long as it did from russian, altough it will take some time however.
The French VDS in chinese use (in Luhu's), the DUBV-23 hull mounted and DUBV-43 VDS is 60's french technology and I doupt it's capabilities against modern quiet SSKs or even the lates US SSNs is somewhat decreased...What china really needs is own new modern sonar system, becouse to improve your ASW capabilities, sonars are like radars to air-defence systems...Can you Hear me?
The French VDS in chinese use (in Luhu's), the DUBV-23 hull mounted and DUBV-43 VDS is 60's french technology and I doupt it's capabilities against modern quiet SSKs or even the lates US SSNs is somewhat decreased...What china really needs is own new modern sonar system, becouse to improve your ASW capabilities, sonars are like radars to air-defence systems...Can you Hear me?
The French VDS in chinese use (in Luhu's), the DUBV-23 hull mounted and DUBV-43 VDS is 60's french technology and I doupt it's capabilities against modern quiet SSKs or even the lates US SSNs is somewhat decreased...What china really needs is own new modern sonar system, becouse to improve your ASW capabilities, sonars are like radars to air-defence systems...Can you Hear me?
Quite agreed...
I joust can’t understand PLAN obvious neglect of ASW. All this new ships have only limited ASW capabilities and handful of Ka-28 helicopters can’t really provide decent ASW protection to fleet... This is one area where we joust don’t see any signs of significant progress that PLAN has shown on almost all other areas during last decade...
I recall reading that towed array sonar has 3-4 times the effective detection range vs. hull-mounted or bow-mounted sonar (for surface ships), which would explain why navies bother to use them. i.e. Russian navy use "Ox Tail" VDS, and the Akula SSN use "Pelamida" towed array sonar. Plus it covers the "dead zone" behind the ship.
Although the DUBV-43 VDS is old, I think the PLAN can prolly reverse enginner and improve it. Having it installed on an ASW platform is definately better than not having it. Plus you can always upgrade it to something better later on.
Personally, I like the Japanese 8-8 model for an escort fleet, with strong ASW capability. If I were to build such a fleet with 8 destroyers + 8 frigates, I'd prolly choose 6 x air-defense destroyers, 2 x ASW destroyers, & 8 x ASW frigates.
The air-defense destroyers would be equipped with long-range SAM with secondary anti-surface capability, like Rif-M or possibly even navalized S-400 in future. These ships would also be equipped with large SSM's and secondary SAM system.
The ASW destroyers would be equipped with long-range ASW missiles & towed sonar, in lieu of SSM's. Instead of the usual 8-16 SSM's, the ship would have something like 8 x RPK-6's. The secondary arament would be Klub-N VLS system with 91RE2 ASW missile, plus other types as needed, and SAM system.
The ASW frigates would be equipped with Klub-N VLS system with 8 or more ASW Missiles, or other types as needed. It'd also have medium & short-range SAM's and towed sonar.
If the mission requires it, the Klub-N VLS system can be equipped with SSM or LACM's in lieu of ASW Missiles.
Although the DUBV-43 VDS is old, I think the PLAN can prolly reverse enginner and improve it. Having it installed on an ASW platform is definately better than not having it. Plus you can always upgrade it to something better later on.
Personally, I like the Japanese 8-8 model for an escort fleet, with strong ASW capability. If I were to build such a fleet with 8 destroyers + 8 frigates, I'd prolly choose 6 x air-defense destroyers, 2 x ASW destroyers, & 8 x ASW frigates.
The air-defense destroyers would be equipped with long-range SAM with secondary anti-surface capability, like Rif-M or possibly even navalized S-400 in future. These ships would also be equipped with large SSM's and secondary SAM system.
The ASW destroyers would be equipped with long-range ASW missiles & towed sonar, in lieu of SSM's. Instead of the usual 8-16 SSM's, the ship would have something like 8 x RPK-6's. The secondary arament would be Klub-N VLS system with 91RE2 ASW missile, plus other types as needed, and SAM system.
The ASW frigates would be equipped with Klub-N VLS system with 8 or more ASW Missiles, or other types as needed. It'd also have medium & short-range SAM's and towed sonar.
If the mission requires it, the Klub-N VLS system can be equipped with SSM or LACM's in lieu of ASW Missiles.