@Tam
I did say that I was probably a bit too generous in regards to both the aperture size and input power on the Type 346 aboard the 052D. I think it's quite in the realm of plausible that the power aperture product is 3x+ higher on the Type 055, absent any other improvements. That could explain the larger IFF interrogators.
I do agree about the 054A frigates complementing the 052Ds. They probably provide a similar ASCM/ASW umbrella like the Akizuki do to the Kongo. To this day, there is no official confirmation that the HHQ-9 can engage sea-skimmers, while the Buks can.
HHQ-9 should be able to engage sea skimmers, if they have been using the S-300 as a template. Mid models of the S-300 (48N6E which are the models China received) has a minimum altitude of 10 meters. Even with 20 meters altitude, the HQ-9 with 180kg of warhead can splash a sea skimmer. Note that the Buk with a 70kg warhead has a splash radius of 17 meters, and the HQ-9 would certainly go beyond that. The HQ-9 might even be used against surface targets; 180kg of warhead is as big as a YJ-83 antiship missile's. The Type 054A complement for the larger ships is more likely for ASW, with the 052D covering the 054A for long range AAW.
Your estimates on the aperture size and input power of the Type 346 is loosely based on too much guess. Limit of power on the SSPA would not only depend on the semiconductor but also on the size of the SSPA. With GaAs it is typically 1.5w per mm. A 1 sqr. cm die would input about 150 watts.
Note that if you go the 052D thread recently, there is a news video clip that showed the Type 346A in testing and including on the inside or the back of the array. What is inside no longer looks like a QTRM (4 TR per module) as suggested in the wiki article for the 346. The 346A looks like it uses straight TRMs (one TR per module) which greatly increases the power density.
However, we will have to agree to disagree about the Type 346 onboard the 055 being GaN technology. The SPY-6 won't reach IOC before 2022 and Raytheon has been working on GaN since the early 90s. I haven't even seen them start selling the GaN refresh of the venerable AN/TPY-2 yet. At the same time, of the top 10 companies manufacturing GaN ICs worldwide, none are in China. Yet somehow China is able to manufacture comparable GaN MMICs in quantities that put the combined of US, Japan and Europe to shame. I would put that in the probability category of a blue moon.
This is not relevant, since I have already showed you that GaN SSPAs are already available in the Chinese market for radar and radio use. This includes GaN substrates for radar use. These SSPAs do not exist on a zero context; they are clearly part of something larger in the first place. There are S-band, C-band, X-band and K-band. SSPAs being sold through the catalog are most likely aimed for universities, institutes and small defense institutes for use in prototyping. Students learning to make their own T/R modules for example, or those writing research papers.
I also prefer to rely on Chinese internal sources, as they tend to be remarkably accurate in leak, such as the name of the first 055 long before it was official.
You tend to forget that these companies making GaN MMICs, they also have plants in China, which they supply to Chinese OEMs or export from those. Much of GaN MMIC production is by far is in lighting; for radars and radio, the production assigned for radar would be incredibly small compared for lighting, of which China has a major national goal to light the country with GaN LED for
power conservation. The GaN used for the US military do not rely on any of the top producers but through boutique fabs owned and run by Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. The use of boutique fabs makes per unit very expensive, since each unit has to pay for running the fab, but it gives enormous flexibility and security control. The opacity inherent in studying the Chinese economy also makes it difficult to assess the manufacturers there. Don't put too much faith in studies when they themselves are subject to limitations in access.
I also pointed out that China mines and refines about 80% of the Gallium in the world. That does however, have a way in controlling and decreasing prices. The high grade Gallium that other countries put out, often rely on the low grade Gallium they import from China.
SPY-6's IOC is irrelevant. Its IOC date is more the result of the USN's bureaucracy and additional requirements piled on it. You forget that Raytheon has already IOC its AN/MPQ-65 (not sure if I got the label correct) radar, which is GaN, for the Patriot system, to replace the MPQ-53. I believe that was back in 2016 or 2017. Japan has already put in service the Asahi class, which features GaN based C-band and X-band radars, and Germany has already put in service the Cassidian TRS-4D radar on the F125 frigate. The single faced rotating version of the TRS-4D will go into the LCS starting with LCS 17. That's right, LCS will get GaN radars ahead of Flight III Burke. Thales is already offering the APAR Block II, which is GaN. I don't know if SAAB Sea Giraffe for the Independence class would be offering GaN, but the Europe defense defense industry as a whole is fast moving into GaN based AESA as a standard. GaN would also be used for satellite communication, and in civilian use, with base stations. So Huawei could already be deploying 5G base stations using GaN MIMO arrays.
As for the diesel generators, I illustrated how much of an outlier it would be to have units of such capacity. Truth be told, among electric drive ships there are indeed diesel generaror units in the 2.8MW class (FREMM). However, these are largely used for propulsion purposes and replace the diesel engines otherwise found on CODOG vessels.
Finally, the Burke III will have 3x4MW GT based generators.
My understanding is that they use 4 x 2.5MW.
The fact that the CSSC catalog includes 3.8MW and 9.7MW units --- this is China's largest shipbuilder and one of the biggest producers in the world, they should know shipbuilding --- shows you these are being used. Furthermore, since they are licensed from MAN, these units are also in use for other non China made ships.
I would find it ridiculous that you would use 6 x 1.8MW if you are able to use 3 x 2.8MW or 2 x 3.8MW. Given the relative size of the generators they are the 2.8MW and/or 3.8MW kind on the Type 055.
