Next Generation DDG and FFG thread (after 055, 052D, 054B)

[gelgoog]

Chinese destroyers already have the YJ-21 ballistic missile. It is hypersonic. At best you could make the thing airbreathing to further increase range but it is already more advanced than anything the US Navy has in service.
I agree that the naval air defense missiles could use improvements and no doubt that will happen.

 

[TheWanderWit]

Its an old design because it doesn't do anything revolutionary like what PLA is doing with J-36, DF-27 or Next gen unmanned turret tanks. Its just a very conservative normal surface ship that is on par with US, Korean or Japanese DDG designs. A standard ship with AESA and VLS cells, that's it.

If the Type 055 is an "old design", then lots of US platforms should be classified as ancient, even any recent ones within the same timeline. The Type 055 is not "old". Its design may have been finalized around the early 2010s, around the time it was beginning construction, but that doesn't make it an "old design". The first ship in class only entered service in 2020. And why does it have to be revolutionary? Maybe the 055 isn't a "revolutionary design", but it incorporates features not seen on surface combatants before, and its design and role have clearly pioneered what other countries want for a surface combatant now, given the multitude of countries building large surface combatants like this in a similar or even larger tonnage range with similar capabilities. It's AESA is the largest and most advanced on any surface combatant, and its VLS design is much more versatile and different from other countries' VLS, that even the US appears to be emulating its VLS diameter size for DDG(X) modules.

A true next gen ship in my opinion will be either high stealth focus similar to zumwalt with also very good armament such as ability to launch hypersonic ASBMs, HQ-19 or HQ-29 level Missile and Air defense capability and something next gen such as laser or rail gun.

I honestly don't think "stealth" is a major factor or difference maker when it comes to ships compared to aircraft. But nonetheless, everything you just described is something the 055 and 052Ds (some things) can already do, or will have the ability to do in an MLU down the line. It can already carry ASBMs, which is the first ship to do it, so you could say that's "revolutionary", especially as the force multiplier it can be with other ships, which is a MaRV and has a hypersonic terminal stage. I see zero reason why a YJ-21 variant with a small/mini HGV cannot be integrated into UVLS cells.

As for everything else, HQ-29 is a KEI-sized missile; you probably meant HQ-26, which again does not seem that large to where it cannot fit in UVLS cells, same with HQ-19, but I'm not too sure about its diameter and might be slightly too large. UVLS cells can most definitely fit an ABM missile, but ABM is not a priority or focus for the PLAN because they face no mass ballistic missile threat. I think if any ABM missile like HQ-26 or an entirely newly developed ABM missile is implemented with 055s/052Ds eventually, it'll be more so for hypersonic defense and more complex maneuvering threats. I don't see the need for a rail gun as China already experimented with that, and it should have enough power generation to house DEWs in any future variant or ships that have had MLUs. It's a 13K-ton ship mind you.

If the focus is not on high stealth, then another focus could be integration of drone launching/retrieval. It could be very high displacement such as 20K ton with big VLS cells along with the drone capabilities.

You have to remember these are DDGs, not aircraft carriers. Type 055s and 052Ds already carry drones for use. They aren't slightly larger, higher-end, medium-to-long endurance drones like you may see with some of the PLARFs ISR drones they operate, but they use a certain VTOL drone model for ISR around small islands and whatnot, and could use larger ones if they wanted. What you're asking for is some mega cruiser that has already been discussed and likely isn't going to happen. Assuming 055 has a "successor", it'll again be a variant, or if they do make an entirely new surface combatant, it likely would be in a heavier tonnage range, but not 20K tons.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

Its just a very conservative normal surface ship that is on par with US, Korean or Japanese DDG designs. A standard ship with AESA and VLS cells, that's it.

It has the largest, most powerful, and most advanced AESA. Nobody except perhaps the Japanese have deployed AESAs of equivalent capability on primary surface combatants. It is also the first surface combatant to solely use AESA radars, and first to use dual band AESA radars. Its VLS cells are capable of carrying hypersonic anti-ship ballistic missiles, while the VLS on US/Japanese/ROK surface vessel are not large enough to fit such weapons. The increased size of the 055's VLS also provides for the flexibility to adopt larger and more capable ABM missiles than US/Japanese destroyers. The DDX, which the US had yet to begin building, is basically a US copy of the 055.

 

[ENTED64]

Its an old design because it doesn't do anything revolutionary like what PLA is doing with J-36, DF-27 or Next gen unmanned turret tanks. Its just a very conservative normal surface ship that is on par with US, Korean or Japanese DDG designs. A standard ship with AESA and VLS cells, that's it.

A true next gen ship in my opinion will be either high stealth focus similar to zumwalt with also very good armament such as ability to launch hypersonic ASBMs, HQ-19 or HQ-29 level Missile and Air defense capability and something next gen such as laser or rail gun.

If the focus is not on high stealth, then another focus could be integration of drone launching/retrieval. It could be very high displacement such as 20K ton with big VLS cells along with the drone capabilities.

Thus, something beyond capabilities of current destroyers and cruisers from US and other countries.

I'm not really sure what you are looking for. As others have stated, 055 does have some capabilities that other nations do not field at this point so you can say in some sense it is "revolutionary". On the other hand it is perhaps less revolutionary than the other things you have listed but there might not really be a way around that.

Not everything can have a revolutionary upgrade, sometimes the tech just isn't there. You name a few things that you consider to have revolutionary upgrades but those might be the exception, there's a lot more pieces of equipment than what you list in the military and the vast majority simply cannot be massively upgraded. Surface combatants might have reached the point where the current designs, given current technology, are basically optimal and improvements are from refinement and paradigm shifting new technology simply doesn't exist.

 

[sr338]

Related to future DDG and FFG's VLS. There is a pic I posted over a 1yr ago and I feel we need to address. Below are the UVLS currently in use in the 052D and 055. The full length of the UVLS module are actually around 12m rather than 9m, my assumption is that the bottom 3m are taken by the gas powered cold launch system. If in the future we replace it with a EM cold launch system we could easily fit a 11.5m long missile in the UVLS.

I ran some calculation in DeepSeek, the 1500km range on the YJ-21 can be achived if we assume Sanger ballistics and a warhead the same size as the one on the Harpoon. That range can extend to 2200km if we give if a 3m x 0.83m booster, that way beyond the range of any carrier aircraft.

UVLS on the type 055 is quite future proof imo, they are already big enough for the foreseeable future.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

The full length of the UVLS module are actually around 12m rather than 9m, my assumption is that the bottom 3m are taken by the gas powered cold launch system. If in the future we replace it with a EM cold launch system we could easily fit a 11.5m long missile in the UVLS.

Not quite.

Implementing EM into VLS cells for launching missiles would mean that the entire length of (or most of the length of) the EM-VLS cell will have to become a "barrel" in order to propel the missile upwards, whereby the working principle would be largely similar to railguns or coilguns. This would make the EM-VLS cells much more bulky than the VLS cells of today (which are essentially just empty rectangular boxes), let alone the fact that the EM-VLS cells must become much longer in order to have sufficient length for accelerating the missile upward through the "barrel" in order to achieve sufficient "muzzle speed" when leaving the VLS cell openings.



This means that with the same warship hull size, you wouldn't be able to fit as many EM-VLS cells on warships as you would for conventional VLS cells. This is alongside other potential complications and risks in combat (such as certain degree of damages to the power systems on the warship). Furthermore, there's also the problem on how to design the warship's missile magazines (because there wouldn't be enough missiles if every VLS is EM-VLS), plus how to load and arrange the missiles in the magazines such that the rate of firing those missiles wouldn't be jeopardized compared to conventional VLS cells.

With that being said - If/When there is actually a need for larger missiles, the simpler and more straightforward way would be to increase the length and diameter of the conventional VLS cells - Whether that be for cold, hot or dual-launch modes.

 

[dingyibvs]

Not quite.

Implementing EM into VLS cells for launching missiles would mean that the entire length of (or most of the length of) the EM-VLS cell will have to become a "barrel" in order to propel the missile upwards, whereby the working principle would be largely similar to railguns or coilguns. This would make the EM-VLS cells much more bulky than the VLS cells of today (which are essentially just empty rectangular boxes), let alone the fact that the EM-VLS cells must become much longer in order to have sufficient length for accelerating the missile upward through the "barrel" in order to achieve sufficient "muzzle speed" when leaving the VLS cell openings.

View attachment 157240

This means that with the same warship hull size, you wouldn't be able to fit as many EM-VLS cells on warships as you would for conventional VLS cells. This is alongside other potential complications and risks in combat (such as certain degree of damages to the power systems on the warship). Furthermore, there's also the problem on how to design the warship's missile magazines (because there wouldn't be enough missiles if every VLS is EM-VLS), plus how to load and arrange the missiles in the magazines such that the rate of firing those missiles wouldn't be jeopardized compared to conventional VLS cells.

With that being said - If/When there is actually a need for larger missiles, the simpler and more straightforward way would be to increase the length and diameter of the conventional VLS cells - Whether that be for cold, hot or dual-launch modes.

Agreed, for EM-launched missiles an entirely different launch system is required. IMO such a system would work more like a traditional gun, with a few barrels launching a magazine of missiles through them, and the barrels would be slanted to increase their length. The missile length would have to be shorter to reduce the mass and therefore the length required for the barrels, which should be OK as they should gain high supersonic speeds upon leaving the barrel and would only need a scramjet engine. The cost over time would be lower, but IMO for this to be useful, the space taken up by the barrels + missiles + loading mechanisms need to take up less space than the VLS cells, and/or there need to be performance advantages using EM boost rather than rocket boost. I can see it being more useful on very large warships, as it should scale better with size than the linear scaling of VLS tubes.

 

[hypatia]

Nobody except perhaps the Japanese have deployed AESAs of equivalent capability on primary surface combatants.

In fairness, the USN has a comparable GaN AESA radar, it's just only on one singular DDG at the moment because the USN's shipbuilding capacity is godawful compared to that of the PLAN.

 

[Tomboy]

Cute Orca thinks the power system with 4 gas turbine and 10 diesel is for next generation CG not a conventional carrier. He also says he'll write a post about this post 9.3 presumably because whatever is going to be displayed on 9.3 is of some relavence to this matter.

 

[qwerty3173]

View attachment 157759
Cute Orca thinks the power system with 4 gas turbine and 10 diesel is for next generation CG not a conventional carrier. He also says he'll write a post about this post 9.3 presumably because whatever is going to be displayed on 9.3 is of some relavence to this matter.

Since 055 already is quad turbine powered this is a natural evolution. I've thought about how 4 turbines is a little bit lacking in power for a full sized aircraft carrier.