Next Generation Destroyer thread (after 055, 052D)

RoastGooseHKer

New Member
Registered Member
In addition to the above Weibo post by @勤劳朴实罗素里:

View attachment 145533

(In the coming years/future), there should be a large surface combatant warship type/class that is higher than the 055 DDG in terms of both positioning/role (定位) and displacement/tonnage (吨位). The warship will most likely be a CG in the traditional sense, rather than the so-called all-purpose warship (as previously proposed by Ma Weiming).

(It should also be noted that) the all-purpose warship concept was not proposed by naval design institutes or the navy itself, so the likelihood of it actually being realized is pretty low. This basically tracked with what pop3 had mentioned many months ago.
When it comes to propulsion and power generation, the PLAN surface combatant designers seem rather conservative. Isn't IPS (power by a combination of gas turbines and diesel generators) supposed to be the future for surface combatants in order to generate enough electricity whilst maintaining high cruise speed amid much reduced noice level?
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
When it comes to propulsion and power generation, the PLAN surface combatant designers seem rather conservative. Isn't IPS (power by a combination of gas turbines and diesel generators) supposed to be the future for surface combatants in order to generate enough electricity whilst maintaining high cruise speed amid much reduced noice level?

The main concerns regarding the utilization of IEPS on surface combatants are with the entailed dimension, weight and complexity of the IEPS, which gets worse for smaller-sized ships than larger-sized ones.

That's why you don't see any FFGs or medium-sized DDGs with IEPS. At full load displacements, the Type 45s are more than 8000 tons, whereas the Zumwalts are more than 15000 tons - Both these DDGs run on IEPS.

Besides, there's also the completely justified concerns with reliability (which directly correlates to the maturity of technology). The PLAN certainly wouldn't want what happened to the six RN Type 45 DDGs to happen to her own future DDGs as well.

However, from a certain talk by PLAN Rear Admiral Zhao Dengping at the Northwestern Polytechnical University in Xi'an back in 2017:

1000162973.jpg

One of the key focus for the development of future/next-generation DDGs include IEPS (综合电力推进).

Personally, I think that this (IEPS) is meant for the successor class to the 055 DDGs, regardless of whether said class will be classified as DDGs or CGs, given the anticipated size and displacement increase over the 055s. Meanwhile, the successor class to the 052D/DGs is more likely to be using CODLAG, judging on the deluge of academic papers and patent applications on CODLAG in the past many months.

Of course, depending on the level of maturity of China's IEPS and CODLAG development, alongside the needs of the PLAN for their future surface combatants, things are still subjected to change.
 
Last edited:

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
While this isn't DDG-related, but I find it more appropriate to post the following in this thread than elsewhere.

Per my understanding, @勤劳朴实罗素历 on Weibo likely hinted of a next-generation FFG in the works, potentially using CODLAG propulsion system (which is the same as the Constellation FFGs).

1000163235.jpg

Still, do take the information (and my interpretation) with a pinch of salt for the time being.
 
Last edited:

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
The main concerns regarding the utilization of IEPS on surface combatants are with the entailed dimension, weight and complexity of the IEPS, which gets worse for smaller-sized ships than larger-sized ones.

That's why you don't see any FFGs or medium-sized DDGs with IEPS. At full load displacements, the Type 45s are more than 8000 tons, whereas the Zumwalts are more than 15000 tons - Both these DDGs run on IEPS.

Besides, there's also the completely justified concerns with reliability (which directly correlates to the maturity of technology). The PLAN certainly wouldn't want what happened to the six RN Type 45 DDGs to happen to her own future DDGs as well.
The Type 45's IEP problems were NOT related to the IEP itself but with a design fault in the intercooler system for the WR-21 GTs, leading to multiple plant failures, especially in warm weather locations. I don't see any reason the follow-on class to the 052D could not use a fully IEP system.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
From an academic paper, with a 40.5 meter-long hull section model for simulation analysis. Posted by @勤劳朴实罗素历 on Weibo.

1000163550.jpg

Basic specifications of the ship hull from the paper are as follows:

Overall Length: 165 meters
Beam: 19.6 meters
Hull Depth: 14 meters
Draught: 6.09 meters
Displacement: 6800 tons

The displacement stated in the paper should be refering to the standard displacement. That should mean a full-load displacement of mid/high-8000 tons to low-9000 tons.

The closest existing warship to the aforementioned dimensions would be the Atago DDGs of the JMSDF.

We might be looking at the sucessor-class DDGs to the 052D/DGs with this one.
 
Last edited:

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
British Type 26 frigate is in that range also.

Close one, but not quite.

While being 1.2 meters wider, the Type 26 FFG (more like DDG by its expected armaments) is a whole 15 meters shorter than the aforementioned DDG. The Type 26 is expected to displace ~8000 tons at full load, while the aforementioned DDG is certainly much heavier.

Using the rough displacement estimation formula, i.e. Waterline length x Waterline beam x Draft at full load x Block Coefficient x Seawater density, we can guesstimate the full load displacement of the aforementioned DDG.

By taking the following values:
Waterline length = 152 meters (13 meters shorter than overall length)
Waterline beam = 17.6 meters (2 meters narrower than overall beam)
Draught = 6.09 meters
Block coefficient = 0.54 (roughly similar to the 052D/DL and 055)
Seawater density = 1.025 kg/m^3

The result would be as follows:
152 meters x 17.6 meters x 6.09 meters x 0.54 x 1.025 = ~9017.6 tons
 
Last edited:

Tomboy

New Member
Registered Member
Close one, but not quite.

While being 1.2 meters wider, the Type 26 FFG (more like DDG by its expected armaments) is a whole 15 meters shorter than the aforementioned DDG. The Type 26 is expected to displace ~8000 tons at full load, while the aforementioned DDG is certainly much heavier.

Using the rough displacement estimation formula, i.e. Waterline length x Waterline beam x Draft at full load x Block Coefficient x Seawater density, we can guesstimate the full load displacement of the aforementioned DDG.

By taking the following values:
Waterline length = 152 meters (13 meters shorter than overall length)
Waterline beam = 17.6 meters (2 meters narrower than overall beam)
Draught = 6.09 meters
Block coefficient = 0.54 (roughly similar to the 052D/DL and 055)
Seawater density = 1.025 kg/m^3

The result would be as follows:
152 meters x 17.6 meters x 6.09 meters x 0.54 x 1.025 = ~9017.6 tons
9000 tons seems rather small when compared to DDG(X) which should be at 13500 tons full displacement. I would assume next generation destroyers to be similarly sized for long range blue water deployment with a CSG or alone.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
9000 tons seems rather small when compared to DDG(X) which should be at 13500 tons full displacement. I would assume next generation destroyers to be similarly sized for long range blue water deployment with a CSG or alone.

The overall dimensions of the hull provided in the paper doesn't really permit such large displacements. If anything, I'd be thankful enough if the final iteration(s) of the DDG family into the far future (~20-30 years from now) based on that hull reaches around 10000 tons at full load.

Also, it should be noted that said DDG-class based on the aforementioned hull (assuming the dimensions provided is actually and accurately representative of the product in its final form) is expected to become the successor to the 052D/DGs (as general-purpose destroyers), not the 055 DDGs (as large destroyers/cruisers).

There will be a separate successor DDG/CG-class to the 055s, of which I expect it to be even larger than the current 055 (at maybe ~15000-17000 tons full load displacement). However, as of present, there isn't anything (publicly available, as far as I'm concerned) pointing towards a 055-successor being seriously active in the works beyond what we've obtained from the grapevine so far.
 
Last edited:
Top