Thanks, aware of that.
So yes, it appears that conceivably the latest HHQ-16 missile might have longer range than the Rif-M.
However, it likely won't have the ABM capabilities claimed for the Soviet system.
PLAN Type 051B/C Class Destroyers
- Thread starter supertran
- Start date
So yes, it appears that conceivably the latest HHQ-16 missile might have longer range than the Rif-M.
However, it likely won't have the ABM capabilities claimed for the Soviet system.
I mean the so called HQ-18
Even as the Rif is a long range SAM it is no longer state of the art, with a floor of 25m IIRC, letting pretty much any modern sea-skimmer bypass this missile. The HHQ-16 can also deal with saturation attacks far more easily than the Rif system with its single illuminator that can only cover 90 degrees at a time. Adding the HHQ-16 and a hangar would make the 051C far more useful to the PLAN, which already has plenty of long range platforms to choose from.
Lethe
Captain
Even if a robust modernisation/substitution of the current S-300-based system has a higher theoretical performance ceiling than an HQ-16-based solution, PLAN MLUs have not historically sought to maximise performance but rather to implement simple, cost-effective upgrades, replacing bespoke or legacy systems with current generation, broadly implemented systems having active development, production, maintenance and training pathways, maximising integration and compatibility with the rest of the fleet. If these ships do go through MLU, and bearing in mind the plethora of long-range AAW ships now in service, I think it is more likely that they will come out of it as Frigate or Frigate+ vessels with HQ-16, analogous to 051B MLU as has been suggested.
Last edited:
IMO, probably just a minimal effort, just a passing grade effort, minimal cost will be exerted. The Russian origin Fregat gets changed to a Type 382 Sea Eagle radar. Everything else is a mechanical overhaul. Expired and worn out parts replaced especially among the mechanical radars, guns, and the powertrain.
The RIF-M will get an overhaul. Expired and expiring components replaced. Backend might be modernized, in line of what the Russians already have for their ships. Most important might be software updates on the fire control, which might contain lessons from the war. Firing tests on the missile inventory will be made, expired inventory replaced. Maybe the Russians have new, probably modernized missiles for restock, and the Russians are more than happy to sell for more Chinese Yuan.
Eventually their pennant numbers will be passed on to new 055s as soon as they're made. I think the pennant numbers #109 to #116, including #112 and #113 occupied by the Type 52, and #115 and #116, occupied by the Type 051C, will be passed on to the next batch of Type 055s. I feel it's certain that these pennants are already reserved for the 055s.
The RIF-M will get an overhaul. Expired and expiring components replaced. Backend might be modernized, in line of what the Russians already have for their ships. Most important might be software updates on the fire control, which might contain lessons from the war. Firing tests on the missile inventory will be made, expired inventory replaced. Maybe the Russians have new, probably modernized missiles for restock, and the Russians are more than happy to sell for more Chinese Yuan.
Eventually their pennant numbers will be passed on to new 055s as soon as they're made. I think the pennant numbers #109 to #116, including #112 and #113 occupied by the Type 52, and #115 and #116, occupied by the Type 051C, will be passed on to the next batch of Type 055s. I feel it's certain that these pennants are already reserved for the 055s.
Last edited:
lcloo
Captain
The information on HQ-18 is scarce. A few unconfirmed souce said it is based on missiles of the Rif-M system. So it is like the airforce's approach to Y20's interim WS-18 engine which is based on the Russian engines on early batch of Y20. The missiles may have the same diameter and size of the missiles in Rif-M system. It is also said to have hypersonic speed capable of anti-ballastic missiles interception.
ABM capability is extremely important in defense of Beijing and NE provinces region.
New missiles naturally comes with new seeker technology, probably borrow from HQ-9/HQ-19 missiles if I would to guess. and also it may share other components from HQ-9/HQ-19, and in doing so PLAN can save a lot of money. Firstly they do not have to dismatle the 48 cell revolver launching system, secondly instead of buying updated missiles from Russia they can have locally made missiles which are compatible to new Chinese made sensors and combat suites.
Above is just my thoughts since there is lack of information on type 051C's MLU.
It could turn up as TAM said that they might turn them into another frigate leader like MLUed type 051B and type 052B or they might just update sensors and softeware and retain the revolver missile launching system with Chinese made missile, i.e. HQ-18.
WE will just have to wait and see. Whatever the outcome, it will increase our knowledge on watching PLAN's approach and doctrine.
Last edited:
But I've just found some articles about the HQ-18, saying it's based on the S-300V. To my understanding, the S-300V is actually quite different from the S-300P/S-300F, right? If that's the case, I doubt that it could be integrated to the 051C. But PLA does have another SAM based on the S-300P, designated as the HQ-15. Maybe that can be the answer. Anyway, I agree that it's a more cost-effective way to use an existent SAM to replace the original Rif-M than a thorough MLU.
I previously thought PLAN might totally skip the MLU for 051Cs and 956EMs. But with the latest rumor that they've started the MLU on 956EMs, I don't know anymore. But it's really tricky to upgrade the 051C. Maybe just some minor updates, with China's own S-300 variants (the HQ-15/18, whatever fits)?
But it feels like a downgrade if they're just modified to another version of the 054A plus. Not worth the effort to me.