FFG 054/054A Thread

[planeman]

Jane's article on it, public extract: China launches Russianised Jiangkai-class frigate

By Yihong Chang JDW Correspondent
Hong Kong

Huangpu shipyard launched the Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy's (PLAN's) third Type 054 Jiangkai-class frigate on 30 September, a modified 'Russianised' version of the class known as the Type 054A.

The Guangzhou-based shipyard has started outfitting the ship with the Russian Mineral-ME (NATO: 'Band Stand') radar system, a Fregat M2EM ('Top Plate') search radar and two MR90 Orekh ('Front Dome') targeting radars. As a result, the new frigate has much stronger Russian characteristics than its earlier sister ships.

Both Mineral-ME1 active and Mineral-ME2 passive radars have been fitted to the ship to provide target designation for the YJ-83 'Saccade' anti-ship missile. Mineral-ME1 works in I-band and is capable of simultaneously tracking 30 targets out to 250 km, while ME2 can track 50 targets working across I, G, E, F, and D-bands up to 450 km. With the targeting function engaged, the system can work up firing solutions for 10 different targets.

[crobato]

YC should learn how to count or at least wait for more pictures before publishing stuff he doesn't know. There are 4 Orekhs not 2.

[tphuang]

I honestly didn't think highly of these pictures until the threads posting these got removed.
http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/959/054avlszb3.jpg
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/1108/054avls2ix4.jpg

[crobato]

The first pic might be more important. Could be the structural frames for the VLS, set on the side. Looks like 2x8 cells here, and four of them. 32 cells in all.

[snake65]

The first pic might be more important. Could be the structural frames for the VLS, set on the side. Looks like 2x8 cells here, and four of them. 32 cells in all.

You mean 2x4 cells? According to the author of photos, that's exactly what they are - HQ-16 VLS frames. It seems that the guy is working at the shpyard and might get in real trouble.:nono:

[tphuang]

the guy is in trouble imo. The speed that those threads got shut down in that forum tells me he must be sending off stuff that he should not be.

This is what he wrote about the VLS

054A冷垂发详细介绍 22,qsLt
c~Gt8Zqw+
文字[size=4]文字[冷垂发也可以不必用左轮 Zy2xywj *0nbP8D
n*?=aY G2(nY)9
　　一提热垂发好象就是美国的Mk-41、Mk-48方型箱式垂直发射装置，一提冷垂发好象就是苏联的左轮垂直发射装置，这好象是既定成熟的固定思维方式了 ，
typically, hot launch is thought to be like MK-41, MK-48 like box style vertical launching position. Typical launch is like Soviet's left wheel? vertical launching system
可是我以为冷垂发也可以不必用左轮方式。　新垂发系统的发射箱体在发射导弹时，导弹在发射筒内不直接点火， 而是借助导弹发射筒底部的燃气发生器产生动力推动导弹起飞。
but I don't think cold launch has to use the soviet style. The new VLS's box style launching, when in launch, missile does not direct ignite fire in launch, but rather uses launcher bottom's lighting tool to create motion to push to fly out.
采用这种方式的发射装置的燃气发生器位于导弹发射筒底部，它的上面是一个类似气动缸的装置，当燃气压力达到 一定强度时可以推动原来被固定的活塞（导弹托架）摆脱束缚，高速向上运动，同时带动活塞上的导弹向上同步运 动，冲破易碎发射筒盖，弹离导弹筒，（导弹是垂直发射，他有一个转弯模块，发射出去的导弹垂直射向空中，导 弹在空中点火，这时不论导弹在空中点火是否成功，转弯模块都把导弹侧向推出，从而保证其距发射平台至少10 0米之外）。
This lighting tool is at the bottom of the missile launcher. On top of it is a something like "Pneumatic cylinder" device?When gas pressure reaches a certain level, this can push the stationary rack to move upward and missile also has upward motion, goes through the cover and missile leaves. (the missile lights up in the sky, no matter whether ignition is successful, the missile will be pushed at least 100 m from launching area)
当燃气发生器把导弹打出去时，发射筒就有一个向下的后座力。发射筒悬挂在第二层板面上，因此第二层板面是发 射时后坐力的受力面。第二层板面和悬挂的发射筒不是固定在箱体的四个主支柱上，而是支撑在X型的支架和4个 主支柱的连接点上，感觉箱体骨架结构的连接点都是活的，X型的支架和上面支撑的两层板面及悬挂的发射筒是可 以上下移动的。4个主支柱之间用X型的支架连接,形成箱体的主体骨架结构肯定是用弹性很好又不易变形的弹性 钢材制成的。第二层板面产生的后坐力不是压在四个主支柱上，而是压在支撑的 X型支架和四个主支柱的连接点上。第二层板面产生的后坐力会使X型支架向下移动，并使整个箱体产生轻微变形 ，因为箱体的结构骨架很象弹簧，可能还有液压缓冲，会把第二层板面产生的后坐力卸掉并恢复原来的形状。用整 个箱体的结构骨架把第二层板面产生的后坐力卸掉，我想这就是新垂发系统的发射箱体的卸压原理吧 。
now, it just talks about different levels, probably not as useful

i will try to translate later, but this is talking about cold launch VLS on 054A. Again, just speculation, believe it whatever you choose to believe.

[planeman]

The first pic might be more important. Could be the structural frames for the VLS, set on the side. Looks like 2x8 cells here, and four of them. 32 cells in all.

Well, I hope that the cells are on a lower deck level than the railing in the foreground because otherwise the SA-N-12s are milkbottle rockets.

But going by the proportions of the SA-N-12, I'd guess that we are actually only looking at 16 cells, with two frames stacking one on top of the other.

Also, is this a picture of the VLS modifield Shtil missile?
http://www.mipagina.cantv.net/heeroyui5/p0578334.jpg

[snake65]

Yes, it is.

[planeman]

Shtil VLS in more detail:
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/9712/3c14eld9.jpg
I guess I was wrong about those frames being stacked.

[planeman]

Some internet sources are saying that the 054C has this 76mm gun instead of the 100mm. I won't be convinced until we see it on the ship. I got this off Key Publishing forum which is generally a good source:
http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/7927/76mm054awn5.png

[snake65]

Shtil VLS in more detail:
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/9712/3c14eld9.jpg
I guess I was wrong about those frames being stacked.

The on in your last post is Club-N VLS. Shtil-1 VLS looks like this:

[planeman]

So the picture of those frames points toward a PLAN vessel being equiped with Klub-N? Surly there isn't room on the 054A for both Shtil and Klub-N and we'd expect to see different radars?

[Gollevainen]

...or someone has just pulled out that pic and claimed it as Sthill,
related to some other forum's similar (but more intense&dirtyer) penis contest over this matter....There isent anything relating that picture into Sthill, chinese or 054A whatsoever....expecially when there is clear note plate saying 3S-14E...;) ;)
so lets keep that other forums nonsense out of this forum, shall we (those who are participating in there will get my point and understand what Im saying, rest can sleep their nigths in peace...)

[planeman]

...or someone has just pulled out that pic and claimed it as Sthill,
related to some other forum's similar (but more intense&dirtyer) penis contest over this matter....There isent anything relating that picture into Sthill, chinese or 054A whatsoever....expecially when there is clear note plate saying 3S-14E...;) ;)
so lets keep that other forums nonsense out of this forum, shall we (those who are participating in there will get my point and understand what Im saying, rest can sleep their nigths in peace...)

You're being too criptic for me. I am Captain Obvious himself afterall ;)

I don't care about the other forums bit, just how that photo relates to the Type-054A.

3S14E is the VLS for Klub-N right, as fitted to the Talwar class.

The photo shows 4 blocks = 32 cells. The Talwar class carries just one block = 8 cells. So the photo wouldn't be from a Talwar when it was under construction.

In fact what ship has 32 Klub-N? Clearly the Type 054A can't.

So where does this leave me? :coffee:

Please explain your conclusions re the picture.


PS. I can't see the 3S14E label...

[tphuang]

You're being too criptic for me. I am Captain Obvious himself afterall ;)

I don't care about the other forums bit, just how that photo relates to the Type-054A.

3S14E is the VLS for Klub-N right, as fitted to the Talwar class.

The photo shows 4 blocks = 32 cells. The Talwar class carries just one block = 8 cells. So the photo wouldn't be from a Talwar when it was under construction.

In fact what ship has 32 Klub-N? Clearly the Type 054A can't.

So where does this leave me? :coffee:

Please explain your conclusions re the picture.


PS. I can't see the 3S14E label...
it's right on the bottom of that picture.
no one claimed my original picture to be launchers for shtil, the guy mentionned using a cold launch system different from the Russians, that's it.

[Gollevainen]

??? The pic you tryed to present as a Sthill had 8 cells just like Club-n onboard Talwar...are we talking about the same thing:confused:

[adeptitus]

The Shtil-1 ADM system comes with 3S-90 launcher & 24 x 3M317E SAM in below-deck magazine. When the Russians developed VLS version, they retained similiar configuration via 12-round VLS cels (2x6/row). So a "standard" SA-N-12 VLS system will prolly have 2x12 (24) to 4x12 (48) rounds, in multiples of 12.

The other popular Russian ADMS is the Klinok, which uses 8-round VLS magazines for 9M330E-2 SAM. The Russians like to call them TLC (transport-launch container).

The Klinok is navalized 9K330 Tor. The 9M330 missiles are 3.5 meters in length and weights 167 kg. The Shtil-1 is navalized 9K38 Buk-M1-2, the 3M317E SAM is 5.55 meters long, 400mm diameter, and weights 715 kg. The VLS variant in TLC is 581 kg (1040 w/container) and 5.1 meters long (longer w/TLC).

The surface-ship Club-N system use 4 or 8-cel 3S-14E (E for export?) "unified below deck launcher" VLS system. The export version advertises capability to use 3M-54TE/TE1 SSM and 91RTE2 ASROC. There's also the unadvertised LACM, which is an "offensive" weapon and not included in standard export catalog.

The 3M-54TE is 8.9 meters long and weights 1,951 kg. The 3M-54TE1 is 8.9 meters long and weights 1.505 kg. The 91RTE2 ASROC is 6.5 meters long and weights 1,300 kg. These Klub-N missiles are also ~533mm diameter.

========================================

Based on the photos we've seen, the SA-N-12 and Club-N VLS system are box-shaped, while older systems like the Klinok (SA-N-9) and RIF-M use round/rotary launchers.

So if you see an 8-cel, box-shaped VLS frame, it's more likely that it's for the Club-N. Also, an "unified" Club-N VLS system have to accomodate 9 meter-long missile. The SA-N-12 VLS system is 2x6 cel and only has to accomodate missile under 6 meters length.

Regarding those pictures claimed to be VLS structure, I think they're prolly fake. It doesn't look like 2x6 SA-N-12 config, and I doubt a Frigate would carry that many Club-N VLS systems. Also, based on the floor and equipment laying about, I'd estimate those "VLS structures" in the picture to be much shorter than a Club-N VLS.

If by some remote chance that those are real VLS structures, then this might be a "domestic" development. I'd speculate HQ-7 VLS, since the missiles are much shorter and could fit into such a structure. But that's just a guess.

[tphuang]

??? The pic you tryed to present as a Sthill had 8 cells just like Club-n onboard Talwar...are we talking about the same thing:confused:
sorry, to clear up, I personally think what's on 054A is an indigenous system HH-16 that's actually not that close in appearance to VLS shtil both in terms of the Vertical launching structure and the size of missiles themselves. I believe that the pictures I posted have some credibility, because it makes no other sense for the moderators on Chinese forums to delete them so fast. Those pictures could be taken on other ships. So, I'm just waiting for more pictures to come out right now to make better judgements.

[Gollevainen]

Yeas I know what you tryed to say. I was more confused about Planeman's answer if they quoted the obvious picture of Club launcher as something to do whit Sthill or any other possiple missile that will end up in the foredeck of 054A...

[tphuang]

alright, new pictures of 054A, this is the second 054A in construction at HP as you may have noticed.
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/3186/054ahp2nov2ab7.jpg
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/892/054ahp2nov22do0.jpg
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/2056/054ahp2nov23kk6.jpg

[tphuang]

the other 054A from HP here
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/3336/054ahpnov2at7.jpg
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/273/054ahpnov22aa6.jpg
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/3755/054ahpnov23vw8.jpg
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/9246/054ahpnov24af9.jpg
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/461/054ahpnov25uy8.jpg

[crobato]

The new VLS might be SD-10 based.

[planeman]

I could draw pics like that... where are these sourced and what credibility would you give this rumour?

AMRAAM and Derby SAM versions are slant launched although MICA and IRIS-T SAM families are vertical launched - without booster that will reduce their range to that of short range missile.

[tphuang]

The new VLS might be SD-10 based.

well, then it would be active guided and HH-16 doesn't seem to be active guided.

[crobato]

I got them from military.china.com. They could have been scanned off from a magazine. Because of the forum limitations I cannot upload the full 400k image of it, so the pics here are almost like thumbnails compared to the one I uploaded in the CDF.

Without boosters I don't think the range can go far. The range would be comparable to a MICA or Sea Sparrow launched via VLS. However do note that the PL-12/SD-10 is bigger (wider in diameter, longer and heavier) than the MICA or AMRAAM.

It does appear like the missile is cold launched.

The Orekh like illuminators or what we assumed might be illuminators may be something else, like targeting and tracking radars that would datalink with the missile to handle its midphase flight.

Does not make sense at all to me that someone would still introduce a SARH guided SAM now that you have mastered active radar guidance against aircraft. It would make sense to me if China wants to maximize its PL-12 investment by introducing it in AAM and SAM versions. We have already seen a picture of a PL-12 SAM testing off a vehicle two years ago.

Lately there is a clip shown on CCTV commerating the PL-12's successful launch. This kind of ceremony, although dated and late, does signal that the missile has been fully accepted into the PLA, is in mass production and in operational deployment with those that could use it. And now you are going into further steps in the evolutionary chain with new variants that includes SAM versions. This is an indication of a maturing phase of a design.

[crobato]

According to hmmvw in the CDF, the VLS above is the army version (HQ-16) and the navy version (HHQ-16) will have a booster.

[tphuang]

I got them from military.china.com. They could have been scanned off from a magazine. Because of the forum limitations I cannot upload the full 400k image of it, so the pics here are almost like thumbnails compared to the one I uploaded in the CDF.

Without boosters I don't think the range can go far. The range would be comparable to a MICA or Sea Sparrow launched via VLS. However do note that the PL-12/SD-10 is bigger (wider in diameter, longer and heavier) than the MICA or AMRAAM.

It does appear like the missile is cold launched.

The Orekh like illuminators or what we assumed might be illuminators may be something else, like targeting and tracking radars that would datalink with the missile to handle its midphase flight.

Does not make sense at all to me that someone would still introduce a SARH guided SAM now that you have mastered active radar guidance against aircraft. It would make sense to me if China wants to maximize its PL-12 investment by introducing it in AAM and SAM versions. We have already seen a picture of a PL-12 SAM testing off a vehicle two years ago.

Lately there is a clip shown on CCTV commerating the PL-12's successful launch. This kind of ceremony, although dated and late, does signal that the missile has been fully accepted into the PLA, is in mass production and in operational deployment with those that could use it. And now you are going into further steps in the evolutionary chain with new variants that includes SAM versions. This is an indication of a maturing phase of a design.

well, it certainly is better to have active guided missiles, but I guess in that case, it's just saying that the Sea Eagle radar is not capable of providing mid course correction. Otherwise, I really don't see why you want to put those illuminators there. I certainly expected HH-16 to be similar in size to PL-12, but I guess we just need to wait for more information at this point.

[planeman]

A VLS PL-12 is an interesting idea and wouldn't be a total surprise, but it wouldn't have the range of the SA-N-12.

Here are my range estimate:
PL-12 (air launched) - best conditions - 80km
PL-12 (air-launched) - low alt low speed launch against agile target - 30km
PL-12 SAM slant hot launched - 50km
PL-12 SAM VLS cold - 40km
PL-12 SAM VLS hot - 30km
PL-12 SAM VLS booster hot launched - 40km+ depending on size/duration of booster

Ok, using the VLS Naval MICA as a benchmark for what we could expect from a VLS PL-12, MBDA quotes the altitude limit as 33,000ft ~ 10km vertically. Interestingly that suggests the maximum range is significantly further than the "more than 10km" generally quoted - maybe 30km(?). -In fact the ASTER-15 also from MBDA has a quoted altitude limit of 10km and a quoted range limit of 30km... fits nicely.

[Totoro]

30 km range is quite enough. Basically, I see max 3 categories of SAMs needed on ships, with one of them being optional. Optional is RAM like missile, for very close defense, up to 10 km. Second category is something small and agile that can engage targets as soon as they pop over the horizon. Thats where hq16 should come in, and for that it doesn't need range over 30 km. Last category is SAMs designed to mainly deal with incoming planes, engaging them before they can shoot their missiles. That requires hundreds of kms of range, permanent airborne surveillance and active terminal guidance for over horizon engagements.

Problems there are: A) missile launched in mid air will always have longer range than one launched from a ship, so that may be a futile race in the long run. B) Radar absorbant materials, which are a mainstay of radar stealth, work better when used in layers/thickness which are too much for usual missile size.

[guitarjeff]

the other 054A from HP here
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/3336/054ahpnov2at7.jpg
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/273/054ahpnov22aa6.jpg
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/3755/054ahpnov23vw8.jpg
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/9246/054ahpnov24af9.jpg
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/461/054ahpnov25uy8.jpg

It is pretty ironic that the ship has the "photographing is prohibited" banners hung all over it. I honestly don't understand what the management at the Huangpu Yard is trying to hide. Afterall, a model of the ship was shown at an exhibit years ago, and these pictures don't really show anything new other than feeding the enthusiasm of the naval afficionados. The whole world (at least those of us who choose to care about the project) knows about the existence of these ships. Obviously somebody in the management has too much time (and resources) on their hands.

[kunmingren]

It is pretty ironic that the ship has the "photographing is prohibited" banners hung all over it. I honestly don't understand what the management at the Huangpu Yard is trying to hide. Afterall, a model of the ship was shown at an exhibit years ago, and these pictures don't really show anything new other than feeding the enthusiasm of the naval afficionados. The whole world (at least those of us who choose to care about the project) knows about the existence of these ships. Obviously somebody in the management has too much time (and resources) on their hands.

I dont think the "no photographing sign" or the futile attempt to cover up the ship is meant to keep the ship under secrecy. Its more likely that they just want to discourage those people from disrupting the shipyard's operation. If i was a worker on that ship, i certainly wouldnt want my face posted on any internet forum.

Anyway, i thought frigate wasnt suppose to be for fleet airdefense, wouldnt the HQ-7 be enough for 054 to defend against missiles? the other ship in the fleet can also fend for themselves, and 052C can protect assets like aircraft carrier.

i guess my question is that why do 054 need new SAM system? French ships are armed with Sea Croatale and they seem to be fine with it.

[adeptitus]

i guess my question is that why do 054 need new SAM system? French ships are armed with Sea Croatale and they seem to be fine with it.

The current trend is to replace traditional turret launchers with VLS cels, which allows you to launch more missiles in shorter time. VLS systems also offer better 360-degree interception.

Like the British Sea Wolf VLS, the PLAN could develop a light-weight VLS version of the HQ-7 in 4 or 8-cel configuration. The Israeli Barak SAM, for example, is advertised as having lower weight and structural modification requirement for ease of installation.

As for "new" missiles, like the SA-N-12, it's faster, longer range, and can intercept more targets than the HQ-7.

[swimmerXC]

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/8559/054a110506mq5.jpg

[swimmerXC]

The new VLS might be SD-10 based.

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/4985/vls111406sp0.jpg

[stimpy75]

Hi everybody,just found a russian website about navy matters,where are many real cool drawings,although i can´t read and understand russian,it´s real impressive drawings ,here for example,for further info,just visit the site
http://www.worldnavy.info/specification/
and klick through it

[Jeff Head]

I guess we just need to wait for more information at this point.Here's the best line art of the two versions I have found:

TYPE 054 MAANSHAN
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k279/shipbucket/CFFType054MAANSHAN1-1.gif

TYPE 054A JIANKAI
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k279/shipbucket/CFFType054AJIANKAI1.gif

[tphuang]

latest picture of the launched 054A from Huangpu
http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/1721/054ahpnov22oq1.jpg

[ying1978]

Taken by the same guy as tphuang's picture:

http://img150.imagevenue.com/loc480/th_13310_10_3_3b285541e84ac21_122_480lo.jpg (http://img150.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=13310_10_3_3b285541e84ac21_122_480lo .jpg)

http://img16.imagevenue.com/loc368/th_13320_10_3_5d60132a7401147_122_368lo.jpg (http://img16.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=13320_10_3_5d60132a7401147_122_368lo .jpg)

[ying1978]

Progress at HD:

http://img138.imagevenue.com/loc525/th_17541_3_34639_4bd92ee167abb80_122_525lo.jpg (http://img138.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=17541_3_34639_4bd92ee167abb80_122_52 5lo.jpg)

[tphuang]

well, this is taken by the same guy at Huangpu, a little closer view
http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/3765/054ahpnov23fa9.jpg

[mehdi]

There is a comment that should interest many of you. Look carefully at the Type 730 CIWS and you will see that it is smaller than those on other Chinese Destroyers. Perhaps some work on reducing the size of the CIWS ????

[PeoplesPoster]

There is a comment that should interest many of you. Look carefully at the Type 730 CIWS and you will see that it is smaller than those on other Chinese Destroyers. Perhaps some work on reducing the size of the CIWS ????

Looks the same size to me, it's just turned sideways.

[challenge]

054A look like compact version of 168/169 DDG,frigate size ship carrying 169 DDG weapon and radar system.
PLAN may have realized that 168/169 is to expensive to maintain,therefore they decided upgrade 054 ,carrying the 168/169 radar.weapon and sensor .

[challenge]

do I speculate follow up to 054A? something like 054B in the future.possible that PLAN may have planning 054A version with 170/171 radar system.the technology do exist.already small AESA small enough to fit it small frigate or even corvette providing the small ship "cut down" AEGIS type platform.Israel plan to install MLSTAR type radar system for Saar type corvette,norwegian and spanish navy already using SPY-2 AESA radar system.

[tphuang]

alright, more stuff from HuDong shipyard. I also posted one with just 071 on the 071 thread.
Looks like HD's 054A is starting to finally shape up
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/2213/054ahd1nov24ue0.jpg
http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/248/054ahd1nov242ty1.jpg
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/6681/054ahd1nov243pv0.jpg
now, they claim this is the 2nd 054A under construction in HD.
http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/2100/054ahd2nov24in4.jpg

[ying1978]

http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/248/054ahd1nov242ty1.jpg


The bridge of the 071 is beginning to take shape. :china:
So far, they've been sticking quite close to the first model we saw several years ago.

[tphuang]

054As from HD
The first one
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/5931/054ahdnov29ob0.jpg
The second one
http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/6568/054ahd2nov29ks8.jpg

[guitarjeff]

054As from HD

The second one
http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/6568/054ahd2nov29ks8.jpg

Are we sure that this is indeed the second 054A hull? It is way to early to draw the conclusion. For all concerned this could very well be the corvette constructed for the Thai Navy.

[Jeff Head]

Are we sure that this is indeed the second 054A hull? It is way to early to draw the conclusion. For all concerned this could very well be the corvette constructed for the Thai Navy.In my opinion, this picture makes it very clear that this vessel is indeed a Type 054A.

http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/248/054ahd1nov242ty1.jpg

[tphuang]

Are we sure that this is indeed the second 054A hull? It is way to early to draw the conclusion. For all concerned this could very well be the corvette constructed for the Thai Navy.
I guess you can wait a few weeks for more photos to come out. That will be the best evidence.

I think PLAN might take a couple of paths here.
1) continue production after the first 4 054As and just improve different sensors and control systems and iron out the problems.
2) go through the same process as 054 to 054A and make a similar leap in 054A to 054B.
I wonder which one they will take.

[mehdi]

Type 054B I never heard of that can you elaborate please.

[tphuang]

Type 054B I never heard of that can you elaborate please.

nothing special, just the successor to 054A (I presume there will be one at some point).

alright, I'm not sure if this is new or not, since it looks like every other 054A picture, anyhow, here it goes, with a type 22 beside it.
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/5170/054ahpdec2ea2.jpg

latest photo of the first 054A from HP shipyard. Looks just like before to be honest, I wonder when we will get to see several picture of the VLS.
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/7097/054ahpdec9sw1.jpg

[mehdi]

I was thinking that the future of the Chinese navy would be to incorporate cruise missiles in the design of new warships

[yanyan25]

will VLS ASROC be installed in this type 054A? I think the China lacks to counter the US in this field. they should concentrate it.

[Gollevainen]

will VLS ASROC be installed in this type 054A? I think the China lacks to counter the US in this field. they should concentrate it

No, becouse there isen't any operational ASW missile system available for chinese surface combatants. The only possiple choise would be the Klub-N system with it's assosiated ASw missiles, but it's not going to be fitted to these ships. There was a photoshoped picture of the model of the ship which showed a "seccond" VLS which was claimed to hold some sort of ASw weapon system, but it was nothing more than a fraud, attempt to BS us...

But it's true, the ASW is the biggest default in PLAN and they should really start showing some concern towards it. But as the slow but firm growth to become a bluewater navy has already started, I think in the future we will see some progress made in this field also. A not just a decade ago, the airdefence of PLAN was in similar state and look what happened! It's just that you didn't build the Rome in one night;)

[Kilo636]

No, becouse there isen't any operational ASW missile system available for chinese surface combatants. The only possiple choise would be the Klub-N system with it's assosiated ASw missiles, but it's not going to be fitted to these ships. There was a photoshoped picture of the model of the ship which showed a "seccond" VLS which was claimed to hold some sort of ASw weapon system, but it was nothing more than a fraud, attempt to BS us...

But it's true, the ASW is the biggest default in PLAN and they should really start showing some concern towards it. But as the slow but firm growth to become a bluewater navy has already started, I think in the future we will see some progress made in this field also. A not just a decade ago, the airdefence of PLAN was in similar state and look what happened! It's just that you didn't build the Rome in one night;)

I think PLAN just don't see it wise to invest in anti-sub capabilities as nowdays conventional sub and SSN are hard to deter even by the most advance sonar. When electric sub operating in silent mode by travelling in slow speed making it even more difficult as demonstrated by NATO war exercise and recent Song stalking US CVN.

PLAN with plenty of sub will compensate lack of anti-sub capabilties by having sub escorting the fleet as having the both attack option and defense option. Yes,it is not the most effective. But i believe this is the present doctrine of PLAN with regards to build up. The most economical way to upgrade yr ASW is to build more sub as PLAN do not want to divert additional resources from sub build up..

PLAN with 10 MING 035G, 14 SONG, 2 Yuan 12 KILO and at least a dozen Romeo not including 4 Han and at least 2 093 will give taiwan and USN a headache...

[Gollevainen]

I think PLAN just don't see it wise to invest in anti-sub capabilities as nowdays conventional sub and SSN are hard to deter even by the most advance sonar. When electric sub operating in silent mode by travelling in slow speed making it even more difficult as demonstrated by NATO war exercise and recent Song stalking US CVN

Thats no exuse, and the reports of SSKs effiency is even bigger reason to start paying attention to it. ASW is not some minor role which you can utterly ignore, it's the key element of naval warware since the introducting of submarines. ASW operations are complicated and requires alot from all aspects of your fleet and the overall ASW cabapility pretty much sums up your navy's change to survive in modern naval warfare. The fact that modern subs are becomming more silent and capaple is not the reason to stop investing on ASW, doing so would be ridicilous. It's like trowing your hands up and say "I surrender". Should chinese airdefence just rest and quit for the day when their current systems are unable to properly detect new shtealth planes?

PLAN with plenty of sub will compensate lack of anti-sub capabilties by having sub escorting the fleet as having the both attack option and defense option. Yes,it is not the most effective. But i believe this is the present doctrine of PLAN with regards to build up. The most economical way to upgrade yr ASW is to build more sub as PLAN do not want to divine additional resources from sub build up

Concerating the ASW abilities to just subs is not the solution, it's as effective if your only way to destroy a enemy tank is using ATGMs. If the subs are your only ASW assets, it narrows your fleets overall efficiency to very minium. Using only subs means your ASW ability is limited to the coastal work and to small escort. It's like having only point-defence airdefence systems, but no multi-layer long range fleet defence.

To become a bluewater navy is sum of many things and if one element is lacking, the whole ability is lost or in this case not gained. If china wishes ever to grew from small naval player to the big boys league, it should start paying attention to it's defaults, which I'm sure it is doing. The fact that the overall ASw cabability of PLAN is still weak is that the whole prosess is still at it's starting point. China needs to developt new and more powerfull sonarsystems which is not an easy task when starting to build it from the scrats. It needs to incorporate these new sonars to operational use, and that requires completely new doctrines and operational methods. Training to do that takes time and at the moment these projects are not even ready.
With sonars you can only listen and detect the enemy subs, then you need to destroy them. China needs to field workable modern ASW weapon system (missile system would be good) which needs to be adjusted to the new future sonar systems, but also with the main ASW helicopter in use...

There is still long way to china to walk (or swim;)) before it's fleet modernisation is complete.

[adeptitus]

The 054/054A are more GP (General Purpose) Frigates than ASW platforms. The PLAN is quite lacking in the ASW department. They need everything from better sonars, towed array sonars, towed acoustic decoy, ASW Missile (ASROC), etc.

Many of these systems can be imported from the Russians. While not as advanced as the western counterparts, it'd at least give the PLAN something to work with and improve upon.

[tphuang]

The 054/054A are more GP (General Purpose) Frigates than ASW platforms. The PLAN is quite lacking in the ASW department. They need everything from better sonars, towed array sonars, towed acoustic decoy, ASW Missile (ASROC), etc.

Many of these systems can be imported from the Russians. While not as advanced as the western counterparts, it'd at least give the PLAN something to work with and improve upon.
China's ASW platforms are very green-water. They believe in using submarines against submarines (which honestly is the best ASW tool) and also sub-chasers against submarines. They do have a little of each thing you mentionned, but they need continual improvements there. Of course, that also includes Torpedoes.

[isthvan]

China's ASW platforms are very green-water. They believe in using submarines against submarines (which honestly is the best ASW tool) and also sub-chasers against submarines. They do have a little of each thing you mentionned, but they need continual improvements there. Of course, that also includes Torpedoes.

Chinese ASW strategy seams to be green-water oriented... While I agree that sub against sub is probably best strategy PLAN lacks capability to successfully deploy subs beyond coastal reach.SSKs are joust not suited for blue water operations and SSNs PLAN has aren't numerous nor sophisticated enough to take that task...

[su-27]

I think strange that China isn't working on new ASW weapons. The CY-1 proves that are studies about. In Wikipedia there are talks about an improved weapon based on CY-1 and called CY-3.

[Scratch]

Probably even China is now on a stage where it has to set priorities. There are not that many nations that have sub-capabilites wich would endanger the PLAN. And those nations that do are probably to strong anyway for a conflict. On the other hand, there are several nations with surface and airborne capabilites, so better focus on that first. When you've done so, you can counter those navys and catch up with the leading ones on the surface and then go with your subs.

[guitarjeff]

Is the Russian SS-N-15 Starfish ASW missile up for sale? If so it could be used as a stop gap measure until an indigenous system is available. A ship with a dual hanger housing 2 Mi-29s dedicated to ASW duty would also help. All this makes me wonder whether the PLAN should develop a large ASW/general purpose ship using the 052B hull, the aforementioned systems, C-803 antiship missiles, and a point defense VLS SAM system similar to that found on the 054A.

[tphuang]

Chinese ASW strategy seams to be green-water oriented... While I agree that sub against sub is probably best strategy PLAN lacks capability to successfully deploy subs beyond coastal reach.SSKs are joust not suited for blue water operations and SSNs PLAN has aren't numerous nor sophisticated enough to take that task...

yeah, I'd imagine in a PLAN carrier battle group, 2 093s would probably do the majority of ASW work. I'm not saying that the sonar on the existing ships and ASW helicopters are useless, but China is heavily reliant on its SSNs against much quieter SSKs. That's why I'm a lot more worried that China's torpedo arsenal is weak compared to most Western navies rather than worrying about not having something like ASROC.

[adeptitus]

Is the Russian SS-N-15 Starfish ASW missile up for sale? If so it could be used as a stop gap measure until an indigenous system is available. A ship with a dual hanger housing 2 Mi-29s dedicated to ASW duty would also help. All this makes me wonder whether the PLAN should develop a large ASW/general purpose ship using the 052B hull, the aforementioned systems, C-803 antiship missiles, and a point defense VLS SAM system similar to that found on the 054A.

Unfortunately no. Currently Russian's export catalog only lists RPK-9 (SS-N-29) light ASW missile, and Klub-N 91RE1/RE2 medium ASW missiles.

I'd like to see an ASW version of the 054. I think we discussed that one pretty extensively in prior threads, lol.

[tphuang]

These are the pictures from Huangpu shipyard.
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/9211/054ahpdec18gm0.jpg
the one still in construction
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/2222/054ahp2dec18pq2.jpg

[crobato]

The so called Orekh domes there now seem too round to be Orekhs to me. They could be tracking radars with high frequency direct line of sight datalinks.

[planeman]

The top picture in Tphuang's last post confirms that it has a varient of the Russian AK-176 76mm main gun in place of the more typical French origin 100mm gun.

[Gollevainen]

In this angle perhaps...but in other angels those things looks exactly like the Orekhs...

...We need to wait untill the canvans are take away, then we can make more proper assumptions...

[Gollevainen]

well not so long afterwards...
http://i12.tinypic.com/2mpbswy.jpg
http://i14.tinypic.com/2v0c2v7.jpg

Is it just me but doesent they look suspiciosly white and plastic??

There is just something wrong in the pictures, but I hate to be wrong...but seriosly, nothing is that white.......Looks like someone has took a pic from some model kit, put little plastic bags atop the orekhs and placed it with the bow and main gun of th 071....

[swimmerXC]

well not so long afterwards...
http://i12.tinypic.com/2mpbswy.jpg
http://i14.tinypic.com/2v0c2v7.jpg

Is it just me but doesent they look suspiciosly white and plastic??

There is just something wrong in the pictures, but I hate to be wrong...but seriosly, nothing is that white.......Looks like someone has took a pic from some model kit, put little plastic bags atop the orekhs and placed it with the bow and main gun of th 071....

pictures been brightened with photoshop...

[tphuang]

pictures been brightened with photoshop...
yeah, it looks a little too bright. Also, same thing with the 071 LPD. It looks a little too bright to me. Never mind after looking at the previous 071 pictures from the 16th, it looks alright. 054A just stands out looking really weird.

[planeman]

If they are faked, then they are extremely consistant in small details, like the port datalink radome being blue rather than white. I reckon it's just a basic photo-enhancement.

Re the Type-054A, those four fire control radars look different to on previous warships. They are huge.

Re the Type-071, that's also an AK-176 76mm main gun.

Golly, look again at the pic Tphuang posted, there is no green cover on the main gun and it's clearly an AK-176 with the 'new' casing.

[tphuang]

generally, the picture looks real enough, anyhow. this is the final one coming out of HD.
http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/5703/054ahd2dec19if0.jpg
They were speculating this to be a new 054A, but it looks to be earlier in the construction than the first photos of the second 054A we saw.

[crobato]

In this angle perhaps...but in other angels those things looks exactly like the Orekhs...

...We need to wait untill the canvans are take away, then we can make more proper assumptions...


They look like Orekhs in the new picture, but wait, that's just way too big to be Orekhs.v For illuminators they're huge.

[Gollevainen]

the new pics are in my obinion a model scale to PS into real picture of the 071in building....But I agree, they look rather odd, too big and the radome part is too small and short.

[swimmerXC]

Here ya go Planeman, you can get a good guess now of the length of the 054A
http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8359/054a122006zx9.jpg

[crobato]

Too big to be actual Orekhs, unless the Orekhs themselves just have a revision we don't know about, which is unlikely though.

Still if these work as illuminators, you have to be bigger for a reason, and that usually means more power emission and greater signal gain from a larger antenna. This can mean the illumination range may be longer than the Orekhs, and quite possibly, the missiles may have a longer range than Shtil. This does not look like navalized SD-10 at this point. Leaves me with more questions than answers.

[tphuang]

this is posted in several places, but I figure might as well add it here.
原刊登于<解放日报>2006.12.20第五版
- from "PLA daily" on december 20th
中华人民共和国上海海事局航行通告
黄浦江新船出坞,部分江面禁止通航 沪海航[2006]493号 ]
huangpu river (in Shanghai) has new ships coming out, prohibit traffic
时间:2006年12月21日10:00至11:00及16:00至17:00
in 21st of December from 10 to 11 am and 4 to 5 pm
地点:沪东中华造船(集团)有限公司船坞上下游各500米距岸350米水哉.
Hudong shipyard has launching ship
作业方式:新船出坞后由5艘大马力拖轮协助拖码头靠泊.
method, new ship getting launched using 5 (something)
注意事项:1.作业期间实行临时交通管制;
2.下水前15分钟,船厂和下水船应在明显易见处显示规定信号;
3.临时拆除*8系船浮筒,待出坞完毕再复设;
4.作业和航行时船舶应注意VHF守听,并听众现场巡逻艇的指挥.

[swimmerXC]

BTW I don't know if you guys noticed but you see that orange/red box? Isn't that the VLS?

[tphuang]

BTW I don't know if you guys noticed but you see that orange/red box? Isn't that the VLS?
sorry to disappoint you, that's the banners in Chinese saying that photos are prohibited.

[swimmerXC]

sorry to disappoint you, that's the banners in Chinese saying that photos are prohibited.

I was referring to this pic >_>
http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/1915/054a121906eys3.jpg
http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/1507/054a121906fxr5.jpg

[crobato]

BTW I don't know if you guys noticed but you see that orange/red box? Isn't that the VLS?

Might be yeah. I can't think of anything else what it could be. If that is so, then there is a VLS also in the back and that's the logical place to put it. The hanger structure does appear lengthened compard to the original 054.

The size of the box gives you an approximate idea what the size of the missile might be.

[tphuang]

sorry Swimmer,

anyway, pictures from HD 054A getting launched.
actually, mostly images of 071, but 054A is in the background
http://img386.imageshack.us/img386/4451/071dec21wr0.jpg
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/695/071dec212ce9.jpg
http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/7267/071dec213zz3.jpg
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/2753/054ahddec21cs4.jpg

[tphuang]

even more, these are the ones that show more of 054A's sensors than ever before.
http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/4435/054ahddec212tw2.jpg
http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/8211/054ahdfrontdec21zk9.jpg
http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/1586/054ahdradarsdec21st5.jpg
http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/7228/054ahddec213sq0.jpg
http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/7872/071dec164sv6.jpg

[mehdi]

Hey tphuang thanks for the update and about the pics showing vls at the back of the 054A is it real????

Secondly is there any difference with this 054A compared to the 054A's already built!!!

[Gollevainen]

There isent no VSLs in the back, all the rumours of them are based on the crude PS of the model...
And the new close ups doesent look that PS as the pics with larger pics, wich still looks too sharp to be real....

Also, if its real, could it be that its the first 054A, and the older pics with more greyish hull aside the single type22 are from bit longer from the past???

But as for the Orekhs, if we believe that Russian officals claim, that they súpplied the weapon kit, could it be that when the new SA-N-12 and its VSL mode is available, the old Orekhs are replaced with improved model.
If we want to believe in chinese modification, HHQ-16 as a chinese version of Sthill family comes to my mind...

[tphuang]

There isent no VSLs in the back, all the rumours of them are based on the crude PS of the model...
And the new close ups doesent look that PS as the pics with larger pics, wich still looks too sharp to be real....

Also, if its real, could it be that its the first 054A, and the older pics with more greyish hull aside the single type22 are from bit longer from the past???

But as for the Orekhs, if we believe that Russian officals claim, that they súpplied the weapon kit, could it be that when the new SA-N-12 and its VSL mode is available, the old Orekhs are replaced with improved model.
If we want to believe in chinese modification, HHQ-16 as a chinese version of Sthill family comes to my mind...

oops, I wanted to actually post this image
http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/6516/071dec214fx5.jpg
The last image of my last post isn't really from yesterday.
I don't think HHQ-16 has to be a Chinese version of shtil family. There were some Russian help on the project, they could very well have been helping to get the HHQ-16 work with Orekhs.

[planeman]

Fantastic pics of both the O54A and O71! Bravo!

Re the orange container, far more likely just a ventilation related construction element similar to the blue containers which house site offices etc on the helipads of both the 071 & 054A during the later phases of construction. The which polysomethinguphane tubes coming out of it make it look very much construction and very little VLS.

[crobato]

I think its a new Orekh variant. Not only is it bigger, but the way it looks the body have been recasted to have a lower RCS signature, "stealthified" if you will.

[tphuang]

alright, more photos of 054A from HP shipyard. This time, we get a better look at the VLS, although too many photos, so I will leave that for the next post
http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/9584/054ahpdec22wt9.jpg
http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/158/054ahpdec222ms7.jpg

[tphuang]

alright, the more close up looks on the VLS
http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/3323/054ahpvlsdec22rs1.jpg
http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/5917/054ahpvlsdec222xr4.jpg
http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/8960/054ahpvlsdec223wp9.jpg
http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/8114/054ahpvlsdec224cp2.jpg
http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/79/054ahpvlsdec225vs2.jpg

In my opinion, it looks like 8 x 4.

[tphuang]

anyhow, similar to type 71 LPD. I'm showing some close up shots of 054A from HD.
http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/8870/054ahddec23wf2.jpg
http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/5578/054ahddec232ja1.jpg
I got some pictures of FCR, type 730 and the main gun here
http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/4852/054ahddec23illuminatornb1.jpg
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/4834/054ahddec23maingunoh0.jpg
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/7069/054ahddec23type730sn2.jpg

[tphuang]

alright, I missed one with the last post, this is the one that I think is Sea Eagle and some people think is top plate
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/7735/054ahddec23searchradarpz0.jpg

[Gollevainen]

So it seems...By simply outward looks it resamples more of the Type 381 radar than Fregat, tough the first one has only one plate...but apparently chinese have evolved the design with the two-plate configuration from the russian system...

[adeptitus]

This is gonna sound a bit weird, but that VLS platform reminds me of the SA-N-9.

I think it's unlikely that it'd be the Kinzhal, but for some odd reason it just resembles one covered up to me.

[tphuang]

So it seems...By simply outward looks it resamples more of the Type 381 radar than Fregat, tough the first one has only one plate...but apparently chinese have evolved the design with the two-plate configuration from the russian system...
could be, type 381 is also referred to as Sea Eagle on huitong's site. Could just be a further development in that series like how the type 360 radar also apparently having different versions.

Anyhow, this is going back in time, but a photo of 525 with 886 supply ship
http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/8251/886525dec23kk1.jpg

Back to the present day, more 054A from HD
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/7841/054ahddec24tt0.jpg
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2614/054ahddec242ml1.jpg

[tphuang]

I wonder if the photos will stop, but here are more from today.
http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/7116/054ahddec243bk7.jpg
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/3893/054ahddec244is7.jpg
http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/9547/054ahddec245yz6.jpg
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/6600/054ahddec246bi8.jpg

[sumdud]

What's with the brown spot on the side of the ship?

[Totoro]

Dirt from smoke? Doesn't need to be fire, though.

[tphuang]

the second 054A from Huangpu
according to the guy who posted these pictures, he went to HP and saw that the VLS is square for sure and there are 32 cells.
http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/2658/054ahp2dec29ee3.jpg
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/2852/054ahp2dec292uy8.jpg
http://img47.imageshack.us/img47/324/054ahp2ak176ma7.jpg

[tphuang]

random musing, compare the number of rows on antenna, from Chinese forum
This is for 052B's top plate
http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/5913/052bsearchradarbz1.jpg
guy posted this counted around 36 rows
This for 054A's top plate
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/5276/054asearchradarde4.jpg
apparently 56 on this.
This is Sea Eagle
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/2825/seaeagleradarlm3.jpg
apparently 70 rows on this.

I'm too lazy to count it up, so don't hold me accountable if the numbers are incorrect.

[Gollevainen]

There is more easier way to determine that these radars are different than counting the rows...Just look what is between the plates. The arms that supports the plates are different in the chinese and the russian radars.

[bd popeye]

What's with the brown spot on the side of the ship?

I don't think it's from a fire. Looks like it could be a fuel spill from refueling. That's very common on board warships.

[planeman]

Re the radar. lol, the 'rear' plate is merely rotated about 90degrees between the first two pictures. The rotation system is less telling as it differs noticibly between all three photos.

[sumdud]

I don't think it's from a fire. Looks like it could be a fuel spill from refueling. That's very common on board warships.

Problem is: are fuel spills suppose to be that big? And I doubt the refueling port is next to a dinghy port...

[bd popeye]

Problem is: are fuel spills suppose to be that big? And I doubt the refueling port is next to a dinghy port...


Thats' not uncommon on warships for the refueling probe to be close to the dingy's(small boats) But we can only speculate what that brown stuff is?

Fuel spills during replenishment at sea can be quite large. I've seen some real messes.

[tphuang]

latest picture from HD on 054A
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/9310/054ahdjan1mh2.jpg
http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/9470/054ahdjan12mu1.jpg
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/3830/054ahdjan13fj4.jpg
http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/5081/054ahdjan14el1.jpg
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/7665/054ahdjan15vo0.jpg

[planeman]

latest picture from HD on 054A
http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/5081/054ahdjan14el1.jpg
The SSM fitting looks a lot like the blast ramp of the Type-054's YJ-83 tubes but it doesn't look like an exact match IMO - very close though. Things seem to be pointing towards yJ-83 on the Type-054As as well, which will be a bit of a blow to the PLAN nut riders bforum brigade :roll:
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/2121/type054missilear4.jpg
Note that the YJ-62 tubes on the Type-052C don't have any fixtures that match these on the Type-054A:
http://img489.imageshack.us/img489/148/c602tubescr1.jpg

Pity, I was rather hoping to see YJ-62s. :coffee:

[sumdud]

(For those looking forward to YJ-62s)Well, you have to say, Yj-62s aren't exactly frigate size SSMs. They are more of an overkill. They are heavy. And someone needs to use this missile, of course.

And think of it this way: What improvement does the YJ-62 have over the YJ-8?
Speed? We thought so.
Guidance? We don't know much about it.
It is a dual-use missile w/ LACM/semi-LACM abilities. You don't need that on a frigate.
It has more range; it's a frigate, 150km is enough.

So what does extra abilities does it have?
A larger warhead. But that also mean you will have a bulkier, heavier missile. And notice, it is not as "stealthy". The YJ-8X flies at 5-7m altitude final; YJ-62 does 7-10. Lower you fly, the harder for one to detect you, and harder for missiles to strike you.

[tphuang]

hehe, either way, some new pictures of 054A in HD coming out.
http://img488.imageshack.us/img488/9549/054ahdjan6io6.jpg
http://img472.imageshack.us/img472/1844/054ahdjan62td4.jpg

[tphuang]

more new photos of 054A from HD
http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/2339/054ahdjan8dg0.jpg
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/3421/054ahdjan82hi3.jpg

[tphuang]

some pictures from the HP shipyard.

Note: according to the poster that went to HP shipyard. Other than the 3 type 22s you see in these pictures (two in water + 1 in construction), 6 other are also getting painted. So there are 9 type 22s alone in this shipyard. Gives you an idea of the production here. Also, the 3rd 054A is about to move in after this 2nd 054A is launched.
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/6629/054ahp2jan11ub2.jpg
http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/4109/054ahp2jan112zu3.jpg

[guitarjeff]

Also, the 3rd 054A is about to move in after this 2nd 054A is launched.


It's about time the PLAN replaces those old Jianghus with more modern 054As. Putting sailors onto those air condition-less relics with no point defense SAMs is an embarassment if not a crime.

[tphuang]

many new pictures from HP shipyard.
First, the first 054A, looks like some of the work on the foremast are done.
http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/1723/054ahpjan13pg3.jpg
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/108/054ahpjan132zd7.jpg
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/2183/054ahpjan133ux8.jpg

Now, the second 054A, notice how the type 22 from last picture is moved out and they have a new ship in there?
http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/9963/054ahp2jan13wq2.jpg
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/5634/054ahp2jan132xo2.jpg

[tphuang]

new pictures of the sensors.
What does that sensor on the middle step look like? The one with the receiver?
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/4268/054ahpforemastfv5.jpg
AK-176 main gun
http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/2451/054ahpak176jan13nv4.jpg
The Orekh FCRs
http://img47.imageshack.us/img47/193/054ahporekhjan13zl9.jpg
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/9086/054ahporekhjan132zv5.jpg

[tphuang]

alright, I think we've all been waiting for this. Now that we can see the 16 VLS launchers, how many cells do you guys think are per launchers?
http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/8905/054ahpvlsjan13xq2.jpg
http://img119.imageshack.us/img119/1898/054ahpvlsjan132ug2.jpg
Note, this picture is just comparing to a previous picture of catching a corner of the VLS launcher
http://img119.imageshack.us/img119/6996/054ahpvlsjan133wk8.jpg
http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/5920/054ahpvlsjan134qk6.jpg
http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/3937/054ahpvlsak176jan13nj0.jpg

Does anyone still think it uses shtil?

[tphuang]

more photos from a little further out
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/4640/054ahpjan134qk5.jpg
This time further out enough that you can see those 2 type 22s parked beside it
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/3153/054ahpjan135lz0.jpg
and again of the second 054A, does anyone think that's the 3rd 054A beside it?
http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/1189/054ahp2jan133ms6.jpg

[swimmerXC]

http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/3937/054ahpvlsak176jan13nj0.jpg

Does anyone still think it uses shtil?

seems pretty small considering that guy's butt is covering almost 1/4 of the VLS, if he sat from one end to another it probably go from the end of his butt to his knee
compare it to the HQ-9 VLS when probably a person's height is probably a little smaller than the diameter of the VLS
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/805/vls11307za9.jpg

[tphuang]

well, it all depends on how wide HH-16 is at this point, then that would give a better assessment. Anyhow, I was talking about this sensor
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/5586/054ahpforemast2ts1.jpg
another photo of 054A with type 22s
http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/9083/054ahp022jan13cb9.jpg
btw, it's interesting that they lowered on Z-9C on there this time instead of ka-28

[planeman]

That VLS confuses the hell outta me. Going by the FCR I was sure it was going to be a VLS version of the Shtil, but the VLS hatches simply don't match, not anywhere near in fact. For a start there are only 16 hatches implying only 16 missiles.

We can safely guess that they aren't SSMs because there is a clear SSM set-up amidships behind the bridge (identical to the Type-054's suggesting YJ-83 rather than YJ-62)?

Then again they could be Klub? Either ASW or land attack? Or LACMs of Chinese origin.

Shtil VLS: http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=727&d=1161525563

Artist's impression of PL-12 VLS: http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=751&d=1162540333

Klub VLS: http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/9712/3c14eld9.jpg

http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/5610/type054vlsmy9.jpg
These VLS hatches are about 0.75m across. The hinges are on the outside so probably they are wider than long, but the missile inside can't have a launch diameter of more than about 0.7m which is not a big deal since that includes most anti-ship missiles (Harpoon etc) - it's very large.


The PL-12 has a wingspan of just under 0.7m so it could be that each hatch has a single PL-12 derived missile under it, but it's hardly a compact arrangement.

The HQ-7 has a wingspan of only 0.55m:
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/surfacetoairmissile/hq76.jpg

Frankly if it's a typically Chinese non-compact arrangement with 16 HQ-7s then that'll be a huge disapointment, though hardly a surprise.

[tphuang]

That VLS confuses the hell outta me. Going by the FCR I was sure it was going to be a VLS version of the Shtil, but the VLS hatches simply don't match, not anywhere near in fact. For a start there are only 16 hatches implying only 16 missiles.

We can safely guess that they aren't SSMs because there is a clear SSM set-up amidships behind the bridge (identical to the Type-054's suggesting YJ-83 rather than YJ-62)?

Then again they could be Klub? Either ASW or land attack? Or LACMs of Chinese origin.

Shtil VLS: http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=727&d=1161525563

Artist's impression of PL-12 VLS: http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=751&d=1162540333

Klub VLS: http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/9712/3c14eld9.jpg
hmm, MK-41 only has one hatch. I'm pretty sure it holds more missiles than 1 per complex. I don't see why PLAN would put only one HH-16 in a HH-9 sized launcher. 4 ESSM or 1 SM-2. 2 is the minimum at this point in my opinion.

[Scratch]

Pic one in post #368: Is there already a helicopter on the aft of the ship, or is it just a mockup for evaluation?

Anyhow, I was talking about this sensor
A simple satalite uplink?

Are the controll-surfaces of HHQ-16s / PL-12s foldable when fitted into a launchtube?
Putting two missiles in a cylinder shaped tube is a waste of space, I would say 3 per tube is a good number.

[eecsmaster]

I think there are 32 missiles. You only see 2X8 because the launch complex is angled. We can further deduct that the missiles are cold launched.

[su-27]

In my opinion the launchers could be capable of have a singol LACM per launcher or a number of sam. Not impossible either new ASW missiles based on CY-1.

If the launchers are able to carry not only sam but other kinds of missiles, the 054a could have the same role of the FREMM design

[Gollevainen]

Now this what we all been waiting for....:china: :china: :nana:

There's clearly 16 VLS silos. Thats a fact. It reminds somewhat similar to the Rif launchers in Kirov class cruisers, but the hathces are too close together that there could be a rotary launcher bellow them. So there is 90% 16 missiles onboard. What are those missiles? Well only thing is 100 % certain and that is that they are SAMs. No ship of this class (not even chinese ships any longer) goes to sea without SAM cover.

Then what SAM system is onboard? My quess is HHQ-16 which is chinese derivation (wheter just chinese VLS for Shtill or completely chinese missile, that I don't know) from the SA-N-12 missile. All the factors speak behalf of it. The missile guidance radar set is derivation of the Fregat/Orekh suite. Basicly if you have a football field, you most likely are going to play football in it, not basket ball...

I think there are 32 missiles. You only see 2X8 because the launch complex is angled. We can further deduct that the missiles are cold launched.

???? It's not angled, at least not that much that it would hide another set of 2x8 VLS...

If the launchers are able to carry not only sam but other kinds of missiles, the 054a could have the same role of the FREMM design

If there is only 16 missilesilos, then there will only be SAMs onboard those VLS. 16 is about the minium of SAMs that is fitted in modern warships today and any number less than that (and itself seems too low to me) is a serious default.

Anyhow, I was talking about this sensor

It's the Type 347G, chinese copy of the Italian DARDO CIWS system. It's normally associated to the Type 76A and it's also intergrated to the tpye 730 CIWS system. Apparently its been set to controll the 76 mm maingun. In the 054 there where the type 344 gun control...

[eecsmaster]

look carefully at the base of the missile complex; it's not married to the centerline, which means there is a very high probability that there is another half containing 2X8 missiles.

[sumdud]

I would disagree with Golly here.
16 is awfully low, too low.
And China hasn't test with hot-launched VLS missiles yet. (At least as I remember) So this missile is most likely going to be cold-launched, meaning it will be angled, and since all of what we see here faces us, there must be another set on the other side. Maybe hidden just enough.

Rotary launcher? It's in a square.....

I doubt China has the technology to hold mutliple missiles into 1 VLS. China has barely any VLS. While China has foldable wings, I doubt foldable wings would well w/ SAMs.

[guitarjeff]

look carefully at the base of the missile complex; it's not married to the centerline, which means there is a very high probability that there is another half containing 2X8 missiles.

I agree. According to the pics from post 367, it appears that there is a "chunk" missing on the port side--the VLS system is still incomplete at this time. We should check back in a couple of weeks and see if additional 8-cell units are installed.

[adeptitus]

We'll prolly get a confirmation on the total # of SAMs soon (16 or 32).

Along with the HQ-9 this is part of PLAN's first-generation VLS SAM system. Kind of like RN's VLS Sea Wolf. At this time I doubt they're multi-use like Russian Club VLS system or American Mk.41 VLS. They're most likely dedicated SAM TLC's carrying a single missile each and not multi-packed.

Look at it this way, this is a big improvement over the old HQ-7 system. =p

If they could go back and retrofit the 054, replacing the HQ-7 and using the elevated platform for 16-cel VLS, it'd be an improvement over the existing HQ-7 SAM system.

[tphuang]

Now this what we all been waiting for....:china: :china: :nana:

There's clearly 16 VLS silos. Thats a fact. It reminds somewhat similar to the Rif launchers in Kirov class cruisers, but the hathces are too close together that there could be a rotary launcher bellow them. So there is 90% 16 missiles onboard. What are those missiles? Well only thing is 100 % certain and that is that they are SAMs. No ship of this class (not even chinese ships any longer) goes to sea without SAM cover.

Then what SAM system is onboard? My quess is HHQ-16 which is chinese derivation (wheter just chinese VLS for Shtill or completely chinese missile, that I don't know) from the SA-N-12 missile. All the factors speak behalf of it. The missile guidance radar set is derivation of the Fregat/Orekh suite. Basicly if you have a football field, you most likely are going to play football in it, not basket ball...



???? It's not angled, at least not that much that it would hide another set of 2x8 VLS...



If there is only 16 missilesilos, then there will only be SAMs onboard those VLS. 16 is about the minium of SAMs that is fitted in modern warships today and any number less than that (and itself seems too low to me) is a serious default.



It's the Type 347G, chinese copy of the Italian DARDO CIWS system. It's normally associated to the Type 76A and it's also intergrated to the tpye 730 CIWS system. Apparently its been set to controll the 76 mm maingun. In the 054 there where the type 344 gun control...
man, you really think they can only fit 1 missile that's probably no more than 200 kg in that one missile silo? In that case, they are seriously wasting 90% of space.

16 is really really low.

I doubt China has the technology to hold mutliple missiles into 1 VLS. China has barely any VLS. While China has foldable wings, I doubt foldable wings would well w/ SAMs.

so you think they would use HH-9 size silo to fit a missile that's probably 1/6 of its weight? There is no evidence that HH-16 has wings, the PL-12 is only internet speculations.

[Gollevainen]

Well Pics speaks more....
http://i11.tinypic.com/2w4a35w.jpg
http://i1.tinypic.com/2a6sdjs.jpg
(from CDF)
It could be 32 after all, I kinda forgot how beamy the ship actually is...
Thougth (even if the russian system also would had have 32 missiles) it sounds awfully lot for the missile of its size. (i have seen one in live and those are really big!!)

....well atleast we now know why such a small gun, noway would have 100mm fit to that

[tphuang]

you know, does anyone still have that picture of training ship 970 with both the HH-9 VLS complex and the HH-16 VLS complex? That would clear this up quite a bit.

[swimmerXC]

http://img116.imageshack.us/img116/6636/vls111706bfb3.jpg
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/420/97112906hm3.jpg
http://img116.imageshack.us/img116/2295/vls111706bt3.jpg
891?
http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/2616/891121906alw7.jpg

[su-27]

The FREMM will be equipped with:

an OTO MELARA 76 gun... 19 torpedoes MU-90... 8 Exocet AShW missiles and 2 complex of 16 VLS missile launchers...

The FREMM's silos will be fitted with 16 MBDA Aster-15... and
16 Scalp-eg LACMs...

The FREMM is based on Lafayette FFG... The 054 resembles the Lafayette...

What do you think?:roll:

[Gollevainen]

FREMM is considerably larger design (not to mention light years more mature) than 054A.

[tphuang]

http://img116.imageshack.us/img116/6636/vls111706bfb3.jpg
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/420/97112906hm3.jpg
http://img116.imageshack.us/img116/2295/vls111706bt3.jpg
891?
http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/2616/891121906alw7.jpg

man, that didn't seem to address anything. I found this one kind of interesting at least.
http://img460.imageshack.us/img460/5725/054ahpmastvsvlszq2.jpg

[sumdud]

Well, I don't think this VLS is as big as that of the HH-9. There is no evidence that HHQ-16 have wings, but I am going to put up a conservative stance on this. China doesn't have a working TVC yet, so wings have to be there.

It won't be too long before the Type 54A is up, so if HHQ-16 is something very new, then it should pop up just about now, just like how the face of YJ-62 popped up around the commisioning of 52Cs..... We'll see then.

[tphuang]

Well, I don't think this VLS is as big as that of the HH-9. There is no evidence that HHQ-16 have wings, but I am going to put up a conservative stance on this. China doesn't have a working TVC yet, so wings have to be there.

It won't be too long before the Type 54A is up, so if HHQ-16 is something very new, then it should pop up just about now, just like how the face of YJ-62 popped up around the commisioning of 52Cs..... We'll see then.
You know, you can just check the above pictures on 970 test ship and you would've noticed that HHQ-16 has been testing on that complex on 970 since 2004.

[sumdud]

Yea, except we haven't seen the missile..... There is just a lack of evidence.....

[planeman]

The CDF picture above trying to show how there are in fact 32 hatches doesn't convince me because the line dividing the front eight hatches from the rear eight is parallel to a base-line contecting the opposite hand supports:
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/7219/type054vlsaqp3.jpg

I really hope I'm wrong because 16 missiles is too few IMO and places the Type-054A as somewhat more towards middling among the current crop of GP frigates, and almost certainly some way behind the latest Indian Project 17s.

[planeman]

hmm, MK-41 only has one hatch. I'm pretty sure it holds more missiles than 1 per complex. I don't see why PLAN would put only one HH-16 in a HH-9 sized launcher. 4 ESSM or 1 SM-2. 2 is the minimum at this point in my opinion.
You might be forgetting that the 'old' Sea Sparrow SAMs only fitted one per tube on the Mk 41 VLS so the completely revamped Evolved Sea Sparrow (ESSM) has a signficantly smaller wingspan so that four can be fitted in.

Wing span comparisons:
RIM-7 Sea Sparrow: 0.8m
PL-12: 0.64m
HQ-7: 0.55m
SA-11/SA-N-7 & SA-17/SA-N-12: 1.1m
Standard: 1.08m

[sumdud]

Doesn't look parallel to me, but if you look at the photo with the VLS roof installation, it was roof-shaped....just very shallowly......
-----
If there are 32 hatches, then I don't think the missile would be very tall, however, since those in the middle, if long, would run their tails into each other.

[planeman]

If it is a very shallow roof shape then I'd expect to see the furthest 16 hatches just shorter in perspective.

Anyway, here's a quick analysis of missile options based on the approximate hatch size which we know to be less than 1m from front to back:
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/7070/missilediametersjg9.gif
I think that the SA-N-12 is still an option because the hatch only needs to be about 0.85m diameter if a square launch tube is used (wing span 1.1m).

I think that 4 x PL-12 is out of the question unless they get folding wings or completely new wing form (as happened to the ESSM).

[tphuang]

You might be forgetting that the 'old' Sea Sparrow SAMs only fitted one per tube on the Mk 41 VLS so the completely revamped Evolved Sea Sparrow (ESSM) has a signficantly smaller wingspan so that four can be fitted in.

Wing span comparisons:
RIM-7 Sea Sparrow: 0.8m
PL-12: 0.64m
HQ-7: 0.55m
SA-11/SA-N-7 & SA-17/SA-N-12: 1.1m
Standard: 1.08m

That's a really good point. Haven't thought of that. I guess we will see with more pictures coming out. I can't see PLAN building a ship of this weight class, dedicate so much real estate on the ship for the VLS complex and only equipping it with 16 missiles, but that's just me.

[planeman]

I can't see PLAN building a ship of this weight class, dedicate so much real estate on the ship for the VLS complex and only equipping it with 16 missiles, but that's just me.Sadly I can. This VLS is a bit of a disapointment really, we were expecting 48 missiles and we get either 16 or 32 depending on who's guessing. Given the PLANs previous indiginous SAM complexes, notably HQ-9 and HQ-7, they really don't have a good track record for space efficiency.

[swimmerXC]

Sadly I can. This VLS is a bit of a disapointment really, we were expecting 48 missiles and we get either 16 or 32 depending on who's guessing. Given the PLANs previous indiginous SAM complexes, notably HQ-9 and HQ-7, they really don't have a good track record for space efficiency.

It funny because you know if you look at this 891
http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/2616/891121906alw7.jpg
Which the 52C testbed you can see the the box shaped launchers and the round ones used on the 052C. They probably could've gone with the boxed shaped VLS but chose instead the revolver one... :confused:

[tphuang]

It funny because you know if you look at this 891
http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/2616/891121906alw7.jpg
Which the 52C testbed you can see the the box shaped launchers and the round ones used on the 052C. They probably could've gone with the boxed shaped VLS but chose instead the revolver one... :confused:

I believe the box ones are actually the launching system for HH-16. At least, that's what people on Chinese forums and that other picture you posted is saying.

[PeoplesPoster]

Well Pics speaks more....
http://i11.tinypic.com/2w4a35w.jpg
http://i1.tinypic.com/2a6sdjs.jpg
(from CDF)
It could be 32 after all, I kinda forgot how beamy the ship actually is...
Thougth (even if the russian system also would had have 32 missiles) it sounds awfully lot for the missile of its size. (i have seen one in live and those are really big!!)

....well atleast we now know why such a small gun, noway would have 100mm fit to that

This post pretty much prooves the 32 launchers. It's a view from both sides, where you can plainly see the 16 launchers on each side.

[snake65]

If it is a very shallow roof shape then I'd expect to see the furthest 16 hatches just shorter in perspective.

Anyway, here's a quick analysis of missile options based on the approximate hatch size which we know to be less than 1m from front to back:
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/7070/missilediametersjg9.gif
I think that the SA-N-12 is still an option because the hatch only needs to be about 0.85m diameter if a square launch tube is used (wing span 1.1m).

I think that 4 x PL-12 is out of the question unless they get folding wings or completely new wing form (as happened to the ESSM).

I don't have the exact wingspan of Shtil-1ME, but I guess it's significantly less than 1.1m, keeping in mind that the missile itself is 0.36m in diameter.

[adeptitus]

The FREMM will be equipped with:
an OTO MELARA 76 gun... 19 torpedoes MU-90... 8 Exocet AShW missiles and 2 complex of 16 VLS missile launchers...
The FREMM's silos will be fitted with 16 MBDA Aster-15... and
16 Scalp-eg LACMs...
The FREMM is based on Lafayette FFG... The 054 resembles the Lafayette...
What do you think?:roll:

The FREMM Frigate is 5,600+ tons, and I think only the French Navy will be equipped with the land-attack version, which use the larger DCN SYLVER A-70 VLS system that could accomodate the SCALP EG cruise missile.

The La Fayette is 3,200-3,600 tons dispalcement, and only equipped with DCN SYLVER A-43 VLS system for 16 x ASTER-15 SAMS.

Hmmm.

The original 054 Frigate was basically a Chinese La Fayette based on 1980s technology. I did a comparison entry on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_054_frigate

The 054A is basically 054 with upgraded domestic and imported Russian systems. If it's indeed equipped with 16 VLS SAM, then that'd match the updated La Fayette FFG's 16 x ASTER-15 SAMs.

The FREMM, RN Type 23 "Duke" class, Fridtjof Nansen, & Spanish F100 class all carry 32-48 SAMs, but they're also 5,000-6,000+ ton displacement and larger in size.

[su-27]

Also Italians ships will be equipped with LACMs (!!!)

The Type 23 FFGs are equipped with the sea-wolf system that is far closer than ASTER 15.

the Fridtjof Nansen, & Spanish F100 class as the same design Karel Doorman and Sachsen class are called frigates but there are real air defence DDGs so are better comparable with Oryzon air defence DDG with 48 launchers.

The question is:
If 054A have 16 launchers not strange: the 32 launchers of FREMM will be fitted with 16 SAMs and 16 LACMs, the Lafayettes will replace the crotale system with 16 ASTER-15 VLS SAMs. Note that nor FREMM neither Lafayette are equpped with CIWS but 054A have two advanced CIWS.

If the 054A have 32 launchers, my God, is more armed than FREMM (???),
I think that not all 32 will be fitted with SAMs.

If the 054A could be as capable as Lafayette I think two ways:
If will be made a mass production of 054a I think that will be employed in team with more capable multirole DDGs (I think to a 052b style).

If will be made only 3-4 ships, I think to a test design to develop a FREMM style FFG.

There are talks about first chinese CBG will be made by 11 ships: 1 Varyag, 2 052b, 2 052c, 4 054a, 2 093. Do you like?

[adeptitus]

I think the ROCN Kang Ding Class is the only La Fayette FFG with CIWS gun installed (Phalanx). They've been trying to replace the crappy SAM system on it with 16-cel TC-2 VLS for years, but I haven't seen any progress so far.

If all you want is to cram more missiles on the ship, it's possible to do with smaller SAMs like the Israeli Barak VLS, or US RAM/Sea RAM.

If you think about all the Type 76x series dual-37mm AAA guns in use... if you could replace them with something similar to the USN 11-cel Sea RAM CIWS, that'd increase the air defense capability on older PLAN ships by quite a bit.

http://navysite.de/launcher/searam_1.jpg


IMO the 054 and 054A are GP (General Purpose) FFG's and not intended for AAW/AD roles. The SAM system it carries are for self-defense only and wouldn't have the range or capability for fleet-defense.

Frigates are better suited for ASW roles. I'd like to see the PLAN build ASW flavor of the 054 FFG with towed array sonar and ASROC type weapons. For air defense, something like the 052C would be more capable with bigger and better missiles.

[tphuang]

The FREMM, RN Type 23 "Duke" class, Fridtjof Nansen, & Spanish F100 class all carry 32-48 SAMs, but they're also 5,000-6,000+ ton displacement and larger in size.

FREMM is a really bad example, check up on its purpose and you will see why.
Bazan's standard load is 28 SM-2, 64 ESSM - that's 92 missiles for you. I have no idea why it got listed.
The other two aren't even in the displacement range you mentionned
Type 23 like all other RN frigates are used for ASW purpose, also it's standard load is 3500 tonne and full load 4900 tonne.
Nansen is 4600 tonne, it's also used for ASW purposes.

054 is 3900 tonne with full load, so 054A should be over 4000 tonnes. Not as small as you indicate. From its sensor, CIWS and lack of TAS, 054A is clearly intended for AAW roles. PLAN, whether we like it or not, is leaving ASW duties to submarines, aerial assets and subchasers.

Comparison with 052C is not good, since 052C handles the long range air defense, whereas 054A handles more of the medium range air defense.

[crobato]

The CDF picture above trying to show how there are in fact 32 hatches doesn't convince me because the line dividing the front eight hatches from the rear eight is parallel to a base-line contecting the opposite hand supports:
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/7219/type054vlsaqp3.jpg

I really hope I'm wrong because 16 missiles is too few IMO and places the Type-054A as somewhat more towards middling among the current crop of GP frigates, and almost certainly some way behind the latest Indian Project 17s.


If you check the other two pictures, you will see a shallow roof like structure. The first one, the structure is hoisted prior to installation, the third being installed.

[tphuang]

apparently, this picture from the 054A in HD is suppose to show something, but I don't see anything. I will leave it up to you guys.
The guy wrote this on Chinese forums
据内部权威人士及相关人员证实:VLS不存在发射面板向两舷倾斜的情况!
which translates to "According to insiders: VLS not related to the launch of two portholes tilt the face!"
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/6504/054ahdvlsjan16kb9.jpg
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/9376/054ahdvlsjan162ls5.jpg

okay, this is probably far more convincing.
http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/2446/054ahpvlsjan16jc9.jpg

[Gollevainen]

The pics are just too confusing at this point. Yeas there is a pic of the "roof" type structure elevated atop the VLS system which leads us to think there is 32 missiles. But the pictures showing the VLS system from the side are speaking more of the 16 missile configuration. How hard it's to get a decent bird-perspective image of the frontside of the ship???:mad: ...I mean just clime on the roof of some bloody building!!!...;)

[bd popeye]

All this speculation and guess work could be eliminated,as I have stated before, if the PLA was not so secrective.

Honestly, Why can't they just have a press confrence and say. This is our new Type 054 FFG. We will build X of this type ship. And it's statistics will be as follows:

Blah, Blah , Blah...

Now how hard is that?

But if they did that what fun would all this discussion be???

[mehdi]

bd popeye I hope what you said was a joke. Anyway from a sailor I feel that you had too many drinks lately.

[bd popeye]

bd popeye I hope what you said was a joke. Anyway from a sailor I feel that you had too many drinks lately.


1) I do not drink alchol in any form. Nor have I in many, many years.

2) I'm not joking. the rest of the world does this. why can't the PRC?

No offense taken.

As an example, Two days ago the USN held a press confrence about the naming of CVN-78. the USN had numerous news releases. Here are two;

http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=42114

http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=27323

Most other weapon producing nations have similar events. Why can't the PRC? What's the big secrect? An FFG is no big secrect. Neither is an CVN or DDG. I don't want to know all the particulars. Just the basic facts. That's all.

[caksz]

I guess the chinese prefer others to speculate , let them waste time and money on them rather than spend money for press confrence :p ,a few question ... the current revolver vls not actually revolver right? they had their own lid (though not install on 054a) and how is the size of box style vls 16 or 32 missles is compareable to size of vls on 052c ?

[Pointblank]

I guess the chinese prefer others to speculate , let them waste time and money on them rather than spend money for press confrence :p ,a few question ... the current revolver vls not actually revolver right? they had their own lid (though not install on 054a) and how is the size of box style vls 16 or 32 missles is compareable to size of vls on 052c ?

The Chinese rotary-style VLS is not a revolver style VLS, in that each missile silo has its own lid. The box style VLS is obviously more compact, as there is less empty space between each silo.

[crobato]

apparently, this picture from the 054A in HD is suppose to show something, but I don't see anything. I will leave it up to you guys.
The guy wrote this on Chinese forums
据内部权威人士及相关人员证实:VLS不存在发射面板向两舷倾斜的情况!
which translates to "According to insiders: VLS not related to the launch of two portholes tilt the face!"
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/6504/054ahdvlsjan16kb9.jpg
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/9376/054ahdvlsjan162ls5.jpg
[quote]

I am guessing that the roof structure is just there to provide temporary cover for VLS lids.

[quote]
okay, this is probably far more convincing.
http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/2446/054ahpvlsjan16jc9.jpg

Looks like Mk. 41 style That means four lids on each row, two lids set back to back.

[tphuang]

here are some new photos from HP shipyard. There are some pictures of 022, but I didn't bother getting them. Apparently, there is definitely a 3rd 054A under construction in HP and there is also a closed area built just for 022 construction.
Anyhow, the first 054A
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/5775/054ahpjan210ip.jpg
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/2466/054ahpjan2122qa.jpg
http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/1733/054ahpjan2131kf.jpg
http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/7696/054ahpjan2149jp.jpg

[tphuang]

the second 054A in HP, looks like taking shape pretty fast.
http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/6482/054ahp2jan212js.jpg
close up view
http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/8986/054ahp2jan2122jq.jpg
further out, you can see the 022 under construction more clearly.
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/5120/054ahp2jan2135rw.jpg

[tphuang]

I really do hope this will put an end to the VLS debate.
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/6873/054ahpvlsjan219aj.jpg
http://img105.imageshack.us/img105/1110/054ahpvlsjan2120md.jpg
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/7415/054ahpvlsjan2139nm.jpg
http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/6235/054ahpvlsjan2142vo.jpg
http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/7522/054ahpvlsjan2152uh.jpg

[tphuang]

more of these pictures
http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/6106/054ahpvlsjan2168iu.jpg
http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/9641/054ahpvlsjan2174gs.jpg
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/2947/054ahpvlsjan2188io.jpg
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/5210/054ahpvlsjan2199di.jpg
http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/3880/054ahpvlsjan21104mq.jpg

[eecsmaster]

I see 4*2*8 square hatches. Anyone wanna back me up on this?

[netspider]

I think it is 4*8, totally 32 missiles.

I see 4*2*8 square hatches. Anyone wanna back me up on this?

[Gollevainen]

Well after recovering from the first blow this new relevation just raised tons of new questions...

It seems that there is 32 hatches if you focus on the centreline (coloured in red in my pic collase) But that would mean that the hatches are actually quite weird shape, Rectangle and not square (or almoust square) as you would expect a missile sile being. No missile is that shape...

So it leaves to options. Either there is actually four missiles under each hathc but that would make the total number of missiles to 64! which isen't even theoretically possiple in ships of this class...So it pretty much leaves us with one missile silo having "dual opening" eg. the hach open to one silo in two parts like carrage door...

So I'm more and more with 16 missiles...but I say my final word after clear photo taken from good bird angle which reveals all the secrets...

[eecsmaster]

i mistyped. I meant to say "2*4*4"


So yes, 32 rounds total.

I'm surprised that no one has brought up the fact that the newest pictures show rectangular hatches while the old ones show circular ones. Another design difference between the ones build in HD and JN?

[planeman]

Now with clearer pictures it is apparent that there are 32 hatches, and they look square to me (sorry Golly). I think that 32 x SA-N-12 deriative is most likely.

[crobato]

I'm surprised that no one has brought up the fact that the newest pictures show rectangular hatches while the old ones show circular ones. Another design difference between the ones build in HD and JN?

Not at all. I think the "circular hatches" were painted on protective roof like covers to decieve onlookers.

[planeman]

I think it's more likely a photo interpretation error, probably mixing up sealed-tube ends with weather hatches etc.

[Gollevainen]

Well I'm not covinsed, I remain in my position, as its quite logical...You divide a square (or almoust square) area to two equal size areas with horisontal or vertical line you get rectangulars which are illogical to the given task...How do you explain the shape of the hatches?

[crobato]

I count one hinge = one hatch. 32 hinges, 32 hatches.