FFG 054/054A Thread

[maozedong]

Originally Posted by kickars

The thing is there never been an 'official' tonnage of 054A from PLAN. We only think the tonnage of 054A is about 4500t by comparing with 054.

some thing interesting that is chinese official magazine < Naval & Merchant Ship > -舰船知识( 中国造船工程学会主办 ),gave the information about 054 displacement is 39,000t in full load, and Jane's < War Ship> also use the same information in the same time,the book published 054 displacement is 39,000t in full load.they are both adopting the same chinese official source.so, if 054 and 054A use the same propulsion four SEMT Pielstick (now MAN Diesel SA) 16 PA6V-280 STC diesel engines,054A displacement only 4,2000t in full load.
but in Sinodefence.com the information for 054/054A displacement is 4,2000t and 45,000t in full.

[crobato]

Some rumors, implying a fifth and a sixth vessel in Hudong (did not count the possible construction in Huangpu).

今日海军最猛组图：沪东和黄埔的第五艘、第六艘054A 下饺子



沪东和黄埔的新青年五妹和六妹，不知道现在怎么样了？
作者：songfq 发表日期：2008-07-06

[tphuang]

568 has been named, I guess this is its official commissioning?

ZT568叫巢湖舰
7月9日上午,南海某军港彩旗飘扬,军乐声声,仪仗队持枪肃立，海军南海舰队在这里隆重举行海军巢湖舰命名 仪式。官兵们身着雪白的新式军装，列队欢迎,海军南海舰队司令员苏士亮中将、副司令员肖新年少将、副参谋长 么志楼少将、巢湖市委常委、巢湖军分区司令员李传志，巢湖市委常委、副市长王明鉴和市民政局负责同志等参加 了命名仪式, 解放军总装备部、海军装备部、海军南海舰队机关和首长到会祝贺,海军某支队共2千多名官兵参加 了命名大会。

巢湖舰是我国自行研究建造的最先进的导弹护卫舰,具有较强的反潜、防空、对海作战和信息战、电子战能力。巢 湖舰的建设得到了上级机关的高度重视,配备了军政素质高的舰员,目前,舰上拥有一名博士研究生,七名硕士研 究生等一批高学历人才,官兵们争当一流舰员,争创一流业绩,决心把巢湖舰建设成一艘标杆舰,回报巢湖人民的 厚爱.

市委常委、副市长王明鉴在命名会上表示，拥有现代国防技术的568号导弹护卫舰以“巢湖舰”命名并列编部队 服役，不仅展示了人民海军强大威力，更使我市名扬海内外，这不仅是我市人民的光荣和骄傲，也为我市争创“全 国双拥模范城”增添了新的动力。王明鉴就下一步双拥共建工作指出，我们将以此为新的起点，进一步加强同“巢 湖舰”官兵的沟通交流，广泛开展与“巢湖舰”的合作共建，“巢湖舰”一定能够成为舰员与巢湖人民增加友谊的 桥梁，成为军地双拥共建的典范。

中共巢湖市委、市人民政府向巢湖舰赠送了一辆江淮瑞风商务车、10万元慰问金和专为巢湖舰创作的巢湖舰舰歌 。

命名仪式大会上海军南海舰队司令员苏士亮中将为568舰颁发了命名证书并授军旗，巢湖市委常委、巢湖军分区 司令员李传志，巢湖市委常委、副市长王明鉴与“巢湖舰”舰长、政委互赠了纪念品。(传自巢湖民政局网站信息 )

[tphuang]

this is what's going on in HP shipyard right now, does this look like 054A? I'm not too sure.

[AssassinsMace]

I'm no expert but the lines leading to the bow of that ship are different from a 54A. It looks more similar to the 52Bs and Cs but I have no idea what the wedge cut at the tip of the bow is all about.

[crobato]

I agree with assasins' observation. Here is a picture for comparison. The shape of the bow to the superstructure is more indicative of the 052B/C class.

[Roger604]

That's great news. For the 052D, they need to have a VLS like the 054A's. The 054A's can actually fit more cells than the 32 it has. So the larger 052D should have at least 64 and up to 96. As crobato mentioned here in SDF, they should also abandon the superstructure PAR panels for a top of the mast PAR like the Daring class. And they definitely need helicopters. Helicopters are a big weakness of the Chinese military in general.

[flyzies]

^ With that many missiles it would take up enormous space. Perhaps PLAN should develop something that's effective and efficient as the MK-41 VLS...

[Jeff Head]

Originally Posted by tphuang

this is what's going on in HP shipyard right now, does this look like 054A? I'm not too sure.

Beam looks far too wide for a 054A, and it looks like it stretches quite a ways back there in the third picture. I may well be wrong, but that looks like a larger vessel and does not have the right lines for a 054A.

[Skywatcher]

Originally Posted by Roger604

That's great news. For the 052D, they need to have a VLS like the 054A's. The 054A's can actually fit more cells than the 32 it has. So the larger 052D should have at least 64 and up to 96. As crobato mentioned here in SDF, they should also abandon the superstructure PAR panels for a top of the mast PAR like the Daring class. And they definitely need helicopters. Helicopters are a big weakness of the Chinese military in general.

Aren't superstructure PARs more powerful than mast mounted PARs, by virtue of their larger sizes? I imagine that the PLAN would want to stick to the superstructure arrangement to deal with enemy aviation (I'm thinking of the ROCAF and the USN carrier wings in particular).

[Roger604]

Originally Posted by flyzies

^ With that many missiles it would take up enormous space. Perhaps PLAN should develop something that's effective and efficient as the MK-41 VLS...

Sigh..... you mean something like this

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/surf...angkai_03large

A Type 054A can easily fit one of these in the front and one set in the back too. A much larger displacement Type 052D can fit at least 3 x 32 cells.

Originally Posted by Skywatcher

Aren't superstructure PARs more powerful than mast mounted PARs, by virtue of their larger sizes? I imagine that the PLAN would want to stick to the superstructure arrangement to deal with enemy aviation (I'm thinking of the ROCAF and the USN carrier wings in particular).

If you look at a picture of the Daring class you see that the top mounted PAR is pretty large too. By mounting things high you have a much better ability to track sea skimming missiles.

[flyzies]

Originally Posted by Roger604

Sigh..... you mean something like this

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/surf...angkai_03large

A Type 054A can easily fit one of these in the front and one set in the back too. A much larger displacement Type 052D can fit at least 3 x 32 cells.

Yes i am well aware China has VLS on 054A thankyou very much. But it can only fire the HQ-16 and (possibly) Y-8...which means its nowhere near as efficient or effective as MK-41; as that could launch everything from RIM-162 to SM-3 to Tomahawks. One launch system for all the ships missiles...

[Gollevainen]

A Type 054A can easily fit one of these in the front and one set in the back too. A much larger displacement Type 052D can fit at least 3 x 32 cells

Ehh..no. 045A can fit and has one set of the VLS in the front, but there is no room for it in the rear. Don't let somewhat clear spot in the upper deck to fool you to think that there isen't anything bellow it. VLS system, like any other system that penetrates bellow the decks takes space and in ships of these size, the space is already tight. You cannot just imagine that you can stuck just about anything into the ship and expect that stuff bellow would just go away...If 054A could carry VLS set in the rear, it most certainly would have done that.

Another factor is the plain old topweight...If you would fit a heavy system like VLS so high from the waterline (remember the place where you think the rear VLS would go is two decks higher than the front VLS) it increases the weight in the wrong area in the ship. You all have been in physic class, so you propapbly remember few things about moments of force...

And the VLS in 054A can only fire HHQ-16, or at least there is no indication that it could launch any other type of missiles.

[adeptitus]

I have yet to see a clear photo of the VL-SAM that goes into the 054A, but for purpose of discussion we'll assume it's the HHQ-16 with speculated max range of 42km-65km. That makes it a medium range SAM.

I'm sure you could mount more HHQ-16 cels on a larger ship. But if the purpose of building the larger ships is to load larger, heavier long-range naval SAM on them, then it's rather pointless to fill them up with short to medium ranged missiles.

To compare, the weight of a SA-N-6 SAM (S-300F) is more than twice the weight of a SA-N-12 SAM. Same with SM-2 ER vs. SM-1. Bigger missile = fewer missile carried.


As for the space issue, we can see that on the 051C, they mounted the S-300F/SA-N-6 in the aft in lieu of hanger deck. It's a trade-off to provide the ship with sufficient SAM rounds to perform its AAW role.

Other ships, such as the Canadian Halifax class frigate, also has "above deck" VL-SAM installs due to lack of internal space:

[crobato]

1. At 6100mt surface displacement, the 052C is hardly a big ship. In fact, for a surface displacement of that figure, its remarkable you can put 48 honking big S-300 class missiles on it. Between 6000 to 9000mt, you have a whole range of super frigates and destroyers whose SAM capability ranges from 32 to 64 missiles, with smaller Standards and ESSMs. The fact the 052C packs 48 such missiles on that displacement with rounded launchers I would say is quite amazing, but there has to be some sacrifices made like one less helicopter.

2. I have previously pointed out that for larger and larger missiles, it becomes more safer and convenient to use cold launched systems rather than hot launched. It takes a little imagination why. The bigger missile goes deeper down the ship, which has its own dangers when the missile take off blast occurs near the engine room, fuel tanks and ammo storage. The stronger blasts require larger vent tunnels out of the cannisters and into outside vents, and all these means eventually such a setup means that hot launched systems for large missiles take up more space.

3. Its possible for cold launched systems to be more space compact than hot launched systems, eliminating the vents and side tunnels. The key to this is to develop squared matrix type launchers and move away from rotary launchers. Each launcher would have a separate blast container underneath the missile (the 052C launcher already has this scheme). Examples are the 3S-14E VLS launcher on the Talways, and the VLS launcher intended for the VLS Shtil. However, I'm not sure if the PLAN has such a system under development.

4. It may be possible that 052D may in fact retain the cold launched rotary launcher and show refinements on the radar equipment instead.

5. It may also be possible that HQ-9 development may also be a dead end, a missile that maybe inconveniently too big, and future development maybe focused on developing improved versions of the HH-16.

6. We can have a conceptual hybrid where the 052C's PAR can be combined with HH-16, but unless HH-16's seeker can be active, a SARH HH-16 combined with the PAR can only be possible if the PAR has separate transmit and receive elements, like an AESA, so the array can search, track and target (SARH) illuminate all at the same time. So far the only known vessels on Earth that has radars that can do all these things are the APARs on the Sachsen class and De Zeven Provincien class frigates with SM-2 missiles.