SinoDefence Forum

planeman

I think the best Frigate in East Asia is Singapore's Fomidable class:

With Aster-15 and low RCS these rock. I'd put the Type-054a as a possible second place, although if Japan or South Korea built frigates like they build destroyers, it'd still be a little bit behind.

Gollevainen

first westenr build ship that is so ugly that it turns actually looking rather appealing...

__________________

planeman

Ok, just to give everyone plenty of stuff to think about, here are a few of the latest generation Frigates from around the world:

De Zeven Provincien Class, Netherlands. 2 in service. At over 6,000t this ought to be called a destroyer, but for political reasons (?) is called a Frigate.


Alvaro Class, Spain. 4 in service. With Aegis and at over 5000t this is another destroyer in Frigate's clothing.


Nansen class, Norway:


Al Riyadh class, Saudi Arabia:

tphuang

the thing is that PLA expects something with better air defense than this. If you look at 054A, it has the longer ranged HH-16 and 2 type 730 CIWS. And it doesn't have top plate/sea eagle type of air search radar like 054A.

And also, probably more ASuW firepower is expected.

planeman

Interesting comparision between the Aster-15 and the SA-N-12. You are right that the SA-N-12 is normally credited with a greater range and altitude, and both are generally considered to be extremely good, though Aster is probably the more highly regarded - in part because of the natural bias many military observers have to the prestige of the Royal Navy(?). Difficult to say which is the better choice.

Of course, if range is the primary factor then we coulfd edge the Taiwanese Standard armed Perry's ahead in the frigate race but I wouldn't - SA-N-12 is way more modern than the SM-1MR.

Back to the Formidable class, I'd rate its level of stealth as probably much higher than the Type-054a's. Other aspects I'd expect the Formidible to be ahead in are ASW sensors, crew automation and damage control. Probably powerplant also.

But there's no doubt about it, the Type-054a is a very credible frigate which if employed to maximise its strengths, and with proffessionalism, is a very serious threat whoever the opponent is.

tphuang

Looking away from the total capability, just look at PLAN doctrine wise, it looks for Air defense first in its ships and then Anti-ship capability. I wouold expect 054A to eventually be able to fire both HH-16 and HH-7 with a common VLS launcher + 2 type 730 CIWS. You have 3 layers of air defense right there. Even right now, you have 32 HH-16 and 2 type 730 CIWS that gives 054A the ability to do some fleet defense. As I said, if you add the 2 phased array air search radar on top and possibly data-linked with 052C and operate as one complete air defense envelope, that provides fleet support.

I would say from the description of Formidable, it sounds like it will be equipped with more advanced ASW system. The problem is that PLAN doesn't seem to emphasize surface fleet ASW as much as it should. That's probably why China picked Sov, when it had the opportunity to pick bw Sov and Udaloy II.

As for powerplant, it looks like they are both using CODAD and 054A is using more powerful diesel engines.

Transient

Where the Formidable beats the 054A hands down is in its ASW suite. With the ALOFTS variable depth sonar and the embarked SH-60 ASW heli, the Formidable lives up to its name ASW wise. In terms of ASuW, platform to platform, the Formidable also has an edge when compared against the 054A. While not having a longer ranged ASM than the 054A, it has better organic sensors than the 054A by virtue of the SH-60 and the SH-60's radar (probably the APS-143 or equivalent). The ALOFTS sonar would also be able to provide fairly long range over the horizon situational awareness. Finally, while the 054A has an additional layer of hard kill ability in terms of the 2 CIWS, the Formidable is better able to handle a saturation attack with its active radar homing Asters, meaning that the limit in the number of missiles per wave the system is engaged is governed only by the number of missiles the system can handle for mid course guidance. And the number of Aster missiles the Herakles can provide guidance for at any one time has been quoted as 'certainly ten' by a Thales spokesman.

snake65

Wrong.
This was drawn by a bunch of highly qualified guys known as Academic Krylov Central Naval Research Institute (CNII) as a line of modular ships from lightly armed OPV to the monster with Rif-M under motto "Corvet for 21st century". They mostly concentrated on optimizing hull characteristics. AFAIR some of those studies were used when designing the hull of actual 20380.

tphuang

ASW - let's wait to see the entire 054A ASW package.
ASuW - 054A probably has numeric advantage in terms of missiles. Aside from that, the stuff you are stating is not really true. PLAN surface fleet get targetting data from different Y-8 platforms, not only surfrace data, but also missiles and fighters. It also shares targetting data with other surface combatants. It doesn't act as a single unit. Even with out all that, it still has the bandstand/SeaSoal OTH radar. Now, this radar provides guidance for OTH strikes. I'm not sure what kind of targetting information it can provide. Not sure if they have mastered the technology of bouncing off ionsphere.

AAW - you can't really underestimate the usefulness of CIWS layer. For example, if you read the 054A thread, each goalkeeper CIWS was tested to be able to easily handle 3 concurrent strikes (before the missiles reach 600 m from the ship). As for the number of targets that can be handled by the 4 illuminators, we don't really know whether HH-16 uses something like 9M38 guidance or 9M317 guidance. I would assume it should be at least like the latter, which means it doesn't have illuminate the missile the entire way. Can they handle 10 concurrent targets, theoretically yes. And HH-16 also allow you to engage targets futher out.

Transient

ASW wise, I think it is pretty certain that as far as the helicopter (which is a primary ASW component) is concerned, the SH-60 would be a better platform than what China has at the moment. Perhaps the 054A will have a towed array/VDS, but it seems that the general consensus is that it would not have one.

For ASuW, I delibreately chose not to talk about external targeting assets, since we would go into a lot of other stuff doing so (the Formidable can rely on the E-2C and the F-50 MPA for targeting info too). Where the Formidable has the advantage is in the SH-60 which will have a capable ISAR radar, as well as its VDS. Both not only provide OTH targeting coordinates but target identification as well. The 054A's Bandstand is incapable of that and will have to rely on its Z-9 or Ka-28 to do so. So targeting wise the 054A is less capable than the Formidable. The 054A might have a 16 missile complement, but if we are to look at the 054, only 8 ASM missiles are carried. Personally I think that's a more likely number, but I could be wrong. So perhaps the 054A might have more bite, but one against one it's the Formidable that will sink its teeth in the 054A first.

All we know is that the Herakles can handle at least 10 ASMs at one time, but the 054A's system is still a total unknown. What is known is that if it uses 9M38 missiles, or SARH all the way, then its a hands down victory to the Formidable. As for number of missiles capable the radar is capable of providing mid-course guidance for, I think the Herakles radar would beat the 054A's Top Plate (or equivalent) with its passive array. It would allow for interleaving of modes as well as a long dwell capability on one sector.

Overall, while we do not know of the full capabilities of each, I think it is safe to say that the Formidable is a more capable vessel than the 054A.

crobato

Some points. ISAR identification isn't going to work without direct LOS. So you are likely to have target detection and tracking at OTH ranges but not identification. Some of other form of target identification method would be needed beyond OTH.

054A has bow sonar. Its possible it may be used for OTH target detection.

Fregat and Bandstand works together for both aerial and sea target detection, identification, tracking and engagement. Fregat provides search and identification functions, while Bandstand/Mineral ME1/2 provides target tracking and engagement. Mineral ME1 can track 25 targets up to 250km at I-Band, and ME2 passively with 50 targets at I, G, E, F, and D bands up to to 450km, with simultaneous engagement of 10 targets (note this is both air and sea targets combined).

Aster 15 has 15km effective range against missiles, 30km range against aircraft. This is similar to the Sea Sparrow. Note HQ-7/Croatale's 13km range is likely to be against missiles. SA-N-12 is 25km against missiles, 50km against aircraft.

SARH vs. ARH doesn't matter so much except on the end phase. Both would still require midphase flight guidance.

A more pronounced advantage for the Formidable is the Heracles radar being electronic scanning. So when it comes to air defense you weigh the Aster's ARH seeker and Herakles ESA vs. the SA-N-12's longer range and the fact that the 054A also has a secondary defense layer with two CIWS.

The quality of the electronics overall definitely seems more impressive to me on the side of the Formidable class, as well as the low RCS design and ASW capabilities.

planeman

I think between us all we are starting to get some conscensous.

I am not knocking the SA-N-12, but I think Aster is the mutt's nuts, and Singapore has bought into a winner. Now if only it wass practical to fit the Aster-30 mission systems into a 3000-4000t hull without compromising ASW and Surface warfare...

Back to the ideal frigate, I think that trend is increasingly towards modularity and families of vessel - a concept started with the MEKO series but now taken up with great enthusiasm by other shipbuilders.

The Sigma family of corvettes, apparently potential orders from the asia-Pacific region...


Another emerging design, the Russian P20380:




Talking of MEKO, this is a funny pic:

Apparently now they are making speedboat versions*, lol. I want that baby as my private yacht.



*Yes I know....

Transient

ISAR capability would come from radar mounted on the SH-60 (no confirmation of actual electronics on the SH-60s ordered yet, but likely to be of APS-143 class). As for OTH target identification, that would come from the ALOFTS VDS towed array carried by the Formidable. The Fregat identification functions likely is against aerial targets, the same way the Herakles also has identification functions vs aerial targets but not surface targets.

The Aster has a quoted range of "in excess of 30km". http://www.eads.net/web/lang/en/800/.../41351224.html

I did a search of the Aster 15 engagement range vs missiles, but could not find a link which stated effective range vs missiles was limited to 15km. It would be nice if you could point me to a link.

SARH and ARH do not matter too much in engagements taking place at long ranges. However, as the engagements get progressively closer to the platform, ARH allows for more salvoes to be fired over that allowed by SARH guidance.

planeman

Latest concepts from France:

Gowind corvette:

Displacement : 1200t - 1900t depending on version
Maximum speed : > 30 kts
Range : 3 000 mn
Endurance : > 20 days
Complement : 65 (+15)
Helicopter : flight deck & hangar 5 t helicopter
Propulsion : option :CODAD The FREMM Frigate, being built for France and Italy with slight variations.

planeman

More pretty pictures, this time of Vosper Thornycroft's designs: