SinoDefence Forum

Totoro

I'm sorry, can you explain that statement? I just don't see the logic there. The domes, as far as i know, arent there to deflect radar. They themselves are there to help the type 52c monitor its surroundings. Sure, from a very certain angle they may have a low RCS, but overall they're quite unstealthy.

MIGleader

those domes are not nessacerily perfect speres. a perfect sphere will deflect
radar from any direction, but a slightly distorded ellipsoid will throw the energy around. look at the pictures of the domes and you will see. perhaps the equipment underneath has a bigger signature than the domes.

tphuang

need to clear up on something. The lo-lo range of a AAM is the range fired from a destroyer that skims the water, right? If that's the case, then YJ-83 has a 210 KM+ lo-lo range and a 250 KM+ hi-lo range.

slackpiv

You cant compare the 052C vs. the Arleigh Burke head on. They will never go agianst each other head on. You have to compare the specific roles that they individually perform. The 052C does have a 4 par in the same configuration as the spy1. However this does not by any means imply that it is a copy of the aegis. It does imply however, that they possibly fulfill simiilar role and are comparable. In terms of missile capacity, the Arleigh bruke blows the 052C. 96 VLS cells compared to 48 VLS cells. Then you have to compare the sm-2ER vs. the HQ-9. The info on the HQ-9 is unknown but most sources point the range to be ~100KM. The sm-2ERs range is 240KM. Soon the SM-2s will be complemented by the SM-3. For CIWS the Arleigh Burke FlightIIA carries the evolved sea sparrow. The Arleigh Burke Flight I carries the Phalanx. The 052C carries the Type 730 CIWS gun system. In the ASM mode the Burke carries the Harpoon and the Tomahawk ASM. The 052C carries an unknown missile but it is believed by many sources to be 200KM+ and supersonic. However the strike role in the USN is meant to be fulfulled by the naval airwing. In the ASW the Burke carries AN/SQQ-89 integrated ASW Suite which includes TACTAS and SH-60B LAMPS. There is no evideance that the 052C carries towed array. The 052C carries the ka-28. In each of the following roles that the DDGs are meant to fulfill, the Burke appears to come out ontop.

tphuang

yeah, 52C definitely takes the most hit in the air defense. It needs to improve that a lot. I personally think the CIWS is pretty even on the ships. ASW for 52C:
"ANTI-SUBMARINE SYSTEMS

The ship is fitted with two triple 324mm Yu-7 (Mk-46 Mod 1) antisubmarine torpedo tubes. Additionally, the destroyer has four 18-barrel multiple rocket launchers (MRLs) installed on the front deck. The purpose of these MRLs remains unknown but is thought to be used to launch antisubmarine rockets, ground- attack rockets and/or decoys/chaffs."

I was under the impression that Burke also used MK-46. We don't know what kind of system 052C actually uses. The ka-28 are rubbish, but hopefully we can upgrade it to WZ-10 once it comes out. Also, China is currently develop HHQ-16 with the Russians, so the HHQ-9 will be upgraded.

Totoro

ka 28 is rubbish compared to what? wz-10 is an attack gunship. I'd say ka 28 is more suited for maritime operations and ASW than wz10. You need a large enough spacious chopper that carries enough of payload and most importantly enough fuel for long endurance flight if you're gonna use it on a ship.

MIGleader

the s-300 on the type 51c's were supposed to be a pretty capable missle. still, if the chinese could build a largewr 52c which could hold more missles and sensors, it would be more capable than the burke.

tphuang

compared to ka-52.

Totoro

Again an attack gunship? What is with you and heavy attack platforms? A frigate/destroyer/cruiser based helicopter must be multipurpose, must be able to tow a sonar, carry torpedos, be able to ferry personell and supplies, must be able to perform search and rescue missions. Ka-28, however older than the choppers you mention, is more suited for those roles.

If you're gonna operate from a carrier of some sort with enough space to spare for attack platforms, then yeah, there could be use for wz10 or ka 52. Even that would be rather pointless in antiship battle, only if youre providing air support for an amphibious assault.

MIGleader

a shipborne attack helicopter is an interesting concept. it has amazing potential. imagine if the pla developed a naval atack version of the wz-10 that could fire small torpedoes, ground and ship attack rockets, and depth charges. then it refited the minsk and kiev to hold a wing of these choppers. that would give the plan amazing firepower, especially against small frigates and facs.

of course, destroyes would still use ka-28

adeptitus

The KDA Penguin (AGM-119) anti-ship missile is carried by naval helicopters:
http://www.kongsberg.com/eng/kda/pro...pace/missiles/
http://www.kongsberg.com/eng/kda/pro.../missiles/mk2/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penguin_missile

But this ship comparison is a bit silly. IMO in future combat scenario whoever wins air superiority will be able to just dump air-launched missiles at the ship until it sinks. The ship is never going to be able to out-run an airplane.

Totoro

True, air superiority over sea is as important today as it ever was. And shipborne attack helicopters are sort of useless in open waters. No sane person is going to send a lone frigate in the open sea, facing the enemy. Helis with penguin class antiship missiles are good for littoral control, like stopping an amphibious attack, preferably launched from the coast. They've no chance against frigates or larger ships equipped with medium range anti aircraft missiles.

bd popeye

Silly ? Sort of....Air superiorty? The USN wins for now hands down. I don't think the missle dumping sequence will work. I mean how many misiles do you want to fire to sink a single ship? Missiles are expensive. Even for the PLAN. You need to preserve them to fight another day.

Yes..so true, that's why the USN is upgrading it's Sea Hawks will be MH-60R's. Many MH-60R's Sea Hawks are now in service. Eventualy all 243 will be in service. A truely multi-purpose helicopter.

http://www.navicp.navy.mil/03/0320/mh60r.htm

__________________
Discover the Chinese and World Military picture threads!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And the Chinese Daily Life Photo thread!!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And don't forget

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"I am what I am.... 'Dat's all what I am"

IDonT

Not really, what the Burke has over the 052C is flexibility. All of 052C's vls launchers can only hold and lauch the S-300 sam.

EAch of the Burke 96 VLS cells are capable of holding the following weapons:
1 tomahawk, 1 harpoon, 1 standard SAM, 1 VLS antisubmarine rocket, and 4 ESSM in quad pack.

Magazine loadouts are determine by its mission.

MIGleader

it was already clear that the burke was superrior to the 52c in airdefence. china really should make a large 90 cell launche. i mean, the hq-9 is pretty samll, so future destryers may have more missles.