Next Generation DDG and FFG thread (after 055, 052D, 054B)

[Blitzo]

Updates from SOYO on the next-generation FFGs (post-054B FFGs):

View attachment 165039

The importance of crew habitation/creature comforts in the ship is something many people underestimate, and means that some people will view the ship as being less heavily armed for a given displacement (as tonnage will need to be allocated for better living conditions), as has been the case for 054B.

It's a pretty well established trend now around the world that most ships are getting bigger while their weaponry is not necessarily increasing compared to preceding generations of warship equivalent classes, so hopefully people will apply the same logic to PLAN ships rather than expecting every bit of tonnage of a frigate or destroyer is maximally crammed with VLS.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

The importance of crew habitation/creature comforts in the ship is something many people underestimate, and means that some people will view the ship as being less heavily armed for a given displacement (as tonnage will need to be allocated for better living conditions), as has been the case for 054B.

It's a pretty well established trend now around the world that most ships are getting bigger while their weaponry is not necessarily increasing compared to preceding generations of warship equivalent classes, so hopefully people will apply the same logic to PLAN ships rather than expecting every bit of tonnage of a frigate or destroyer is maximally crammed with VLS.

They thought that every ship must become like the Isreali Saar-6 FFLs or the Russian FFGs and FFLs, without the understanding that cramming so many weaponry comes with significantly hefty costs that would be detrimental to the overall performance of said ships when it comes to high intensity combat on the high seas.

In the meantime, there have been plenty of claims of the 054A FFG having the crampiest living quarters amongst all major frontline surface combatants of the PLAN. It's a good thing that the 054B and next-gen FFGs fixed that issue.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Satellite photo of the dock across the pond in Dalian. Could potentially be something?

View attachment 163719

I took a look at Dalian Shipyard's imagery dated today (21 November), and... what is this?




I switched back-and-forth between L1C and L2A of Sentinel 2, but all the measurements lie within the 190-200 meters of range.

On the other hand, the 055 DDG is only 180 meters long (of which the ship at the top of the photo matches the dimension description).

A couple possibilities:
1. Just another 055 DDG that hasn't got all its hull modules joined together; or
2. Poor photo quality distorting measurement attempts; or
3. An actual unidentified new ship.

Do we know if the Dagushan site still constructs civilian ships these days?

 

[Wrought]

Updates from SOYO on the next-generation FFGs (post-054B FFGs):

View attachment 165039

48 VLS cells for FFG is surely too many, new or not. Constellation is 7k tons and still only 32 cells. If you need more firepower, then build a DDG.

 

[Tomboy]

IMO, I'm happy with anything between 6500-7000t range and CODLAG. Current 054 series are too small and depending on who you ask too slow for blue water operation. UVLS would be a plus but not required for me.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

48 VLS cells for FFG is surely too many, new or not. Constellation is 7k tons and still only 32 cells. If you need more firepower, then build a DDG.

(Note that all the VLS mentioned in this post are of the 650mm diameter, not the 850mm diameter UVLS on the DDGs.)

An alternate way to look at this could be the possible option for those 48 VLS cells to include the 8 missile slots that are converted from the 8 slanted missile canisters, the latter of which have been the standard configuration for all frontline FFGs of the PLAN. That means the overall number of missiles deployed onboard will only 8 more than the previous FFG classes. Of course, taking this option would necessitate either having the YJ-83K adapted for VLS usage, or that other anti-ship missile model(s) would be needed.

In the meantime, if there are indeed 48 VLS cells on the next-gen FFGs in addition to the 8 slanted missile canisters - Such FFGs still wouldn't be equivalent to the DDGs in terms of firepower, let alone a multitude of other more important capabilities like fleet-wide air defense and anti-ship missions. Moreover, there is also the next-generation general-purpose DDG in the works right now, and the increase in UVLS cell count on those DDGs are very much expected.

---

All-in-all, note that SOYO did mention "most probable specification ceiling" (...规格上限，最有可能是...).

The eventual design of the next-gen FFG may or may not retain the same armaments as the current 054A/B FFGs, so there's that.

 

[Wrought]

(Note that all the VLS mentioned in this post are of the 650mm diameter, not the 850mm diameter UVLS on the DDGs.)

SOYO did say "most probable specification ceiling" (...规格上限，最有可能是...), so there's that.

---

An alternate way to look at this could be the possible option for those 48 VLS cells to include the 8 missile slots that are converted from the 8 slanted missile canisters, the latter of which have been the standard configuration for all frontline FFGs of the PLAN. That means the overall number of missiles deployed onboard will only 8 more than the previous FFG classes. Of course, taking this option would necessitate either having the YJ-83K adapted for VLS usage, or that other anti-ship missile model(s) would be needed.

In the meantime - If there are indeed 48 VLS cells on the next-gen FFGs in addition to the 8 slanted missile canisters, I don't see why not either. The Constellation FFGs have 16 slanted missile canisters for NSMs onboard per ship, in addition to the 32 Mark 41 VLS cells.

Such FFGs still wouldn't be equivalent to the DDGs in terms of firepower, let alone a multitude of other more important capabilities like fleet-wide air defense and anti-ship missions. Moreover, there is also the next-generation general-purpose DDG in the works right now, and the increase in UVLS cell count on those DDGs are very much expected.

I know, I just wanted to preemptively register my disapproval of the weapons fetish. Assuming you aren't constrained by shipyard capacity—and PLAN obviously is not—then more hulls with fewer weapons each is a far better option than the other way around. Steel is cheap and air is free. More sensors, more speed, more range, more endurance, all to the good. More weapons? Meh.

 

[Amistrophy]

IMO, I'm happy with anything between 6500-7000t range and CODLAG. Current 054 series are too small and depending on who you ask too slow for blue water operation. UVLS would be a plus but not required for me.

reclass the 52Ds as heavy frigates lol

 

[Tomboy]

reclass the 52Ds as heavy frigates lol

Different roles, 052D is a very dense ship (imo not really a good thing, 052D is mentioned to be very cramped for crews) for air defense. Frigates are meant to be submarine hunters and what not with secondary air defense capability for self defense. Anyhow I feel like all current PLAN surface combatants barring 055 are on the smaller side for blue water operations. Partly it was limited by old doctrine and obsolete propulsion technology in the early 2010s, which is also why all PLAN ships are very narrow and long compared to western ships of similar displacement.

I expect newer destroyers/frigates to be slightly uparmed with a bit more/bigger VLS but much larger in size to support long term blue water ops. Also remember, Constellation and FREMM frigates are all pushing 7000t so I don't think PLAN's new frigate being that large as unreasonable.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

I know, I just wanted to preemptively register my disapproval of the weapons fetish. Assuming you aren't constrained by shipyard capacity—and PLAN obviously is not—then more hulls with fewer weapons each is a far better option than the other way around. Steel is cheap and air is free. More sensors, more speed, more range, more endurance, all to the good. More weapons? Meh.

Well, I certainly wouldn't mind having slightly more SAMs on next-gen FFGs, given the scale and severity of aerial threats that PLAN surface warships can certainly expect to face in a high-intensity WestPac conflict. There's also the recent lesson from the Red Sea to take into account.