052C/052D Class Destroyers

[solongbd]

Recent pictures of one of the oldest 052C destroyers--Haikou (DDG 171)

 

[charles18]

You need to at least upgrade yourself from wikipedia to AI chatbots.

Of the total 74 active Burkes, there are 21 Flight I and 8 Flight IIs, which lack strike capabilities other than Harpoons, as well as absence of heli hangers, making it a solely air defence role. Their radars (SPY-1D) are also obsolete (by Chinese standards these days). Based on mission profile and capabilities, these are not comparable to 052Ds and 055s. They were all built between 1988 – 1999 so go figure how many more breaths they can take.

The only Burkes that matter are the Flight IIAs and Flight IIIs, which add up to 45. For the sake of the argument, let's say 052Ds are flight IIA equivalents and 055s are flight III equivalents. The USN is already numerically inferior (if not technologically) in destroyers.

The final nails in the coffin are the vast Chinese corvette (50~ 056A) and frigate fleets (44+ 054/A/B), which you will find no counterparts in USN (leave the poor LCS in their graves), enabling the heavy weights to focus on air defense and strike missions, while some Burkes need to be diverted for ASW and non-CSG escorts missions, tilting that number game even less in USN's favor.

Enough OT. Please do some basic due diligence.

Wow calm down there buddy.
I think you're taking this out of context.

Andy1974 simply said the US navy currently has more destroyers than China. Which is absolutely true.
I think you're trying to reinterpret his message into "something else" and commenting on it.

Perhaps what you're getting at is in a hypothetical confrontation between China and the US using only surface combatants who would win? I would put my money on China.
Why?
The US is building an average of 2 destroyers per year while China can easily build 2 cruisers, 4 destroyers, and 2 frigates.
Therefore it is only a matter of time before the Chinese surface combatant fleet overwhelms the US navy.
Furthermore Chinese destroyers have larger VLC vertical launch cells enabling them to carry much larger, lethal, and longer range anti-ship missiles. I have very little confidence in the Arleigh Burke destroyer's "harpoon missiles" compared to the YJ-20 and YJ-21.

 

[Inque]

The USN can't send every Arleigh Burke it has to one location anyway, so a raw comparison between their numbers and 052Ds and 055s isn't that useful. What matters more is how many that can be sent.

 

[Tomboy]

? They have exact same strike capabilities as all other burkes, TLAMs and SM series. Same cells, just slightly less of them.

Also, while SPY-1D is kinda old, it still provides tracks just fine. Radars don't kill, and unless you can visibly show that SPY-1D is insufficient for average modern engagement(not 2030s, not 2040s one) - this is a dangerous point to make.
Esp. if you count in Type 052Cs.

Also, even the worst and oldest Burkes are still AEGIS vessels unlike any of the 056s and 054As and most of the non-52C/52D/55s destroyers in Chinese services which are at this point large frigates in all but name. It's odd to casually discount those Burkes and then start talking about how Frigates and Corvettes are better.

 

[test1979]

CCTV confirms that the fully loaded displacement of the Type 052D destroyer is 7,500 tons.

 

[AndrewS]

Also, even the worst and oldest Burkes are still AEGIS vessels unlike any of the 056s and 054As and most of the non-52C/52D/55s destroyers in Chinese services which are at this point large frigates in all but name. It's odd to casually discount those Burkes and then start talking about how Frigates and Corvettes are better.

The Type-052/055s are large Frigates?

These days, I would say the distinction between Frigates and Destroyers is whether they have a large, expensive AESA panel(s).

That comes with a requirement for more VLS cells.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

The Type-052/055s are large Frigates?

These days, I would say the distinction between Frigates and Destroyers is whether they have a large, expensive AESA panel(s).

That comes with a requirement for more VLS cells.

@Tomboy is actually saying that all the DDGs in the PLAN that came before the 052Cs are essentially large frigates. This is actually a pretty accurate description, especially when taking their high-seas combat capabilities (HSCC) into account, even after those ships had their MLUs.

 

[Blitzo]

Total is 59.

According to wiki the Arleigh Burke equivalent is 74 active, 12 under construction/fitting out/trials, with a further 10 authorized, for a total of 96.

A gap of 37 destroyers in total.

I want to comment on the discussion that followed this post.

Technically Andy1974 is not incorrect in comparing the numerical difference between PLAN destroyers and USN destroyers, for the sake of general interest.

But I hoped that other posters would have had the wisdom to just look at it and ignore it, rather than then talking about things like:
- difference in fleet structure between the two navies
- difference in weight class, armament, characteristics between PLAN and USN destroyer classes
- general "superiority/inferiority" of each side's navies in relation to destroyers


This has been discussed ad nauseum over the years, to the extent that surely people must be aware that none of those comparisons are useful, and direct comparisons of destroyer number between the PLAN and USN are also not useful either, and the only way to interpret such useless comparisons is to ignore them?


That is to say, a "gap of 37 destroyers" is something which is meaningless without context -- and the goal for us here is to not give it context, we should actively deprive it of context, and instead just pretend such a comparison was never posted to begin with.


Otherwise in future I'm just going to blanket delete such posts that ends up being so off topic and start issuing warnings to members who consistently lack the wisdom to:
A) start such posts that lead down off topic discussions which are fruitless
B) continue off topic discussions which are fruitless (especially if they have been warned to be more disciplined in the past)

 

[ddr711]

Total is 59.

According to wiki the Arleigh Burke equivalent is 74 active, 12 under construction/fitting out/trials, with a further 10 authorized, for a total of 96.

A gap of 37 destroyers in total.

I think this calculation might not be accurate.

As of the end of 2025, the commissioned Chinese Aegis destroyers should be: 6 × Type 052C + 33 × Type 052D + 8 × Type 055 = 47.

The United States has 74 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.

Furthermore, looking at the number of launched destroyers between 2021 and 2025, China launched 13 × Type 052D + 6 × Type 055 during this five-year period.

The United States launched 4 × Arleigh Burke Flight IIA + 4 × Arleigh Burke Flight III during the same period.

Considering the shipbuilding industrial capacity of the United States and the number of launches from both countries in the last five years, the projected total number of commissioned destroyers plusthose already launched by 2030 should be approximately (47 + 19) for China VS (74 + 8) for the US. The total gap should be within 20 vessels.

 

[Tomboy]

Considering the shipbuilding industrial capacity of the United States and the number of launches from both countries in the last five years, the projected total number of commissioned destroyers plusthose already launched by 2030 should be approximately (47 + 19) for China VS (74 + 8) for the US. The total gap should be within 20 vessels.

Untrue, China has only 5 more 052Ds and 6 055s left to commission with no further launch. There is no guarantee that PLAN will continue mass orders and given that PLAN will likely be going through a large technological overhaul this 5YP, alot of new types will be introduced which will limit production rate.