055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[FORBIN]

Nope I don't draw a line from Sachsen class acquisition cost share to what might be an engine config in 005. That would be total nonsense. I was referring to an answer that I made to a statement earlier. I a reply ironman was so kind to question my answer. and thats why I took the share argument.

To get things straight for you and others that might stumble on that now, I will put the quotes together later... that should clear the fog.

Thank you i was worried but it is extremely difficult woow ! remenber me the new SSN 093B with especialy the VLS ... in addition maybe more difficult for submarine and i have see some using Virginia for a comparison !
I am not very good for propulsion prefer weapons load, potency as majority

 

[Jura The idiot]

absolutely, that's what I saw as well.
That is no indication, that IEP will be used, but that the graphic designers don't have a better idea what might be. anyway.

wait, so what is it that makes you claim Type 055 will feature an IEP?!
(I thought you were presenting credible info according to the source you gave in ...
#2849 Salty_Waters, Today at 1:47 PM

... by junshig.com (Shanghai Anchang Network Security Technology Co.L.).

)

 

[Iron Man]

Hey folks, unfortunately let’s begin with off topic. Thank you very much for your support, by highlighting the offensive character of ironmans reply. I dunno if it was his intention, but for sure it draws the attention from the content of the thread and my question to him.

Sounds like you're still butthurt and wish to keep the off-topic crap going. "Delicate tulip" isn't even remotely the most serious thing I've seen on this forum so grow some thicker skin and get over it already.

The electric engines in this system are really tiny (at least compared to the reduction gears and the gas turbines).

It seems a similar system (the picture above is the Lockheed-Martin system, the system used is from L-3) is intended to be retrofitted on Arleigh Burkes and the electric motors should be enough for up to 13knots (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)

Well technically those aren't electric engines, they are power converters meant to siphon off excess power from the engines that would otherwise be wasted and use them for ship's services.

 

[Salty_Waters]

wait, so what is it that makes you claim Type 055 will feature an IEP?!
(I thought you were presenting credible info according to the source you gave in ...
#2849 Salty_Waters, Today at 1:47 PM
)

please tell me where I claim that 055 will feature IEP? Is it so hard to read my post with attention? I was asking if there are some information available that 055 will feature it. I never claimed that it will. Feel free to show me where I made that claim.

 

[Salty_Waters]

Hey FORBIN, I hope it gets a bit clearer now what I am up to.

Nope I don't draw a line from Sachsen class acquisition cost share to what might be an engine config in 055. That would be total nonsense. I was referring to an answer that I made to a statement earlier. In a reply ironman was so kind to question my answer. and thats why I took the share argument.

To get things straight for you and others that might stumble on that now, I will put the quotes together later... that should clear the fog.

Salty_Waters u make me curious allow me a question u use by ex datas for German Sachsen for do a comparison in fact try know what Chines hide ? for what purpose ?

ok I’ll try tp get this straight…

it started with:

I agree, especially since they are building a lot of them at once. If they were doing something really new they would build one ship and conduct some serious tests before starting "mass production".

If they really want a new propulsion system and a lot of 055s within a short time, I could image that one of these hulls might be an "experimental" version with COGLAG or IEP and perhaps some other new technology.

I replied:

That's what I thought earlier as well.

But looking at the building process of the 052D and the 054A reality teached me something different. Both classes had at least the second unit already in production before the first was in water or even well tested. With the 054A it where 4 first units. China has changed in that way, they are much more self confident in the shipbuilding programs, for good reasons. That's my lesson from that named classes.

And these classes had new features the predecessor hadn't.

nevertheless testing the IEP in a land based setup already happened. I'll provide images if I can find them again. Experiences with that concept where already made. To admit, on civilian vessels, but thoroughly evaluated by the technical institutes in china.

That forced him to answer

Both these classes are poor choices for your "lesson", mainly because both of them have predecessors that were thoroughly tested with significant wait times before progression to the next class: the 052D had the 052C, and the 054A had the 054. Once the 054 and the 052C were built, tested, and their designs refined, there was certainly no need to take baby steps with the 054A and the 052D, and it was easy to build them en masse. Your "new features" consisted of electronics and weapons which were already tested on the 909 test ship so by the time they made it onto the production ships, they were already thoroughly vetted. New but tested weapons/sensors + established hulls = fast builds. Nothing so dramatic that anyone needs to learn a "lesson" over.

clarifying my point with:

regarding my statement in #2801

"anyone can", if really interested in that matter, browse through libraries of naval shipbuilding literature. There is given great backgroundinformation, how and why system integration of sophisticated weapon systems and electronics has become the most critical and time consuming issue at building modern complex naval units. In comparison, the share of costs as an indicator for complexity and time consuming work for a destroyer: 29% electronics, 24% weapons, 9% propulsion and power transmission, 13% hull and Equipment, + a bunch of different items. Furthermore, integration of well tested modern electronics and weapon suites has made the construction of a naval vessel as ten times more complicated as commercial vessels. It is also stated, that tested equipment, that is used on a testbed-class still has mayor issues, with integration on a new platform. Why do I think, that China has changed in naval vessel building self confidence, and my „lesson learned“ is true?

First of all, calling the 052D in principle the same platform as the 052C with some minor changes (same with 054A and the 054) ignores the fact, that some of the weapons and electronic systems changed, thus leading to a redesign of some internal structures and higher effort for system integration (as I discussed above). Again, the tough job is not up to the hull, it is about the overall system integration. Changes in system, lead to risks of system integration.

Furthermore my judgement was, that Chinese Shipbuilding changed. They learned a lot, with the earlier classes and have new technologies for risk minimization (computer aided production simulation f.e.). So that they are able, to do the more complicated job with more complex and more sophisticated classes, without prototyping, evaluating and changing in single follow on steps. They have found ways to minimize the risk of integration of new systems, enabling them to build the initial units of a class simultaneously. The 055 is somewhat evidence for it. That will be the new mayor combatant of the PLAN, with the most sophisticated tech, with a brand new hull design… How can they build 4 initial units simultaneously without a real predecessor class? The answer: the lesson learned, no matter what one likes it or not, China has made some critical steps in shipbuilding methods and technology. Does that give any indication about the IEP on the 055, for sure not. And I would agree, that building 4 at a time is likely an indication that China is not going the risky step of IEP integration.

when Jura stating that he has no clue what I am up to I tried to specify again:

my point is: It is not the hull and it's steal structure that makes naval shipbuilding the challenging job. It is the complex system integration of weapons, sensors and combat management/ship management system. The share I presented should highlight the big share of electronics and weapons on a naval vessel, by almost half the acquisition cost. That is a number to be easily transferred to other complex naval vessel classes. To be fair, the costs are not representing the complexity of the work to be done at all. But it gives a good impression where the risks are.

ironman stated, if I understood him correctly, that 052C and 052D where so much the same classes, that there is no need for further design evaluation... I disagree on that, because electronics and weapons on that both classes are not the same... therefore PLAN took well calculated risk in building almost two hulls of the 052D in the same time, before the first is evaluated properly. Thus highlighting, that China is more self-confident with naval shipbuilding than years before.

but I think, it should be read in context with the original posts. maybe the point becomes clear.

Finally to avoid misunderstandings.

I was simply saying, China changed the procedure. Instead of building first of the class and evaluating it until all design flaws are identified, they are self confident building something completely new with 4 units in first batch. Something they did somehow with 052D and 054A.

I can accept if one is saying, that 052D and 054A where not that brand new and there where certain experiences with their predecessors. I have a different perspective on that from the system integration point of view (the most risky part in naval shipbuilding). Changing mayor components leads to design risks, that China accepted by building two (052D) or four (054A) units at the same time. For me that is a change in modus operandi, that clearly comes into play while we are watching that brand new class (055) with four units in construction.

Last but not least, I repeat: that building procedure has nothing to do with the possibility of IEP in 055, something I didn't claim. Like I didn't claim that 055 will have IEP, like I didn't claim the CGIs are evidence that 055 will have IEP.

hope the fog is gone.

 

[Salty_Waters]

Sounds like you're still butthurt and wish to keep the off-topic crap going. "Delicate tulip" isn't even remotely the most serious thing I've seen on this forum so grow some thicker skin and get over it already.

It is not sounding like that, you are a butthurt. And you don't realize, that you put yourself in a stupid position. Offending someone you don't even know just reveals the absence of basic skills in positive interacting with other people. You don't understand, that this kinda behavior makes your no-matter-what-good-they-might-be-arguments pointless, because people where not listening to them, but concentrate on your butthurting. If that is something you want/need, well go on with it. But you have to accept that you will loose audience. Like me, because you are the first person on my ignore list now.

 

[Salty_Waters]

wait, so what is it that makes you claim Type 055 will feature an IEP?!
(I thought you were presenting credible info according to the source you gave in ...
#2849 Salty_Waters, Today at 1:47 PM
)

I was posting the source of one of the CGIs and I was naming the source of the other CGI a magazine. Thus differentiating them from simplified fanboys wet dreams.

If I was not clear enough, I'll try again. For me CGIs found in magazine or somehow other commercial publications are way more credible with what they depict, than graphics produced by some nerds at home. There is a difference for me, and I described that. Nevertheless, If a serious commercial background is given or not, I don't take them as serious to say that this is evidence for technical feature. I just can take them as a peace of the puzzle. Thats why I named other reasons than CGIs as well for me to discuss this IEP thing.

I found it was worth to differentiate, when someone else tries to compare that CGIs with pictures from the YETI...

 

[Iron Man]

It is not sounding like that, you are a butthurt. And you don't realize, that you put yourself in a stupid position. Offending someone you don't even know just reveals the absence of basic skills in positive interacting with other people. You don't understand, that this kinda behavior makes your no-matter-what-good-they-might-be-arguments pointless, because people where not listening to them, but concentrate on your butthurting. If that is something you want/need, well go on with it. But you have to accept that you will loose audience. Like me, because you are the first person on my ignore list now.

If we were to judge butthurtness by degree of invectiveness, I think "jerk", "fool", "pale nerd", and implicit threats of physical violence reflect far more butthurt pain than "delicate tulip". And judging by your posts here so far, I'm pretty sure you don't need to be in my "audience".

See u a reason why 055 have " only " for a big Cruiser in fact 112 silos for missiles why only 48 in back ? big hangar for 2 big helos just an idea ...?

I actually think there will be 64 VL cells in the back, except turned 90 degrees sideways compared to the front set of modules. I had even posted a CGI where 80 cells each could be placed in both the front and rear set of modules.

 

[antiterror13]

160 VLS ? I like it .... but highly unlikely unfortunately

 

[Iron Man]

160 VLS ? I like it .... but highly unlikely unfortunately

Oh I think there will be at most 128 cells, but I think the capacity is there for 160 with the current hull size; they have just chosen not to max out the 055 full of cells is all.