055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread
- Thread starter FarkTypeSoldier
- Start date
- Status
Jura The idiot
General
I venture to ask if this:
could be a three-band radar (as in for example S/C/X)?
(the view comes from
Jura The idiot
General
... quotingSome quick observations and questions...
It appears the muzzle brake on the main gun is different or hasn't been installed (?)
...
130mm main gun without muzzle brake, 11×30mm CIWS.
Jura The idiot
General
now I'll be posting a series of pictures with captions translated by google, once I read them:
goes on below due to the limit on the number of pictures in a post:
"In April 2016 the hull amids (after) carrying"
"In May 2016, the hulls were closed"
"In June 1916 the third section of the hull segment closed"
"September 2016 ship bow section is about to close"
goes on below due to the limit on the number of pictures in a post:
Jura The idiot
General
continuation of the post right above:
goes on below:
"In October 2016, the ship's forehead was subdivided"
"In October 2016 the ship's foreclosure segment is about to close"
"In October 2016 the ship stern platform segmented load collapsed"
"November 2016 the whole ship through the main body"
"In February 2017 the rear of the main building sub-section appeared"
goes on below:
Jura The idiot
General
... the above series is coming to its end (LOL it's taking me longer than I thought) with:
source:
【原创】守望江南——贺055驱逐舰下水
"March 2017 ship bridge construction of the main body"
"April 2017 Multi-function mast section mounted"
"In early June 2017 the ship's main gun carried"
"June 26, 2017, about to launch the 055 first ship"
"2017 on June 28 morning, about to launch the 055 first ship!"
source:
【原创】守望江南——贺055驱逐舰下水
Here is a about 055.
I don't understand why it quoted Russian media about the specification. It is not like it can be hidden for long, especially number of VLS can not be hidden. Tonnage and lengths etc. maybe.
Anyway, here is the spec used.
Length: 183 meters
Beam: 22 meters
Draught: 8 meters (full or standard displacement?)
Displacement (standard): 9000 tonnes
Displacement (full): 12300 tonnes
Top speed: 32 knots
Crew: 310
VLS: 64 + 64
The two guests did not comment on the specifications. They are 滕建群 (Teng Jianqun) and ？卫东. I can not figure out the family name of the second guest. Teng Jianqun used to serve in the navy and now is a researcher in international and military affairs, receiving special allowance from the state counsel.
I don't understand why it quoted Russian media about the specification. It is not like it can be hidden for long, especially number of VLS can not be hidden. Tonnage and lengths etc. maybe.
Anyway, here is the spec used.
Length: 183 meters
Beam: 22 meters
Draught: 8 meters (full or standard displacement?)
Displacement (standard): 9000 tonnes
Displacement (full): 12300 tonnes
Top speed: 32 knots
Crew: 310
VLS: 64 + 64
The two guests did not comment on the specifications. They are 滕建群 (Teng Jianqun) and ？卫东. I can not figure out the family name of the second guest. Teng Jianqun used to serve in the navy and now is a researcher in international and military affairs, receiving special allowance from the state counsel.
Last edited:
I find it peculiar that the design goes to such lengths to lower RCS that it uses flush deck and it uses new design for rear decoy launcher, covering the usual round tubes....
yet in some regards no effort was taken to give other subsystems similar RCS reduction measures, ones that could have easily been applied. Like covering the base of the front CIWS with some plates (if not redoing the whole CIWS cover). That base is literally a RCS magification machine.
And building a shroud around the VLS well (something like on british Type 45) It would do wonders for RCS again, as those numerous lids and hinges can add quite a bit to RCS.
yet in some regards no effort was taken to give other subsystems similar RCS reduction measures, ones that could have easily been applied. Like covering the base of the front CIWS with some plates (if not redoing the whole CIWS cover). That base is literally a RCS magification machine.
And building a shroud around the VLS well (something like on british Type 45) It would do wonders for RCS again, as those numerous lids and hinges can add quite a bit to RCS.
The quoted draft seems a tad low for standard displacement. The photos show the antifouling paint going up to about 9m draft at the bow. Although, if that includes the sonar bulb, then the mean draft is certainly less.
- Status