PLAN Sovremenny DDG 136, 137, 138 & 139 Thread
- Thread starter FarkTypeSoldier
- Start date
The ship was designed during the 60s. Its US contemporary would be the Spruance class destroyer. But even by comparison, the design style looks a bit dated even by that time period.
This is not surprising as the US was always ahead when it comes to naval ship design and introduced the first modern guided missile destroyer, the Arleigh Burke, which is used as the basis for naval destroyer design even to this day by navies around the world.
I don't think nor have I seen any of the RPKs ever in Chinese service. They must either be using UGT or YU-6/10 on these ships.
Angular stealth lines can look so boring...
The Spruance’s were dedicated ASW ships. Their direct equivalent were the Udaloys, not Sovremenys. The Udaloys looked a lot cleaner than Sovremneys too.
however, unlike the udaloys, which had at least credible self-defence capabiltiy against missiles and aircraft, the Spruance had negligible self defence capability. So it would not be too unkind to say the Spruance’s exceptionally spare, clean looks is the result of it being an overly large ship for its limited capability.
Sovremney were general purpose destroyer, with considerable area air defence capability, formidable anti-surface strike capability, a powerful shore bombardment capability, as well as creditable ASW capability.
The Spruance clsss was originally going to be general purpose destroyers just like the Sovremneys. They were even intended to have a massive single automatic 8 gun in the forward position for shore bombardment. But they were stripped down to almost pure ASW to save cost. When general purpose capabilities were restored to the very same Spruance hull a few years later, the result was the Ticonderoga class cruiser, the Ticos looked a lot less clean and uncluttered.
Last edited:
To add what Mr. Santos said, Sovremenny isn't the equal match to the Spruance; the Sovremenny's SAM defense way outclasses it. The Sovremenny's equal can be better found in the Kidd class, which has the poetic irony of all being ended up in Taiwan. Once you start having missile target illumination and more competent air search radars with a full 3D capability, the ship becomes more cluttered. Kidd's SPS-48 here, the large square arrays you see, are the direct equivalent to the Sovremenny's 'Top Plate' Fregats, with the same working principle. Main difference is the Fregats are double sided, so their update tick is double. Spruance's main search radar SPS-40 is only a 2D one, and the PLAN equivalents of such is like the Type 360 radars like you will find in the two Type 054.
The Mk. 26 arm launchers is also another parallel to the Shtil launchers on the Sovremenny. The Mk. 26 stores and launches 44 Sea Sparrows or Standards, while the Sovremenny stores and launches 48 Shtils missiles, which are similar to the early Standards. The Kidds also have 8 antiship missiles, same as the Sovremenny, but of course, the Sovremenny differs here packing a much bigger wallop from its antiship missile. The visual charisma of the Cold War Soviet warships comes from their enormous antiship or antisubmarine missiles.
The Udaloy, even though it is dubbed as an ASW vessel, has some top level clutter too in its original fit. But it differs with the Spruance because it has such a formidable, if not ridiculous, close in air defense suite, with 64 Klinoks, or another way to describe it, a floating Tor-M1 arsenal. The Spruance with its 8 cell launcher with Sea Sparrows, isn't close in the same league. Of the four destroyers mentioned here, the Udaloy might be the best short ranged AAW brawler here even for a purposed ASW ship.
They eventually did become "near general purpose" destroyers. They retained a point-defense capability against aerial targets, but upgraded it with time (2xCIWS, 1xRAM, 1x8 Sea Sparrow). 21 out of 24 ships were upgraded with a 61 cell VLS capable of launching Tomahawk and ASROC missiles. Some ships got 8 Harpoon anti-ship missiles as well. Because they lacked area defense SAM capability, they did not get the letter 'G' added to their DD designation. Sovremmeny's lacked cruise missile land attack capability, so the two classes were roughly similar in their degree of general purpose role.
Last edited:
The Kidd class DDGs were a lot more powerful at air defense than the Sovremmenys. The SPS-48 has a much larger array compared to Top Plate, which makes up for lower update rate by being able to detect targets at longer ranges and use less radar time to track each target. These ships complemented the S-band SPS-48 with an additional air search radar, the L-band SPS-49.
That's 44 per launcher vs 24 on the Sovremmeny (on the Kidd only the aft one housed 44 missiles I think). The Mk. 26 are dual arm launchers, while those on the Sovremenny are single arm, so all other things equal they would have double the firing rate. Another difference is that Mk-26 could also launch ASROC missiles.
Better range does not compensate for a higher update rate, as tracking rate and range are just two different things, neither compensates the other. From a defensive standpoint I would go with tracking rate. Maximum uptick for SPS-48 is about 15 times a minute based on its rate of rotation, while the Fregat is about 12 RPM, so a double face is about 24 times a minute. (Type 382 rotates about 30 times a minute, so it can reach an update rate of 60 times, so that's a boost for the 136 and 137 ship refits.) The oldest Sovs have a different radar, they use the Top Pair instead of the Top Plate of the later batches.
I forgot, the Kidd has 24 in the front and 44 at the back launcher. Each dual arm launcher has the rate of 2 missiles at 9 seconds, while the Shtil fires a missile every two seconds, or one missile every four seconds per launcher, for a total of 4 missiles in 8 seconds. (Wiki info for both).
Kidd only has two target illuminators, as clearly seen in the photograph, the Sovremenny has six. So the capacity to engage more targets simultaneously goes to the Sov.
As for ASROC, the Kidds has a separate launcher, but the Sov can do ASROC from its 533mm torpedo tubes.
Kidds have main guns, front and rear, so does the Sov, with the Sov having dual guns per turret, so it has a much higher firing rate. SPQ-9A handles the gunnery for the Kidds, while the MR184 handles it for the Sov. I remember in one exercise, a Sov was able to take out cruise missile targets with its main guns.
Kidds, as per Taiwan version, has two 20mm Phalanx, while the Sovs in their original fit, have four 30mm AK630s guided by two MR123. So close range I would go with the Sov here.
No equivalent to the Mineral radar and antiship targeting, which has active and passive OTH via atmospheric ducting. In terms of direct line of sight engagement using antiship missiles, the Kidd has to rely on the SPQ-9A, while the Sov relies on the Mineral. The Soviets prefer, up to this day as the modern Russian Navy, to have two distinct separate fire control radars for antiship missiles vs. gunnery, while the West prefers to integrate both functions in a single radar.
Last edited: