054B/next generation frigate

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Interestingly, this Weibo user –– whom I regard as credible –– seems to suggest that

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

In the image below, from left to right: 054A, 054AP (for Pakistan), and 054B. The compartments/openings in the red boxes are diesels. In the case of 054B (far right), each compartment contains a pair of diesels, for a total of four diesel engines. In the blue boxes are gearboxes connecting the diesels. The yellow box is the electric drive compartment, which directly connects to the propeller shafts.

The same Weibo user also suggests the image below depicts the general design of the 054B, and that there are two masts in the forward structure. He also mentions the bridge is located closer to the bow compared to 054A.

If this case of the propulsion system of 054B being CODAD is true, then it is highly probable that the large opening at the fore portion of the hull is actually the VLS. Besides, that means it is also quite possible that the expected opening at the ship's bow portion for the 100mm gun mount could have been obscured by the overhead crane in the satellite photo, judging by and comparing with the satellite photos of the 054A and 054AP on the left and center.

 

[Zichan]

In the case of 054B (far right), each compartment contains a pair of diesels, for a total of four diesel engines. In the blue boxes are gearboxes connecting the diesels. The yellow box is the electric drive compartment, which directly connects to the propeller shafts.

Why would an electric drive ship need gearboxes to connect the diesel sets? Normally, each diesel engine will connect to a generator. From there, the power is rerouted to the electric motors via conductors. This allows more freedom in engine placement and obviates the need for reduction gear.

 

[aahyan]

Obviously 052D and 054A is not going to retire yet. I am just thinking how would a 4 tier navy in China work. 054A, 054B, 052D, 055. Perhaps 054A could serve as the cheap all purpose patrol ship while 054B follow the more high intensity combat oriented role? In that case it will be 054B, 052D, 055 composition? 052D is still very good so it is definitely in. Or perhaps all 4 will be working together?

You missed upcoming (proposed) 052E(X)...

What about this possible scenario in coming future:

3 tier surface combatants (Littoral, 1st & 2nd Island Chains)
FFN - 056/A
FFG - 054/A
DDG - 051B/C, Souvs, 052D/DL

Supported by SSKs - Song/Kilo/Yuan


3 tier surface combatants (Beyond 1st & 2nd Island Chains)
FFG - 054B (or 057)
DDG - 052E (X)
CG - 055/A

Supported by SSNs/SSBNs - 093/094/095/096

NP: 2nd suggested tier will sure complement CCG & ARG.

 

[Gloire_bb]

We can't say much about 054b yet.

Possible optimization points (reasonable for a large frigate) include:

(1)Fleet ASW/GP. Likely indicator - presence of turbines(CODAG). Overly extensive strike is unlikely, as PLAN of all things lacks VLS count the least. Likely to be 555 reliant. Maximum ASW capability. Moderate series.

(2)Near seas squadrons flagship (replacement for MLUed old destroyers temporarily taking the role). Likely indicator(s) - diesel propulsion, H/AJK16 (unification with 054A), oversized anti-ship strike capability (UVLS or big slant launchers in increased numbers). Maximum ASW capability. Moderate series.

(3)'Global cruiser' (high-tier presence in far seas, guarding Chinese interests, property and freedom of navigation in far seas). Likely indicator(s) - diesel propulsion, conservative amounts of armament and sensors (up to leaving ASW completely out of the picture), aimed at moderating sustenance costs. Moderate series.

(4)Direct 054A follow-on (rather than a stablemate). Likely indicator(s) - full diesel powerplant, moderate, jackknife-type strike armament (light ASCMs), large series. 'Good enough' ASW capability. Large series.

Roles, of course, can be easily mixed or twitched/switched with time. And even ship touted to other roles can do others just fine, when needed.
Specialization (3) is the least likely, as PLAN is quite clearly being geared towards a big war. Of the remaining 3, 1 will almost 100% be decided by the powerplant(i personally don't see it likely), and 2 and 4 are reasonably close for 2 to become 4 with the passage of time..

 

[by78]

Why would an electric drive ship need gearboxes to connect the diesel sets? Normally, each diesel engine will connect to a generator. From there, the power is rerouted to the electric motors via conductors. This allows more freedom in engine placement and obviates the need for reduction gear.

Based on what I read, and this is also in part my speculation, 054B's propulsion/power generation system is not a radical re-design or clean-sheet per se. It's based partly on the 054A's system, with electric drives tacked on. The gearbox (located between the diesels) connects directly to the drive shafts on 054A, but for 054B, the gearbox (still located between the diesels) connects to the generators and the electric drives, which in turn connects to the drive shafts. If 054B is indeed the designation for the new frigate, then this comports with the PLAN convention that hulls are designated by their propulsion system. For example, even though 052B and 052D are radically different externally, their designations both begin with the number 052, because their propulsion arrangements are the same. In the case of 054B, the PLAN probably didn't see its propulsion system to be so radically different as to warrant a new number.

 

[Blitzo]

Based on what I read, and this is also in part my speculation, 054B's propulsion/power generation system is not a radical re-design or clean-sheet per se. It's based partly on the 054A's system, with electric drives tacked on. The gearbox (located between the diesels) connects directly to the drive shafts on 054A, but for 054B, the gearbox (still located between the diesels) connects to the generators and the electric drives, which in turn connects to the drive shafts. If 054B is indeed the designation for the new frigate, then this comports with the PLAN convention that hulls are designated by their propulsion system. For example, even though 052B and 052D are radically different externally, their designations both begin with the number 052, because their propulsion arrangements are the same. In the case of 054B, the PLAN probably didn't see its propulsion system to be so radically different as to warrant a new number.

One of the benefits IEPS is that the prime movers can interface directly with the gensets (and those motors in turn interface with drive shafts) so you don't need big gearboxes, which among other things saves on space/flexibility and reduces noise.

So the idea of retaining a gearbox would be odd to me if the ship is IEPS.


I personally have for a few years now wondered just how much weight the "05X = propulsion type" thing actually carries, so I am relatively open to the idea of 054B essentially being a near clean sheet design with an entirely different propulsion arrangement and different prime movers.

Given that for a few years now 054B has been spoken of as including at least one gas turbine, I think we should hold fire a bit, and recognize that the holes in the ship's hull which we see right now could be interpreted in multiple ways.

 

[snake65]

It was in his post -- he stated that because the ship is still "054X" that it would be a CODAD ship, as it "keeps its 054 designation"


On the contrary, there have been fairly persistent rumours that this ship would have IEPS of some type and include a gas turbine, yet our current impression of name for it is still 054B.

That's not a source but an assumption.

 

[Blitzo]

That's not a source but an assumption.

What makes you think that he had a source to begin with?

He literally explained his own reasoning in the post and didn't claim to have a "source".


So why wait?

 

[sequ]

If this case of the propulsion system of 054B being CODAD is true, then it is highly probable that the large opening at the fore portion of the hull is actually the VLS. Besides, that means it is also quite possible that the expected opening at the ship's bow portion for the 100mm gun mount could have been obscured by the overhead crane in the satellite photo, judging by and comparing with the satellite photos of the 054A and 054AP on the left and center.

Perhaps, this new ship hasn't been built up high enough for the hole of the cradle/basket of naval cannon to appear. Why I think this is because the moat for the shaft is visible and it sits quite low the hull.

But on the other hand, does this mean this ship is going to use just one shaft and one propeller???

 

[Blitzo]

Perhaps, this new ship hasn't been built up high enough for the hole of the cradle/basket of naval cannon to appear. Why I think this is because the moat for the shaft is visible and it sits quite low the hull.

But on the other hand, does this mean this ship is going to use just one shaft and one propeller???

Very unlikely that's for the shaft. It wouldn't look like that and wouldn't be that high in a continuously visible line.

And as you said, if shouldn't have only one shaft anyhow.


Between the idea of "ship too low so far to not see turret opening" and "ship built up to deck level but only one bow opening visible" the latter seems far more likely, including when considering it is built in a modular fashion and the modules would not be that low to enable us to see a continuous line for the shaft (which should be set at an angle as well, this shouldn't be visible like this).


The most likely conclusions imo are:
1. The bow opening is for the main gun, and there is no bow VLS.
2. The bow opening is for a bow VLS, but for some reason we can't see the bow opening for the main gun (perhaps obscured or partially covered or something)