054B/next generation frigate

[Tam]

By 366 did you mean 344?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I clearly meant Type 366, Chinese version of Mineral M OTH radar. It has secondary function in picking up low flying objects and tracking them, although it's main purpose is antiship.

Type 344 is not used on the 054A and 056. 344 is used on all the destroyers, 054, and 053H3. The reason for this is that the Type 344 is associated as the fire control radar for larger guns, 90mm, 100mm, and 127mm. In the case where the 344 is present, it would be queued by the Type 364 to the threat direction. In ships where the Type 366 is absent such as the 051B destroyer, the Type 344 also acts to target ships with antiship missiles within the radar's line of sight.

For ships that use 76mm, they use the Type 347G radar, same radar used on top of the CIWS.

 

[Cloud_Nine_]

I clearly meant Type 366, Chinese version of Mineral M OTH radar. It has secondary function in picking up low flying objects and tracking them, although it's main purpose is antiship.

Type 344 is not used on the 054A and 056. 344 is used on all the destroyers, 054, and 053H3. The reason for this is that the Type 344 is associated as the fire control radar for larger guns, 90mm, 100mm, and 127mm. In the case where the 344 is present, it would be queued by the Type 364 to the threat direction. In ships where the Type 366 is absent such as the 051B destroyer, the Type 344 also acts to target ships with antiship missiles within the radar's line of sight.

For ships that use 76mm, they use the Type 347G radar, same radar used on top of the CIWS.

Since there's no 366 on Type 055, how likely do you think that one of the pairs of large panels on the hull is some kind of OTH?

 

[Tam]

Since there's no 366 on Type 055, how likely do you think that one of the pairs of large panels on the hull is some kind of OTH?

The large panels on the side of the hull are defensive ECM. As they are pretty large I suspect some extreme power in jamming. These panels are replicated on the Fujian but on the sides of the island superstructure. I suspect that as the new next generation of ECM, some form of it may show up on the 054B.

It's probable that the 055 isn't using active OTH, but is using passive OTH through its new ESM systems. The 366 uses both active and passive OTH, with one antenna active and the back antenna attached to it back to back as the passive reciever. The 055's gunnery fire control radar is a mode function on its four fixed X band AESA on the mast. This also handles the antiship targeting for antiship missiles within line of sight, as well as search scanning on the sea surface which is the Type 364 function. This I meant the 055's X band arrays on the top mast, not the big ones used for the SAMs, is a true MFR that does sea search, and targeting for guns and antiship missiles within line of sight, as well as queuing for the HQ-10 and the CIWS, combining the function of the 364, 344 and part of the 366.

I suspect the 055 along with the 052D, rather than waste a YJ-18 on a close range within line of sight naval target, would use the HQ-9 as a short range within line of sight (up to 40km) antiship missile. In such a use, on the 052D, the Type 366 provides the targeting, and on the 055, the X band AESA.

 

[Zichan]

Yes, my point is to illustrate that it's still ultimately a 3D AESA that is mechanically rotated. In terms of its 360 degree coverage, that is due to mechanical rotation. However, it should retain all of the functions of a regular 3D AESA.
I.e.: hypothetically speaking, if its mechanically rotated mount were to malfunction, the array will still be fully functional in the hemisphere it is now fixed and pointed towards.

Not really a hemisphere in the last case. As the radar beam is scanned further away from perpendicular, the main beam(lobe) becomes wider and the sidelobes become relatively bigger to the main lobe. In practical terms, this introduces a scanning range limit of +/- 60 degrees for AESA radars with dense TRM element placement. Sparsely populated AESA can have much narrower scanning ranges.

 

[Gloire_bb]

I suspect the 055 along with the 052D, rather than waste a YJ-18 on a close range within line of sight naval target, would use the HQ-9 as a short range within line of sight (up to 40km) antiship missile. In such a use, on the 052D, the Type 366 provides the targeting, and on the 055, the X band AESA.

That's almost a given - most non-light ASCMs tend to have very significant minimal ranges, and can't be expected to be effective at low ranges in any case.
All sort of Harpoonski missiles(subsonic group with no long climb and acceleration) are good at moderate ranges, but that's it.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

(Partly cross-posted from the 075 LHD thread)

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1675871675722895360

Rough translation + Some edits:
Continuing from the 075 thread, @Horobeyo obtained the measurement of the midship width of the purported 054B FFG's hull at 18-19 meters, which is greater than or equal to the 052D DDG, and 2-3 meters wider than 054A.

He stated that the power system onboard the 054B FFG should be very powerful. It is also speculated that there is at least one gas turbine in the prime mover(?), corresponding to the comprehensive all-electric propulsion system as claimed by rumors many years ago. Even if the propulsion system is not-as-good as expected, it's still going to be a diesel-electric combination.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

(Partly cross-posted from the 075 LHD thread)

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1675871675722895360

Rough translation + Some edits:
Continuing from the 075 thread, @Horobeyo obtained the measurement of the midship width of the purported 054B FFG's hull at 18-19 meters, which is greater than or equal to the 052D DDG, and 2-3 meters wider than 054A.

He stated that the power system onboard the 054B FFG should be very powerful. It is also speculated that there is at least one gas turbine in the prime mover(?), corresponding to the comprehensive all-electric propulsion system as claimed by rumors many years ago. Even if the propulsion system is not-as-good as expected, it's still going to be a diesel-electric combination.

Addition from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, roughly translated:
The reason why we dare to rule out the diesel-fuel combination is because the diesel engine does not match the speed and torque characteristics of the gas turbine. The diesel engine first generates power and then the electric motor is coupled with the gas turbine. Compared with direct mechanical coupling, it is less difficult to design for our country. Higher reliability and lower cost. Of course, gas turbines can also generate electricity, and they are distributed to the entire ship's electrical equipment and power through integrated power distribution. The difficulty lies in power distribution, but our country (China) has already mastered this technology anyways.

 

[davidau]

Addition from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, roughly translated:
The reason why we dare to rule out the diesel-fuel combination is because the diesel engine does not match the speed and torque characteristics of the gas turbine. The diesel engine first generates power and then the electric motor is coupled with the gas turbine. Compared with direct mechanical coupling, it is less difficult to design for our country. Higher reliability and lower cost. Of course, gas turbines can also generate electricity, and they are distributed to the entire ship's electrical equipment and power through integrated power distribution. The difficulty lies in power distribution, but our country (China) has already mastered this technology anyways.

Bravo! 054B would be top of the world's frigates with the array of sensors, radar and missilies to replacxe 054 and act as escort for carrier groups

 

[charles18]

Addition from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, roughly translated:
The reason why we dare to rule out the diesel-fuel combination is because the diesel engine does not match the speed and torque characteristics of the gas turbine. The diesel engine first generates power and then the electric motor is coupled with the gas turbine. Compared with direct mechanical coupling, it is less difficult to design for our country. Higher reliability and lower cost. Of course, gas turbines can also generate electricity, and they are distributed to the entire ship's electrical equipment and power through integrated power distribution. The difficulty lies in power distribution, but our country (China) has already mastered this technology anyways.

I was never interested in the upgrades to the radar or weapons for the Type 054B.
If we look at the entire battle group as a whole, an upgrade to a frigate's radar and weapons adds little.
However a frigate with an all electric propulsion system is adding a new capability to the battle group.
I think that counts for a lot more.

 

[snake65]

Addition from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, roughly translated:
The reason why we dare to rule out the diesel-fuel combination is because the diesel engine does not match the speed and torque characteristics of the gas turbine. The diesel engine first generates power and then the electric motor is coupled with the gas turbine. Compared with direct mechanical coupling, it is less difficult to design for our country. Higher reliability and lower cost. Of course, gas turbines can also generate electricity, and they are distributed to the entire ship's electrical equipment and power through integrated power distribution. The difficulty lies in power distribution, but our country (China) has already mastered this technology anyways.

To me this sounds confusing. Is he talking about IEP with combined Diesel and GT generators or is he talking about CODLAG?