Re: PLAN Type 056 Class OPV/Corvette
That's exactly my point, it's semantics on terms like frigate or destroyer which is why the ratio of frigate to destroyer isn't really meaningful on what's considered healthy.
Actually it is meaningful, because the proportion of ships I'm talking about is not the proportion of ships with the "name" but ships with the functions and capabilities.
In this sense, if you want, my definitions of DDG and FFG in my last few posts are as follows:
DDG: a surface combatant that displaces over 6000 tons full, capable of blue water operations, and with armament and sensors of greater quality, quantity and/or magnitude than that of an FFG, and holds the ability to lead naval SAGs and contribute as primary defensive escorts of a naval task group.
FFG: a surface combatant that displaces either below or slightly above 5000 tons full, capable of blue water operations, with armament and sensors of lower quality, quantity, and/or magnitude than that of a DDG, and is cheaper to operate, and is suited for lower intensity operations but can also contribute to escort roles as part of a larger formation. (Of course, frigates are all so typically assigned to ASW operations given their smaller size and relative cheapness, but ASW is not necessarily part of its inherent definition)
Obviously, ships like 052C, 052D, 055 fit into the DDG category while ships like 053H3, 054/A, and a notional future frigate will fit into the FFG category.
Some older ships like 051s and 053s are called DDGs and FFGs respectively, and hold such titles in hunger respective flotillas, but they are not operated as DDGs and FFGs in the above definitions and hold roles more as green water patrol ships. However they are all due to be retired soon, so that isn't an issue.
056 (and a hypothetical 056B) would not be considered an FFG in my definition.
I'm not matching USN and JMSDF ships pound for pound. Otherwise, I would be espousing 70+ 055s, not a combination of 052Ds and 055s with the bulk being the former. 052Ds max out at 7500 tons compared to Burkes which can get close to 10,000 tons. You are right that there will be other missions which a 052D or 055 be fully capable of dealing.
You missed my point when I said 052D and 055 can deal with other missions. I meant that it would be inefficient for them to do those missions where their capabilities are not needed.
Peacetime (or even wartime) escort of convoys, lower intensity blue water missions, ASW.
I'm not arguing that a frigate has no role in ASW but I don't believe there needs to be a successor frigate design in the 5000 ton range for another 20 years. Just how often do you have a lone wolf ASW ship playing tag with a sub in blue waters?
You won't have a random FFG going against a submarine in the he middle of nowhere, but if a task group encounters a potential hostile contact, the response will involve not only an air response via helicopters, but also ship borne interdiction as well, either to draw the attention of the submarine, or to orientate itself in a better position to prosecute the target and/or support aerial ASW efforts, all while the rest of the task group moves in a different heading to its mission while avoiding the submarine (you don't want to send a carrier with its main escorts on a path where you know a submarine might lie). That will all require a ship that is willing to get closer to a submarine than other escorts are, and that increases the risk of that ship being attacked. That is why you want a more dispensable ship, and thus a frigate.
I don't see them being cheaper or more dispensable if it's a frigate with front and rear VLS and smaller AESAs.
Why not? OHP can be considered a smaller version of spruance. 054A is a smaller version of 052C. Type 26 will be a smaller version of type 45.
All those frigates have similar capabilities to larger destroyer counterparts, only in lower quantity and magnitude. They have shorter range weapons, shorter range radars and other sensors, and smaller overall displacement. That is why they are cheaper and more dispensable than a DDG.
Just because a frigate has some VLS and an AESA doesn't mean it isn't considerably cheaper than a much larger 7500 ton 052D which might have twice the VLS load and a much more powerful longer range AESA and other sensors (as well as all the other subsystems that rise in cost due to scaling for a larger ship), let alone a 13,000 ton 055 that might have four times the VLS load and a much more powerful sensor suite and command capabilities.
That is where the difference in cost comes from.
All the 054As can be dedicated to that blue ocean role you espouse with the first island chain adequately covered by a 2000+ ton ASW OPV/corvette/light frigate. If I save with (20) 2000 ton ASW corvettes vs (20) 5000 ton frigates, is it really wasteful if I build another (20) 052Ds instead where I don't have to pony up new R&D costs and I get scale of economy to mitigate production costs?
Deploying all 054As on blue water missions means you have no frigates for the western pacific/home waters, and there will be many situations that will still require the flexibility of a frigate versus that of a destroyer closer to home. For instance, shorter range escort of convoys where an 056s weaponry is not enough and where a DDG is too much. And of course, ASW against a capable opponent.
A notional 056B might be useful in the ASW role but it will have limited endurance and will only be able to operate for short durations in the second island chain before either needing refuelling or returning home, so it will effectively be limited to green water operations within the first island chain.
A 2000+ ton shallow draft ASW ship with good sonar, TAS, helo, hangar, anti-sub rockets, makes a great economical ASW platform to complement the 054As. Incheon class falls in this category.
Such a ship will not be capable of blue water operations and will be limited to green water.
