054/A FFG Thread II

[dingyibvs]

So, anybody wanna talk about the 3rd piece of nugget offered by Fzgfzy, that the 054B will appear soon? What do you guys expect besides the integrated mast? Is it possible to switch the VLS system to the universal VLS? Quad pack HQ-16?

 

[Blitzo]

So, anybody wanna talk about the 3rd piece of nugget offered by Fzgfzy, that the 054B will appear soon? What do you guys expect besides the integrated mast? Is it possible to switch the VLS system to the universal VLS? Quad pack HQ-16?

Ooh where did he say that?

I expect integrated mast (probably the rice lamp at Wuhan), universal VLS.

I hope for dual hangar, slightly lengthened hull.

I dream of IEPS.

 

[Iron Man]

Quad-packed HQ-16 is never going to happen, even with the universal CCL VLS. The missile body is just too fat. I think quad-packed DK-10A is far more realistic. That, along with a 4-panel X-band AESA, 32-cell CCL VLS, IEP, at ~5,000 tons, would be a very good 054B as far as I'm concerned.

 

[dingyibvs]

He mentioned it in the same post on CD, I'll xpost the link here

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

妹妹的，设计就一西北风嘛，法国佬要骂街了，居然抄我那个我没造的3万多吨的那个方案，兔子笑笑，我的舰岛是054A啊。。。。对了说到A。。。我去年说今年B有望开工那事，还居然真的可能赶趟罗

 

[Tyloe]

If existing test systems are an indication of future use, then the enclosed mast at Wuhan could house its main radar. Switching to HHQ-10 ciws is viable as well. Maybe no fixed arrays if they want cost differentiation.

 

[dingyibvs]

Quad-packed HQ-16 is never going to happen, even with the universal CCL VLS. The missile body is just too fat. I think quad-packed DK-10A is far more realistic. That, along with a 4-panel X-band AESA, 32-cell CCL VLS, IEP, at ~5,000 tons, would be a very good 054B as far as I'm concerned.

If the MK-41 can quad pack ESSM, I think there's a chance for the universal VLS to quad pack the HQ-16, or at least some variant of it. It doesn't really matter though, some variant of the DK-10A is just fine, it just needs some sort of quad-packed mid-range air defense missile, and it should be designed with the universal VLS in mind. By that I mean it should make as much use of the 800mm width and the 7m length as possible to maximize range and lethality.

 

[Iron Man]

If the MK-41 can quad pack ESSM, I think there's a chance for the universal VLS to quad pack the HQ-16, or at least some variant of it. It doesn't really matter though, some variant of the DK-10A is just fine, it just needs some sort of quad-packed mid-range air defense missile, and it should be designed with the universal VLS in mind. By that I mean it should make as much use of the 800mm width and the 7m length as possible to maximize range and lethality.

If the HQ-16 is anything like its progenitor the Russian Buk missile, just the missile body itself is 400mm, and that's not even including the wings. The ESSM by comparison has a missile body diameter of 254mm; it can easily quad-pack in to the 650mm width Mk 41, while the HQ-16 will not be able to quad-pack into either of the PLAN's VL systems.

 

[dingyibvs]

Per Forbin the HQ-16 is only 340mm in diameter, dunno how accurate that is though. Hopefully in the future there might be a ship launched PL-15 or even a PL-21 variant with boosters for fleet defense.

 

[Gloire_bb]

Buk/Uragan is only ancestor.
Shtil-1's 9M317ME missile(much more related to HQ-16) is 360mm (folded), which is much closer.
Obviously they aren't same.

 

[Iron Man]

Shtil-1's 9M317ME missile(much more related to HQ-16) is 360mm (folded), which is much closer.

This is just not right at all.

Here is an HQ-16:


Here is the Buk family of missiles (the 9M317ME is on the bottom):


It is quite obvious the 9M317ME looks absolutely nothing like the HQ-16, which is closest in appearance to the 9M38M1.