PLAN Type 054 FFG Thread II

Discussion in 'Navy' started by tphuang, Sep 14, 2008.

  1. Iron Man
    Offline

    Iron Man Major
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    3,007
    Likes Received:
    2,608
    If the VLS is as depicted in the CGIs and drawings, i.e. (mostly) flush with the deck, then definitely the 054B will not be using a full 9m UVLS, if it is even using the UVLS.
     
  2. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Captain
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    2,635
    Likes Received:
    4,675
    The H/AJK-16 will be more than 5 meters, I would think up to 5.5m if they can make that fit in the Sovremenny's missile magazine. A Shtil-1 missile is about 5.5 meters in length, and the magazine stores the missiles standing straight up. The HQ-16 is around just over 5 meters, so that's fine, the balance for the space would be for the gas transfer channels underneath. The U-VLS comes in 3.3m, 7 and 9 meters in length. You need the 9m to fire YJ-12 (assuming there is a VLS version) or YJ-18. HQ-9 missile is 6.8m, so the 7 meter version of U-VLS is good for launching that. But launching HQ-16 on U-VLS is a waste of space. 054B may not have the radar infrastructure to support the HQ-9 and one of the most annoying things about the HQ-9 vs HQ-16 is that both don't use the same frequency band for target illumination, unlike Standards and ESSM which can use the same illumination array.

    I don't think H/AJK-16 needs improving, it seems to work great. The missiles themselves can be improved though, and most importantly, the radar suite.

    I would think the reason for keeping slanted canisters for the anti-ship missiles amidships rather than using VLS is to save the space underneath.
     
  3. schenkus
    Offline

    schenkus Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2014
    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    354
    In my opinion replacing the H/AJK-16 with the U-VLS on the 054B makes sense if there is (or will soon be) a new missile that can be quad packed "ESSM style" in the U-VLS and is good enough to replace the HQ-16 for medium range air defence. In that case even a 16 cell U-VLS would be better than the 32 cell H/AJK-16.
     
    kurutoga likes this.
  4. Jura
    Offline

    Jura General

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    23,894
    Likes Received:
    27,767
    hey, did you see the mammoth yet?
    OedoSoldier‏ @OedoSoldier 2h2 hours ago




    推定長度21m、外径は50cm


    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]


    noticed through ...
    it's being discussed in
    PRC/PLAN Laser and Rail Gun Development Thread https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/prc-plan-laser-and-rail-gun-development-thread.t7906/page-9
     
    perfume, Hyperwarp and davidau like this.
  5. schenkus
    Offline

    schenkus Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2014
    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    354
    One thing is sure: this won't be fitted on a frigate :D
     
  6. Jura
    Offline

    Jura General

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    23,894
    Likes Received:
    27,767
    24 minutes ago posted just a heads up for those who wouldn't know about this presumably important development; I'm looking forward to read what various people will be saying

    plus I have general type of questions like
    Aug 26, 2017
    (ignored or worse LOL)

    EDIT
    Feb 2, 2017
     
    #3726 Jura, Jan 31, 2018
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2018
  7. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Captain
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    2,635
    Likes Received:
    4,675
    Yes indeed they are planning on a new medium ranged SAM one that is going to be bigger than lets say a navalized PL-12. A good example would be something based on the 9M96E2 missile which I will use as a guidepost for a missile that is quad packable and still ranges up to 120km. Now an H/AJK-16 is no slouch in terms of size, an HQ-16 is not a small missile either, and there is likely room for quad packing missiles the size of a PL-12. Question is the length of the missile. The 9M96E2 is about 5.65m in length, and the H/AJK-16 has to be over 5 meters in length, as the HQ-16 is about 5 meters. The Shtil-1 is about 5.44 meters. That probably doesn't give much of a margin unless the H/AJK-16 is around 5.8 to 6 meters in length (5.8m if the H/AJK-16 is copying the shorter Mk. 41 Self Defense version). The actual 9M96E2 is cold launched though, which means additional length must be considered for the compressed gas canister. So its more likely the U-VLS with the 7 meter length would be a more comfortable fit with margins to spare.

    However, until a Chinese equivalent to the 9M96E2 missile is introduced, the U-VLS is oversized for single HQ-16s, and while I have heard about the U-VLS claiming to be able to support HQ-16 (and other missiles like DK-10 and YJ-83 and so on) I have never seen test tired on one unless maybe the Type 055 or a special test ship that can demonstrate that using a digital beam forming X-band radar that can work for target illumination. The Type 052D can't test this since it lacks X-band target illumination, with its being on C-band. HQ-16 would certainly require its own concentric canister to work on a U-VLS, though that should not be a problem to develop one if one doesn't exist for it currently. As a final note, the 9M96E2 has active guidance and would spare the ship from having ship board illumination, and if the PLAN develops a similar equivalent using PL-12/PL-15 seeker, that would make things a lot simpler.

    If the new frigate decides to use HQ-9, you will likely need to create a frigate version of the Type 346, maybe a single or dual panel, maybe each panel smaller, that spins around with a radome to cover it. That won't be unlike the "pineapple" radome we have been seeing in drawings and with an actual test mockup on Wuhan. Small fixed panel C-band illumination arrays would have to be set on the mast supporting the "mini-346" for HQ-9 target guidance. Not impossible to do, and the ship will keep the X-band Type 366 and 344 for ASM and gun fire control.
     
  8. Iron Man
    Offline

    Iron Man Major
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    3,007
    Likes Received:
    2,608
    This thing is truly gigantic. If it is a railgun, then it represents a huge leapfrog over US efforts, since their railgun is still at a non-turreted experimental stage.
     
    Figaro and manqiangrexue like this.
  9. Jura
    Offline

    Jura General

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    23,894
    Likes Received:
    27,767
    I was actually thinking if I didn't excited about what in fact would just for example a new type of crane LOL!
    I hope not 33 minutes ago
     
  10. no_name
    Offline

    no_name Major

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,584
    Likes Received:
    2,465
    21 metres would be about the length of J-20, just as reference.
     
    Hyperwarp likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page