Plan Type 056 Class Opv/corvette

Discussion in 'Navy' started by dingyibvs, Nov 11, 2010.

  1. snake65
    Offline

    snake65 Junior Member
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    118
    Well, obviously it has reload ability on 22800.

    The "installations" without missiles on 22350 are called Palash. Essentially the same guns, 22350 is planned to have 9M100 SRAAM, therefore missile component of the CIWS was dropped.
    Palash on Vietnamese 11660 corvettes has Sosna-R missiles, these are the ones you referred to as version of Pantsyr with el-op guidance.
     

    Attached Files:

    #3201 snake65, Jun 13, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018
  2. Viktor Jav
    Offline

    Viktor Jav Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2017
    Messages:
    672
    Likes Received:
    515
    And why should any future ship be only limited to only 2 out of those 3 options ? There is no universal rule or engineering law stating that a ship cannot be limited in such a manner.
    Moreover, if we are to take a look at the PLAN inventory it is clear that the Universal VLS combines both the USKS and the Redut into one package. Even more, I have never stipulated that any future PLAN corvette must have a Redut esque VLS for medium range missiles. That is not within their scope of combat. It is the Universal VLS/USKS that I have always focused on, for them to launch either ASROCS or AShMs, not medium range sams like the Vityaz.
    That is obvious because the Pantsyr is only begining its naval service on the Karakurt Classes and the lead ship is even yet to be launched yet. But we can still draw inference from the Kashtan CIWS which has been installed on the Gepard class frigates (though they are equal to the 056As in weight) and the Steregushchiy-class corvette. And even if we are to be so generous as to assume that in the unlikely case the Gepards did not have the auto reloading mechanism included (though this is unlikely since they explicitly reported that these versions are the exact same versions to be found on larger vessels as well), they still have by default an 8 round salvo which is what the current 056A has now.
    With anti missile defense, it is always a prerogative to ensure that the first target is persecuted fully to ensure it's destruction before moving on to the next. So having the Kashtan's focus in this matter is not a weakness, moreover with infared homing or any self guidance system installed. The missiles can still persecute targets independent of the guns in a fire-and-forget manner.

    We must also consider, again the enviroment that the 056As and any future successor is expected to work in, as well as advances in technology. In costal littoral areas, the 056A can count of a variety of support to assist it in its ASW duties (like the Y-8 MPA and the underwater hydrophone network). Moreover, vertical take off UAVs can be stowed aboard in less space than a single helicopter would demand. And since the ship would be operating within range of friendly EW assets, there is a low risk of these UAVs being jammed.

    Lets consider first the military requirements of the Russian navy as well its economic capacity in this matter. For starters, blue water operations is definitely not on their books for the next 20-30 years . Yet at the same time they urgently need a platform that can be carry out long range land and naval strikes within it's immediate vicinity, but without the usual related costs and logistical requirements due to their ship building industry's state. This drove them to develop corvettes like the Buyan and the Steregushchiy-class. Ships smaller enough to be cheap to build and maintain yet possessing an unusually heavy punch. But these ships, as you pointed out yourself, puts more emphasis on surface warfare at the costs of ASW.
    Then consider China's position, while it has the capacity to build a large fleet. It is also increasingly has the need to maintain a credible blue water fleet for overseas interest, but at the same time it needs to protect it's coastal territories from enemy incursion (especially submarines) and compared to Russia, it has more ports and more important harbors to guard. Also since China is not a party to the SALT agreements, it can maintain land based cruise missiles (and its economy means it can also maintain a large fleet of bombers to launch ALCMs as well) . So it has no need for a sea based platform to scoot around the legal requirements like Russia must.
    In short there is little reason why Russia's decision to acquire "heavy corvettes" must be emulated by China.
    The 22800 is brought up for the sole reason to prove that a ship's armament is not restricted by either it's size,weight or classification. So lets us keep it as such.

    Then why are you always highlight the number of VLS cells in all your earlier posts ? As well as putting for the caveat that a 16 cell is enough for ASW duties for both littoral and blue water operations for a corvette and frigate hybrid ?
    But lets for the sake of discussion go with your proposition that in the future the PLAN wants to acquire a trimaran design weighing around the 2000 to 3000 ton like the picture you posted whose dimensions are slightly larger or around the same size as the 054A. And they want it to fulfill the roles of both the earlier Type 54A and 056A.
    We can immediately see the problems with this proposition, because at even first glance this will not be a small ship.
    Also current estimates hints at the PLAN wanting no fewer than 60 LCS and at least 40 frigates, possibly even 60 as well in the future. And let us also be generous in this instance and assume that the PLAN can have a modular set up for the coastal and blue water variants in terms of VLS count, this will mean that the PLAN would be spending a lot of unnecessary money on a large hull that will be only equipped for coastal combat when they can just have a smaller hull that will be cheaper but still perform roughly the same. China can very well save much from having 2 separate classes of ships of 60 hulls each instead of a 120 hull fleet of a same make.
    If having a second helicopter on the platform is of such importance in this matter, then fine by all means, the PLAN can possibly acquire a 056A successor that has a design to accommodate such. But let us be cognizant of the fact that the PLAN's requirement for it's future frigates calls for a armament of no less then 32 VLS cells, long range radars, and a robust CIWS defense. And that there is a fine line between it an a off shore patrol vessel's capability.
     
    #3202 Viktor Jav, Jun 13, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018
  3. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Simple enough. Its weight and space. Even Project 20386 Derzky, the next super corvette, only has two out of these three options, namely the Redut VLS and the UKSK. But not the Kashtans or Pantsyr. As a note the Derzky is already a 3500 ton ship, making it practically a frigate

    Redut has its own VLS, although you can quad pack Redut missiles into UKSK. But the advantage of having a dedicated VLS, is that it can be made much smaller, and much shorter, maybe something like 3 to 4 meters in length, instead of 9 meters. You save enormous space. That's the flaw of universality --- the missiles may end up being much too short for the VLS.

    The Yu-8 is probably only 4.5 meters long, if its similar or based to its CY-2 predecessor. The AJK-16 VLS is likely 5.5 meters long, since it could fit into a Shtil missile magazine rather flushly, with Shtils standing at 5.5 meters, as based on the VLS installed on the Sovremenny refit. U-VLS is either 7 or 9 meters. Even assuming 7 meters, that's a big waste of space. compared to using the AJK-16.

    The entire Kashtan complex has to persecute targets within the same hemisphere. The missiles cannot turn independent of the guns. They can only lock on to what and where the guns are aimed at. That's a problem in my opinion. If the missiles are separate from the guns, and the guns are separate from each other, they can prosecute targets on three different hemispheres. Lets take the example here of the refitted 053H3.

    Another thing about the Kashtan is that bucks against the idea of decentralization and the wise principle of not putting all your eggs in one basket. The Kashtan is all your eggs in one basket. What happens if it got damaged? What happens if it malfunctions? Maybe it didn't work because of crap maintenance or a broken part?
     
  4. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    This is in my opinion, not an argument against having a deck big enough for two helicopters.

    China is not looking for a cruise missile launching corvette. But a corvette or light frigate with ever improving sub hunting ability is always welcome. The biggest upgrade I can think of that is a second helicopter.

    The 22800 can be best described as a missile boat, or a glorified FAC. It has no ability to find and prosecute a submarine.

    16 cells allows for a good mix. 8 cells dedicated for SAMs, wither 8 bigger SAMs or quad packed 32 smaller SAMs. The other 8 reserved for ASROC. Plus having 8 slant launchers, you have 8 SAM, 8 ASROC and 8 ASM.

    I think if the PLAN adopts this trimaran, the armament layout maybe different, probably just 8 VLS cells for ASROCs, and use an HQ-10 launcher instead for the SAMs.

    The trimaran weighs about 2500 tons. That's about as much as the Russian heavy corvettes or the 053H3s. By standards today, that should be a corvette, but the Chinese never has a word for corvette and always refers to these ships as light frigates or just frigate. It will not fulfill the 054A's AAW role since it lacks the sheer number of VLS for that. But what it does can do better is be an ASW ship, and it can be a better ASW ship than the 056 and the 054A. The only other surface warship to have two helos on deck is the 055. That's a huge gap. It can be a better ASW ship compared to any other PLAN surface ship with the exception of the 055.

    The trimaran offers other potential advantages too, like using water jets instead of propellers, which removes propeller noise. There might also be less wake noise from the hull. The quieter the ship, the less it can be detected by an opposing submarine and the better its own sonars could work. It can sprint faster too, moving from one area to another, for its hunt. Count also potential cruising efficiencies too.


    You're assuming that the PLAN is thinking of using this to replace the 054A. It is not. The 054A is replaced by the 054B, which is growing to become a full blown battle frigate, or some would call, a heavy frigate. And just as the 054B is potentially a size and weight upscale from its predecessor, the 056 successor may follow the size upscale trend.

    The 054B or whatever successor to the 054A is still likely to be a single helo carrying ship. No other surface ship in the PLAN carries two helos other than the 055 and the 051B refit. To have a 2500 ton warship that carries two helicopters is an unmatched proposition. Chinese shipyards have experience building catamarans and trimarans, this isn't hard to pull off.
     
  5. Jura
    Offline

    Jura Lieutenant General

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    18,119
    Likes Received:
    24,025
    I don't read your duel with Tam LOL just happened to notice:
    which is incorrect: three Project 22800 ships have been launched as of May 3, 2018
     
    bruceb1959 likes this.
  6. Viktor Jav
    Offline

    Viktor Jav Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2017
    Messages:
    672
    Likes Received:
    515
    Actually that is not all correct, if we look at what Russia is propossing for the Derzky, we see that they propose for it to has 2 CIWS (AK-630), the Redut and the Kalibr missiles (though they did not divulge on whether it would be slant launched or vertically launched, but I am putting my money on the latter). That is all 3 weapons system listed above on a compact platform. For a proposed Chinese variant the Redut can be deleted in place for the Kashtan/Pantsyr and the 2 CIWS be merged into one of the former.

    And yet again splitting up the systems into 2 parts means that either one would be at a disadvantage when faced with a situation outside their capabilities, the missile would not be able to target immediate targets while the guns cannot engage targets beyond 3 km and beyond effectively. They will also have significant blind angles if one is placed on the front and one at the back.
    And if redundancy is such an issue with you, then the Kashtan can also be place in 2 places as well. Having a scaled down version of 1 gun barrel instead of 2 and 4 missile instead of 8, but having one at the front and one at the back will give any future corvette an unparralled umbrella of defense.


    But it is in MY opinion, an argument that a LCS is not as needing for a second hangar as compared to an ocean going frigate or destroyer.

    And a corvette with improved ASW need not come with all other other armaments that you want for it, a future corvette can potentially have 2 hangar for helicopters, but it does not need a 16 cell VLS for both ASROCs and Shtil missiles. A corvette is not considered "heavy" just because it has 2 hangars instead of one.

    And I am not trying to bring up the 22800 as such. I thought I have made that point crystal clear, why are you insistent on beating a non existent horse ? The 22800 is there to debunk the fact that a ship's weapons system is not restrict by size, weight OR classification, official or implied. Nothing else, nothing more. Can we stop trying to pull it into a issue that was never an issue to begin with ?
    And it is not like the 22800 is completely incapable of ASW operations, it has onboard sonar systems and torpedo tubes, what it lacks is helicopter facilities. It is a serious defect yes, but it is not like it means that the 22800 cannot sink a sub if it finds one.

    And yet for a corvette, there is absolutely no need for it to have any other better SAM system than for it's immediate protection. Quad packing the VLS with DK-10 SAMs (if that is even possible for the 054A's VLS, there is no clear evidence for it) will be a gross overkill and it will need better guidance systems that what the 056A or its future successor will boasts and it will push up its costs unnecessarily . And the odds that a littoral ship operating in friendly waters or under friendly air cover (which is the environment which the PLAN's OPV are expected to) to face off against any credible or sizable surface force is minimal at best. So a single 8 cell VLS holding 4 ASM and 4 fullsized ASROCs or any other combination will be plenty enough.


    On the subject of language and translation, lets us not be so quick to assume that just because the Chinese label these as "light frigates" means that their envision use of them are the same as what the West has in mind. Not having a word for "corvette" can just simply mean that the Chinese never bothered to invent a new word for it and just simply combined existing words to label them.
    And the Trimaran is not all good news only, being a ship of larger size. It will have difficulties operating is confined areas, that will be a problem if the future LCS is operating in small atolls. And I must also state here for the record that my issue was never about the trimaran design in the first place.


    We have no idea what the Type 054B's final configuration will be. For all considerations it is just as likely to have 2 hangars and 2 helicopters instead.
    This also applies to its potential armaments and systems when in comparison with other frigates and "frigates in name" operated by other navies. It can still have a 32 cell VLS at the front for SAMs and a slant launcher at the back for 8 AShMs or it can have another 8 cell VLS instead which is more or less the standard configuration for most frigates out there. Existing frigates like the Shivalik has very similar configurations and still sits within the proposed 5000 ton weight range of the Type 054B.
    And while I expect the 056 to be upscale, I highly doubt that any future successor will be receiving the kind of weapons that you are proposing. Because in both costs and practical combat purposes there is simply no need for that.
     
    #3206 Viktor Jav, Jun 14, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2018
  7. Viktor Jav
    Offline

    Viktor Jav Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2017
    Messages:
    672
    Likes Received:
    515
    The Universal VLS can also be used to accommodate YJ-12 AShM missiles and its large space can also be used to hold larger more capable ASROCs in the future, the PLAN is testing out one that visually is much larger than the Yu-8 atm from a slant launch box. So it is not out of the question for it to be utilized out of a full sized VLS in the future, there is more flexibility to be had as the LCS can go with a full load of ASROCs in a dedicated ASW mission.And having 2 different VLS systems will mean extra space needed to accomodate them, negating the advantage offered by a shorter cell. And a shorter missile can be fitted into a longer VLS tube as the image shows. So the idea that a shorter missile cannot be utilized in a longer VLS cell is wrong.
    [​IMG]
     
  8. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    I am referring to the Kashtan specifically, not the small AK-630s.

    I am not sure if that is a problem if two of the three systems have shared hemispherical coverage.

    In the case of let's say, of an upgraded 056, this one based on Norinco's exhibit, you got two 730Bs on top of the minihanger deck that would situate them amidships or waistline, with the HQ-10 at the same position. On the 053H3, the HQ-10 is in the front, with the 730Bs at this position.

    In any case, any littoral combat vessel also has a 76mm gun that is dual purpose, and would act as the AA covering the front arc. An ASM would try to hit the ship at the side, so you can at least bear the 76mm gun, a 30mm gun, and the missile at the target. With the Kashtan you can bear down two guns, but at the expense of being vulnerable if both sides are attacked simultaneously.

    There is also the question how heavy the Kashtan is, in contrast to using two AK-630s. The Kashtans have their own independent radar systems; the AK-630s can be driven by a central radar and EO. That can save a lot of weight.

    I don't think so. If you got two helicopters, you can cycle the two helicopters, one at rest or repair, the other up in the air. That gives you more resources at the disposal of the captain.

    The 16 cell VLS is only a consideration, not a necessity. A corvette can be considered heavy when it approaches a certain weight guidepost. That seems to me like 3000 tons. Even at 2500 tons, the warship can already be ocean going, and the minimum warship that can blue water should be considered a frigate.

    I don't recall the ship having those.

    An HQ-10 or any close range missile should be sufficient yes.

    The Chinese term is more of a weight classification. Frigate to the West is a bit more than a weight classification. NATO classifies Project 20380 as frigates not corvettes, because of their capability and range. The Russian Navy refers to them as Guards ships.

    I don't see China having any problems operating multi-hulled ships in their littorals, which there is plenty, especially in the commercial side.


    It would be good if it has 2 helicopters, I am making the conservative assumption it may only have one. The future 056 variant or successor also needs a radar upgrade, similar to what they did with the two Bangladeshi OPVs this year.
     
  9. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    No duel here. We are having a lively discussion, trying to opine on each other's viewpoints..
     
    bruceb1959 and Jura like this.
  10. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    1,541

    I understand that, but the PLAN isn't looking for a small and stealthy AD surface warship that can throw supersonic missiles like Taiwan's Tuo Chiang class. They are looking for an ASW ship that can be used to "bastionize" the three China seas.

    I don't think a Yu-8 ASROC is that big. Based on the dimension and range of the CY-2, that should be 55 kilometers range with a 4.5m long body. That will well fit within an H/AJK-16 VLS if it has a 5.5m length depth. The weight is only 600kg. Its actually lighter than a single HQ-16 missile or a YJ-83.

    .YJ-12 are huge missiles, I think at least 2500 kg to 3000 kg. Even a YJ-18 should be around 2300 kg if its like the supersonic Klub.

    There is a short version of the U-VLS, only at 3.3 meters depth. I believe that's meant for quad or multipacks of small SAMs. That won't be deep enough for a Yu-8.
     
Loading...

Share This Page