Type 52C VS. Arleigh Burke

No, another PAR called H-200 is associated with the KS-1A. That's the name of the radar unit displayed with the KS-1A in defense expos.

The S-300 radars also track and illuminate, but a seperate unit does the search. The MPQ-53 does search, track and illuminate all in one unit. I think the newest radar unit for the S-300PMU2, the 96LE which China now has, also searches, tracks and illuminates in one unit.

The SPY-1 only searches and tracks, but uses seperate illuminators.

In that way, the 052C PAR is different from AEGIS. I am personally not sure if the HQ-9s used on the ship use TVM or active seeking. The only thing for sure is that the ship does not use seperate illuminators. You must have very powerful PARs to do illumination along with search and track, then combine everything into a four faced unit to give a 360 degree coverage. Now that's a bit tricky, since it means the illuminating beams can be passed on from one phase array to another. AEGIS does not do that, nor the S-300 radar systems, heck nothing in the world does that. It probably is simpler to use active homing on the SAMs instead.

I'd think it's active seeking.


In 1998 Chinese sources disclosed that this SAM, originally designed with a passive seeker intended to attack electronic warfare aircraft, would eventually feature an active-guidance system with antitactical ballistic missile (ATBM) capability.[10] In 2003 a Malaysian defense journal revealed that the FT-2000A did have a new active phased-array radar for long-range missile guidance.[11]

Just as I mentioned, it gets really tricky if you are passing the illuminating beam from one phase array to another. AEGIS does not do this, neither does the S-300 units. It gets very complicated and it probably is a lot simply to use active radar guidance (SM-2s still use SARH and S-300 uses TVM).

FT-2000A is not the same as the FT-2000. FT-2000 uses the HQ-9 missile body with an anti radiation seeker. The FT-2000A is a variant that uses the HQ-2 (aka SA-2 Guideline) and fitted with the same anti radiation seeker. If there is a new active radar unit associated with the FT-2000A, it probably is doing the search, tracking and guidance for the HQ-2s now.

The interesting thing about the FT series is the potential that the missiles could be used to target a radar source on the ground or water if the missiles are fired on a ballistic path. Which makes me wonder if other smaller SSMs could be used the same way.

IDonT said:

16 Supersonic sea skimming missiles arriving at the same will not even strain the anti-air systems of the Burke.

052C is not stealth!!! It has just some features that reduce its radar cross sections that were BADLY implemented. Just look at its mask and see how many cylindrical and spherical radar domes. In fact, the Burke may have a smaller radar cross section.

S-300 is a good SAm against aircraft, not against a highly manueverable sea skimming missile such as the harpoon. A salvo of 8, will put the 052 to the bottom of the sea.

ASW rockets!!!!! They are good against World War II submarines but have no combat value against the USN.

Click to expand...

thank you very much mr. "IDont know anything"

the harpoon is a pathetic missle compared to the yj-62. what makes you assume china doesnt use docys, chaff, and helis aswell?

the 52c uses the hq-9, and improvemnet over the s-300. besides, the harpoon is not "highly agile". the s-300 was designed to shoot down such missles.

those cylyndricalsheress having infinite changing radii, much like the f-22, and are made of ram materials. the 52 clearly has shown its stealth worth. claiming the smaller rcs of a burke just shows how ignorant and addicted to american weapons you are.

all of your arguments could be countered by peoples previous posts, which you obviously didnt bother to read. asw rockets are a bit outdated, but i was just stating a fact. it not like the burke and 52c dont have torpedoes.

good day to you

Oh boy oh boy. There is so much meat here for me to chew on....

the harpoon is a pathetic missle compared to the yj-62. what makes you assume china doesnt use docys, chaff, and helis aswell?

Click to expand...

I don't know what kind of decoys China uses but I do know that the USN Chaff & ECM works.



And we all know that Harpoons, although slow do work. I also through personal knowledge know that the ECM on a Arlieg Burke can shut down a lot of electroinics including. Honestly in a real battle the PLAN would have a tough time targeting an A/B.

None of us know how ell the PLAN systems work.

More later....

the speed of an harpoon isnt its only weakness. its also the range, of at most 130 km of the latest model. thats about as much as plan missles from the 90s. so a 52c can fire at an ab while staying out of the burkes firing range. that yeilds a great advantage, regardless of how well the burke can protect itself.

operation praying mantis is a typical example of the u.s navy seeming overly powerful simply because its oponent was weak.

im not saying the burke is weak, but simply that praying mantis was not the best of analogies for this.

Can I point out the 90+ launchers can be used for Tomahawks.

yeah...then you would have no launchers left to launch the standards.
even so, the range is the true limiting factor. any enemy destroyer armed with a missle of superior range can simply avoid the ab.

bd popeye said:

Oh boy oh boy. There is so much meat here for me to chew on....



I don't know what kind of decoys China uses but I do know that the USN Chaff & ECM works.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And we all know that Harpoons, although slow do work. I also through personal knowledge know that the ECM on a Arlieg Burke can shut down a lot of electroinics including. Honestly in a real battle the PLAN would have a tough time targeting an A/B.

None of us know how ell the PLAN systems work.

More later....

Click to expand...

Hey Popeye,

all the recent Chinese DDGs have 4 large caliber multipurpose MLRS for shooting decoys. No one knows what the performance of them are, obviously. You can find more information on the current Chinese DDGs at huitong's site

It has some information that is not on sinodefence (and vice versa).

Also, I have some questions about AB, is it true that the harpoon launchers got taken off the latest AB? If so, what does it current use for Anti ship missions? I know VLS can fit tomahawk, but that's a LACM. It doesn't have the guidance built in to hit moving targets. I was trying to look this up last night and couldn't find what I needed.

Never mind, I was an idiot about Tomahawk. Yeah, I just read it can also be AShM.

It says there that Luyang 168 Guangzhou has a Top Plate 3D air-search radar is installed on top of the foremast.