PLAN Sovremenny DDG 136, 137, 138 & 139 Thread

SinoSoldier said:

The addition of the universal VLS isn't so much about augmenting its anti-surface capability as it is about providing the Sovs a degree of tactical flexibility. You could retrofit the Sovs to become an arsenal ship or air defense destroyer without having to go to the docks; that would place them ahead of every single PLAN destroyer short of the 052D in terms of modularity. Moreover, these vessels are spacious enough to accommodate strike-length VLS, which I suspect will become more or less the "standard" aboard future PLAN vessels and MLUs.

The DK-10A is the most likely candidate for a VL, quad-packed SAM.

Click to expand...

Well you did talk about quadrupling its capability in the same sentence as you mentioned the YJ-12 so the natural interpretation is that you are referring to augmenting the antishipping capability of the Sov.

I think it would be a waste of a ship turn the Sov into an arsenal ship, which typically refers to a ship without the high end sensors normally associated with advanced warships but with an outsized load of VLS cells. It does not even have enough deck surface area for universal VLS cells to be considered an arsenal ship in the first place. 32 cells is hardly arsenal ship-worthy IMO.

As for tactical flexibility, I think it would be a possibility if and only if the universal VLS can load quad-packed MRSAM's. I know the DK-10 is usually thrown around as such a candidate but we have no solid evidence so far that the PLAN even considers this a possibility. Either way, even if the Sov is refitted with universal VLS I highly doubt it will carry HHQ-9 missiles due to lack of ability to guide them to their maximum effective range. It would load something like 8-12 cells of 32 to 48 DK-10's, 8 cells of CY-5 or whatever anti-sub missile is in use, and it would have 12-16 cells left for YJ-18 and/or CJ-10.

Iron Man said:

Well you did talk about quadrupling its capability in the same sentence as you mentioned the YJ-12 so the natural interpretation is that you are referring to augmenting the antishipping capability of the Sov.

I think it would be a waste of a ship turn the Sov into an arsenal ship, which typically refers to a ship without the high end sensors normally associated with advanced warships but with an outsized load of VLS cells. It does not even have enough deck surface area for universal VLS cells to be considered an arsenal ship in the first place. 32 cells is hardly arsenal ship-worthy IMO.

As for tactical flexibility, I think it would be a possibility if and only if the universal VLS can load quad-packed MRSAM's. I know the DK-10 is usually thrown around as such a candidate but we have no solid evidence so far that the PLAN even considers this a possibility. Either way, even if the Sov is refitted with universal VLS I highly doubt it will carry HHQ-9 missiles due to lack of ability to guide them to their maximum effective range. It would load something like 8-12 cells of 32 to 48 DK-10's, 8 cells of CY-5 or whatever anti-sub missile is in use, and it would have 12-16 cells left for YJ-18 and/or CJ-10.

Click to expand...

My comment was pertinent to the capability, not the potential mandate, of a notional Sov with universal VLS. Being equipped with such a VLS does not imply in any manner that the PLAN views these vessels as "arsenal ships".

In any case, I think that placing the universal VLS on most major PLAN combatants allows for some degree of commonality and modularity within their navy. Giving the Sovs the capability to carry a myriad of weaponry might still prove useful in tandem with other naval assets.

SinoSoldier said:

My comment was pertinent to the capability, not the potential mandate, of a notional Sov with universal VLS. Being equipped with such a VLS does not imply in any manner that the PLAN views these vessels as "arsenal ships".

In any case, I think that placing the universal VLS on most major PLAN combatants allows for some degree of commonality and modularity within their navy. Giving the Sovs the capability to carry a myriad of weaponry might still prove useful in tandem with other naval assets.

Click to expand...

Well you also specifically mentioned retrofitting the Sovs to become arsenal ships so I'm not sure what you are stating at this point. You should also remember that 24+ 054As as well as the 051B and probably the 052Bs after their refits will all be carrying HHQ-16-style VLS so either way both of these types of VLS will be represented in the PLAN for decades to come.

Iron Man said:

Well you did talk about quadrupling its capability in the same sentence as you mentioned the YJ-12 so the natural interpretation is that you are referring to augmenting the antishipping capability of the Sov.

I think it would be a waste of a ship turn the Sov into an arsenal ship, which typically refers to a ship without the high end sensors normally associated with advanced warships but with an outsized load of VLS cells. It does not even have enough deck surface area for universal VLS cells to be considered an arsenal ship in the first place. 32 cells is hardly arsenal ship-worthy IMO.

As for tactical flexibility, I think it would be a possibility if and only if the universal VLS can load quad-packed MRSAM's. I know the DK-10 is usually thrown around as such a candidate but we have no solid evidence so far that the PLAN even considers this a possibility. Either way, even if the Sov is refitted with universal VLS I highly doubt it will carry HHQ-9 missiles due to lack of ability to guide them to their maximum effective range. It would load something like 8-12 cells of 32 to 48 DK-10's, 8 cells of CY-5 or whatever anti-sub missile is in use, and it would have 12-16 cells left for YJ-18 and/or CJ-10.

Click to expand...

The point of modularity is to reduce waste. If say a conflict between China and NK begins, how many ships with advanced sensor and anti-air capabilities do you think the PLA will need? A HQ-16 equipped Sov would be mostly wasted. Of course, in order to actually achieve useful modularity, there needs to be quad-packed HQ-16s, so that it can actually switch between strike and AA missions.

dingyibvs said:

The point of modularity is to reduce waste. If say a conflict between China and NK begins, how many ships with advanced sensor and anti-air capabilities do you think the PLA will need? A HQ-16 equipped Sov would be mostly wasted. Of course, in order to actually achieve useful modularity, there needs to be quad-packed HQ-16s, so that it can actually switch between strike and AA missions.

Click to expand...

What makes you think an HHQ-16-equipped Sov would be mostly wasted where an HHQ-9-equipped Sov would not be wasted, especially if we are talking about a "conflict" with NK? You're essentially saying that the Sov is "mostly wasted" right now, and not only that, was already "mostly wasted" from the time it finished construction, because these ships were designed with non-quadpacked MRSAMs from the very beginning, and even worse, non-VLS-launched SAMs.

No, there is no "waste" going on here. A Sov upgraded to HHQ-16-style VLS would be a considerable upgrade from the single-arm launchers it had before, especially if it can increase missile loadout from 48 to 64. It would utilize the already-existing domestically-produced infrastructure (ordinance, VLS, hardware/software, maintenance crewing/training) used by the 054A and soon by the 051B. It would also be able to use whatever ASW missile the PLAN is currently or soon to be using. Depending on its length, the YJ-18 may also be able to fit.

BTW, the HHQ-16 is IMO probably not amenable to quad-packing, even in the universal VLS. It is simply too fat and it is also hot-launched, which means the universal VLS would need to provide its own extra volume for exhaust venting. You need a slim missile like the ESSM or the DK-10 (with folding fins).

Iron Man said:

Well you did talk about quadrupling its capability in the same sentence as you mentioned the YJ-12 so the natural interpretation is that you are referring to augmenting the antishipping capability of the Sov.

Click to expand...

I think ? SinoSoldier mean with versatile VLS possible have up to in theory in fact by ex 32 x YJ-12 it is a mater of power, the size of the salvo/burst.

FORBIN said:

I think ? SinoSoldier mean with versatile VLS possible have up to in theory in fact by ex 32 x YJ-12 it is a mater of power, the size of the salvo/burst.

Click to expand...

Except that YJ-12 looks like it's way too large to fit into a universal VLS cell.

For VLZ size of cell's :

The cell length or depth is up to 9 meters (29.5 feet) for large missiles, up to 7 meters (22.9 feet) for medium size and up to 3.3 meters (10.8 feet) in length for small missiles. The eight compartments or cells each can hold a single missile, although a requirement also exists for the smaller cell to hold up to four missiles, such as the U.S. Navy’s quad pack arrangement for the Evolved Sea Sparrow missile. The size of each launch cell is 850 millimeters square (33.45 inches square).

Click to expand...

And i think we get wrong it is YJ-18 for surface combattants , 052D and also SSN 093B.

YJ-12 do max 7 m long, 75 cm diameter he fit. and again mor YJ-18

Iron Man said:

Except that YJ-12 looks like it's way too large to fit into a universal VLS cell.

Click to expand...

It would fit for sure, no doubt

I finish with Chrome for edit penible !!!

For VLS size of cell's :

The cell length or depth is up to 9 meters (29.5 feet) for large missiles, up to 7 meters (22.9 feet) for medium size and up to 3.3 meters (10.8 feet) in length for small missiles. The eight compartments or cells each can hold a single missile, although a requirement also exists for the smaller cell to hold up to four missiles, such as the U.S. Navy’s quad pack arrangement for the Evolved Sea Sparrow missile. The size of each launch cell is 850 millimeters square (33.45 inches square).

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

And i think we get wrong it is YJ-18 for surface combattants, 052D right now and also SSN 093B.

YJ-12 do max 7 m long, 75 cm diameter he fit and again more YJ-18 annouced close SS-N-27 supersonic variant ofc SS-N-27/3M-54E-1 do 8.9 m long, but only 53 cm diameter 2 t max, YJ-18 2 to 2.5 t.