055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Oldschool

Junior Member
Registered Member
Anyone heard anything about China planning destroyer larger than 055 and capable of midcourse interception. Maybe able to host HQ16.
 

Kejora

Junior Member
Registered Member
The HQ16 is smaller than the HQ-9 already on 055s. I haven't read anything except for some very dubious American articles that discuss anything bigger than 055 though.
I heard the problem with HQ-16 is they use different targeting radar than HQ-9.
I mean the hq19 interceptor. Or DN11. Capable of sea based interception.
If HQ-19 and HQ-26 aren't bigger than their western counterpart (THAAD, SM-3) then they could fit on the existing Type 055 VLS, no need for bigger ship. Unless they want bigger radar which mean thay could use Type 071's hull as basis for BMD ship like US proposal to use San Antonio LPD's hull
BMD-ship-003-130408-SeaAirSpace-HII-Lisa-Nova-Scotia-2012-64211.jpg
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
It appears to be done with its shipbuilder trials and is headed to the PLAN for its second set of trials which will be done on the ship's new base and its new crew. Commissioning, not yet, not until these trials is done and the crew is trained. The question is where is the ship going? SSF? NSF? Is this one of those funnel capped ships? Are the funnel capped ships going to the SSF? If this is SSF, then its destination will be Hainan alongside 105 and the Shandong.
 

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
Type-055 Does it have ballistic anti-missile capability?
Depends on the ballistic missile. I would think the ability to shoot down some tactical ballistic missile is intrinsic to any effective medium or high altitude airspace denial surface to air missile system. So type 055 probably can shoot down some ballistic missile fired from Taiwan across the straits, or from one part of Taiwan to another.

Medium, intermediate range and ICBM would be another story. But it seems unlikely in the very near future for China to face such medium or intermediate range missiles from a seaward direction. drastically different missiles and ships would be needed to conduct terminal ICBM defense. given Chinese navy’s relative weakness compared to the navy of the only country likely to thrown ICBM at China across an ocean, staking terminal ICBM defence on ships would seem to be unwise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top