054B/new generation frigate

tphuang said:

054B is significantly larger than 054A and it will have significantly higher power demand in the future. There are significant advantages in power efficiency & power system usage for IEPS over CODAD. If IEPS tech and the new 20 cylinder 9MW+ engine is ready then why not wait for that?

If you consider the jump from 053H3 to 054A in capability, are you seeing the same jump from 054A to 054B? If not, then do you anticipate the current power generation on 054B allow for that?

is PLAN building this class just for a 4 boat transition or for a long production run?
If former, then why are they not trying out a new generation propulsion with it?
If latter, then do you see 054B to still be a desirable design in 15 years?

remember, 054A enters service more than 15 years ago and it is still a capable platform even now.

If I think of the capabilities you would need by 2035, it would seem like power generation is a huge requirement for anything they would want to do.

Click to expand...

Most likely answer is that new propulsion systems are some combination of immature and/or too expensive for PLAN tastes. And 054A->054B is obviously a much smaller jump compared to 053H3 because that was quite simply a hopelessly obsolete design. Huge leaps are possible when you are way behind the curve. Needless to say, the situation today is very different.

It remains to be seen whether 054B is a transition or production class, but both have reasonable justifications. Depends on how conservative PLAN is feeling. My guess is they believe they've squeezed all they can out of 054A, so they need to move on now. And yes, 054B will be fine in 15 years. There is always a place for less advanced hulls, just like how PLAN continues to operate many such hulls today. Not every mission requires the latest and greatest in cutting-edge surface combantants. Perfect should never be the enemy of good—or at least, good enough.

tphuang said:

Let me put it this way.

054B is noticeably larger than 054A, but has the same amount of armament. The original thought that I had for 054B is that it needs to have a new propulsion to sustain faster speed than 054A (go at 29 knots) and more important to provide the cabin spacing and such needed for long deployment. And given the larger size, that like means it is designed with more cabin comfort in mind. So, you have a larger platform but without more firepower. It doesn't make sense to have a platform like this if it isn't equipped with a more powerful propulsion that can allow for future upgrades in power consumption. So, what is exactly the point?

Why don't you just build more 054A if you need more number? If you don't need more frigates right away, then why not wait for a couple of more years for when your 9.5 MW diesel engine and IEPS tech + latest high discharge battery pack tech become ready?

I look at FREMM, it uses CODLAG with 32MW GT+ 4 2.2MW diesel engine. So, just 40-41MW combined power. if you have 36-38MW pure diesel IEPS with battery storage, that is actually plenty of power for probably 29 knots and you can sustain several MW for sensors and weapons.

Click to expand...

It seems to me PLAN is going for the European school. Frigates as heavy long range patrol boats.

Otherwise if the rumor of fujian being 29.5 knot at combat, 054B is actually fine. Not future proof but adequete.

I speculate PLAN see frigates as less and less of a fleet units now it has over production of destroyers.

Destroyers: protect CV, tip of spear.

Frigates: Split into 2 tiers, home patrol and long range patrol types.

Alternatively 054B is copying air force. Build the thing first, replace engine after the engine problem solved?

Wrought said:

Most likely answer is that new propulsion systems are some combination of immature and/or too expensive for PLAN tastes. And 054A->054B is obviously a much smaller jump compared to 053H3 because that was quite simply a hopelessly obsolete design. Huge leaps are possible when you are way behind the curve. Needless to say, the situation today is very different.

It remains to be seen whether 054B is a transition or production class, but both have reasonable justifications. Depends on how conservative PLAN is feeling. My guess is they believe they've squeezed all they can out of 054A, so they need to move on now. And yes, 054B will be fine in 15 years. There is always a place for less advanced hulls, just like how PLAN continues to operate many such hulls today. Not every mission requires the latest and greatest in cutting-edge surface combantants. Perfect should never be the enemy of good—or at least, good enough.

Click to expand...

At this point, it doesn’t offer enough capability jump over 054A. So if 32 cell VLS, 27 knots and hq10 is sufficient for PLAN in 15 years, why don’t they just build more 054A?

Why build a larger and more expensive platform that does essentially the same task?

if PLAN is upsizing the hull, then it clearly want some option to expand its mission set. It wants a platform that is not maxed out. Maybe a lo option to 055 on longer deployment. At some point, PLAN may want a smaller warship that can go 32 knots since it will have nuclear carriers. And then what?

It seems to me quite silly to go with a new hull and still use a relatively under powered propulsion thats not optimized for modern warfare.

tphuang said:

At this point, it doesn’t offer enough capability jump over 054A. So if 32 cell VLS, 27 knots and hq10 is sufficient for PLAN in 15 years, why don’t they just build more 054A?

Why build a larger and more expensive platform that does essentially the same task?

if PLAN is upsizing the hull, then it clearly want some option to expand its mission set. It wants a platform that is not maxed out. Maybe a lo option to 055 on longer deployment. At some point, PLAN may want a smaller warship that can go 32 knots since it will have nuclear carriers. And then what?

It seems to me quite silly to go with a new hull and still use a relatively under powered propulsion thats not optimized for modern warfare.

Click to expand...

Sure seems to me like you've invented a role for the 54B, decided that its (unclear) capabilities were not fit for purpose, and wrote if off on your own. The radar upgrades on their own make it worth producing over the 54A IMO. What the 54A had was and is miserably outdated for modern combat, the 54B's new radar at least should give it a fighting chance.

tphuang said:

At this point, it doesn’t offer enough capability jump over 054A. So if 32 cell VLS, 27 knots and hq10 is sufficient for PLAN in 15 years, why don’t they just build more 054A?

Why build a larger and more expensive platform that does essentially the same task?

Click to expand...

The DDG(X) design is talking about future-proofing for lasers of 150KW or 600KW, to replace the Phalanx CIWS and SeaRAM.

A 600KW laser implies a total power draw of 3.6MW.

We can see that the propulsion diesels have been upgraded on the Type-54B. We also see the latest Arleigh Burkes have an upgrade to their 3 electricity generators from 9MW to 12MW

So it would be reasonable to assume the Type-054B has also increased electricity generation capacity for future upgrades.

EDIT

Discussion below on a 20MW upgrade on the upgraded Type-052DL and 4MW on the Type-054A

tphuang said:

if PLAN is upsizing the hull, then it clearly want some option to expand its mission set. It wants a platform that is not maxed out. Maybe a lo option to 055 on longer deployment. At some point, PLAN may want a smaller warship that can go 32 knots since it will have nuclear carriers. And then what?

It seems to me quite silly to go with a new hull and still use a relatively under powered propulsion thats not optimized for modern warfare.

Click to expand...

The number of fast frigates required for an ASW role in CSGs is very limited. Call it a total of 9 ships by 2040, depending on the assumptions. The vast majority of Frigates being produced just don't need that speed for their missions.

I have been thinking about the limited improvement of 054B. Is it a problem? I think no, along with many here. It is a solid iterative improvement over 054A. It is a strong design competitive with the best world has to offer. Some frigates carry bigger missiles, but that is not going to make them superior to 054B at doing what a frigate should be doing. So the problem was never it is a bad ship, it just feels rather lacking of a leap by China standard.

It improves on 054A but how much value the improvement is in question. The radar system improved quite a bit, but ultimate how much it translate to effectiveness is in question. A battleship with twice the armor is not twice as good if it sink equally fast to a torpedo bomber. Will 054B's much better radar lead to much better effectiveness? Hard to say but maybe not. It is still almost as vulnerable to air strikes. The radar improved because the tech improved, and we update the existing design. This is very much a iterative improvement. Which is to say the goal was never to impress, but to just build a similar ship with current tech standard. Even though the ship look very different which may give impression of a leap like F-4 to F-15, it is more of equivalent to J-11 to J-16.

Reflecting on this reveals a fundamental issue of Chinese naval development:
China has caught up to west, the low effort catch up improvements are over. We can no longer expect leaps like in the past. Merely having similar design with updated tech will never impress us or change dynamic of naval warfare. There needs to be drastic innovation like in the air force. Like J-20 to J-36. This requires risk taking and innovation, something navy seem less interested in.

Because end of the day China do not have to risk innovate over enemy, it is happy to just scale up its undersized navy. Why risk delaying a program with ambitious undertaking when number is still the priority? China is the biggest trading nation. It deserves the a navy as large as its share of global maritime trade. With that in mind, the current navy is tiny. Impressive looking yes, but severely undersized. And this may be why they care less about one upping the opponents, scaling up number at comparable quality remain the priority. I am afraid we have to dial down our expectations in general from now on.

I have to add, just because it has the same amount of VLS, doesn't mean the combat capability hasn't improved. Better sensors, EW, HHQ-10 all add up to a form a much better combatant. Damage control is also likely improved with more space.