054B/next generation FFG thread


AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
>In a Chinese carrier group, we can expect 2-3 destroyers providing a close AAW escort for the carrier, plus a role for an "expendable" ship for close-in ASW work.

I don't think it's set in stone currently how a future Chinese CBG may operate, let alone in far waters. I don't think the current CBG arrangement is something reflective of what the PLAN views optimal, which lends weight towards the idea - rapid induction of other vessels and supporting ships - (those that may be better suited to faster boats, UUV's etc..) I think this is just what they have arrived at given the current and near-future vessel mix.

You are always going to have a carrier as a high-value target.
Call it $4 Billion for the 003 carrier plus another $5 Billion for 50 aircraft in the airwing.

And because the carrier is that high value, I can't imagine a situation where you wouldn't want 2-3 Destroyers dedicated to the close-in AAW role.

And for ASW work, an "expendable" ship to aggressively go after approaching submarines. And this ship would naturally be covered by Carrier Aircraft and nearby Destroyers.
 

Gloire_bb

Senior Member
Registered Member
And for ASW work, an "expendable" ship to aggressively go after approaching submarines. And this ship would naturally be covered by Carrier Aircraft and nearby Destroyers.
Ships don't really go in the old sense for approaching submarines in combat - nor do modern submarines really approach in the old sense.

In case, however, it is needed - maneuvering 052D will do the trick.
 

tphuang

Brigadier
VIP Professional
Registered Member
052D are using CODOG propulsion (not quiet at all) and half of them are not optimized for Z-20 operation. No where to being a good ASW platform. They are pretty optimized for AAW and not particularly great for long endurance blue water missions. Let's just keep them doing what they are good at. Having 30 to 40 of them around in ECS and yellow sea will thoroughly cover and extend China's air defense along first island chain. Powerful sensors to detect and network aerial targets and launching HQ-9s at them + storing a whole bunch of YJ-18s. The hypothetical 054B should be a whole lot better at ASW missions.
 

Gloire_bb

Senior Member
Registered Member
052D are using CODOG propulsion (not quiet at all) and half of them are not optimized for Z-20 operation.
I don't understand this argument.
half of them aren't optimized for Z-20 - sure, but 054B still doesn't exist at all. Half(and counting) is well over 0.

If 054B is intent on being used with the fleet - it will almost certainly be using the same combination, too. Through IEPS - sure, but that's just a sign of a newer ship.

They are pretty optimized for AAW and not particularly great for long endurance blue water missions.
They're mainline surface combatants. Their job is to shoot at everything within reach, and to under no circumstances let something pass past them. This "past them" is especially crucial since any hypothetical "listeners" tend to operate to the sides of the formation(no physical barrier), and 055 can be expected to be either far forward (positioned for strike) or behind(ABM), unless of course your whole screen isn't composed of them.

So being b/n the carrier and the threat (physically, too, if the situation calls for it) is exactly a 052D job - there is no one else to do it. This obviously includes submarine threats, or what's the point...
 

OppositeDay

Junior Member
Registered Member
If 054B is intent on being used with the fleet - it will almost certainly be using the same combination, too. Through IEPS - sure, but that's just a sign of a newer ship.

With IEPS, power sources are mechanically decoupled from the propellers so noise isolation should be easier. Without gearboxes to worry about, they can simply stack more diesel generators. I wonder if it's feasible to skip the gas turbine if they're going for a more modest max speed of 28 or 29 knots.

Going all diesels also remove the need to add air ducts for gas turbines. Does anyone know how much work is needed to incorporate gas turbines into a diesel-only design? If they want gas, wouldn't it be much simpler just to use some variant of the original 052 design which has a displacement less than 5,000t?
 

tphuang

Brigadier
VIP Professional
Registered Member
I don't understand this argument.
half of them aren't optimized for Z-20 - sure, but 054B still doesn't exist at all. Half(and counting) is well over 0.

If 054B is intent on being used with the fleet - it will almost certainly be using the same combination, too. Through IEPS - sure, but that's just a sign of a newer ship.

They're mainline surface combatants. Their job is to shoot at everything within reach, and to under no circumstances let something pass past them. This "past them" is especially crucial since any hypothetical "listeners" tend to operate to the sides of the formation(no physical barrier), and 055 can be expected to be either far forward (positioned for strike) or behind(ABM), unless of course your whole screen isn't composed of them.

So being b/n the carrier and the threat (physically, too, if the situation calls for it) is exactly a 052D job - there is no one else to do it. This obviously includes submarine threats, or what's the point...
Yes given what they have, 052D is the work horse of a Chinese CSG at the moment. They have to do AAW and ASW at the same time. When you don't have more ideal solutions, they will have to use suboptimal platforms for certain roles. Hence, the entire argument for 075 doing ASW also. But if you have enough 054Bs, you would want to use them in ASW role.

With IEPS, power sources are mechanically decoupled from the propellers so noise isolation should be easier. Without gearboxes to worry about, they can simply stack more diesel generators. I wonder if it's feasible to skip the gas turbine if they're going for a more modest max speed of 28 or 29 knots.

Going all diesels also remove the need to add air ducts for gas turbines. Does anyone know how much work is needed to incorporate gas turbines into a diesel-only design? If they want gas, wouldn't it be much simpler just to use some variant of the original 052 design which has a displacement less than 5,000t?
Diesel engines are pretty loud. You also want 054B to keep up a nuclear carrier at 30+ knots. That's why it's better to have gas turbine. I wonder if they can have a large battery pack, so that when they are in the low speed mode for ASW missions, they can just rely on battery power. Of course, that would probably take a lot of space.
 

Zichan

Junior Member
Registered Member
With IEPS, power sources are mechanically decoupled from the propellers so noise isolation should be easier. Without gearboxes to worry about, they can simply stack more diesel generators. I wonder if it's feasible to skip the gas turbine if they're going for a more modest max speed of 28 or 29 knots.
The Type 054A is all diesel and has a top speed of 27 knots, so an extra knot might be doable. While IEPSs ship can do away with gearboxes, they need to replace them with generators and electric motors. The generators are bulky and heavy.
Going all diesels also remove the need to add air ducts for gas turbines. Does anyone know how much work is needed to incorporate gas turbines into a diesel-only design? If they want gas, wouldn't it be much simpler just to use some variant of the original 052 design which has a displacement less than 5,000t?
In an IEPS ship, there is almost complete freedom in placement of prime movers, like gas turbines. Some ships place them at the top deck, just under the funnel (Queen Mary 2). Queen Elizabeth class carriers have their two gas turbines just underneath the islands, minimising the volume lost to air ducts.

Gas turbines are much more power dense than diesel engines. For a surface combatant, where space comes at a premium, they are often the optimal way to achieve high top speeds. Furthermore, when operating at full power gas turbines tend to be quite fuel efficient.

FREMM (Constellation) class frigates have a combined Diesel engine electric drive and a gas turbine that clutches in at speeds over 18 knots in a configuration known as CODLAG.
 

externallisting

New Member
Registered Member
You are always going to have a carrier as a high-value target.
Call it $4 Billion for the 003 carrier plus another $5 Billion for 50 aircraft in the airwing.

And because the carrier is that high value, I can't imagine a situation where you wouldn't want 2-3 Destroyers dedicated to the close-in AAW role.

And for ASW work, an "expendable" ship to aggressively go after approaching submarines. And this ship would naturally be covered by Carrier Aircraft and nearby Destroyers.
My point being that the role of destroyers kitted out for an AAW role mightn't necessarily be the case given the (speculative) role other platforms might play. Potentially freeing up some of that loadout for more offensive weapons etc would be a boon. I haven't seen a single picture nor any information showing what they put in those tubes, nor do I think I'm likely to. We just assume it similar to what we have seen/know to be the case on other ships. However with a greater diversity we might see some interesting things if some of that is potentially freed up. Already it's clear the PLAN is past aping USN force structure, adopting platforms such as the 076 that don't have a clear analogue. But it's a broad and open thing as to where it might lead, and I apologise for leaning so far into theorising.

>And for ASW work, an "expendable" ship to aggressively go after approaching submarines. And this ship would naturally be covered by Carrier Aircraft and nearby Destroyers.

I don't think we're arguing upon anything salient here either, and I'll just restate my position that in a fleet role, as a flanking presence part of a larger group I agree. I just don't think the current setup is something set in stone, I anticipate with the 003 and ships like 054b coming online we might see a shift in roles and deployment from what we're used to seeing.
 

Top