054B/next generation FFG thread


Gloire_bb

Senior Member
Registered Member
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.
ARH HQ-9 missiles are probably already offensive enough in the first place. Or at least have all the necessary potential to be so. Moreover, such unification frees cells for stand-off ASW weapons, too.
So "AAW" role isn't really just AAW - it is just a line combatant of the CSG, creating an upper(AAW/ASuW/Counter-space) and lower(ASW) denial hemispheres, with far larger "flat" engagement zone reliant on external data (fuzed battlefield picture).
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
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.


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.


Diesel engines---all engines---can be rafted and isolated into cells. You can do further isolation at the gearboxes and shafts. As the engines are likely inspired from MTU designs, you're looking at a V16 here. This is not a straight four diesel here. You know how increasing the number of cylinders in an engine then spacing the timing and the weighting of the crankshafts can smooth out an engine, why a six cylinder is smoother than a four cylinder, an eight cylinder smoother than a six, a V12 even more smoother than a V8, and then you arrive to a V16. Then these engines are isolated, and rafted, the engine mounts are hydraulic and so on. These features were incorporated into both the 054A and 056 series. Not saying that all these make the power train smoother than a gas turbine, which completely lacks reciprocating movement. Just saying that the diesel powertrain can be made smooth enough that the PLAN deems it sufficient for the mission.

If 054B has a gas turbine and IEP, its not going to be called a 054B. So far the PLAN Type no. is based on power train and platform, and "054B" sounds to me like it will still share the power train and hull platform from the 054 albeit with heavy changes on the upper hull structure, the same way the 052D, 052C, 052B and 052 all share the same power train structure from the 052, with big changes happening on the superstructure, sensors and armament of the ship.

Reasons for using diesel engines comes down to thermal efficiency. A marine gas turbine will reach about 36 to 40%. A marine diesel engine will reach as high as 48 to over 50%. There are marine engines used in the commercial field that boasts thermal efficiency as high as over 60%.
 
Last edited:

sndef888

Senior Member
Registered Member
A bit late to the party, but the fact that the 054B is taking so long to come out makes me optimistic that it might make quite a lot of changes

Things that previous posters have mentioned like gas turbines, IEPS, space for UUVs, space for 2 helicopters, multi mission modules, etc

I'm hoping we see at least a few of these new features
 

TK3600

Junior Member
Registered Member
What about export perspective? Sure HQ9 is overkill for PLAN but I think keeping tye capability is important. For smaller country a 054B with HQ9 is a capital ship.
 

tphuang

Brigadier
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Diesel engines---all engines---can be rafted and isolated into cells. You can do further isolation at the gearboxes and shafts. As the engines are likely inspired from MTU designs, you're looking at a V16 here. This is not a straight four diesel here. You know how increasing the number of cylinders in an engine then spacing the timing and the weighting of the crankshafts can smooth out an engine, why a six cylinder is smoother than a four cylinder, an eight cylinder smoother than a six, a V12 even more smoother than a V8, and then you arrive to a V16. Then these engines are isolated, and rafted, the engine mounts are hydraulic and so on. These features were incorporated into both the 054A and 056 series. Not saying that all these make the power train smoother than a gas turbine, which completely lacks reciprocating movement. Just saying that the diesel powertrain can be made smooth enough that the PLAN deems it sufficient for the mission.

If 054B has a gas turbine and IEP, its not going to be called a 054B. So far the PLAN Type no. is based on power train and platform, and "054B" sounds to me like it will still share the power train and hull platform from the 054 albeit with heavy changes on the upper hull structure, the same way the 052D, 052C, 052B and 052 all share the same power train structure from the 052, with big changes happening on the superstructure, sensors and armament of the ship.

Reasons for using diesel engines comes down to thermal efficiency. A marine gas turbine will reach about 36 to 40%. A marine diesel engine will reach as high as 48 to over 50%. There are marine engines used in the commercial field that boasts thermal efficiency as high as over 60%.
I agree that plan is happy with the performance of 054a. I am just saying 054b has higher requirements.

Rafting and other sound isolation techniques require a lot of space to really be effective. I don't have any issue with rafting the noisy part of the motor system on a ship optimized for asw. I would rather you do this starting with an already quieter propulsion unit. That's where ieps comes in. We will see if their ieps technology has matured enough to go on a naval ship.

The other issue with the codad propulsion is that the current config max out at 27 knots for a 4000t ship. How much additional power is need to power a 5500t ship at 32 knots. Would that require double the power? I would think so.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
I agree that plan is happy with the performance of 054a. I am just saying 054b has higher requirements.

Rafting and other sound isolation techniques require a lot of space to really be effective. I don't have any issue with rafting the noisy part of the motor system on a ship optimized for asw. I would rather you do this starting with an already quieter propulsion unit. That's where ieps comes in. We will see if their ieps technology has matured enough to go on a naval ship.

The other issue with the codad propulsion is that the current config max out at 27 knots for a 4000t ship. How much additional power is need to power a 5500t ship at 32 knots. Would that require double the power? I would think so.


Rafting won't be an add on. It would already be incorporated to the ship design from the blueprint stage. IEPS itself will take up space. As Type designations are tied to platform and PowerPoint, "054B" points to an all diesel ship based on the 054 platform and I would continue to assume this unless there is direct evidence that is changed, of which the best evidence of that would be a new designation change, like "057".
 

tphuang

Brigadier
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Rafting won't be an add on. It would already be incorporated to the ship design from the blueprint stage. IEPS itself will take up space. As Type designations are tied to platform and PowerPoint, "054B" points to an all diesel ship based on the 054 platform and I would continue to assume this unless there is direct evidence that is changed, of which the best evidence of that would be a new designation change, like "057".

But how are they doubling the power?
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
But how are they doubling the power?

Use more powerful diesel engines. Diesel engines scale up to powering the largest bulk freighters and containerships in the world. The Type 071, the Type 901, and the Type 075 are all diesel engined.

For surface warship use, for example, the Iver Huitfeldt class frigate. Four 8.2MW diesel engines, each an MTU 20V. Fully loaded, its a 6,600 ton ship that can run 30 knots. It has 32 Mk. 41 VLS, plus 24 Mk. 56 VLS, which is a stand up VLS meant to individually fire an ESSM each. There are provisions for 8 Harpoons but enough space to push it to 16. This ship is being used as the basis for the RN's new Type 31 Arrowhead 140 frigate.

The Type 31 also reminds me that as much as we talk about the 054A and 054B for ASW duties, the frigates themselves are conceived mainly for general purpose.
 

ashnole

New Member
Registered Member
A bit late to the party, but the fact that the 054B is taking so long to come out makes me optimistic that it might make quite a lot of changes

Things that previous posters have mentioned like gas turbines, IEPS, space for UUVs, space for 2 helicopters, multi mission modules, etc

I'm hoping we see at least a few of these new features
No, please no swappable multi-mission modules, please! Nobody wants a Chinese version of an LCS-like disaster!
 

ashnole

New Member
Registered Member
The Type 31 also reminds me that as much as we talk about the 054A and 054B for ASW duties, the frigates themselves are conceived mainly for general purpose.
That's because the Type 31 is actually designed as a General Purpose Frigate.

Royal Navy's ASW-specialized Frigate is the upcoming Type 26 Frigate. We should compare 054B to the Type 26 actually.
 

Top