054B/next generation frigate

Tam said:

Reliable or not, it's currently the most realistic and logical based on the current palette of PLAN sensors we have seen and defensive systems at least in my opinion. I have seen this design in some fan art, but that design would already be obvious to people given all the pieces that's already out. Plenty of tailwind from given Lego pieces.

View attachment 95134

Click to expand...

I'm just wondering if the bow section would be too long with the addition of the ciws and (hopefully) UVLS. The current 054a already looks like it has an oversized bow

sndef888 said:

I'm just wondering if the bow section would be too long with the addition of the ciws and (hopefully) UVLS. The current 054a already looks like it has an oversized bow

Click to expand...

I think it will be HHQ-16. If they use U-VLS they would be packing HHQ-16 in them. Despite the larger cell size, U-VLS does not have dedicated exhaust transfer channels which allows the arrays to be more compact and space efficient. Test ship 892 showed it has both the dual sided AESA search radar and the new AESA target illuminators we have seen on the newest 054A. This suggests the dual sided radar is used to queue the target illuminators.

You want them big flaring bows to counter rough weather.

For HHQ-16 to be used on U-VLS it's only a matter of coughing up a new launch canister for it.

Tam said:

Reliable or not, it's currently the most realistic and logical based on the current palette of PLAN sensors we have seen and defensive systems at least in my opinion. I have seen this design in some fan art, but that design would already be obvious to people given all the pieces that's already out. Plenty of tailwind from given Lego pieces.

View attachment 95134

Click to expand...

I question the amidships slant launchers; I expect there to be a truncated VLS arrangement like on the 055. I also can't tell if the VLS has flame trenches, but I expect it to be UVLS as it wouldn't make any sense not to standardize across the surface fleet.

The twin helo hangars seem unlikely though, if the size/displacement is going to be only modestly increased.

ZeEa5KPul said:

I question the amidships slant launchers; I expect there to be a truncated VLS arrangement like on the 055. I also can't tell if the VLS has flame trenches, but I expect it to be UVLS as it wouldn't make any sense not to standardize across the surface fleet

Click to expand...

Slant launchers don't consume space beneath and that's a benefit for a tight ship. You can change the slant launchers from YJ-12 to any YJ-83 variant which now features land attack, or to the YU-11 ASROC for ASW.

You can change this section later to something that features a VLS without changing the other sections.

Totoro said:

The twin helo hangars seem unlikely though, if the size/displacement is going to be only modestly increased.

Click to expand...

I agree on this.

ZeEa5KPul said:

I question the amidships slant launchers; I expect there to be a truncated VLS arrangement like on the 055. I also can't tell if the VLS has flame trenches, but I expect it to be UVLS as it wouldn't make any sense not to standardize across the surface fleet.

Click to expand...

frigate may very well not have enough free estate there - or it will come with too much of a compromise. Furthermore - there is no light ASCM for it, and for a frigate that's probably a downside.
Slant YJ-83Ks IMHO are an obvious choice here.

Tam said:

I think it will be HHQ-16. If they use U-VLS they would be packing HHQ-16 in them. Despite the larger cell size, U-VLS does not have dedicated exhaust transfer channels which allows the arrays to be more compact and space efficient. Test ship 892 showed it has both the dual sided AESA search radar and the new AESA target illuminators we have seen on the newest 054A. This suggests the dual sided radar is used to queue the target illuminators.

You want them big flaring bows to counter rough weather.

For HHQ-16 to be used on U-VLS it's only a matter of coughing up a new launch canister for it.

Click to expand...

Is it possible that they'll use U-VLS with the new "3-5" SAM, and possibly its extended range variant to replace HHQ-16 in ships with U-VLS like the Chinese version of the 9M96E/9M96E2 missiles? IMO that will allow quadpack for more missiles, and a triple-tier air defence with 50km Chinese 9M96E/120?km Chinese 9M96E2/200+km HHQ-9B.

If they are going to put those huge U-VLS cells on 054B, I don't see any reason why it should still be using HHQ-16. That would be a terribly inefficient space usage.

tphuang said:

If they are going to put those huge U-VLS cells on 054B, I don't see any reason why it should still be using HHQ-16. That would be a terribly inefficient space usage.

Click to expand...

Not really. If the missiles are hot launched, it will be a canister within a canister so part of the U-VLS space is used for exhaust release. This replaces the exhaust release and transfer channel used in the AJK-16 VLS, but this channel uses up space anyway in its own way. So this is an equal exchange. The channel for the extra VLS size.

If you want to use cold launch, like the land variant of HQ-16, then it will only be a single canister and there's plenty of space around the missile. However cold launch dictates that you need a gas bottle to throw the missile into the air and that requires that you lengthen the VLS.

For whatever reason PLAN has decided to use hot launch for the HHQ-16, I don't know why, they will stick to their choice nonetheless despite the land variant being cold launched. Should note the Russians are using cold launch for their Shtil VLS.

For the 054B its likely you will use a new shortened version of U-VLS. This let's you save space and weight for a smaller ship.

Please note the YU-8 ASROC will have to be hot launched just as it is on the AJK-16 VLS.