Very well said. There is a thread in CJDBY about Tico and arleigh burke. The agreement is that both are similar in terms of AA defence capability, but Tico acts as a commanding ship in a CSG (excluding aviation) due to its larger size, more room for that extra personnel and equipments as a commanding ship. To me 055 is the Chines equivlant of Tico in role.The Type 055 is going to the PLAN's largest and most capable surface combatant.
It will undoubtedly have:
1) Very strong capability for AAW with deep magazines (ie VLS Cell numbers)
2) The ability to use its VLS in a multi-role capability, meaning different types of missiles
3) Have strong ASW capabilities (hopefully with a hanger for two helos)
4) Have strong anti-surface capabilities with a large main gun and ASMs in the VLS
5) Have the strongest, most capable air and surface search radars available.
6) Have very strong C4SI capabilities to act as the command ship for the group.
It is important that each CSG or large ARG have such a vessel it can use to coordinate and even control the overall defense of the group, outside of the air operations of the carrier, and the amphibious/air assault operations of the LHD/LPDs.
Such a vessel can conduct cooperative engagement using the other DDGs who are proving more AAW coverage and closer in ASW coverage, or using the appropriately outfitted FFGs who are out doing the more remote ASW patrols, and who have their own air defense capabilities.
In war time against dangerous foes, you will likely have two of these vessels with a CSG.
In such a role, the FFGs are very important to provide outer ring ASW for the CSG and ARG, and to be able to defend themselves. They are also important to act as flagships for smaller SAGs where you may have several FFGs complimented by LCS type vessels (Type 056).
The very capable, but smaller (smaller than the Type 055), multi-role DDGs (like the Type 052C/D) serve as important AAW assets and ASW assets for the CSG and the ARG, and themselves can become task force flag ships for larger SAGs.
Both the FFG and DDG vessels can also perform individual missions and exercises wherever necessary, knowing that they have decent capabilities all around to defend themselves or whatever they are tasked to operate with.
So...having those large, cruiser-like vessels is important and it really adds the depth and capstone capabilities to the defense of large, capitol task forces. Those capabilities are important, but also expensive...and you do not need them for all of those activities I just named that the FFGs and the other DDGs can perform.
It is a strategy that provides multi-oriole capabilities in depth, to be applied as necessary, allowing those capabilities to be scaled as necessary, depending on need.
In this particular aspect of their naval operations, the PLAN seems to be adopting very similar overall tactics to the US Navy.
Why? Because they have observed them for a long time and realize their value if you can afford it. Apparently the PRC has decided that it can afford it.
Now, the PLAN will have its own unique plans and missions, and exercises to add to this, but I think this is the basic strategy...and it is a good one.
055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread
- Thread starter FarkTypeSoldier
- Start date
- Status
Very well said. There is a thread in CJDBY about Tico and arleigh burke. The agreement is that both are similar in terms of AA defence capability, but Tico acts as a commanding ship in a CSG (excluding aviation) due to its larger size, more room for that extra personnel and equipments as a commanding ship. To me 055 is the Chines equivlant of Tico in role.
DDG-1000 class is in a class of its own. It uses a number of new technologies and has the capability to field some more (such as rail guns and DEW due to its IEPS). But DDG-1000 class also has a very strange armament mix and thus it has a very strange role... because for a 15,000 ton ship it "only" has 80 VLS, while it carries two large 155mm advanced gun systems. It also heavily emphasizes stealth. It is also equipped with no real ciws, only having two 30mm guns more suited to anti surface point defence than shooting down AShMs.
Even if DDG-1000 replaces its two 155mm guns with rail guns in future and if they supplement their 30mm guns with DEW laser ciws, the ship is still a bit of a strange animal. The immense attention and money paid to its stealth means it basically is not going to be actively emitting and will exercise EMCON to preserve its stealth. In fact, DDG-1000 doesn't even have an S band MFR and has to rely on an X band MFR for volume search as well as horizon and surface search. This basically means DDG-1000 isn't going to be part of any carrier battle group as part of an escort, and will likely be used as a "strike cruiser" where it may carry a large load of LACMs or ASHMs in its 80 VLS rather than SAMs (though Mk-57 PVLS no doubt can carry the ESSM and standard missile family). But only 3 DDG-1000 class ships will be built, meaning their availability will also be quite limited during standard operations. The game changing nature of railguns in many future high intensity combat scenarios is also not entirely certain, because while they will obviously revolutionize the capability of a ship's main gun and possibly ciws, even optimistic projections do not see them having a range that can truly replace LACMs which can have range in excess of 1500km, meaning if one wants to attack land targets with shipboard railguns they may have to get within 200nm of the target.... and if one is facing a capable high tech enemy, one has to ask whether you want to send a multibillion dollar warship that close simply to use your rail guns. Of course, one can still park DDG-1000s 1000km from a target and lob cruise missiles away, but one can do that with a Burke as well.
Therefore, I'd argue that despite the DDG-1000's impressive array of new technologies and design, and its potential for fielding railguns and DEWs, it is also a ship only in limited numbers and in many ways it is searching for a mission. (Though obviously other missions where DDG-1000 may excel at is as a command ship)
055 on the other hand, is thought to have 112 or 128 VLS, and likely displaces quite a bit less possibly at 13,500 ton full displacement. It also will likely be equipped with three advanced active radars, which strongly suggests it will actively emit during many missions, i.e.: it will act as an air defence ship. A 130mm main gun and a PJ-11 30mm CIWS and a 24 cell HQ-10 CIWS SAM rounds off the 055's armament and makes the ship look like an upsized ticonderoga or Sejong class in terms of role and armament, only carrying more and newer radars, and being bigger, and being stealthier as well (though 055 will not be as stealthy as DDG-1000 class -- and it is not meant to be given its mission will mean it will actively emit often and thus possibly give away its position, reducing the effectiveness of the stealth that DDG-1000 class may have given the cost of such stealth).
But 055 is also large enough to accommodate newer propulsion. 055 is expected to use four QC-280 gas turbines in COGAG arrangement, but it is also expected that an eventual 055A will field IEPS, possibly using the same four QC-280 gas turbines. that would likely give 055A enough electricity to power newer and more powerful radars, but also more importantly to power a railgun (to replace the PJ-38 130mm main gun) and equip itself with DEW lasers. However it is unlikely that 055A will reduce the number of VLS, and it will also likely retain its current CIWS in addition to any laser CIWS. 055A may be more stealthy relative to 055, but I cannot see any reason for the Chinese Navy to seek stealth on the scale of DDG-1000 class.
So in short, to answer your question, if 055A does get IEPS and is equipped with a railgun, it would still likely be quite different to the Zumwalt class as it currently is and also quite different to the Zumwalt class if it were refitted with railguns... because there are many unique aspects of the Zumwalt class and its sensor suite, armament choice and count, and overall design (namely for the sake of stealth), which 055 and 055A likely will not replicate.
joshuatree
Captain
Quit a few posts made good arguments that a next gen frigate is needed and serves a purpose. With that said, I agree with your assessment of concurrent 052D and 055 production. When 055 production really ramps up, there's not a lot of good reasons to keep 052D production going if there is a next gen frigate to handle duties such as CSG outer ring AAW and ASW duties or solo light mission duties. The resources would be better spent directing into more 055 production. A middle weight destroyer in such a lineup just seems redundant. Of course, because the modules for the first 055 have yet to be seen and barring any unforeseen development hiccups, it makes sense to hear about another batch of 052Ds being ordered. It's hedging your bets in case the 055 production takes a lot longer. Keep in mind, PLAN's destroyer flotillas still need to desperately replace the antiquated 051s, much less grow into a force that is representative of the second largest economy. There's no reason why if the 055 productions ramps up smoothly, any 052D orders cannot be cancelled and replaced with more 055 orders. This can be gradual too with perhaps a conversion of a 052D production line to 055 while retaining the others, slowing down the production rate of 052Ds.
For all the discussion about upgrading 052Ds with newer sensors/equipment as time goes on, let's not forget the 055 will have more power capacity (4 turbines?) vs the 052D so that will be a limitation for future weapons systems.
Russian pride and potential impact to their export market reputation would be the biggest obstacles to a Russian purchase of any 052Ds. The 22350s are much smaller than their current cruisers and destroyers. With their shipyard so far only launching one hull every ~4 years, the 19 cruisers/destroyers which are getting long in the tooth won't be completely replaced for quite some time. This is going to seriously reduce the Russian Navy surface fleet capability if they can't ramp up their own internal production and won't seek the outside market to augment.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
I think Zumwalt is a breed apart
I have a feeling that UK or Russia would not have the cutting edge technology to build something like Zumwalt
I have a feeling that UK or Russia would not have the cutting edge technology to build something like Zumwalt
Not aiming at such cutting edge technology also keeps them from spending 20 billion on 3 ships
That is BS...
They can. But they wont thanks to the costs and useless need of this ship.
They can. But they wont thanks to the costs and useless need of this ship.
I'd argue that the Zumwalt class is a breed apart not necessarily because of its technologies and its individual capabilities, but rather because of its overall strange mission role, which I think is difficult to identify.
It is obviously not suited for air defence, and while it can conduct deep in land strike with cruise missiles in its VLS, a Burke could also conduct such a mission.
I think the truly unique missions that a Zumwalt class DDG can conduct which other ships cannot, is to act as a command ship. It can also potentially conduct naval gun fire support via its two 155mm AGS, but one then has to ask the US Navy would be willing to risk sending a 4 billion dollar warship (not including research and development costs) within 83 nautical miles of a target, especially if the opposing force has an intact navy and air force. The stealthiness of the Zumwalt class is obviously useful in increasing its survivability, meaning it can potentially be deployed closer to an enemy without being detected, but one then has to ask what kind of mission a Zumwalt class DDG would conduct at such close ranges and also whether (again) the stealthiness of the Zumwalt class means the USN is willing to risk the very expensive ship in closer proximities to an opponent.
The other role of the ship of course is to act as a testbed for new technologies, which I'm sure it will do an admirable job at.
The Zumwalt is a fire support centric multi-role combatant.
It has very good AAW capabilities, but not for broad, area coverage.
So there is a different focus between the two. Because I believe the Type 055 will definitely be an AAW centric multi-role vessel.
With the Rail Gun, the Type 055 would enhance its firs support capabilities, but I believe it would still be focused on AAW.
IMHO, the Type 055 is going to be more akin to a Tico cruiser...or the Flight II Burkes (which will also ultimately have a 127mm rail gun as well).
It is a fire support centric, large, multi-role combatant.
Actually it will be well suited for the mid to short range air defense role. it is going to have 80 PVLS cells, and I bet 20 of them will carry quad-packed ESSMs...and they woill also be SM-6 capanble.
As to fire support, yes, both can conduct deep strike missions with their missiles, but ther Zumwalt has two 155mm guns that will be able to conduct absolute, troop close fire support.
That is one of the things that sets it apart. it is the US getting back what it loss with the Iowa class in terms of fire support for the marines, including acting as several batteries of 155mm howitzers to proving even danger close fire support if necessary.
Yes. That is one of its primary functions.
Yes...it is what they are built for.
It will not act alone. There will be pother very expensive vessels accompanying them, including a CSG is there is real danger of adversary air.
Of course this is all the case...but we are drifting too far into a discussion of the Zumwalt when this is the Type 055 thread.
It's mostly my fault, but let's try and get back on topic.[/QUOTE]
I will reply in the zumwalt thread.
- Status