055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[duskylim]

Im having trouble finding an online video but it was the Phoenix TV military show for April 8. It also showed up on multiple Chinese military forums that China is currently experiencing some issues with propulsion for the Type 055. It didn't mention the QC-280. So is it that the QC-280 isn't powerful enough for a larger ship such as Type 055 because if it was wouldn't China have already built a larger successor to the 052C?

Let me educate you on how ship propulsion systems are designed.

Unlike in an automobile, ships do NOT require all the power to be derived from a single engine or powerplant.

In fact multiple engines are frequently combined to drive multiple sets of propellers (screws).

Building a larger ship does NOT necessarily require developing newer engines for them.

You can easily take an existing engine and simply use as many of them (in combination with the appropriate number of screws) to achieve the necessary power required.

This has many other advantages.

Using many smaller engines adds to the ship's reliability, ease of maintenance, and in a warship, resistance to being completely incapacitated by damage.

So the designer would simply use more than 2 QC-280's to achieve the required horsepower.

 

[Jura The idiot]

Let me educate you on how ship propulsion systems are designed.

...

So the designer would simply use more than 2 QC-280's to achieve the required horsepower.

and if Type 055 was a battleship, more boilers

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

could be added, too LOL

 

[xiabonan]

Let me educate you on how ship propulsion systems are designed.

Unlike in an automobile, ships do NOT require all the power to be derived from a single engine or powerplant.

In fact multiple engines are frequently combined to drive multiple sets of propellers (screws).

Building a larger ship does NOT necessarily require developing newer engines for them.

You can easily take an existing engine and simply use as many of them (in combination with the appropriate number of screws) to achieve the necessary power required.

This has many other advantages.

Using many smaller engines adds to the ship's reliability, ease of maintenance, and in a warship, resistance to being completely incapacitated by damage.

So the designer would simply use more than 2 QC-280's to achieve the required horsepower.

One good example of this is the Enterprise VS Nimitz Class. The A2W reactors on board Enterprise is of much lower power output compared to the A4W reactors on the Nimitz. What did the US navy do then? They simply put 8 of those on the CVN65, whereas Nimitz class have only 2 A4W reactors. Of course this is an improvement(A4Ws), but the point is, for ships, you can add powerplants up to achieve the desired total power output, and the larger the ship, the easier this will be as there's more room for propulsion.

Furthermore, the QC280s are very powerful steam turbines themselves, although considerably larger than American GE LM2500, in terms of power output they're at least on par.

 

[Pmichael]

Any possible problems of the Type 055 are mostlikely not gas turbines related. China proved they can handle it.

It's all about to integrate gas turbines and diesel engines in an IEP system.

 

[xiabonan]

Any possible problems of the Type 055 are mostlikely not gas turbines related. China proved they can handle it.

It's all about to integrate gas turbines and diesel engines in an IEP system.

There's still no indication of any sort that the 055 would be equipped with IEP.

Although it brings benefits but I don't see the urgent need to implement that in the 055.

 

[Pmichael]

There's still no indication of any sort that the 055 would be equipped with IEP.

Although it brings benefits but I don't see the urgent need to implement that in the 055.

Well, of coues we don't know the finalized specifications of the Type055. But moving away from the CODOG system to something more modern is imo the most important aspect of the next generation of large Chinese surface ships.

 

[xiabonan]

Well, of coues we don't know the finalized specifications of the Type055. But moving away from the CODOG system to something more modern is imo the most important aspect of the next generation of large Chinese surface ships.

Why do you feel this way?

Because to me, it's the least important, in fact it shouldn't a concern at all. CODOG is just fine, or COGAG.

What's most important, to me, is her sheer size.

PLAN urgently needs larger surface combatants that could make best use of the 346A radars by having a higher bridge, providing more power, and a larger hull to house more missiles.

 

[Solaris]

Furthermore, the QC280s are very powerful steam turbines themselves, although considerably larger than American GE LM2500, in terms of power output they're at least on par.

At 28 MW each they are more powerful than the original gen1 LM2500's at 19 MW each, 4 of which drove 10 kt Ticonderogas and 9 kt Arleigh Burkes around the seas at 30+ knots. I would guess that 4 of these GT's in a COGAG configuration could easily supply the propulsion needs of a 12-13 kt 055, if it is that size.

 

[kroko]

At 28 MW each they are more powerful than the original gen1 LM2500's at 19 MW each, 4 of which drove 10 kt Ticonderogas and 9 kt Arleigh Burkes around the seas at 30+ knots. I would guess that 4 of these GT's in a COGAG configuration could easily supply the propulsion needs of a 12-13 kt 055, if it is that size.

Is the QC-280 fully manufactured in china or are some parts still produced in ukraine?


Also, what do you think about the estimatives of the dimensions of type 055 (based in a land struture) presented in the latest entry in this blog:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Blitzo]

Is the QC-280 fully manufactured in china or are some parts still produced in ukraine?

Fully manufactured in China.

FYI, QC-280 is the chinese manufactured version of the Ukrainian DN80 gas turbine. So you can tell by the name that it is Chinese.

Also, what do you think about the estimatives of the dimensions of type 055 (based in a land struture) presented in the latest entry in this blog:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Having done a google earth estimation of the dimensions itself, I would say he is in the right ballpark.

21+ m is probably more like 23m, however there's nothing wrong with being conservative, after all we only have the foundations to go off. Once google earth updates the area we'll have a more accurate structure to measure.

The length for this ship is impossible to discern at this point, and 175m could be possible, but may lie in the lower range of estimates.