2022 Zhuhai Airshow Naval Systems


sheogorath

Senior Member
Registered Member
To keep up with carrier. Carrier usually sails at 30 plus knot when launching planes.
The top speed of the Kuznetsov class is rated at 29 to 30 knots, though, so I'm not sure if that's actually the case. For reference, the QE class also does 32 knots max.

It is US CVN's who routinely exceed that speed because even the CdG is rated at +25knots
 

Lethe

Senior Member
If 052Es are to be given more VLS when compared to 052D, their hull dimensions would have to be expanded.

For comparison,
052D: 155m length x 17m beam x ~6m draft (64 VLS)
052DL: 161m length x 17m beam x ~6m draft (64 VLS)
055: 180m length x 20m x ~6.6m draft (112 VLS)
Arleigh Burke: 155m length x 20m beam x 9.3m draft (96 VLS)
Sejong the Great: 166m length x 21.4m beam x 6.3m draft (80 VLS + 48 K-VLS)
Maya: 170m length x 22.2m beam x 13m draft x ~7m draft (96 VLS)

I am always an advocate for more VLS for the 052Ds, since they are designed and built with the major goal of facing off against the "Pacific Heavyweights", i.e. Arleigh Burkes, Mayas and Sejongs. China is practically on her own and surrounded by three powerful navies.

However, instead of pursuing the "fitting as many VLS into one big hull as possible", I suppose it would be better for China to increase her VLS cell count on 052E to just 80. Perhaps it would be much more important for China to be able to print out as many 052E hulls with better radar+sensor+fire control systems, flexibility and survivability as possible.

More automation on 052E should also be pursued (just take Mogami FFGs for reference), in order for available PLAN manpower to be spread across more ships + reducing potential manpower and firepower losses in case any warships got sunk during wartime.

If we grant that 052D is already more heavily armed and better equipped than most vessels of comparable size, but with less range, endurance and general habitability, then I think there is a strong argument that any further increase in size/displacement should go to addressing those weaknesses rather than further reinforcing its strengths. If the mooted increase in size/displacement is large enough to do both, then it is likely to be encroaching on 055 territory and one should simply build more of the those instead.

Further, the easiest way to increase the size/displacement of a vessel is by lengthening it, yet 052D already has a finer aspect ratio (length:beam) than most modern combatants. Further increases in length may not be possible or desirable. Also, higher levels of automation seem to translate to increased displacement, perhaps owing to higher levels of redundancy and an increased emphasis on accessibility and ease of maintenance for the fewer crew that remain.
 

by78

Lieutenant General
Export corvette + patrol boat.

52490824887_8f8800ac4b_k.jpg
52490824902_ec494e5ad6_3k.jpg
52491589954_2b2acd6c45_k.jpg
52491589974_aa9e72fdab_k.jpg
52490825022_7372fc039a_k.jpg
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Senior Member
Registered Member
If we grant that 052D is already more heavily armed and better equipped than most vessels of comparable size, but with less range, endurance and general habitability, then I think there is a strong argument that any further increase in size/displacement should go to addressing those weaknesses rather than further reinforcing its strengths. If the mooted increase in size/displacement is large enough to do both, then it is likely to be encroaching on 055 territory and one should simply build more of the those instead.
My point is that PLAN should go for doing both addressing those weaknesses AND further reinforcing its strengths with regards to the 052E.

Regarding your statement "likely to be encroaching on 055 territory":
1. One 052D displaces ~7650 tons at full load;
2. One 055 displaces ~13000 tons at full load.
Which means there's a ~5350-ton difference between the 052Ds and 055s, which is enough to be filled by one 054B.

Therefore, I don't really see how increasing the number of VLS cells on 052D from 64 to 80 on 052E, alongside addressing those weaknesses AND further reinforcing its strengths of the 052D would have 052Es enroaching into the territory of the 055s. At most, I believe, the 052Es would be reaching the level of Flight 3 or 4 of the Arleigh Burkes.

Further, the easiest way to increase the size/displacement of a vessel is by lengthening it, yet 052D already has a finer aspect ratio (length:beam) than most modern combatants. Further increases in length may not be possible or desirable.
To achieve the desired dimensions of the 052E while retaining the finer aspect ratio of the 052D, increasing the length of the 052D/052DL is only one of the methods.

Also, higher levels of automation seem to translate to increased displacement, perhaps owing to higher levels of redundancy and an increased emphasis on accessibility and ease of maintenance for the fewer crew that remain.
Sure, fair enough.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
My point is that PLAN should go for doing both addressing those weaknesses AND further reinforcing its strengths with regards to the 052E.

Regarding your statement "likely to be encroaching on 055 territory":
1. One 052D displaces ~7650 tons at full load;
2. One 055 displaces ~13000 tons at full load.
Which means there's a ~5350-ton difference between the 052Ds and 055s, which is enough to be filled by one 054B.

Therefore, I don't really see how increasing the number of VLS cells on 052D from 64 to 80 on 052E, alongside addressing those weaknesses AND further reinforcing its strengths of the 052D would have 052Es enroaching into the territory of the 055s. At most, I believe, the 052Es would be reaching the level of Flight 3 or 4 of the Arleigh Burkes.


To achieve the desired dimensions of the 052E while retaining the finer aspect ratio of the 052D, increasing the length of the 052D/052DL is only one of the methods.


Sure, fair enough.


If you're going to put more VLS on the 052D without changing it's length, you have to replace the section with the VHS array with a new section that contains VLS. Think of a ship like a set of building blocks. In a modular ship design, a block or a section of the ship can be replaced by alternative pre designed blocks. However you will lose what benefits the VHS array conveys, although it's not a problem for the 055. But this also points that the AESA arrays on the 055 are more powerful than the 052D to make the VHS array redundant. However this also means that with arrays this powerful, you need the cooling and power systems to match, which the 052D cannot match as a platform.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Senior Member
Registered Member
If you're going to put more VLS on the 052D without changing it's length, you have to replace the section with the VHS array with a new section that contains VLS. Think of a ship like a set of building blocks. In a modular ship design, a block or a section of the ship can be replaced by alternative pre designed blocks. However you will lose what benefits the VHS array conveys, although it's not a problem for the 055. But this also points that the AESA arrays on the 055 are more powerful than the 052D to make the VHS array redundant. However this also means that with arrays this powerful, you need the cooling and power systems to match, which the 052D cannot match as a platform.
Oops, my mistake. May have caused a confusion there.

The original statement in my preious post "To achieve the desired dimensions of the 052E while retaining the finer aspect ratio of the 052D, increasing the length of the 052D/052DL is only one of the methods." is incorrect.

The correct statement should be: "To achieve the desired dimensions of the 052E while retaining the finer aspect ratio of the 052D, increasing the length of the 052D/052DL is only one of the several methods available for the ship designers."

Which means there are metrics other than just length that can be expanded, i.e. beam and draft.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Oops, my mistake. May have caused a confusion there.

The original statement in my preious post "To achieve the desired dimensions of the 052E while retaining the finer aspect ratio of the 052D, increasing the length of the 052D/052DL is only one of the methods." is incorrect.

The correct statement should be: "To achieve the desired dimensions of the 052E while retaining the finer aspect ratio of the 052D, increasing the length of the 052D/052DL is only one of the several methods available for the ship designers."

Which means there are metrics other than just length that can be expanded, i.e. beam and draft.


It won't be a 052D anymore if you increased beam and draft. You might as well make a 055.

If you want to preserve the existing assembly lines and retain as much of the original modules, your best alternative is to change one section of the ship that trades off the VHS radar for more VLS or increase length even further by replacing the aft VLS section with a longer one.
 

Lethe

Senior Member
My point is that PLAN should go for doing both addressing those weaknesses AND further reinforcing its strengths with regards to the 052E.

Regarding your statement "likely to be encroaching on 055 territory":
1. One 052D displaces ~7650 tons at full load;
2. One 055 displaces ~13000 tons at full load.
Which means there's a ~5350-ton difference between the 052Ds and 055s, which is enough to be filled by one 054B.

Therefore, I don't really see how increasing the number of VLS cells on 052D from 64 to 80 on 052E, alongside addressing those weaknesses AND further reinforcing its strengths of the 052D would have 052Es enroaching into the territory of the 055s. At most, I believe, the 052Es would be reaching the level of Flight 3 or 4 of the Arleigh Burkes.

Rather than looking at the raw numerical difference in tonnage, I am more interested in the ratio between them. I think that as the smaller vessel goes upwards of ~70% of the size/displacement of the larger one, the question becomes increasingly pointed as to whether there is sufficient differentiation between the two types to justify the existence of both, given that a single platform has advantages in terms of production and upgrade economies of scale, logistics, training and maintenance. Even if it were possible in engineering terms to produce a Burke-sized 052-series ship, I believe this would be past the point at which it makes more sense to just build more 055s instead.

To achieve the desired dimensions of the 052E while retaining the finer aspect ratio of the 052D, increasing the length of the 052D/052DL is only one of the methods.

Length is but one way of enlarging the ship, but it's the easiest method with the fewest implications for other systems. If you start playing around with the draft and beam, you will have to redesign much of the interior layout of the ship to make efficient use of that additional volume. Add to this that it will have definitely implications for the powerplant/drivetrain, i.e. the ship will require more power to achieve a given speed, which itself is going to demand more volume. So, the proposition that 052DL may already be maxed out on length has implications for how designers will think about addressing future requirements going forward. Even if they want a ship larger than 052D but smaller than 055, they could well decide to address that requirement with a brand new hull form and new powerplant design.
 
Last edited:

Top