FFG 054/054A Thread

[adeptitus]

I think most major navies are now using a 3-layered missile defense system, with medium-range SAM, short-range SAM, and CIWS guns. The CIWS gun is the last line of defense, and when all else fails, you still have that hail of metal slugs to protect you.

We're fairly certain that the ship will have 30mm CIWS guns installs. I'm more curious to see exactly which SAM (domestic or import, VLS type, etc) system is used.

My gut feeling tells me that we prolly won't see ASROC missiles (or even towed sonar) on the 054A, though it's possible that it may have longer-range ASW rockets (than those currently used) installed on MLR rack.

 

[Gollevainen]

Well if the Ak-630 was fielded in 1975 and it's fundamentally quite different system than the modern CIWS, is it really a miracle that a system introduced in 21st century is superior? I mean it would be quite alarming to find out that it isen't...

 

[Jeff Head]

.....

That's a very clear pic. I am sure in the future as others are launched and outfitted, we will see more and more such pics.

This is looking like a very capable enhancement of the 054. With four being built now, I believe the PLAN will build quite a few more (maybe the 20-25 talked about), but we will have to wait and see. Either way, with their larger displacment, VLS capabilities, ASuW capabilities, potential ASW capabilites, and other weapons fit, I think it will be a very capable guided-missile frigate in the PLAN fleet and represents a continuing rapid modernization.

Contrary to Jane's I believe (and have stated

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) that the PLAN is not slowing down and is continuing to build and procure very modern and capable surface combatnts at a fast pace and is something that much be watched and respected by other nations and by analysts.

 

[swimmerXC]

.....

 

[tphuang]

Well if the Ak-630 was fielded in 1975 and it's fundamentally quite different system than the modern CIWS, is it really a miracle that a system introduced in 21st century is superior? I mean it would be quite alarming to find out that it isen't...

that's something we already know, that 1 type 730 is better than 2 AK-630. But anyhow, basically, what are type 730 CIWS's competitors?
Phalanx
Goalkeeper
Kashtan

Someone on that thread said that USN actually wanted to install goalkeeper but the government blocked it? Anyone aware of this?

If type 730 can be better than goalkeeper, then it could very well be the best CIWS.

 

[Gollevainen]

Well if some chinese guy, no matter how close he is with this system says it's better than Goalkeeper, we should just look at it with a grin If I would say that the 155K98 is the best gun-howitsers that there is, you should ignore it as the same way as this statement...pride over your own work may sometimes go atop reason...

Anyway I'm saying the system isen't good, It may well be even better than Goalkeeper. Unfortunetly we can only make assumptions based on the released data. With CIWS, the fire controll is much more important than the actual gun (The differences of two 30mm rotary cannons are minimal, both will execute the mission if they know where to shoot) Without neutral trialing with the both systmes at the same time under same cirqumstances and targets, then we can say which is the best.

Also remeber that the type 730 belongs to the first generation of western type CIWS, Kashtan for example follows quite different path (like almoust every other russian/soviet systems) and is ahead in philosofical level compared to the only-gun CIWS.

 

[Kilo636]

Well if some chinese guy, no matter how close he is with this system says it's better than Goalkeeper, we should just look at it with a grin If I would say that the 155K98 is the best gun-howitsers that there is, you should ignore it as the same way as this statement...pride over your own work may sometimes go atop reason...

Anyway I'm saying the system isen't good, It may well be even better than Goalkeeper. Unfortunetly we can only make assumptions based on the released data. With CIWS, the fire controll is much more important than the actual gun (The differences of two 30mm rotary cannons are minimal, both will execute the mission if they know where to shoot) Without neutral trialing with the both systmes at the same time under same cirqumstances and targets, then we can say which is the best.

Also remeber that the type 730 belongs to the first generation of western type CIWS, Kashtan for example follows quite different path (like almoust every other russian/soviet systems) and is ahead in philosofical level compared to the only-gun CIWS.

U already mention! U assume base on released data and u come to the conclusion Type 730 isn't good? I know a lot of people always have the perception,PLA is still in the 70s and 80s!

I remember 1 or 2 yrs ago,somebody say 5.8mm rds introduced by the PLA sucked. Then i happened to pass sniper paradise and see a article comfirmed the superiority of 5.8mm rds. outperforming the NATO and Russian rds! I wonder what are those people going to say when they saw that article?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[adeptitus]

I think some of us assume the 054A would have better ASW weapons, such as ASROC type missiles, because we felt it was the logical choice for a new frigate. PLAN's ASW capability is weak and they really need some ASW frigates with more than just hull-mounted sonar and short-range ASW rockets.

If I were planning for new PLAN ships, I'd have certaintely ordered ASW frigates. If I didn't have ASROC type weapons ready (CY-X?), I'd import them from Russia for evaluation, then license the technology for domestic production.

But what *I* think is logical is just that, my own opinion, and not real PLAN deployements. From observation, I felt that the 054 series (054/054A) are GP (General Purpose) Frigates that emulates the La Fayette. When the French installed Sea Crotale SAM the PLAN installed HQ-7, and when the French upgraded to Aster-15 missiles, the PLAN also upgraded to SA-N-12.

But, I'm not expecting to see towed radar array, unmanned underwater craft, or ASROC type missiles on the 054A. At best, I think we'll see longer-range ASW rockets. The PLA/PLAN's administration leans heavily toward self-reliance and proven systems. They adopt new technology cautiously with cost as a major consideration.

 

[Gollevainen]

In my following paragrahp I said:

Anyway I'm saying the system isen't good, It may well be even better than Goalkeeper. Unfortunetly we can only make assumptions based on the released data. With CIWS, the fire controll is much more important than the actual gun (The differences of two 30mm rotary cannons are minimal, both will execute the mission if they know where to shoot) Without neutral trialing with the both systmes at the same time under same cirqumstances and targets, then we can say which is the best

.

Now which part of that made you say U assume base on released data and u come to the conclusion Type 730 isn't good? ???? Did you just read the first line?

5.8 mm rifle rounds have nothing to do with the CIWS systems (as itself is only loosely related to the actual subject, 054A frigate). So people, quit throwing lame excuses everytime your pride is offended...you know that not all made in China in the past couple years is heavenly superior to everything else made in the face of the earht...But neither it's automaticly inferior to western systems. Thats why I urge you to look every case as it own and not make false assumptions. And have some freaking objectivity!!!!

 

[tphuang]

Is this what u say below? The system is not good but better than the suck Goalkeeper! Since type 730 is no good but is better than a system who is compare to a no good system. So goal keeper must be sucked.. Which is the conclusion i come to..





As u already mention,actual data cannot be obtain of the Type 730.
Therefore i used the case of 5.8mm rds as the PLA did not release the very actual performance of it. A independant study and report of the 5.8mm rds was conducted by some user who actually use it and test it and there come to the conclusion that what is circulating around the net abt the superiority of 5.8mm rds was proven. Of cos ,obtaining 5.8mm rds were more easier than trying to get the actual type 730 CIWS and tested it. Since i don think any outsider can easily access the Chinese CIWS like the 5.8mm rds. It is impossible to prove its stated performance of the article r bullshit. People has a conception all Chinese article is bullshitting and PRC military is always in the 70's and 80s which is getting proven wrong again and again. I will say there is still many fake article as but lesser as every yrs goes by as PRC gets stronger! :china:

So this article may prove to be correct for what it states!

I remember u mocking abt tphuang as he talked abt the CIWS type 730 installed on 054A frigate with a green canvas covered on it. Tphuang can almost comfirm it but u laugh at him challenging him how can he comfirmed it by just looking at the green rd canvas covered on it! We all have seen a mock up of 054A,plus tphuang also provided the photo of the mock-up and why can't it be proven?
In the end,the thing with the green canvas was proven to be a Type 730 CIWS!

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/showpost.php?p=44260&postcount=142

It must have hurt those Chinese hater who we once again prove them wrong that we got the correct spec...

while I appreciate you trying to stand up for me and China, it really isn't needed. This is a forum and we are simply discussing the merits of some pictures. I don't even believe some of the stuff I post, but rather I post them to give people more things to think up.

Now, according to the same guy posting say this. He is saying that when one goalkeeper CIWS is facing 3 incoming AShM in trials, then it can take all 3 down with the final one shot down around 600 m from the ship. I think he was implying that type 730 can achieve at least that kind of result. Now, I think he is talking about subsonic AshM, not sure about supersonic AShM.

Now, I do believe that Kashtan in terms of concept is more advanced than the guns only type of CIWS, but that doesn't mean its performance is better than the other 3. Personally, I would prefer if possible to have a common VLS that can fire both a medium and short range SAM (ESSM/RAM, HH-16/HH-7, shtil/sa-n-11) + a guns only CIWS Rather than a VLS firing a medium SAM and a combo CIWS with both missile and gun.