PLA Navy news, pics and videos
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
And risk the other nations attacking Chinese shippings after their governments color revolutionized?
Put kill switch in it, openly. Tell the client if you want superpower you're gonna have to compromise.
Wouldn't the packing configuration of the containers give it away that it's not really a civilian ship? An actual freight carrying container ship will try to fully load up?
In this example even if foldable the radar containers needs to be higher than the missile containers etc. Unless they can make work with a fully loaded configuration or have containers that can be push aside to make room quickly when it's time to deploy.
In this example even if foldable the radar containers needs to be higher than the missile containers etc. Unless they can make work with a fully loaded configuration or have containers that can be push aside to make room quickly when it's time to deploy.
The bigger point is that there is a very high chance you can see VLS cells for 1/10th the cost of Arleigh Burkes.
Moreover, just 100 units of destroyer-kits for cargo ships could spike the PLAN's VLS count to match that of the USN. 500 units would be looking at 3-5x the USN's total VLS kit (30,000 VLS cells), and I'd guess it'd cost 50-100 billion for 500 destroyer kits.
Moreover, just 100 units of destroyer-kits for cargo ships could spike the PLAN's VLS count to match that of the USN. 500 units would be looking at 3-5x the USN's total VLS kit (30,000 VLS cells), and I'd guess it'd cost 50-100 billion for 500 destroyer kits.
I don't think this is a Q ship, I feel like a better use is using these as auxiliary air defense ships to be stationed around a area of interest.
Almost like picket ships, then. Freeing up the Naval units for more maneuvering required work.
If I think of the missions:
1. Within bastion areas under Chinese air cover (Chinese ports, Taiwan Straits, etc)
These ships are "stationary" and we can expect CEC from overhead aircraft or accompanying Destroyers.
So they could:
a) perform medium-range air defence with their own radars
b) act as Arsenal ships for long-range air defence missiles, with offboard control via CEC.
2. For distant operations in contested waters
100-teu containerships are just too slow (10-15 knots) to keep up with a regular naval formation like a CSG
So:
a) they use a larger and faster containership hull
b) they get kept to the rear, and carry long-range antiship or land-attack missiles
c) you have small forward deployed, independent SAGs, with a mix of Destroyers, Frigates and Containerships
A module comprising 8 Mark 41 VLS cells is ~$14 Million these days.
So 60 Cells would work out as $105 Million, which is one-twentieth the cost of a Arleigh Burke.
Of course, there are other costs such as the radar, CEC and combat management system to add.
But then again, my first guess of Chinese VLS costs is half that of the US.
---
I just don't see a requirement for vast numbers of these ships, so even 100 should be more than enough.
Let's say there are 3 groups of 10 in the Taiwan Straits area.
Each group would add 600 additional VLS cells carrying SAMs. I just don't see enough incoming missiles to require more than this.
Then add a few to each port, and some for distant operations past the 1IC