D
PLAN Sovremenny DDG 136, 137, 138 & 139 Thread
- Thread starter FarkTypeSoldier
- Start date
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
Yet armament wise the refitted Sovs are still no match for the mainstay DDGs like the Type 52C and D due to the nature of the missiles they can fire and the sensors they carry. Classification of modern ships by weight is almost a work in futility nowadays.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Why not? Hq16 is similar to the MK 41 VLS modules which is 3 times higher than height of an average man!
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
True, but there was still a significant overhang above the person servicing the gun, plus there is also the bottom ammo storage, considering that it carries between 90-120 rounds, it has to be massive.
It is a plausible notion, but one that we will have to see to be certain.
1/ The graphic in Chinese is normaly goot but not certain
2/ Make sense turrets be kept
3/ 1000 rds by magazine
big qty US Burke, Ticonderoga have 680 by gun i don't know qty for especialy 052C/D new if one have ?
In post #392 in this thread there is a very nice russian schematic of the ships (https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/pl...-137-138-139-thread.t6645/page-40#post-443988) and you can see that the guns need about 2 decks but the space below the missile launchers (which got turned into the VLS) is about 3 decks.
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
Well judging by the schematics the area below the gun just about cuts it for the installation, and even if it did not. I don't see why the VLS section cannot be extended above the top deck, see as the gun too stood out significantly.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Of course it can be done.. the VLS doesn't have to stay flush with the deck however it all boils down to how much reengineering and modification PLAN plans on doing with the Sovs.
Keep n mind that it's not just a matter of removal of the gun turret/mount and the auto feeder mechanism below deck and plunking in VLS canisters. Since Sovs were not designed to be modular, entire restructuring and rewriting, plumbing etc may need to be rerouted. It also alters the weight distribution of the ship especially if additions are needed to go above deck to fit the VLS.
Like most things in life it all comes down to $$ and ROI in capabilities.
Good enough is sometimes good enough especially considering they have 052s and 055s being pumped out like hot cakes.
Not likely to happen. The Shtils have a 10 year life, and by now, those originally on the DDG 136 and 137 would have expired by now. The ones for DDG 138 and 139 will also be expiring soon. The ones for DDG 168 and 169 (Type 052B) would already be expired or close to expiration by now.
Without refits, those ships are all fated to inactivity.
I am not optimistic about whatever they are replacing on the rear deck gun. I don't even think there might be replacements at all.
The second set of Project 956EM that went to China never had any rear deck guns in the first place. They also lost four AK-630s for two Kashtans CIWS forward of the helicopter deck, which is also where they are likely to put Type 1130s on the DDG 136/137 refits. There is also a bulb on the rear, can't say if its radar or satcom. I suppose the rear gun was removed in the design stage to compensate for the two Kashtan CIWS and the bulb.
In the refit, there is also an added Type 364 radar in the form of a bulb, installed on the tall rear mast, so that has its own weight budget.
When it comes time to refit DDG 138 and 139, it would be interesting if they keep or remove the two Kashtans. Replacing them with Type 1130 is more of a sidegrade, likely to yield no combat benefits, other than logistical advantages.