052C/052D Class Destroyers
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Found it. It's more interesting than that(but more logical, tbh)
The transport container is angular, but the launch container is circular, and may very well be old one inside a new outer shell. Which is logical,because no one is going to change hundreds of land TELs without a good reason. This way they gain both conveniences of storage&fitting and compatibility,
Overall - I don't think retaining old launchers will be a big problem.
Previous refits were actually lighter (automatic magazines for rail launchers were complex and heavy). Here we're either adding weight(if trying to fit 48 forward), or cutting inside the ship with unknown complexity - it may very well be undoable.
Basically - if it's possible to achieve the necessary level of tactical compatibility (radars, ECM, coms, and new missiles) - I don't personally think 052Cs even need such a deep refit. They're quite modern ships as they're right now.
It would make sense if you wish to retain the older VLS and simply use the canisters from the land based missile. But I don't see the sense and effort of putting tube canisters into the square canisters as that lengthens the process, and this is likely done at the factory. Which means you still have two separate stock keeping units instead of one.
Even if a round based inner canister is used inside the square canister, it does not assure that this inner tube canister is the same as that used for the land based missile.
The reason why I like to get rid of the circular VLS is that its mechanically complicated, with each VLS requiring its own mini crane to help load the missile. But this disadvantage might still be livable.
An update to the main radars is necessary. Its not an issue of technological obsolescence, even if an AESA design of 20 years old like needs to have some update, but its necessary for parts attrition and wear. In an MLU a lot of things are replaced for new, even if they are identical parts. The older parts are due to expire, simply because wear and tear and electronics do have an expiration.
For an older radar you would have to stockpile all the T/R modules originally used with the radar at the time of its launching. Or you can do is replace the old T/R modules with that of a much more recent radar that's currently in production, as each of the older modules burn out and ran out of supply. So a radar refresh is absolutely necessary from a logistical viewpoint and with the collateral benefit of a big boost from the tactical standpoint, making the refreshed radars much more closer to the performance of the radars used in the latest Type 052D iteration.
So logistically and from a servicing standpoint, it would make sense replacing the modules used on the Type 346 to the modules used in the latest Type 346A subvariant. The replacement operation would take place within the ship itself and no need for dry docking. You can also update the back end electronics. If the newer generation modules perform better than the old one, you have the bonus of the refitted radar to perform superior to the original. Part of an MLU is to bring the ship as close as possible to the same maintenance standard as the other ships (hence why I still think the VLS change needs to happen). This isn't being done for the cost or the tactical viewpoint but from a logistical standpoint. This is why the Project 956E refit is mostly a sidegrade rather than an upgrade and the same goes to the 052B refit.
Personally, I think the Type-052C should retain the radars and existing VLS.
These are the most expensive part of the ship, and should still be highly effective.
And there is already a stockpile of parts and missiles for these ships.
If you want another set of the latest AESA Radars + VLS, they might as well be put on a new hull.
Does anyone know which anti-sub rockets the PLA uses? And how many are carried on each ship?
From what I've read, CY-5 and Yu-8 have appeared on 054As before, fired from the H/AJK16 VLS, while the 052D is also rumoured to carry the CY-5, fired from the UVLS
Is this accurate?
From what I've read, CY-5 and Yu-8 have appeared on 054As before, fired from the H/AJK16 VLS, while the 052D is also rumoured to carry the CY-5, fired from the UVLS
Is this accurate?
Last edited:
Mass combined attacks with disimilar weapons is not a new concept or anything complex really. You launch the supersonics later, all missiles saturate at the same time. Actually, I can think of at least a couple of reasons for wanting to have sub and supersonics together in an ASuW fleet.
If the VLS is indeed changed (I find it less likely than not), it will be mostly done for other reasons.
Yu-8 is in service with 054As. I'm not sure if the CY-5 exists, however we definitely know the Yu-8 exists and is the official PLAN designation of the weapon. If I had to guess, I'd say that CY-5 is either the same weapon as Yu-8, or it was a proposal for the same mission that Yu-8 ended up fulfilling.
We do not know what kind of VL ASROC type weapon the UVLS equipped ships (052D, 055) use yet. It might be Yu-8, might be something else.
steve_rolfe
Junior Member
Looking at the Chinese and English wiki pages.......yes there are quite a few discrepancies on the timetable of the 052D builds, and regarding what will be the 20th 052D to become active, i would go with the Chinese wiki page as it seems more upto date, and has definitely proven to be more reliable than the English version of wiki......anyway the vessel you have mentioned is not listed as entering service, but still being outfitted on English wiki, just because its listed as the 20th vessel, doesn't actually mean it will be the 20th vessel to be commissioned.
The Chinese sure have commissioned quite a few 052D's this year.............i wonder if they will start building anymore batches before 2025, under the current 5 year plan?