Type 054B/next generation FFG thread


Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
None of them could have any serious issue in design but the all-new IEP system could.

Huh? What makes you think that an IEP system could? You are referring to a country that appeared to have taken a global lead in electromagnetics, ranging from MAGLEVs to railguns to EM catapults to EVs. As I said, if the PLAN thinks its going to have trouble, they will not install on the ship. Whatever technical advantages IEP is, is not going to outweigh the disruption of their building schedules. They will install it on the 054B only if it is ready. The IEP system will have to be proven itself, either on the ground, on test platforms, and on test ships, before it will be on the 054B. You will be foolish to assume the 054B will be used as a test ship itself. By the way, IEP itself is not shown to be a problem with on the Daring class, it is the cooling equipment on the ship that failed. Cooling is critical on destroyers with AESA, such as the Daring, and its going to be more so when the 055 not only has panels larger than any ship, but it also has a second set, not to mention its communications and EW are also set in flat array form. This is a tremendous amount of RF and EMF the 055 is emitting with all the possibilities for interference. IEP isn't the problem on the Zumwalt either but it has issues with its radars. These two cases illustrate where a ship can potentially fail, never mind that it took years for the 052C radars to fix its problems, for the AEGIS to work with littorals, years to fix the Admiral Gorshkov's radars and fire control system, this being Russia's most modern warship.

The 075 happens to be the country's first ever LHD, second flat top, and the first to be built by this shipyard which has no experience in building flat tops. Its a risky move there that they are already building the third without having to wait for the first to be commissioned.
 
Last edited:

blindsight

Junior Member
Registered Member
Huh? What makes you think that an IEP system could? You are referring to a country that appeared to have taken a global lead in electromagnetics, ranging from MAGLEVs to railguns to EM catapults to EVs. As I said, if the PLAN thinks its going to have trouble, they will not install on the ship. Whatever technical advantages IEP is, is not going to outweigh the disruption of their building schedules. They will install it on the 054B only if it is ready. The IEP system will have to be proven itself, either on the ground, on test platforms, and on test ships, before it will be on the 054B. You will be foolish to assume the 054B will be used as a test ship itself. By the way, IEP itself is not shown to be a problem with on the Daring class, it is the cooling equipment on the ship that failed. Cooling is critical on destroyers with AESA, such as the Daring, and its going to be more so when the 055 not only has panels larger than any ship, but it also has a second set, not to mention its communications and EW are also set in flat array form. This is a tremendous amount of RF and EMF the 055 is emitting with all the possibilities for interference. IEP isn't the problem on the Zumwalt either but it has issues with its radars. These two cases illustrate where a ship can potentially fail, never mind that it took years for the 052C radars to fix its problems, for the AEGIS to work with littorals, years to fix the Admiral Gorshkov's radars and fire control system, this being Russia's most modern warship.

The 075 happens to be the country's first ever LHD, second flat top, and the first to be built by this shipyard which has no experience in building flat tops. Its a risky move there that they are already building the third without having to wait for the first to be commissioned.
Of course it could, just as any untested new design. The IEP system on Zumwalt did cause some trouble, although that won't happen in the Chinese design, since the issue was associated with AC distribution. But there's no guarantee DC distribution won't have its specific problem. Even Ma himself said it wasn't a mature tech yet.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Of course it could, just as any untested new design. The IEP system on Zumwalt did cause some trouble, although that won't happen in the Chinese design, since the issue was associated with AC distribution. But there's no guarantee DC distribution won't have its specific problem. Even Ma himself said it wasn't a mature tech yet.

Yet to what amount of trouble? Big? Small? Unresolved? The Zumwalt itself is already long past that, and its been going around to a few places. Yet compare that to its radars which we have not heard news since.

If Ma thinks its not a mature tech yet, the PLAN won't put it on the 054B. What is so hard for you to understand? That the PLAN is obligated to put untested tech on a mission critical platform? They can decide not too. They have no obligation to put it on the 054B if it isn't mature. Next generation frigate is such a strategically important platform that they should want zero risk to it. Do you think they are so set in stone that 054B must absolutely have IEP? No it is not and decision making has to be flexible to say we can't do this, we can't accept this, let's go with the proven method instead. If IEP is not mature, the 054B is going in with conventional diesel approaches. The thing is, they have a schedule and they will maintain it. They need to have an X number of ships by this year and this year and it needs to be done.

Read up what went on with the Constellation class FFG. The RFIP calls for an existing mature and proven platform. The USN actually wanted something that was already designed and placed in the water as opposed to designing from scratch. They wanted zero risk. They don't want to experiment any longer.
 
Last edited:

Gloire_bb

Senior Member
Registered Member
If Ma thinks its not a mature tech yet, the PLAN won't put it on the 054B
New hull/propulsion plant isn't some video game "research accomplished" combination.
It's inherently quite risky.

Canonical case a german ww2 ship propulsion - which, contrary to common belief, was seen as mature enough, was reasonably tested both on land and civilian ships(and worked there well!). The "only" thing was it wasn't really tested on warships(KM had no time to do it) - and this small detail alone crippled Kriegsmarine for the whole ww2.
Next generation frigate is such a strategically important platform that they should want zero risk to it.
Zero risk is raft with the sail - and it won't buy you maritime parity with the US.
In a by default tech-intensive fighting domain(which seas 100% are), you take calculated risks and take risk-mitigation measures.
And contrary to beliefs of many, such measures don't mean that country x "isn't a leader in field y".
Irresponsible behavior with public money is a sign of political whatsoever meddling, not of a solid innovation process.
 

KampfAlwin

Junior Member
Registered Member
Yet to what amount of trouble? Big? Small? Unresolved? The Zumwalt itself is already long past that, and its been going around to a few places. Yet compare that to its radars which we have not heard news since.

If Ma thinks its not a mature tech yet, the PLAN won't put it on the 054B. What is so hard for you to understand? That the PLAN is obligated to put untested tech on a mission critical platform? They can decide not too. They have no obligation to put it on the 054B if it isn't mature. Next generation frigate is such a strategically important platform that they should want zero risk to it. Do you think they are so set in stone that 054B must absolutely have IEP? No it is not and decision making has to be flexible to say we can't do this, we can't accept this, let's go with the proven method instead. If IEP is not mature, the 054B is going in with conventional diesel approaches. The thing is, they have a schedule and they will maintain it. They need to have an X number of ships by this year and this year and it needs to be done.

Read up what went on with the Constellation class FFG. The RFIP calls for an existing mature and proven platform. The USN actually wanted something that was already designed and placed in the water as opposed to designing from scratch. They wanted zero risk. They don't want to experiment any longer.
I mean, that's why they're building more 54As right? In case the 54B has some problems that needs fixing. What's the point of not introducing IEPS and other new tech if you're just going to build more 54As?
 

blindsight

Junior Member
Registered Member
Yet to what amount of trouble? Big? Small? Unresolved? The Zumwalt itself is already long past that, and its been going around to a few places. Yet compare that to its radars which we have not heard news since.

If Ma thinks its not a mature tech yet, the PLAN won't put it on the 054B. What is so hard for you to understand? That the PLAN is obligated to put untested tech on a mission critical platform? They can decide not too. They have no obligation to put it on the 054B if it isn't mature. Next generation frigate is such a strategically important platform that they should want zero risk to it. Do you think they are so set in stone that 054B must absolutely have IEP? No it is not and decision making has to be flexible to say we can't do this, we can't accept this, let's go with the proven method instead. If IEP is not mature, the 054B is going in with conventional diesel approaches. The thing is, they have a schedule and they will maintain it. They need to have an X number of ships by this year and this year and it needs to be done.

Read up what went on with the Constellation class FFG. The RFIP calls for an existing mature and proven platform. The USN actually wanted something that was already designed and placed in the water as opposed to designing from scratch. They wanted zero risk. They don't want to experiment any longer.
The Zumwalt-Class have got some problems with harmonic filters, which limited the system power. I think that was not a minor issue.

Any tech break-through can't be called mature before fully tested. So, you suggest PLAN never try any new tech or what? Thet have to try IEP at certain point one day. And when they do that, they may do it in a conservative way. I'm not saying I'm sure about anything related to 054B. Neither do you. So, just wait and see.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
New hull/propulsion plant isn't some video game "research accomplished" combination.
It's inherently quite risky.

Canonical case a german ww2 ship propulsion - which, contrary to common belief, was seen as mature enough, was reasonably tested both on land and civilian ships(and worked there well!). The "only" thing was it wasn't really tested on warships(KM had no time to do it) - and this small detail alone crippled Kriegsmarine for the whole ww2.

Zero risk is raft with the sail - and it won't buy you maritime parity with the US.
In a by default tech-intensive fighting domain(which seas 100% are), you take calculated risks and take risk-mitigation measures.
And contrary to beliefs of many, such measures don't mean that country x "isn't a leader in field y".
Irresponsible behavior with public money is a sign of political whatsoever meddling, not of a solid innovation process.

Excuse me? Maybe that's what the Kriegsmarine decided due to the urgency of war, but may not be what the PLAN decided.

How is this related with direct maritime parity with the US? Look at all the Chinese space programs, they are not meant to go chase to chase, toe to toe with the US. The Chinese space program doesn't operate like the Soviet Union's. Instead, they proceed at their own pace, based on what's achievable with them. That actually leads to some incredibly successful results. Look at the 003. Its not meant to directly match the US either. Despite all the advantages of nuclear, they went conventional, has one elevator and one catapult less. They do what is achievable. Smaller, achievable steps being done more numerously can get you farther than a few bold steps that would sometimes fail miserably, even catastrophically. Every step forward is a plus.

Regardless of what's going into the 054B, the PLAN will do what is achievable for them. They will be the ones to judge if IEPS is mature or not to go into the ship. If the 054B is a green, this is not going to be some kind of test platform like the 052 or the Han class that they have to fix and refit over and over again. Those days are long over for the PLAN. When the 054B launches, she will be straight off a reliable mission critical ship.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
I mean, that's why they're building more 54As right? In case the 54B has some problems that needs fixing. What's the point of not introducing IEPS and other new tech if you're just going to build more 54As?

I don't believe they are building 054As because they think 054Bs are going to be faulty. The parallel production of 052C/052D, 055/052D, 056/056A, don't suggest that.

Its possible they already inked an existing contract for the 20 054A prior to validating the 054B. The reason why 20 054A was inked in the first place, could have been because of the cancellation and reset of an earlier 054B plan. This led to a gap that the PLAN rushed to fill by signing this 20 ship contract. Then the "reset" 054B came out faster and was validated sooner than expected. The parallel production of ships like the 052C/052D and 056/056A comes from contract overlap, an existing contract that you have to finish and a new contract that you just signed.

In any case I would also expect the 20 054A to have improvements batch by batch if existing contracts allow for revisions.
 

blindsight

Junior Member
Registered Member
Excuse me? Maybe that's what the Kriegsmarine decided due to the urgency of war, but may not be what the PLAN decided.

How is this related with direct maritime parity with the US? Look at all the Chinese space programs, they are not meant to go chase to chase, toe to toe with the US. The Chinese space program doesn't operate like the Soviet Union's. Instead, they proceed at their own pace, based on what's achievable with them. That actually leads to some incredibly successful results. Look at the 003. Its not meant to directly match the US either. Despite all the advantages of nuclear, they went conventional, has one elevator and one catapult less. They do what is achievable. Smaller, achievable steps being done more numerously can get you farther than a few bold steps that would sometimes fail miserably, even catastrophically. Every step forward is a plus.

Regardless of what's going into the 054B, the PLAN will do what is achievable for them. They will be the ones to judge if IEPS is mature or not to go into the ship. If the 054B is a green, this is not going to be some kind of test platform like the 052 or the Han class that they have to fix and refit over and over again. Those days are long over for the PLAN. When the 054B launches, she will be straight off a reliable mission critical ship.
Nobody can decide whether an all-new tech is mature or not without fully testing it. For the new DC-based IEP, you can't 二even find a single surface combatant in any part of the world. According to your logic, PLAN will never try it since it'll never turn mature.
 

Gloire_bb

Senior Member
Registered Member
Excuse me? Maybe that's what the Kriegsmarine decided due to the urgency of war, but may not be what the PLAN decided.
Kriegsmarine example was just an illustration of a "research complete" approach.

Instead, they proceed at their own pace,
Everyone does his development at their own pace.
It doesn't matter if China creates nuclear carriers or conventional ones, this goes beyond length measuring context. China is clearly creating a system of systems capable of taking on a similar US ecosystem.
For it, there are technologies that lie on a key path, and there are technologies that lie on a secondary path.
Nuclear/conventional propulsion for carrier doesn't lie on a critical path for China right now - and probably will never will; it's a question of optimization as of now. IEPs for frigates, though probably actually does, because whole investment into carrier battle forces has to be able to deal with US sea denial assets (read - the huge fleet of Virginias).
For this, frigates have to be capable of properly listening at higher speeds - if possible, right to the point where towed array itself becomes deaf. Because CSG at combat needs (not just "good to have") these speeds, and it needs them continuously.

US are cheating here, because they can get higher silent speeds off the shelf (+need is lower, to begin with - their opponents rely on different means of attack).
 

Top