Type 055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread


kriss

Junior Member
Registered Member
My hypothesis on the “mystery” of the small-but-advanced-sensors 052Ds is that they aren’t supposed to match anything in the US navy, they’re meant to be doctrine matches for the Japanese Akizukis.
Akizuki don't even have area air defense capability as its role in japanese doctrine is to provide additional local air defense for fleet leaders which are Kongos and Atagos more like Spruance if you have to find a match for it.
 

Biscuits

Junior Member
Registered Member
Akizuki don't even have area air defense capability as its role in japanese doctrine is to provide additional local air defense for fleet leaders which are Kongos and Atagos more like Spruance if you have to find a match for it.
The Spruance doesn’t even have VLS. Or area air defense capability either.

Obviously PLAN ships can’t have the exact same capabilities as JMSDF ships. Japan’s only serious rival at sea is South Korea. I’ll admit the Korean DDGs at least are beautiful designs, but they have what? 3 of them? And 1 helicopter carrier, half the size of Japan’s own.

PLAN on the other hand is expecting a minimum of 3 hostile carrier groups. So the spec requirements would be completely different.

052s having better everything isn’t going to make them any worse than the Akizuki at providing additional defense to fleet destroyers.

Guess we will find out what the relation between 055 and 052 is once they start going on exercises.
 

kriss

Junior Member
Registered Member
The Spruance doesn’t even have VLS. Or area air defense capability either.

Obviously PLAN ships can’t have the exact same capabilities as JMSDF ships. Japan’s only serious rival at sea is South Korea. I’ll admit the Korean DDGs at least are beautiful designs, but they have what? 3 of them? And 1 helicopter carrier, half the size of Japan’s own.

PLAN on the other hand is expecting a minimum of 3 hostile carrier groups. So the spec requirements would be completely different.

052s having better everything isn’t going to make them any worse than the Akizuki at providing additional defense to fleet destroyers.

Guess we will find out what the relation between 055 and 052 is once they start going on exercises.
I'm talking about doctrine wise as intercept/block shots for the VIP body guard role. If US didn't go full aegis you could bet their Spruance replacement would have VLS. The difference between Akizuki and PLAN ships is JMSDF build Akizuki to do one thing which is to protect their precious aegis flagship and all other capability are welcomed addition and that means there are not a single type of ship in PLAN and most (if not all) other navy that's even a remotely doctrine match.
 

Bltizo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
There will certianly be many of them. I don’t buy the US version that these are Ticon style “fleet leaders” simply because China itself designate them DDG, not CG.

They try to contextualize the 052D as a Burke equivalent, but that’s sort of a miss since they’re smaller.

My hypothesis on the “mystery” of the small-but-advanced-sensors 052Ds is that they aren’t supposed to match anything in the US navy, they’re meant to be doctrine matches for the Japanese Akizukis.

These are smaller DDGs that carry very powerful sensor suites but less VLS. Their mission is to defend normal DDGs and act as a force multiplier.

If this hypothesis is true, China will probably build one 055 for every one to two 052s.
Comparison of different ship classes based on their roles within their respective navies makes it difficult to compare ships on their respective capabilities.

Saying whether a ship is intended to "match" a contemporary ship from a different navy makes the mistake of assuming that each navy's ships are intended to serve a similar role or have a similar capability to their contemporary peer.

It also makes the mistake of assuming that for a ship of Navy A to have a similar role to a ship of Navy B, that both ships must have similar capabilities relative to each other. What is more important is the capability that they have within their own Navy.



For the 052D, I believe comparing it to a Burke and an Akizuki is not inappropriate though it is also imperfect.
 

Yellow Submarine

New Member
Registered Member
Comparison of different ship classes based on their roles within their respective navies makes it difficult to compare ships on their respective capabilities.

Saying whether a ship is intended to "match" a contemporary ship from a different navy makes the mistake of assuming that each navy's ships are intended to serve a similar role or have a similar capability to their contemporary peer.

It also makes the mistake of assuming that for a ship of Navy A to have a similar role to a ship of Navy B, that both ships must have similar capabilities relative to each other. What is more important is the capability that they have within their own Navy.



For the 052D, I believe comparing it to a Burke and an Akizuki is not inappropriate though it is also imperfect.
I see the Type 052D's as being more like mini-Burke's than Akizuki equivalents, based on their respective weapon and sensor fits.
 

Yellow Submarine

New Member
Registered Member
The Spruance doesn’t even have VLS. Or area air defense capability either.

Obviously PLAN ships can’t have the exact same capabilities as JMSDF ships. Japan’s only serious rival at sea is South Korea. I’ll admit the Korean DDGs at least are beautiful designs, but they have what? 3 of them? And 1 helicopter carrier, half the size of Japan’s own.

PLAN on the other hand is expecting a minimum of 3 hostile carrier groups. So the spec requirements would be completely different.

052s having better everything isn’t going to make them any worse than the Akizuki at providing additional defense to fleet destroyers.

Guess we will find out what the relation between 055 and 052 is once they start going on exercises.
24 of the 31 Spruance class had their ASROC Mk-112 "pepperbox" launchers replaced with a 61 cell Mk-41 VLS array loaded with a mix of TLAM and VL-ASROC. They still lacked an area air defence capability. The other 7 received a more austere refit, retaining the Mk-112 ASROC launchers while being fitted with two Mk-143 ABL on either side of the Mk-112 launcher.
 

Top