055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[ougoah]

Yeah there's been heaps of media buzz about the Type 45's propulsion woes. Put that down to being relatively novel and experiencing issues. Ford class carriers have had its share of detractors too.

On second viewing of the Aster 15 and 30 missiles, it seems the European destroyers are well outranged by Russian, Chinese, and US SAM ranges. But they are all more or less proportional to size and weight. The ESSM stands out though. USN and PLAN surface to air missiles seem to have similar reach, not counting ABM like SM-3 and HQ-19 and HQ-29 (or whatever the different types are called). PLAN's HHQ-16 at 70km range for its size is slightly underwhelming compared to the ESSM. Not sure if HHQ-16 is quad packable into PLAN's universal VLS.

 

[ougoah]

RN picking a fight with PLAN is a joke. If the capability gap more or less balances out overall, the numbers gap is as wide as the difference between the USN and PLAN. There are 6 Type 052C in service and close to 20 Type 052D - something like 14 or 15 in service and 5 or 6 nearing service. One type 055 in service with 6 being constructed and nearing service at various levels. RN has the F-35 advantage but they are small in number and assuming a fight between PLAN and RN takes place, it would be RN joining a fight in the SCS so the air is going to be absolutely spammed with Chinese fighters while hypersonic missiles home in on imperialist ships. 6 Type 45s and QE carrier will last about twenty minutes in a real fight.

There are dozens of subs hiding around, all sorts of supersonic anti-ship missiles and cruise missiles coming in from ships, subs, bombers, fighters, and land. Dozens of AShBM raining down at hypersonic speeds and smaller obsolete but still relatively modern vessels to sink for USN + RN. Any SCS battle will be fast and brutal. The US will have to pray to all their various gods that their NEMESIS wonder weapon will be as effective in practice. And if somehow PLAN + PLAAF loses, they may as well use tactical nukes to rid the rest of the invading fleets. Doubt the US and UK will escalate further and if they do, it's certain death for everyone. This is why the US will happily have their ships rammed, buzzed, and harassed by Chinese and Russian ships and planes while never daring to fire a single shot unlike the gung ho attitude they have when it came to the Iranians.

 

[Jura The idiot]

Yeah there's been heaps of media buzz about the Type 45's propulsion woes. ...

wow, "media buzz", not the Royal Navy covering up stuff until the beginning of 2016 (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) and then the Royal Navy not fixing one of its prime assets for years (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)?

my imagination of China is this wouldn't have happened there (with, say, Type 055), because the personal risk to those doing coverups, and to those putting off important funding, would've been too high

 

[ougoah]

wow, "media buzz", not the Royal Navy covering up stuff until the beginning of 2016 (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) and then the Royal Navy not fixing one of its prime assets for years (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)?

my imagination of China is this wouldn't have happened there (with, say, Type 055), because the personal risk to those doing coverups, and to those putting off important funding, would've been too high

Let's not speculate on that. It'll invite all sorts of imaginations about corruption etc.

The greatest "issue" I see with PLAN's current surface fleet is the HHQ-16. The ESSM basically achieves a similar range (~70km vs 60km) to the HHQ-16 but does it at nearly half the length, diameter, and weight of the HHQ-16. If PLAN had something equivalent, it'll be able to pack far more missiles for supplementary medium range point defence. Everything else seems to be on par with the best if not actually exceeding them already whether it's radars, EW, ECM, ECCM, HHQ-9, Type 1130, HHQ-10, or the various anti-ship and land attack missiles.

 

[Tam]

Its like comparing apples vs. oranges, but in my opinion, the Type 45 better compares against the Type 052D. However, the Type 052D comes off as more versatile and has greater offensive capability.

How does 055 compare to RN type 45 destroyer?

 

[Blitzo]

Let's not speculate on that. It'll invite all sorts of imaginations about corruption etc.

The greatest "issue" I see with PLAN's current surface fleet is the HHQ-16. The ESSM basically achieves a similar range (~70km vs 60km) to the HHQ-16 but does it at nearly half the length, diameter, and weight of the HHQ-16. If PLAN had something equivalent, it'll be able to pack far more missiles for supplementary medium range point defence. Everything else seems to be on par with the best if not actually exceeding them already whether it's radars, EW, ECM, ECCM, HHQ-9, Type 1130, HHQ-10, or the various anti-ship and land attack missiles.

A quad packed MR SAM has been rumoured to be in advanced development.

The nature of the UVLS being universal and being relatively large in diameter means its flexibility is limited by development of payloads and imagination.

 

[Tam]

Let's not speculate on that. It'll invite all sorts of imaginations about corruption etc.

The greatest "issue" I see with PLAN's current surface fleet is the HHQ-16. The ESSM basically achieves a similar range (~70km vs 60km) to the HHQ-16 but does it at nearly half the length, diameter, and weight of the HHQ-16. If PLAN had something equivalent, it'll be able to pack far more missiles for supplementary medium range point defence. Everything else seems to be on par with the best if not actually exceeding them already whether it's radars, EW, ECM, ECCM, HHQ-9, Type 1130, HHQ-10, or the various anti-ship and land attack missiles.

I never see the 052D fire an HQ-16 missile and so I doubt the 055 has it either. They are likely to leave the gap between the HQ-9 and HQ-10 blank until some quad packed MRSAM will take its place. The size of such a missile would be similar to the Russian Redut/Vityaz/S-350 family, also known as the 9M96 series. These are the primary SAM armament of the Admiral Gorshkov frigates. The longest of these series, the 9M96E2, has a range of up to 120km with the shortest member around 40km. On land, these missiles can be quad packed into a single S-300 canister.

That is like quad packing four Aster 30s into a single VLS. The Asters are the closest thing in the west for these missiles, which by the way, are actively guided like the Asters.
a
If PLAN even wants to do this, they can quad pack 9M96s to fit the RIF-M VLS on the two old Type 051C destroyers.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

As for the HQ-16, what it does have over the ESSM and the Asters is a ginormous 70kg explosive warhead. The ESSM only has 40kg and the Asters around 15kg. The Soviets were compensating their inaccuracy with a bigger splash radius and a higher single take down per hit. The Russian Buk missile which the HQ-16 is based from, is said to have a 17 meter splash radius, got that from an article long ago when one of them took out the MH370 flight. The missile may have a higher rate of acceleration, and is capable of hitting Mach 4.2 at its short distance, namely the 9M317ME Shtil-1 variant (these are used on the Type 052B and the Chinese Sovs.)

 

[Blitzo]

I never see the 052D fire an HQ-16 missile and so I doubt the 055 has it either. They are likely to leave the gap between the HQ-9 and HQ-10 blank until some quad packed MRSAM will take its place. The size of such a missile would be similar to the Russian Redut/Vityaz/S-350 family, also known as the 9M96 series. These are the primary SAM armament of the Admiral Gorshkov frigates. The longest of these series, the 9M96E2, has a range of up to 120km with the shortest member around 40km. On land, these missiles can be quad packed into a single S-300 canister.

That is like quad packing four Aster 30s into a single VLS. The Asters are the closest thing in the west for these missiles, which by the way, are actively guided like the Asters.
a
If PLAN even wants to do this, they can quad pack 9M96s to fit the RIF-M VLS on the two old Type 051C destroyers.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This is off topic, but the Russian Navy uses Redut VLS for its 9M96 family of SAMs. They are not fitted in the circular Rif family of VLS.

The 9M96E and E2 cannot be quad packed in the Redut VLS (they're singular), but the 9M100 SAM can be quad packed in Redut VLS.
The 9M100 family however are more of a SRSAM with a range of about 10km (or 15km, I've seen some conflicting numbers), not an MRSAM

 

[obj 705A]

the type 45 is a good warship & all, but seriously.. comparing the type 45 to the type 055 is an insult to the 055, forget about the 055, even the 052D is supperior (not equall) to the type 45, I won't state the specs of them you can check the wiki or whatever for that, in any case the 052D has 64 universal launchers, more than what the type 45 has, not only that but the 052D's VLS is much larger giving the missiles much greater range than those of the type 45, wether it's air defence or anti ship, due to limited funds the UK has to make their ships "specialized" (ie: they don't have enough money to make their ships multirole).

 

[ougoah]

The Sylver VLS and the Aster 15 and 30s definitely limit the Daring class to air defence but in this field it supposedly is second to none, if range of missiles are ignored. Then again as a purpose designed destroyer to fleet defence, Asters have enough range. The RN's doctrine is similar to the USN's - centred around a carrier fighter wing that can perform various missions. Everything else on the surface is to protest those carriers and perform some limited anti-surface roles itself along with a comprehensive anti-sub warfare in combination with airborne assets. So comparing them truly is inappropriate. Personally I think this doctrine is superior to the "Russian" one which is just spamming the ocean with capital ships armed to the teeth lobbing hundreds of anti-ship missiles with subs performing a secondary role to supplement this effort while countering enemy subs.

We have seen PLAN shift towards the US doctrine since it selected the air defence focused Type 052C over the Type 052B and invest heavily in a strong future carrier fleet with the rest of the surface fleet serving as multirole ships but also primarily air defence eventually, when matured CATOBAR carriers come along with the entire air wing they'll carry. For now PLAN is still very much giving 055's multirole status and they clearly want these heavy destroyers to serve both doctrines well. China's always taken what it considers the best from Russian thinking and combined it with American while mixing its own in too. The perks of catch-up position. The matured Type 055 will probably get quad packed medium range SAMs to add to existing repertoire. Maybe a railgun and ballistic missile defence or ASAT missiles similar to SM-3 as well. That's going to be a Kirov + AB III with a railgun.