055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gelgoog

Brigadier
Registered Member
tamsen_ikard said:
How capable is Type-55 compared to US destroyers in terms of armament?

Can this ship carry quad packed SAM missiles? Without quad packing short-ranged missiles. The number of missile it can carry could be very limited.

What about Tomahawk cruise missile style long range ground attack missile? Is that available?
Click to expand...

The Type 055 has the CJ-10 cruise missile. It can also supposedly quad-pack the DK-10A SAM.
The armament levels should be similar to a US Ticonderoga class cruiser. Let alone a Burke class destroyer. But unlike the Ticonderoga class cruiser these ships are much newer and should have improved electronics and radar than US ships.
 
G

gongolongo

Junior Member
Registered Member
Temstar said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Professor Canrong Jin talking about future of PLA at Hong Kong. He previously revealed the existence of a hypersonic missile with terminal manoeuvrable warhead prior to the 2019 National Day parade which turned out to be DF-17, so I would seriously consider any hints he drop. He said:

1. J-20 is comparable to F-22 and superior to F-35.
2. Type 055 is the most advanced surface warship in the world. Arleigh-Burke class is not comparable to it. Zumwalt is more advanced than 055 in many areas, but in the real world it's in fact useless.
3. Given a few more years, China will have 10+ "cruisers" in service. In this case cruiser is most likely referring to 055 unlike the destroyer designation of PLAN.
4. Given a few more years, China will have 3-4 EMALS CATOBAR carriers in service
5. He seems to believe J-20 will be navalised

In the same panel but not in this video he also said there exists a new advanced road based ICBM that is superior to DF-41.
Click to expand...


1. F-35 is much more multi-faceted with a bigger focus on sensor integration. The J-20 is an interceptor. Head on the J-20 might win in a vacuum but the battlefield is very complex where the F-35 may be able to fight in much better.

2. The 055 is very impressive and very advanced. But China doesn't nearly have as many ships compared to the US. AB and 055 have very different roles. USN is centered around carriers and the AB is focused on AA and defense roles. The 055 is much more multi faceted where it is the central piece of the Chinese navy.
 
G

gelgoog

Brigadier
Registered Member
Considering how quickly China built and launched 8x Type 055 ships I think the US Navy is probably sweating buckets.
The Ticos aren't getting any newer that's for sure.
 
by78

by78

General
Update from Dalian shipyard.

50429417246_34e61a3da3_k.jpg
 
tupolevtu144

tupolevtu144

Junior Member
Registered Member
by78 said:
A few screen captures of interest:
50437463296_2c5cbc5150_o.jpg
Click to expand...
I've always wanted to ask this but I've heard that those "launchers" on the 055, 054A, 052C and 052D (I think they're also fit on several other classes of ships too) can not only launch chaff, smoke and flares but also launch anti-torpedo depth charges (think is strange because the 054A is also fit with RBU launchers) and unguided rockets for shore bombardment and close engagements (firing rockets at nearby enemy ships). From what I've heard those unguided rockets has got frag warheads, anti-armor warheads or high-explosive warheads. Can anyone tell me if this is true?? Also what are the official designations of those launchers (the launchers on 055, 054A, 052C and 052D are generally the same but I can spot some small differences)
 
D

defenceman

Junior Member
Registered Member
Hi all these missile launches operate simultaneously or has to be one by one
usually how they operate with the other navies around the world
if possible to answer by someone with more knowledge
thank you
 
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
tupolevtu144 said:
I've always wanted to ask this but I've heard that those "launchers" on the 055, 054A, 052C and 052D (I think they're also fit on several other classes of ships too) can not only launch chaff, smoke and flares but also launch anti-torpedo depth charges (think is strange because the 054A is also fit with RBU launchers) and unguided rockets for shore bombardment and close engagements (firing rockets at nearby enemy ships). From what I've heard those unguided rockets has got frag warheads, anti-armor warheads or high-explosive warheads. Can anyone tell me if this is true?? Also what are the official designations of those launchers (the launchers on 055, 054A, 052C and 052D are generally the same but I can spot some small differences)
Click to expand...

I may say no to all these.

Those are Type 726-4 Decoy launchers. The way they are labeled makes them part of the EW set and integrated into the EW. The rest of the set are the Type 726-1 ESM, Type 726-2 ESM, and Type 726-3 ECM.

As an EW integrated decoy system, this means the launcher contains different chaff sizes optimized against different frequency bands. If there is an incoming antiship missile, with its active radar seeker homing in on the ship, the ESM would detect the threat radar signal, analyze it, then determine which chaff it would use among the menu of choices based on the frequency the missile radar uses.

So far two decoys are identifiable and I think that besides chaff, the other is an active decoy. An active decoy contains a battery and a radio transmitter. What an active decoy does is that the ESM takes the radar signal of the threat, makes a copy and programs it to the active decoy to generate the same signal to mimic the radar echoes from the ship. The missile is spoofed into taking the decoy's signal instead of its original echoes.

All these launchers are the same with the 055 getting the stealth treatment. They are also present in the Liaoning, Shandong and Type 075. The refits on the Shenzhen and the Sovremennys also feature them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top