Type 056 Class Opv/corvette


Lethe

Senior Member
Ok there are two different discussions here: the merits of additional box launchers on 056/A and the merits of a significantly larger frigate with additional capabilities such as a helicopter hangar, greater endurance, additional equipment, etc. But let's just stick with the first issue as raised by daifo.

I think that 056A should have additional box launchers because the current four only allows for two each of Yu-11 and YJ-83, and this is insufficient for a combat vessel. If you want these munitions at all, you want more than two of each, for the same reason that you don't see armed police carrying guns with only one or two bullets. You either don't carry a gun at all or you carry enough ammunition so as to respond, if necessary, to a real-world situation that calls for their use. Of course the alternative is to leave one munition type home and carry four YJ-83 or Yu-11 alone, but that presents its own problems, i.e. lack of operational flexibility in a fluid tactical environment. If that is the only answer, it would seem most sensible to run with four Yu-11s and leave the YJ-83s at home, at least for the 056As.

We are not talking about changing the mission profile of the ship or making changes that significantly increase total lifecycle cost. Increasing from the current four to even six or eight cells is a minimal cost change that significantly increases the ship's ability to fulfil the roles already assigned to it.
 
Last edited:

Tam

Major
Registered Member
Ok there are two different discussions here: the merits of additional box launchers on 056/A and the merits of a significantly larger frigate with additional capabilities such as a helicopter hangar, greater endurance, additional equipment, etc. But let's just stick with the first issue as raised by daifo.

I think that 056A should have additional box launchers because the current four only allows for two each of Yu-11 and YJ-83, and this is insufficient for a combat vessel. If you want these munitions at all, you want more than two of each, for the same reason that you don't see armed police carrying guns with only one or two bullets. You either don't carry a gun at all or you carry enough ammunition so as to respond, if necessary, to a real-world situation that calls for their use. Of course the alternative is to leave one munition type home and carry four YJ-83 or Yu-11 alone, but that presents its own problems, i.e. lack of operational flexibility in a fluid tactical environment. If that is the only answer, it would seem most sensible to run with four Yu-11s and leave the YJ-83s at home, at least for the 056As.

We are not talking about changing the mission profile of the ship or making changes that significantly increase total lifecycle cost. Increasing from the current four to even six or eight cells is a minimal cost change that significantly increases the ship's ability to fulfil the roles already assigned to it.
You already have an existing proposal for a corvette with 8 missile launchers, essentially a slightly larger 056A. Apparently rejected by the PLAN for their own internal reasons and rebanked into an export project.

Once again. Its been considered. And rejected. There might be a reason why we don't know or not sure about, but there is one the PLAN isn't beholden to inform to outsiders
 

Lethe

Senior Member
You already have an existing proposal for a corvette with 8 missile launchers, essentially a slightly larger 056A. Apparently rejected by the PLAN for their own internal reasons and rebanked into an export project.

Once again. Its been considered. And rejected. There might be a reason why we don't know or not sure about, but there is one the PLAN isn't beholden to inform to outsiders
The changes from 056 to P18N are much larger and have an entirely different cost/benefit structure compared to simply adding another two or four box cells. PLAN rejecting an enlarged type along the lines of P18N has no bearing on the merits of adding an additional two or four cells. Additional box cells would provide a significant increase in capability or flexibility at minimal cost and with minimal design change. Nobody is talking about also adding a hangar or more AAW armament or ESM equipment or whatever.

I happen to think that a 2500-3000 ton frigate providing first-rate ASW capabilities in an affordable package would be a very useful asset for PLAN. But that is separate and additional to the prospect of additional box cells for 056. P18N would not be a suitable platform for such a project first and foremost owing to lack of speed. F-22P is much closer but a clean-sheet design would be preferable.
 

AndrewS

Major
Registered Member
I happen to think that a 2500-3000 ton frigate providing first-rate ASW capabilities in an affordable package would be a very useful asset for PLAN. But that is separate and additional to the prospect of additional box cells for 056. P18N would not be a suitable platform for such a project first and foremost owing to lack of speed. F-22P is much closer but a clean-sheet design would be preferable.
The Type-056A already has a first class ASW sensor suite.
And it is acknowledged that the best weapon against a submarine is a helicopter or ASW aircraft.

So you would expect the Type-056A to work with these airborne platforms, which are launched from elsewhere.

Speed is not an issue for patrol, escort and ASW duty.
 

Lethe

Senior Member
Speed matters for transiting to an area of interest, being able to reposition much faster than the submarine can quietly and so constricting their options for tactical maneuver and approach, and the ability to use "sprint and drift" escort techniques. I am talking 30-35 knot speed here, nothing ludicrous. Look at top speeds for warships that were designed first and foremost for anti-submarine warfare like Grisha/Krivak/Udaloy, Perry/Spruance, Type 22/23, Shirane/Hyuga: all >30 knots.

A lack of an organic ASW helicopter is acceptable for a short range, low endurance ship like 056A that will always be operating under land-based air cover, but not for a vessel intended to operate further out and for longer durations.

I believe that such a 2500-3000 ton ASW frigate would be distinct enough from 054A to serve alongside it, but I should note that I conceive of such a vessel as one element in a notional future fleet structure that evolves to include a larger (and yes, faster) oceangoing ASW frigate succeeding the 054 series.
 
Last edited:

gelgoog

Senior Member
Registered Member
I don't think China has a need for something like that. The Type 056 is already a pretty decent design, it is a corvette, not a frigate.
If anything they seem to be moving towards the other direction, by replacing the 30mm cannons with 14mm machine guns. Which personally I think is a mistake but still. Unlike Russia which seems to stuff its corvettes to the gills with weapons because they have no larger ships and their shipyards suck, China has plenty of modern frigates and destroyers. The Type 056 is an OPV.
 

Eurofighter

New Member
Ok there are two different discussions here: the merits of additional box launchers on 056/A and the merits of a significantly larger frigate with additional capabilities such as a helicopter hangar, greater endurance, additional equipment, etc. But let's just stick with the first issue as raised by daifo.

I think that 056A should have additional box launchers because the current four only allows for two each of Yu-11 and YJ-83, and this is insufficient for a combat vessel. If you want these munitions at all, you want more than two of each, for the same reason that you don't see armed police carrying guns with only one or two bullets. You either don't carry a gun at all or you carry enough ammunition so as to respond, if necessary, to a real-world situation that calls for their use. Of course the alternative is to leave one munition type home and carry four YJ-83 or Yu-11 alone, but that presents its own problems, i.e. lack of operational flexibility in a fluid tactical environment. If that is the only answer, it would seem most sensible to run with four Yu-11s and leave the YJ-83s at home, at least for the 056As.

We are not talking about changing the mission profile of the ship or making changes that significantly increase total lifecycle cost. Increasing from the current four to even six or eight cells is a minimal cost change that significantly increases the ship's ability to fulfil the roles already assigned to it.
056 was never meant to operate far away from the shore or being the one to hand out the killing blow. In an actual shooting war it will most likely remain comfortably under the cover of land-based aircraft and coastal missile batteries. Its main mission will be to secure/guard the littorals, allowing larger combatants to do the actual fighting. Alternatively, within the 1st island chain, it could be deployed under the guidance of larger destroyers to swarm/bait/distract the enemy as to create opportunities for other units to strike. If a 056 ever finds itself needing more that 2-4 Yu-11 or YJ-83 then there is something seriously wrong with your war fighting strategy.
 
Last edited:

Tam

Major
Registered Member
The changes from 056 to P18N are much larger and have an entirely different cost/benefit structure compared to simply adding another two or four box cells. PLAN rejecting an enlarged type along the lines of P18N has no bearing on the merits of adding an additional two or four cells. Additional box cells would provide a significant increase in capability or flexibility at minimal cost and with minimal design change. Nobody is talking about also adding a hangar or more AAW armament or ESM equipment or whatever.

I happen to think that a 2500-3000 ton frigate providing first-rate ASW capabilities in an affordable package would be a very useful asset for PLAN. But that is separate and additional to the prospect of additional box cells for 056. P18N would not be a suitable platform for such a project first and foremost owing to lack of speed. F-22P is much closer but a clean-sheet design would be preferable.
The P18N isn't much larger, its only 300 tons larger, from 1500 to 1800 tons. Its the same ship with 8 ASMs and a hanger added, with the length only extended by 5 meters from 90 to 95. I honestly don't know what the hell you are talking about. You seem to think that the PLAN hasn't already considered this from the start.

Yet you are talking about a 2500 ton ship, which is from 1500 tons, an additional 1000 tons. That's exactly what the 053H3 are, and you are recasting for a new mission and a new ship entirely. By the way, this 2500 ton ship, which the 053H3 is, is around 130 meters.
 

Tam

Major
Registered Member
Speed matters for transiting to an area of interest, being able to reposition much faster than the submarine can quietly and so constricting their options for tactical maneuver and approach, and the ability to use "sprint and drift" escort techniques. I am talking 30-35 knot speed here, nothing ludicrous. Look at top speeds for warships that were designed first and foremost for anti-submarine warfare like Grisha/Krivak/Udaloy, Perry/Spruance, Type 22/23, Shirane/Hyuga: all >30 knots.

A lack of an organic ASW helicopter is acceptable for a short range, low endurance ship like 056A that will always be operating under land-based air cover, but not for a vessel intended to operate further out and for longer durations.

I believe that such a 2500-3000 ton ASW frigate would be distinct enough from 054A to serve alongside it, but I should note that I conceive of such a vessel as one element in a notional future fleet structure that evolves to include a larger (and yes, faster) oceangoing ASW frigate succeeding the 054 series.
On the contrary, when subs are in the quietest, in their tactical mode, they only operate around 5 to 10 knots. Subs are not that quiet at over 20 knots, much less 30 knots. Another problem with fast ships is that their propellers will surely cavitate at speed, and that amount of noise is going to give away where the ship is to its submarine enemy, while the cavitation noises will reduce the effectivity of the towed arrays.

Grisha, Krivak, Udaloy, these ships have gas turbines to give them that snuff. One has to consider that the Russians or the Soviets have the resources to build gas turbines, so that even their small Tarantul class missile corvettes have tiny gas turbines. Gas turbine production in China appears way more limited and is rationed, so in order to put more hulls to the sea, you have to resort to slower diesel engines. If you look at the Grisha's successor, the Gepard class, that too is powered by a gas turbine, even when its only a 1500 ton ship. Having more powerful engines allow the Gepard to be more heavily armed (it has eight antiship missiles) for the same weight as the 056 with a slightly greater maximum speed of 28 knots, but it may also come at a higher cost per ship.

If they wanted a 2500 tons ASW frigate the PLAN could have evolved one from the 053 base, as they did with the C28 for Algeria and the F22P for Pakistan. But in the open sea, such a ship would be vulnerable to air attack. Grisha, Krivak and Udaloy, all have bad air defenses, mainly confined to close quarters. All the ships you mentioned, either only have close range defenses, or are limited in the numbers they can engage. For aerial protection, they would incur the cost of AAW ships protecting them, hence the Udaloy with the Sovremenny and the Slavas, the Type 22/23 with the Type 42 (ironically called a destroyer despite its a smaller displacement). Creating a specialized ship that requires another specialized ship to protect them sounds like an inefficient investment, you will simply go back to the notion of a single multirole vessel that has both adequate AAW and ASW ability for a multirole utility that can defend itself both air and underwater.

All you have to see is how the Krivak itself evolved, from an ASW specialized frigate then to the Talwar and finally the Admiral Grigorovich class, and in doing so, picked up considerable AAW abilities, turning itself in a fully rounded multirole frigate.

You can see how the modernization refits of the Udaloy went. The last version of the Udaloy traded its ASW missiles for Moskits, turning it into an antiship warship, and the modernization mid life update on another Udaloy, traded its ASW Silex missiles for eight Switchblade antiship missiles and VLS cells for Kalibr.
 
Last edited:

daifo

Junior Member
Registered Member
From a few examples of the YJ-83 being used, maybe it is the operator (being rebels), but it seems that it taking a ship out is pretty low. Whether if it actually it hit a ship , the ship is still operational or the ecm of the ship is able to deflect the missile. Hence, why i think that a larger saturation attack is needed when meeting an advance adversary. Context:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Top