China to export Type 052D destroyers, signalling more advanced ships in the pipeline: analyst

[xuxu1457]

The price may be under $1 billion.

 

[casual]

The price may be under $1 billion.

no way. $2.5billion min

 

[FuturePAF]

If the Type 076 is meant to be a medium carrier, it would be better if it was build like the French Charles de Gaulle carrier, a 42,500 ton ship. A slightly larger design would be necessary if the ship is not going to be nuclear.

Two catapults on a modestly sized ship, that can launch fixed wing AWACS planes. It seems to be being considered by other PLA watchers as a possible inspiration for the Type 076, if my understanding the following video is correct. 3:26 onwards?

A smaller version of the Type 003 would probably be the best option, in my amateur opinion. Something in the 50-60,000 ton range (similar in size to the Type 002 Shandong) would probably be large enough to get the benefits of a major carrier (CATOBAR with fixed AWACS) while being small enough that they could be built in a shipyard other then the one building Type 003 class carriers.

If the PLAN is to be close to parity with the USN, it will need a mix of 15-20 medium and super carriers; so a force of at least 8 medium carrier and 8 super carrier would probably be what the PLAN will need by 2050.

A 60,000 ton carrier would probably also be a great export product for countries like Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and Russia (which had intended to procure the Mistral and also needs a replacement for its Kuznetov Carrier)


So the best design that meets the need to still be an LHD it large enough to project significant power and still be conventionally powered, would be a CATOBAR variant of the queen elizabeth class like the one France was studying; but instead of 75,000 tons, still staying working the 60,000 ton size of the queen elizabeth.

This design was called the PA2 or DAEC carrier

Whatever happened to France’s Queen Elizabeth twin, the DEAC aircraft carrier?

In the lead up to the formalised design of the Royal Navy's Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers, then design partner DCNS, now Naval Group presented a medium-sized, conventionally powered aircr

www.defenceconnect.com.au

French aircraft carrier PA2 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

View attachment 919049

Found a video of the design. An LHD version of this design would probably complement the Saudi Type 052DE very well.

The Turks may also be interested in a 60k ton carrier, especially if they acquire the J-10 and want to put the T-FX on a Carrier.

The Brazilians would also love such a design considering how large their country is and the need to police their EEZ and possibly deal with a contingency vis a vi Venezuela. Acquisition of the Type 052DE would also be a good addition for the Brazilians as well. In fact the French had proposed an earlier version of this design to the Brazilians in 2008.

The Brazilian requirement (according to Proceedings: The Official Journal of the US Navy) was for a 50,000-60,000 ton carrier with dimensions of approx. 290 meters long, 8 degree angled deck, 2 bow cats, 1 waist cat, 2 edge lifts, and a hanger deck instead of a well deck and ramps.

An article on this design:

DCNS Evolved Aircraft Carrier (DEAC) / Deuxième Porte-Avions / DPA / PA2 - Background

www.globalsecurity.org

DCNS Evolved Aircraft Carrier (DEAC)​

The permanence of availability that had characterized the French naval fleet is no longer possible with a single carrier. To re-establish this permanence of availability, a second aircraft carrier would have to be available. It was one of the discreet stars of the Euronaval fair on 30 October 2010. The new "PA2" was unveiled at the DCNS booth, the result of work by DCNS and STX France since the abandonment of the Franco-British aircraft carrier project in June 2008. The general design of the vessel was reminiscent of the "Juliette" project, initiated by DCNS before a cooperation agreement was signed by London and Paris in March 2006.

Displayed in February 2014, the DCNS Evolved Aircraft Carrier (DEAC) was compatible with all CTOL aircraft (including Airborne Early Warning aircraft) and features the latest technologies including cutting-edge Combat System (SETIS®), UAV integration, advanced conventional propulsion and state-of-the-art platform stabilisation system (SATRAP/COGITE). It would provided power projection, sea control and air defence and based on French Navy CVN Charles de Gaulle's combat proven design and aviation system, In addition to the design, DCNS offered customised transfer of technology, material packages, dedicated infrastructures development (i.e. naval base and construction/maintenance shipyard) as well as life support solutions.

The question of choosing the propulsion for the second aircraft carrier (PA 2) is anything but settled. Proponents of classic and nuclear propulsion launch and revive studies. Professor Coutau-Bégarie emphasizes an affec for the very powerful atom (Hervé Coutau-Bégarie, "The problem of the second aircraft carrier", Revue de Défense nationale, July 2003, pp. 135-144). The choice of such a propulsion, in addition to submarines (SNA and SNLE), for surface vessels goes back to the PA58, the draft of an atomic-powered cruiser and the two PH75.

The displacement of the PA2 is 59,000 tons at full load. This building is therefore less heavy than the French version of the CVF previously studied (65,000 tons). However, the capacities in the carriage of aircraft are identical, with infrastructures sized for 32 Rafale, 3 Hawkeye and 5 helicopters. This design benefits from the previous one of an improved form of hull. In general, the boat has been optimized to meet the needs of the French Navy, but also with a very strong cost reduction perspective.

Officially, no figure is given but, a reduced cost of approximately 20% was expected. Efforts were focused on the budget required for the implementation phase, But also on operation, with reduced maintenance and a restricted crew thanks to automation. Thus, the crew of the PA2 was given as 1690 people, of which only 900 for the driving of the ship. This represented a significant decrease compared to the Charles de Gaulle. Although smaller (261 meters, 42,000 tons) and carrying fewer aircraft, the current French aircraft carrier is armed by just under 2,000 people (including the on-board air group).

The PA2 had two boilers to power two 90-meter steam catapults. Not yet mature and probably more expensive, the concept of electromagnetic catapults, designed to equip the new American carriers, was not retained. The model presented by DCNS and STX adopted an all-electric propulsion, with three diesel-alternators, a gas turbine and three electric propulsion motors. The whole develops 85MW, of which 64 MW for the only propulsion, which must allow the carrier to spin at 26 knots. In the event of damage to one of these shafts, the concept of three lines allows a speed of 20 knots to be maintained, which is sufficient to accommodate a large Hawkeye-type aircraft despite strong constraints (wind and with the device inoperative).

For French manufacturers, the new PA2 design is the best compromise between the French industrial capabilities, the cost constraints of the Ministry of Defense and the operational requirements of the navy. Simple and robust, using as much as possible civil technologies ("COTS" equipment on shelves), this PA2 revisited uses maximum reliability materials. This is particularly the case for radars, with the use of Herakles, already chosen for the 11 future multi-mission frigates (FREMM) of the French Navy. There is also above the bridge a SMART-S type surveillance radar, sold by Thales to many navies. The self-defense system is also limited to two quadruple launchers for Aster 15 missiles and small-caliber tele-operated artillery. The cost constraints of the Department of Defense and the operational requirements of the Navy.

The draft budget for 2012 envisaged the preparation of the next major stop of the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle. The second major technical stop the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, in 2016-2017, requires provision already long-term supply, hence the mention in the draft budget law for 2012, and which is found in the following years.

If the decision was taken in 2012 and new studies are launched, it is hard to imagine that the construction plans will be ready by 2015 at best. It will then be necessary to count a minimum of 7 and a half years, the incompressible duration currently estimated for the construction, until the ship is operational. This would bring about the commissioning of the PA2 around 2023, about 25 years after the first outing to the sea of Charles de Gaulle.

 

[jhungary]

Found a video of the design. An LHD version of this design would probably complement the Saudi Type 052DE very well.

The Brazilians would also love such a design considering how large their country is and the need to police their EEZ and possibly deal with a contingency vis a vi Venezuela. Acquisition of the Type 052DE would also be a good addition for the Brazilians as well.

Both Saudi and Brazil would most likely passed on Chinese 052D Export.

First of all, both Navy are quite small, especially for Brazilian navy, both had not operate anything bigger than a Frigate, it would take massive resource to make a jump into Destroyer, RAN (Royal Australian Navy) estimate the switch they made from 8 ANZAC Class Frigate to just 3 Hobart Class Destroyer cost RAN A$20 billions dollars for supply base, upgrade and personnel, while Saudi have the cash, they don't have the base to do them. Brazil don't have the cash.

On the other hand, both countries heavily relying on Western Defence tech, Saudi especially had acquired Mk41 VLS in 2018, unless US is okay to have them put it on Chinese ship, Saudi would have to basically rebuy everything, from VLS to missile and train the crew on a totally different system.

Brazil don't have the know-how, or frankly need to have Destroyer, all South American Navy were small, and they were all dwarfed by one giant navy in the world in the north. Any acquisition of such ship would be a feel-good level, it would be a hanger queen, and I don't think Brazil would be on that stage to just get something to just show off.

 

[jhungary]

no way. $2.5billion min

It isn't gonna sell if China is pricing those 2.5 bil each...

That's more than a

Type 45 Destroyer (1.5 billion GBP/1.7 billion USD each),
Hobart Class Destroyer (3.01 billions AUD/1.98 billion USD each),
Álvaro de Bazán-class Frigate (0.9 billion Euro/1 billion USD each),
Maya Class Destroyer (165 billion Yen/1.2 billion USD each)
SeJong The Great Class Destroyer (0.95 billions USD each)
Horizon Class Destroyer (0.95 billion Euro/1.1 billion USD each)

Even AB class Flight 3 is similar price and a Flight 2 is only 2.2 billion.....

You are expecting a Destroyer from China to sell for more than most Western Destroyer which has the reputation of being a strong Naval export country that China isn't??

 

[FuturePAF]

It isn't gonna sell if China is pricing those 2.5 bil each...

That's more than a

Type 45 Destroyer (1.5 billion GBP/1.7 billion USD each),
Hobart Class Destroyer (3.01 billions AUD/1.98 billion USD each),
Álvaro de Bazán-class Frigate (0.9 billion Euro/1 billion USD each),
Maya Class Destroyer (165 billion Yen/1.2 billion USD each)
SeJong The Great Class Destroyer (0.95 billions USD each)
Horizon Class Destroyer (0.95 billion Euro/1.1 billion USD each)

Even AB class Flight 3 is similar price and a Flight 2 is only 2.2 billion.....

You are expecting a Destroyer from China to sell for more than most Western Destroyer which has the reputation of being a strong Naval export country that China isn't??

If it cost China approx. $500 million to make one, a 50% markup at $750 million maybe a “respectable” price for both seller and buyer. About the same price as a European Frigate.

The Brazilians could consider the destroyer if it’s paired with the medium conventional carrier. Brazilians may still have a desire to put their Gripens on a carrier.

For the Saudis a carrier battle group would allow them to independently blockade Yemen in the Red and Arabian seas or even the Iranian navy coming into the Arabian Sea. The Saudis could also use their battle group to support friends in Libya or protect their and their fellow GCC partner’s oil shipments to East Asia themselves.

The Turks are another potential customer, due to their eastern Mediterranean and global ambitions.

If the 60k ton carrier comes in at approx. $2 Billion, it could be considered a reasonable price acquisition, and it could also open the doorway for sales of J-35s to these countries.

Sure these navies are currently small, but their ambitions are growing.

 

[S10]

no way. $2.5billion min

Nobody is going to buy for 2.5 billion each. That's more costly that Arleigh Burke Flight III

In fact, nobody will touch the ship if it exceeds a billion.

 

[casual]

It isn't gonna sell if China is pricing those 2.5 bil each...

That's more than a

Type 45 Destroyer (1.5 billion GBP/1.7 billion USD each),
Hobart Class Destroyer (3.01 billions AUD/1.98 billion USD each),
Álvaro de Bazán-class Frigate (0.9 billion Euro/1 billion USD each),
Maya Class Destroyer (165 billion Yen/1.2 billion USD each)
SeJong The Great Class Destroyer (0.95 billions USD each)
Horizon Class Destroyer (0.95 billion Euro/1.1 billion USD each)

Even AB class Flight 3 is similar price and a Flight 2 is only 2.2 billion.....

You are expecting a Destroyer from China to sell for more than most Western Destroyer which has the reputation of being a strong Naval export country that China isn't??

yes. Type 052E is stronger than all those destroyers you listed and on par with AB Flight 3. Also, the prices you listed aren't export prices which are normally 50% more expensive. Also, last time I checked, Type 052E is the only Aegis destroyer on the market.

Nobody is going to buy for 2.5 billion each. That's more costly that Arleigh Burke Flight III

In fact, nobody will touch the ship if it exceeds a billion.

dude, Arleigh Burke Fight III is not for sale. And even if it was, it'll probably export for $4 billion.

 

[jhungary]

yes. Type 052E is stronger than all those destroyers you listed and on par with AB Flight 3. Also, the prices you listed aren't export prices which are normally 50% more expensive. Also, last time I checked, Type 052E is the only Aegis destroyer on the market.

The problem is, that's your word, China have never had any sales of advance weaponry with that calibre, it may as well be Type 052D is better than AB3, we don't know, AEGIS system (the heart of AB Class destroyer) was sold 10 times , 0 for the Chinese AGEIS, you can't just say it's better than them all and I expect country to actually buy them. Considering country that can afford that amount of money have other option they can go with, most likely they will ended up buying EU Hull with loaded with AEGIS for half that price you are asking.

I mean, it's like the new Chinese GPU, you can of course claim they are every bit as good as or even better than NVidia or AMD GPU and hence charging $800 for it, but then would people actually buy them is another story.

dude, Arleigh Burke Fight III is not for sale. And even if it was, it'll probably export for $4 billion.

Hence I did not compare it with AB Flight 2 or Flight 3

 

[casual]

The problem is, that's your word, China have never had any sales of advance weaponry with that calibre, it may as well be Type 052D is better than AB3, we don't know, AEGIS system (the heart of AB Class destroyer) was sold 10 times , 0 for the Chinese AGEIS, you can't just say it's better than them all and I expect country to actually buy them. Considering country that can afford that amount of money have other option they can go with, most likely they will ended up buying EU Hull with loaded with AEGIS for half that price you are asking.

I mean, it's like the new Chinese GPU, you can of course claim they are every bit as good as or even better than NVidia or AMD GPU and hence charging $800 for it, but then would people actually buy them is another story.




Hence I did not compare it with AB Flight 2 or Flight 3

They don't have to take China's word for it, Type 052D was in naval exercises with Pakistan right before IDEX and afterwards made a port call to UAE for the public to visit during IDEX

 

[jhungary]

If it cost China approx. $500 million to make one, a 50% markup at $750 million maybe a “respectable” price for both seller and buyer. About the same price as a European Frigate.

The Brazilians could consider the destroyer if it’s paired with the medium conventional carrier. Brazilians may still have a desire to put their Gripens on a carrier.

For the Saudis a carrier battle group would allow them to independently blockade Yemen in the Red and Arabian seas or even the Iranian navy coming into the Arabian Sea. The Saudis could also use their battle group to support friends in Libya or protect their and their fellow GCC partner’s oil shipments to East Asia themselves.

The Turks are another potential customer, due to their eastern Mediterranean and global ambitions.

If the 60k ton carrier comes in at approx. $2 Billion, it could be considered a reasonable price acquisition, and it could also open the doorway for sales of J-35s to these countries.

Sure these navies are currently small, but their ambitions are growingry

Lol, I wish military acquisition is that. simple

Cost will increase exponentially if you start operating a capability you never had before.
Remember when I say RAN ended up forking out 20 billion because they went with 3 Hobart Class rather than getting another 8 (or 9) Hunter Class Frigate. The problem is, you don't just buy the ship and that would be it. You need to think about how you are going to host it, how you are going to raise the crew, how you can service it. Unless you are talking about the ship cost with full TOT, you are going to have to either have China to base their team in Brazil or Saudi or get thew ship back to China to service that sensitive equipment. And then you also need to expand your current capability to service the ship. And finally, you will have to get a brand-new set of Weaponry to goes with those ship.

Those are immense undertaking, and in return for what? Destroyer only useful if you go Blue Water, because you would have more than enough power to just rely on Frigate/Corvette/PT Boat if you only do littoral. Then you would also need to think about gap plugging, AWD or ASWD cannot be operate alone, you need a Hi-Low match, and then you also need to have the capability to retire the entire fleet for service while you go with another fleet. Unless you are doing what the Australian or Japanese are doing, which is in case of war, their Navy would be under direct command of the US Navy, then you can just be part of the team, Brazil and Saudi don't have that, either they would have to go it alone or they can't go at all.

As I said, Brazil don't have the money to do that, and Saudi don't have enough Port to do that, that's why they don't have Destroyer to begin with. There are only 1 country in South America ever operate modern destroyer, ironically that was Argentina and they operate Type 42 (Yes, the same one the UK use and they used to fight each other in Falkland)

Turk would be a better choice rather than Brazil and Saudi, but would NATO be okay with that?? Or rather, would China be okay with their Destroyer to be implemented into NATO standard? I can't see Turk using Chinese Ship unless they leave NATO.

They don't have to take China's word for it, Type 052D was in naval exercises with Pakistan right before IDEX and afterwards made a port call to UAE for the public to visit during IDEX

watching it in exercise is not the same as buying them and use it yourself.....

If Exercise is any par for the course, then I guess US navy should be selling their ship left and right....

 

[casual]

Lol, I wish military acquisition is that. simple

Cost will increase exponentially if you start operating a capability you never had before.
Remember when I say RAN ended up forking out 20 billion because they went with 3 Hobart Class rather than getting another 8 (or 9) Hunter Class Frigate. The problem is, you don't just buy the ship and that would be it. You need to think about how you are going to host it, how you are going to raise the crew, how you can service it. Unless you are talking about the ship cost with full TOT, you are going to have to either have China to base their team in Brazil or Saudi or get thew ship back to China to service that sensitive equipment. And then you also need to expand your current capability to service the ship. And finally, you will have to get a brand-new set of Weaponry to goes with those ship.

Those are immense undertaking, and in return for what? Destroyer only useful if you go Blue Water, because you would have more than enough power to just rely on Frigate/Corvette/PT Boat if you only do littoral. Then you would also need to think about gap plugging, AWD or ASWD cannot be operate alone, you need a Hi-Low match, and then you also need to have the capability to retire the entire fleet for service while you go with another fleet. Unless you are doing what the Australian or Japanese are doing, which is in case of war, their Navy would be under direct command of the US Navy, then you can just be part of the team, Brazil and Saudi don't have that, either they would have to go it alone or they can't go at all.

As I said, Brazil don't have the money to do that, and Saudi don't have enough Port to do that, that's why they don't have Destroyer to begin with. There are only 1 country in South America ever operate modern destroyer, ironically that was Argentina and they operate Type 42 (Yes, the same one the UK use and they used to fight each other in Falkland)

Turk would be a better choice rather than Brazil and Saudi, but would NATO be okay with that?? Or rather, would China be okay with their Destroyer to be implemented into NATO standard? I can't see Turk using Chinese Ship unless they leave NATO.


watching it in exercise is not the same as buying them and use it yourself.....

If Exercise is any par for the course, then I guess US navy should be selling their ship left and right....

US don't have production capability to sell any new ships. And no, no one wants your LCS

 

[jhungary]

US don't have production capability to sell any new ships. And no, no one wants your LCS

Since when did I say US will sell new ship to someone?

US do NOT export any of their Navy ship expect when they decommissioned it, US WILL sell AEGIS system (Either ADM or BDM system) to countries that wanted to use it.

Name me one nation other than US is using any active US ship?? and lol, you have to be naive to a point ignorant to think US did not have capability to sell new ship tho, they don't sell them because they are too advance to sell them. Considering the "New Ship" for US is Arleigh Burke Flight 3, Ford Class Carrier, Zumwalt Class Destroyer and Constellation Class Frigate.....

 

[FuturePAF]

Lol, I wish military acquisition is that. simple

Cost will increase exponentially if you start operating a capability you never had before.
Remember when I say RAN ended up forking out 20 billion because they went with 3 Hobart Class rather than getting another 8 (or 9) Hunter Class Frigate. The problem is, you don't just buy the ship and that would be it. You need to think about how you are going to host it, how you are going to raise the crew, how you can service it. Unless you are talking about the ship cost with full TOT, you are going to have to either have China to base their team in Brazil or Saudi or get thew ship back to China to service that sensitive equipment. And then you also need to expand your current capability to service the ship. And finally, you will have to get a brand-new set of Weaponry to goes with those ship.

Those are immense undertaking, and in return for what? Destroyer only useful if you go Blue Water, because you would have more than enough power to just rely on Frigate/Corvette/PT Boat if you only do littoral. Then you would also need to think about gap plugging, AWD or ASWD cannot be operate alone, you need a Hi-Low match, and then you also need to have the capability to retire the entire fleet for service while you go with another fleet. Unless you are doing what the Australian or Japanese are doing, which is in case of war, their Navy would be under direct command of the US Navy, then you can just be part of the team, Brazil and Saudi don't have that, either they would have to go it alone or they can't go at all.

As I said, Brazil don't have the money to do that, and Saudi don't have enough Port to do that, that's why they don't have Destroyer to begin with. There are only 1 country in South America ever operate modern destroyer, ironically that was Argentina and they operate Type 42 (Yes, the same one the UK use and they used to fight each other in Falkland)

Turk would be a better choice rather than Brazil and Saudi, but would NATO be okay with that?? Or rather, would China be okay with their Destroyer to be implemented into NATO standard? I can't see Turk using Chinese Ship unless they leave NATO.


watching it in exercise is not the same as buying them and use it yourself.....

If Exercise is any par for the course, then I guess US navy should be selling their ship left and right....

This is the evolution of the design the French proposed to the Brazilians, and within the specifications the Brazilians literally stated they wanted, quoting from the journal, Proceedings. They must have had a plan to pay for it. Up until recently they had a carrier. The Brazilians aren’t looking for multiple carriers, but just one carrier. The Brazilians will have to upgrade their support facilities to support the new and large carrier, but it’s not something they are inexperienced doing. Sure the costs will be higher, which maybe why they haven’t procured a new carrier yet.

Also, under the new government in Brazil, I doubt they will procure the carrier, but the navy may still be keeping an eye out for a carrier that fits their needs, and waiting till the government changes to one that will be more open to procuring the carrier.

For the Saudis, it’s probably less of an economic issue and more of a political issue. The Saudis could probably buy an Arleigh Burke or two and afford to service and support them, but I doubt the U.S. would want to sell it to them.

I doubt the Turks would want to buy a Chinese destroyer as they have their TF-2000 destroyer underdevelopment. But they have a LHD and it’s probably too small to have a useful load out of Kizilelma unmanned fighters. It seems to only operate smaller drones. This is where procuring an off the shelf carrier from China or doing a ToT and building it in Turkey would be an attractive option for them.

Russia is probably the best candidate for a customer for this kind of carrier, if China is willing to sell such a platform to them. The Russians no longer have the same shipyards to build more kuznetzov class carriers anymore and were willing to buy the Mistral LHDs from France, so a 60k ton carrier would be a 1:1 replacement for their current problematic carrier

 

[jhungary]

This is the evolution of the design the French proposed to the Brazilians, and within the specifications the Brazilians literally stated they wanted, quoting from the journal, Proceedings. They must have had a plan to pay for it. Up until recently they had a carrier. The Brazilians aren’t looking for multiple carriers, but just one carrier. The Brazilians will have to upgrade their support facilities to support the new and large carrier, but it’s not something they are inexperienced doing. Sure the costs will be higher, which maybe why they haven’t procured a new carrier yet.

Also, under the new government in Brazil, I doubt they will procure the carrier, but the navy may still be keeping an eye out for a carrier that fits their needs, and waiting till the government changes to one that will be more open to procuring the carrier.

For the Saudis, it’s probably less of an economic issue and more of a political issue. The Saudis could probably buy an Arleigh Burke or two and afford to service and support them, but I doubt the U.S. would want to sell it to them.

I doubt the Turks would want to buy a Chinese destroyer as they have their TF-2000 destroyer underdevelopment. But they have a LHD and it’s probably too small to have a useful load out of Kizilelma unmanned fighters. It seems to only operate smaller drones. This is where procuring an off the shelf carrier from China or doing a ToT and building it in Turkey would be an attractive option for them.

Russia is probably the best candidate for a customer for this kind of carrier, if China is willing to sell such a platform to them. The Russians no longer have the same shipyards to build more kuznetzov class carriers anymore and were willing to buy the Mistral LHDs from France, so a 60k ton carrier would be a 1:1 replacement for their current problematic carrier

Brazil needs a bigger Navy, but as I said, they don't have money to really go for it.

Looking at their 2040 project, they are going to (or said they were going to) acquire a 50,000-60,000 ton carrier, comes with 5 or 6 7000-8000 tons Destroyers and 6 Nuclear Sub........On paper that is a very good combo, but the problem is always going to be can they afford it? You are talking about 20-30 billions from now to 2040. I highly doubt they can afford all those things they wanted in the white paper.

Saudi Navy is only as big as it can be used to counter the Iranian in Gulf of Eden. They never needed a big Navy because that would be US 5th fleet job to protect the kingdom. Do they have the money to build one? Yes. But do they have the political will or even needs to have one, that I very much doubted. Unless you are looking at Saudi completely eject the US from the area, that is not likely.

As said before, Turks won't use anything Chinese if they were in NATO. I don't think China would want to sell them anything even off the shelves. On the other hand, would Turkey buy off the shelves to begin with? I highly doubt that as well.

Russia problem is always money, that is the problem BEFORE the war in Ukraine, that war make this problem even greater. Russian ships aren't really that bad, but the way Russian Navy handle their project is very questionable. And if they messed up their own ship because of incompetent management, you can go figure how they would be able to manage the Chinese ship, that is if China willing to accept oil and gas for payment to begin with......