China's Type 052C Aegis-class Warships -- Ocean Dominance!

[Martian2]

There are only two countries that build indigenous Aegis-class destroyers, China and the United States. For your information, Aegis means "magic shield" in Greek. The U.S. Aegis-class Arleigh-Burke is the gold standard, but China is catching up!

"The modern destroyer remains the workhorse of the Navy." The roles of the modern Aegis-class destroyer "include air-defense, surface attack, and anti-submarine warfare." The latest additional function for an Aegis-class destroyer is sea-based ballistic missile defense. "The Arleigh-Burke has 90 vertical-launch missiles." "Aegis is the greatest weapon put to sea."

The U.S. has the world's most-powerful Aegis-class destroyers and only China is acquiring similar indigenous capability. Documentary videos on China's Aegis-class destroyers don't exist. Instead, we'll watch American documentary, which is very informative, on the Arleigh-Burke Aegis-class destroyers. China has similar capabilities on her Type 052C Aegis-class destroyers or she will soon!

U.S. -- world naval superpower
China -- budding naval superpower


Type 052C Aegis-class destroyer #171 Haikou

Aegis-class destroyer performs sea-based ballistic missile defense Part 1

Aegis-class destroyer performs sea-based ballistic missile defense Part 2

 

[mDumb]

I think AEGIS is overrated here is why:
1. USS Vincennes
The fourth USS Vincennes (CG-49) is a U.S. Navy Ticonderoga class Aegis guided missile cruiser. In 1988, the ship shot down Iran Air Flight 655 over the Persian Gulf, killing all 290 civilian passengers on board, including 38 non-Iranians and 66 children.
2. Maritime Self-Defense Force’s Atago destroyer
Last Tuesday, at about 04:00 Agato, a 170 meter, a Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force Aegis destroyer and the fishing vessel Seitoku Maru collided about 28 km off Tokyo.

The bow of the Seitoku Maru floats off Nojimazaki, Chiba Prefecture, on Tuesday after the fishing boat was split in two in a collison with the Maritime Self-Defense Force’s Atago destroyer

I hope the Chinese version can debug the US Aegis' bugs.

 

[Martian2]

I think AEGIS is overrated here is why:
1. USS Vincennes
The fourth USS Vincennes (CG-49) is a U.S. Navy Ticonderoga class Aegis guided missile cruiser. In 1988, the ship shot down Iran Air Flight 655 over the Persian Gulf, killing all 290 civilian passengers on board, including 38 non-Iranians and 66 children.
2. Maritime Self-Defense Force’s Atago destroyer
Last Tuesday, at about 04:00 Agato, a 170 meter, a Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force Aegis destroyer and the fishing vessel Seitoku Maru collided about 28 km off Tokyo.

The bow of the Seitoku Maru floats off Nojimazaki, Chiba Prefecture, on Tuesday after the fishing boat was split in two in a collison with the Maritime Self-Defense Force’s Atago destroyer

I hope the Chinese version can debug the US Aegis' bugs.

The narrator says that the first Arleigh-Burke was launched in 1991. That's three years after the Iranian incident. After reading Wikipedia, it appears to have been human error in using the early version of the Aegis on the guided missile cruiser. Also, almost twenty years of improvement have been made to the Arleigh-Burke Aegis system.

The collision of a Japanese Aegis-class destroyer does not diminish the awesome power of the warship.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Combat_System

"During 1980, a destroyer was designed using an improved sea-keeping hull form, reduced infrared and radar cross-sections, and upgrades to the Aegis Combat System. The first ship of the Arleigh Burke class, the USS Arleigh Burke, was commissioned during 1991.
...
Iran Air Flight 655

The Aegis system was involved in a disaster in which USS Vincennes shot down Iran Air Flight 655 during 1988 resulting in 290 civilian deaths.

It was determined by a formal military investigation[6] that the Aegis system was completely operational and did not have any maintenance problems. The investigation ruled that had the Commanding officer relied on the complete tactical data displayed by the Aegis system the engagement might never have occurred. Additionally, psychological effects of the crew subconsciously manipulating the data to accord with a predefined scenario greatly contributed to the false identification. The investigation found that the Aegis Combat System did not contribute to the incident, but did aid in the investigation by means of recorded target data."

 

[mDumb]

<The collision of a Japanese Aegis-class destroyer does not diminish the awesome power of the warship.>

You seem to trivialize the collision. I hope the Chinese engineers in Type 052C program would consider this collision into account seriously in their design.

I think it's a joke for a powerful ship (equipped with ACS) to collide with a fishing boat.

 

[Martian2]

<The collision of a Japanese Aegis-class destroyer does not diminish the awesome power of the warship.>

You seem to trivialize the collision. I hope the Chinese engineers in Type 052C program would consider this collision into account seriously in their design.

I think it's a joke for a powerful ship (equipped with ACS) to collide with a fishing boat.

The collision happened because the crew "failed to maintain a proper watch and reacted too late to avoid the collision." "It also said the fishing boat was partially responsible because it failed to issue a warning signal and take action to avoid the collision."

Ship designers and engineers cannot prevent human error and accidents.

MSDF officers charged over Atago collision | The Japan Times Online

"Wednesday, April 22, 2009

MSDF officers charged over Atago collision

YOKOHAMA (Kyodo) Prosecutors on Tuesday charged two Maritime Self-Defense Force officers in connection with the fatal 2008 collision between their destroyer and a fishing boat that claimed the boat's father-son crew.

Lt. Cmdrs. Keitaro Ushirogata and Tomohisa Nagaiwa were indicted without arrest over the collision, prosecutors said.

Ushirogata, 36, was the chief watch officer aboard the 7,750-ton Atago just before its predawn collision with the 7.3-ton Seitoku Maru in February 2008.

Nagaiwa, 35, had relieved Ushirogata and was on watch at the actual time of the collision.

Ushirogata's indictment is considered unusual because crew members not actually operating a ship at the time of a collision rarely face charges. However, the prosecutors decided to also indict him because they believe an overlapping of errors by the two officers led to the collision.

Tuesday's indictments were the first involving MSDF officers since a 1988 collision in Tokyo Bay between the 2,250-ton MSDF submarine Nadashio and the charter fishing boat Fujisan Maru No. 1, which sank with the loss of 30 lives.

After that collision, the sub's skipper was indicted and given a suspended prison term.

The Yokohama District Public Prosecutor's Office has charged both Ushirogata and Nagaiwa with professional negligence that endangered maritime traffic and resulted in the death of the two fishermen.

The prosecutors said the destroyer failed to maintain a proper watch and reacted too late to avoid the collision.

Their conclusion was reached about 10 months after they received an investigative report from the Japan Coast Guard on Nagaiwa and Ushirogata in June 2008.

In Tokyo, MSDF Chief of Staff Adm. Keiji Akahoshi told reporters that the navy will treat the prosecution's actions very seriously.

The MSDF will continue utmost efforts to ensure safety and prevent a recurrence of a similar accident, he said.

The Atago, which is equipped with the sophisticated Aegis air defense system, collided with the Seitoku Maru off Cape Nojima on the tip of the Boso Peninsula in Chiba Prefecture in the early hours of Feb. 19, 2008.

Following the collision, the two fishermen on the Seitoku Maru &#8212; Haruo Kichisei, 58, and his 23-year-old son, Tetsuhiro &#8212; were missing and later declared dead.

Ushirogata, the chief navigator, was the chief watch officer just before the collision, while Nagaiwa, the chief antisubmarine warfare officer, had just relieved him before the collision.

In January, the Yokohama Marine Accident Tribunal, a government body that looks into the cause of sea disasters and takes administrative action, issued a decision blaming the Atago for the collision, saying an improper watch on the part of the destroyer was the main cause of the collision.

The marine accident tribunal judged that Nagaiwa's insufficient watch was the main cause, but did not recognize any causal relationship between the collision and Ushirogata's actions.

It also said the fishing boat was partially responsible because it failed to issue a warning signal and take action to avoid the collision. The decision has already been finalized.

In that administrative decision, the inquiry panel recommended that the 3rd Escort Division of the 3rd Escort Flotilla in Maizuru, Kyoto Prefecture, to which the Atago belongs, provide thorough instruction on safe navigation.

Under the Penal Code, a person who fails to exercise due care required in the pursuit of social activities and thereby causes the death or injury of another can face a prison term of up to five years."

 

[Martian2]

Type 052C (Luyang-II Class) Missile Destroyer - SinoDefence.com

Type 052C (Luyang-II Class) Missile Destroyer

Two Type 052C (NATO codename: Luyang-II class) air defence guided missile destroyers have been built by Jiangnan Shipyard of Shanghai for the PLA Navy. Based on the hull design of the Type 052B (Luyang class) multirole destroyer, the Type 052C features an indigenously developed four-array multifunction phased array radar (PAR) similar to the Aegis AN/SPY-1 equipped by the U.S. Arleigh Burke class and Japanese Kongo class DDG. The ship is also armed with the indigenous HQ-9 air defence missile system, which is believed to be comparable to the Russian S-300F/Rif in performance, and the newly developed YingJi-62 (C-602) anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM).

Following the launch of two Type 052B multirole missile destroyers in 2002, Shanghai-based Jiangnan Shipyard began to build two subsequent hulls based on the same hull design but with different weapon and sensor configuration. The first-of-class 170 Lanzhou was laid down in late 2002 and launched on 29 April 2003. Sea trial began in late 2003 and the destroyer was commissioned in July 2004. The second hull, 171 Haikou was launched on 30 October 2003 and was commissioned in 2005. Both hulls are deployed by the South Sea Fleet based at Zhanjiang in Guangdong Province.

Design

By adopting a modular approach where two classes of destroyers shared the same hull design and propulsions, Jiangnan was able to save construction time and costs in the programmes. However, unlike the Type 052B Luyang class, which was fitted with a mixture of both Russian and Chinese indigenous systems, the Type 052C Luyang-II class was largely based on the indigenous technologies. The bridge is also much taller on the Type 052C, so that four fixed phased array radar antennas can be embedded on its four sides.

Weapon Systems

A total of 48 indigenous HQ-9 air defence missiles are housed in eight 6-cell vertical launch systems (VLS). Unlike the Russian-style revolver VLS, the Type 052C&#8217;s VLS is fixed with each launch cell having its own lid. The missile system utilises the &#8216;cold launch&#8217; method, in which the missile was first ejected from the launch tube, and then ignites its rocket engine at low altitude. This launch method avoids the complex flame and gas exhausting pipes on the Western-style &#8216;hot launch&#8217; VLS, and also decreases damage to the ship structure caused by the rocket motor blast.

The naval variant HQ-9 was developed from the land-based HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system developed in the 1990s. The missile may have adopted some Russian S-300 rocket motor and control technologies, with a &#8220;Track via Missile&#8221; (TVM) guidance system developed from the U.S. Patriot missile technology. The missile is housed inside a cylinder shape container, which is placed inside the VLS. The missile is guided by an unknown type of guidance radar with multi-target engagement capability.

The surface-to-surface weapon of the Type 052C destroyer is the indigenously developed YJ-62 (C-602) ASCM. Unlike the previous YJ-8 series anti-ship missiles, which were all carried inside a box-shape launcher, the YJ-62 is carried inside a cylinder-shape launcher. A total of eight missiles (two 4-cell launchers) are located at the mid-ship position. The missiles are guided by the Band Stand radar installed on top of the bridge and a Light Bulb datalink forward of the hanger. The YJ-62 missile uses strap-down inertial guidance coupled with GPS, and active radar for the terminal phase. The missile has a stated range of 280km, with the missile flying at an altitude of 30m during the cruise phase of an engagement. In the terminal phase, the missile descends 7~10m. The active radar seeker has an acquisition range of up to 40km." (article continues; click on newslink for more info)

 

[ao333]

1) You call French sonar and M. 48 torpedoes "indigenous" and "ASW?"

2) Chinese anti-ship missiles are behind all major world navies, even India...

3) The radar-based missile defense system is cutting edge. But then again, Russia has a comparable system (inferior radar, superior missile) with mass production capacity, as compared to China's handmade systems.

So, when you say "Aegis class," you mean the sea-based missile defense system, not the other crucial aspects including, ASM and ASW.

Great system to intercept F-16 and Mirages (Taiwan), but I don't think it will stay aloat for long in the Spartly islands (Vietnam) against 6 Kilos.

And that's why oversea media isn't fussing about it; it's not a threat, yet.

PS: 052C summaries have been posted several times already... There's no need to repost them bimonthly. Any news of upgrades are welcome, though.

 

[Martian2]

1) You call French sonar and M. 48 torpedoes "indigenous" and "ASW?"

2) Chinese anti-ship missiles are behind all major world navies, even India...

3) The radar-based missile defense system is cutting edge. But then again, Russia has a comparable system (inferior radar, superior missile) with mass production capacity, as compared to China's handmade systems.

So, when you say "Aegis class," you mean the sea-based missile defense system, not the other crucial aspects including, ASM and ASW.

Great system to intercept F-16 and Mirages (Taiwan), but I don't think it will stay aloat for long in the Spartly islands (Vietnam) against 6 Kilos.

And that's why oversea media isn't fussing about it; it's not a threat, yet.

PS: We've seen the 052C several times already... There's no need to repost it once every 2 weeks.

Uh oh, are you going to troll me again? I did put the following in bold: "the Type 052C Luyang-II class was largely based on the indigenous technologies."

P.S. Did you notice how other members have "thanked" me for the informative post regarding the documentary videos on the capabilities of an Aegis-class destroyer? (If you don't like my post, don't read it. Click on something else. I hear that there is a lot of cool articles in the Indian sub-forum. You should probably head over there.)

 

[ao333]

Uh oh, are you going to troll me again? I did put the following in bold: "the Type 052C Luyang-II class was largely based on the indigenous technologies."

P.S. Did you notice how other members have "thanked" me for the informative post regarding the documentary videos on the capabilities of an Aegis-class destroyer? (If you don't like my post, don't read it. Click on something else. I hear that there is a lot of cool articles in the Indian sub-forum. You should probably head over there.)

Buddy, I don't troll you on all your posts. I ignore and thank on some. I'm just here to clearify misleading generalization like, "China can indigenously build Aegis-class destroyers." when only the radar-based missile defense system is comparable to its US counterpart, with the ASW and ASM systems far behind other major world navies.

 

[Martian2]

Buddy, I don't troll you on all your posts. I ignore and thank on some. I'm just here to clearify misleading generalization like, "China can indigenously build Aegis-class destroyers." when only the radar-based missile defense system is comparable to its US counterpart, with the ASW and ASM systems far behind other major world navies.

You just intentionally drive me crazy in some of my threads. Here, reread the first paragraph of my post:

"There are only two countries that build indigenous Aegis-class destroyers, China and the United States. For your information, Aegis means "magic shield" in Greek. The U.S. Aegis-class Arleigh-Burke is the gold standard, but China is catching up!"

 

[4MothaChina]

Buddy, I don't troll you on all your posts. I ignore and thank on some. I'm just here to clearify misleading generalization like, "China can indigenously build Aegis-class destroyers." when only the radar-based missile defense system is comparable to its US counterpart, with the ASW and ASM systems far behind other major world navies.

Man, did you dump in your pants or something? Behind India in ASM technology? You nuts or something? China is the only country in the world with a ballistic Anti ship missile, surely this has to count for something, tracker, seeker or otherwise, and must be outside the league of the Harpoon class ASM's.

Furthermore, if you praise India so much, why don't you go and lick their behinds in their sub-forums, save us the time responding to you, k? Cheers...

 

[ao333]

Man, did you dump in your pants or something? Behind India in ASM technology? You nuts or something? China is the only country in the world with a ballistic Anti ship missile, surely this has to count for something, tracker, seeker or otherwise, and must be outside the league of the Harpoon class ASM's.

Furthermore, if you praise India so much, why don't you go and lick their behinds in their sub-forums, save us the time responding to you, k? Cheers...

1) The ballistic ASM is surface-based. It'd be nice to see it intergrated onto a ship (if the recoil of an IRBM doesn't sink it)....

2) Me, kissing up to Indians? I love the Chinese humour... If you bothered looking into older Indian threads, you'd find that I actually troll them. Many of my trolls made Indians leave the forum. I'm being much more lenient on you guys.

 

[new wave]

Man, did you dump in your pants or something? Behind India in ASM technology? You nuts or something? China is the only country in the world with a ballistic Anti ship missile, surely this has to count for something, tracker, seeker and otherwise, and must be outside the league of the Harpoon class ASM's.

Furthermore, if you praise India so much, why don't you go and lick their behinds in their sub-forums, save us the time responding to you, k? Cheers...

Yeah right, China is so far behind, even India
Pal, can't you see he is here to draw attentions like some cheap....
Well, like his normal routine, shooting trash with nothing to backup his rants, but not surprising at all, thats typical ....'s style.
Btw, i smell curry, is it only me ?

 

[below_freezing]

Uh oh, are you going to troll me again? I did put the following in bold: "the Type 052C Luyang-II class was largely based on the indigenous technologies."

P.S. Did you notice how other members have "thanked" me for the informative post regarding the documentary videos on the capabilities of an Aegis-class destroyer? (If you don't like my post, don't read it. Click on something else. I hear that there is a lot of cool articles in the Indian sub-forum. You should probably head over there.)

for your information, the 052C is an ANTI AIRCRAFT DESTROYER. of course it will lose to submarines. it was not designed for anti-sub warfare.

let vietnam try to get through HY-9 sea patrol plane though? or our Han/Shang nuclear subs? we had kilos 10 years before they did too, and we have an actual oceanographic department in the academy of science that is paid to do nothing but map the sea floor - vietnam doesn't even have the equipment necessary to do that.

 

[Communist]

@New Wave, A033, Martian and others.... Easy Easy....

How long will it take to catch up US Aegis system?