Type 055 DDG News & Discussions

[casual]

The question is why does the ship need 4 large gas turbines; it had 112 VLS tubes, when the Arleigh Burke Flight III carries the same number of VLS tubes at nearly half the tonnage. The Youtuber “SubBrief” says he is told the Type 055’s Radar is a kin to the first generation SPY-1 radar, while the newer Arleigh Burke’s have the SPY-1D and the future radar for the US navy is almost ready; the SPY-6 radar.

This is probably why China classifies the Type 055 As a destroyer and not a cruiser. This is probably also why China classifies the Type 052DL as a heavy Frigate akin to the future US constellation class (Italian FREMM design)

Having said all that, China is advancing rather quickly, so if they make significant progress in radar technology and reach parity with the US in this regard, it’s not inconceivable that they could replace the radar to match the SPY-6 in the next refit in 10-15 years. In the meantime, China will have the ships in place, and the crews trained; an incremental approach to reaching ship numbers while using a stop-gap radar solution while technology matures.

Don't compare Chinese VLS to American VLS. Chinese VLS is larger and deeper.

Each Chinese VLS tube is almost twice as large as American VLS tube. 6.5m^3 vs 3.5m^3

 

[GiantPanda]

Don't compare Chinese VLS to American VLS. Chinese VLS is larger and deeper.

MUCH larger. The average cell in the Chinese UVLS is about 300% larger in volume.

 

[FuturePAF]

Don't compare Chinese VLS to American VLS. Chinese VLS is larger and deeper.

Good point. It will become evident when the PLAN starts quad packing these cells and the China starts putting Hypersonic cruise missiles into the cells. The youtuber did say the USN does think of the Type 055 as primarily a surface warfare ship rather then an ASW or an AAW ship. He called the Type 055 most similar to the Arsenal ship the USN once planned.

 

[KampfAlwin]

The YouTube channel “Sub Brief” has a video on the Type 055, in which he claims the ship is so large because it is an inefficient design, radar technology draws too much electricity and therefore needs to be larger then it could be. If his assertion is correct, as China improves AESA technology, the ship will probably remain the same size but will have a more powerful radar and have more spare space for more VLS.

Don't trust the video. Dude claimed the ship is technologically a 1970s ship with no AESA radars. He even called any claim of AESA 'Chinese propaganda' and asserted that the Type 1130 CIWS on the ship is a Russian design when it is really far, far from it lmao.

 

[FuturePAF]

Don't trust the video. Dude claimed the ship is technologically a 1970s ship with no AESA radars. He even called any claim of AESA 'Chinese propaganda' and asserted that the Type 1130 CIWS on the ship is a Russian design when it is really far, far from it lmao.

Yeah the part where he talked about the CIWS sounded so off. He never mentioned the Dutch goalkeeper, which is the closest equivalent to the Chinese Type 730 and 1130.

Some of his knowledge is probably from some limited and dated sources, but not everything he says sounds off, as far as I understand naval technology, which is why I find his channel interesting to watch.

 

[KampfAlwin]

Yeah the part where he talked about the CIWS sounded so off. He never mentioned the Dutch goalkeeper, which is the closest equivalent to the Chinese Type 730 and 1130.

Some of his knowledge is probably from some limited and dated sources, but not everything he says sounds off, as far as I understand naval technology, which is why I find his channel interesting to watch.

So what points about the 055 from this 'analyst' do you agree with?

 

[FuturePAF]

So what points about the 055 from this 'analyst' do you agree with?

His assertion that the Type 055 Is an Arsenal Ship. It will have more of a focus on surface warfare (as a percentage of its loadout) then AAW and ASW then the Arleigh Burkes.

In a US Naval war college document (China Maritime Report No. 5: China's Dreadnought? The PLA Navy's Type 055 Cruiser and Its Implications for the Future Maritime Security Environment), there is a belief the Type 055 may carry ASBM to take on enemy CBG further out, to protect the Chinese CBG or SAG the Type 055 is a part of.

 

[sheik]

The question is why does the ship need 4 large gas turbines; it had 112 VLS tubes, when the Arleigh Burke Flight III carries the same number of VLS tubes at nearly half the tonnage. The Youtuber “SubBrief” says he is told the Type 055’s Radar is a kin to the first generation SPY-1 radar, while the newer Arleigh Burke’s have the SPY-1D and the future radar for the US navy is almost ready; the SPY-6 radar.

This is probably why China classifies the Type 055 As a destroyer and not a cruiser. This is probably also why China classifies the Type 052DL as a heavy Frigate akin to the future US constellation class (Italian FREMM design)

Having said all that, China is advancing rather quickly, so if they make significant progress in radar technology and reach parity with the US in this regard, it’s not inconceivable that they could replace the radar to match the SPY-6 in the next refit in 10-15 years. In the meantime, China will have the ships in place, and the crews trained; an incremental approach to reaching ship numbers while using a stop-gap radar solution while technology matures.

The PLA Navy already had 7000-ton Type 052D with 2 QC280's. That class was limited by the two QC280's and could not go larger for major upgrade. And 7000 ton were not enough to accommodate more weapons and electronic systems. So apparently the PLA Navy needed a larger platform. But what could they get with limited choices on the gas turbine engines? China's industry could not provide a big variety of engines appropriate for the new ship. And IEP was far from mature so not an option at all. Then what could they do? They could only put 4 QC280's together for the new ship. Due to the sufficient power, the ship could be large enough to be the next generation of Naval platform and would have enough room for future upgrades. That means you will see 055A, 055B, 055C for sure in the coming years and they will be the backbone of the PLA Navy for decades.

The reason PLA calls it destroyer not cruiser simply because Chinese are always low profile and modest, especially when they tried not to be locked by the US as the major opponent too early. There were many other examples. When the state owned TV channel reported the news of CV-17 Shandong they only said the tonnage was 50K class. Well, they did not want to use the full displacement number, and 59K can be the class of 50K. They just tried to minimize the numbers to avoid being seen as a threat to some other countries.

As to the sensors and sub systems on Type 055, I am sure PLA put on it the best ones that the domestic manufacturers could offer at that time, including the dual band radar system (Type 346B radar for S-band, which was not only bigger in size, but also more advanced that the one on Type 052D). Even the main gun was much more powerful than the one on Type 052D which was not a full version due to the weight limit for the smaller platform.

 

[lcloo]

In a neighbour forum on Chinese military, this Sub Brief youtuber got tons and tons of negative comments for his lack of knowledge on type 055 and his authoritarian act of deleting and banning people who questioned validity of his video.

One of many comments posted in the neighbourhood.

5unrise wrote:-
I provided a fairly detailed response to him in the comments section, until he deleted it.

This is a summary of what I said:

1. The Type 346B Dragon Eye is not remotely comparable to the AN/SPY-1. One is a third generation Chinese AESA, while the other is a PESA. The resolution and detection range are an order of magnitude different because of how the array functions.

2. The Type 1130 CIWS is evolved from the domestic Type 730, and is not a copy of a Russian system and bears no resemblence to the Kashtan (a gun-and-missile system).

3. Chinese state media indicated that the Type 055 destroyer will be an area air defence command and control warship, rather than having anti-ship as its primary mission, as Sub Brief claimed.

4. The Type 055 is not remotely comparable to the Ticonderoga in terms of capabilities - the latter is a 1980s design with much less advanced radars and electronic warfare suite.

I posted these under the user name Eurasia Naval Insight. He reacted by banning me from his channel and deleting my comment.

He is insinuating that any criticism of the lack of research, or just plainly wrong information, evident in his video is just Chinese state propaganda. We are not real free agents who simply disagree with his video, but basically paid propagandists."

 

[FuturePAF]

In a neighbour forum on Chinese military, this Sub Brief youtuber got tons and tons of negative comments for his lack of knowledge on type 055 and his authoritarian act of deleting and banning people who questioned validity of his video.

One of many comments posted in the neighbourhood.

5unrise wrote:-
I provided a fairly detailed response to him in the comments section, until he deleted it.

This is a summary of what I said:

1. The Type 346B Dragon Eye is not remotely comparable to the AN/SPY-1. One is a third generation Chinese AESA, while the other is a PESA. The resolution and detection range are an order of magnitude different because of how the array functions.

2. The Type 1130 CIWS is evolved from the domestic Type 730, and is not a copy of a Russian system and bears no resemblence to the Kashtan (a gun-and-missile system).

3. Chinese state media indicated that the Type 055 destroyer will be an area air defence command and control warship, rather than having anti-ship as its primary mission, as Sub Brief claimed.

4. The Type 055 is not remotely comparable to the Ticonderoga in terms of capabilities - the latter is a 1980s design with much less advanced radars and electronic warfare suite.

I posted these under the user name Eurasia Naval Insight. He reacted by banning me from his channel and deleting my comment.

He is insinuating that any criticism of the lack of research, or just plainly wrong information, evident in his video is just Chinese state propaganda. We are not real free agents who simply disagree with his video, but basically paid propagandists."

I’ve watched Eurasia Naval insight’s videos. They are really good. He (or She) did a good review of the Type 055 about 10 days ago.

Sub Brief’s assertion that Anti-shipping will be the primary mission probably comes from what is probably an official USN belief that the Type 055 will be used to take on USN carrier battle groups like the Soviet missile cruisers of the 80s.

 

[Polestar 2]

Don't trust the video. Dude claimed the ship is technologically a 1970s ship with no AESA radars. He even called any claim of AESA 'Chinese propaganda' and asserted that the Type 1130 CIWS on the ship is a Russian design when it is really far, far from it lmao.

Exactly, most of those so called professional analyst about Chinese weapon analysis are nothing but a bunch of racist unprofessional propaganda video which write all kind of rubbish just to misled viewers. There are simply too many junk video on youtube.

I’ve watched Eurasia Naval insight’s videos. They are really good. He (or She) did a good review of the Type 055 about 10 days ago.

Sub Brief’s assertion that Anti-shipping will be the primary mission probably comes from what is probably an official USN belief that the Type 055 will be used to take on USN carrier battle groups like the Soviet missile cruisers of the 80s.

There is no doubt the so called video you recommend for 055 are nothing but a joke! Worthless piece of analysis which just to suit racist and white supremacy who believe only whiteman can produced top class weapon. His delete of a professional comment more or less convicted my correct view on him. If you want to go ahead and stick with him. I will not stop you.

 

[FuturePAF]

Exactly, most of those so called professional analyst about Chinese weapon analysis are nothing but a bunch of racist unprofessional propaganda video which write all kind of rubbish just to misled viewers. There are simply too many junk video on youtube.


There is no doubt the so called video you recommend for 055 are nothing but a joke! Worthless piece of analysis which just to suit racist and white supremacy who believe only whiteman can produced top class weapon. His delete of a professional comment more or less convicted my correct view on him. If you want to go ahead and stick with him. I will not stop you.

Like I said in an early post, I also watch Eurasia Naval Insight’s videos, I’ve been subscribed to that channel for a while. HI Sutton is another commentator I follow; a more professional source.

What you get from watching Sub Brief’s videos is seeing what a veteran of the USN and most western observers see. You get an understanding of that perspective. To call him racist is too far, but technological nationalist is a more fair assessment (similar to how the British hype their Type 45 Destroyer). And if the USN underestimates the PLAN, its to its own detriment as well as playing into the PLAN’s strategy of keeping a low profile for as long as possible as @sheik pointed out in an earlier post.

But you also have to see if the western commentators point out areas China may still lags behind, as you may not get that from any other source, such as the ABM capabilities allegedly the Type 055 does not possess and the ability for the radar to operate at full power for extended periods of time. If these claims are false, in due time it will be known. And even if the claims are true, China is catching up fast and will soon meet these limitations if they exist, just like in the development of the WS-15 engine.

But as they say on Twitter; Retweet does not mean endorsement. But I will say I was mistaken for accepting on face value his VLS count (disregarding volume) and the story on the lagging radar capabilities. I will admit I did forgot about the VLS volume difference and how much China has advanced in radar technology in such a short time (which comes from limited and perhaps outdated OSINT data). At this point no one really knows the full capabilities and all the limitations of both countries as they are the two leading defense equipment producers, and can no longer discount one will not be able to surpass the other with their next piece of equipment, as they are Full Spectrum Peer Competitors.

 

[LKJ86]

Via http://www.81.cn/yw/2022-04/07/content_10146283.htm

 

[Wergeland]

What is Chinese DDG like Type 052 and type 055, were armed with hypersonic misslies like Df-17 and DD-100?
If possible, it would effectively make any enemy boat a target thousands of kilometers from chinese coast.

In theory these destroyers armed with hypersonic missiles could go on patrol anywhere in international water.
Potentially act as deterrence against hostile force, in the same way as CBG's.

 

[NW-Blue]

What is Chinese DDG like Type 052 and type 055, were armed with hypersonic misslies like Df-17 and DD-100?
If possible, it would effectively make any enemy boat a target thousands of kilometers from chinese coast.

In theory these destroyers armed with hypersonic missiles could go on patrol anywhere in international water.
Potentially act as deterrence against hostile force, in the same way as CBG's.

None of these ships are armed with those missiles you mentioned. DF-100 is land based and truck mounted, so is DF-17. DF-17 is definitely too big to be launched from ships. DF-100 maybe able to fit on 055 but I doubt it, but definitely not 052D, as its VL tubes are too small for that.

052 is mainly for fleet air defense and ASW duties, and 055 have more surface-to-surface capabilities. It does have its own land-attack missiles, and most likely will be able to launch land attack cruise missiles in the future, whether there will be any hypersonic versions developed for that, it will be interesting to see in the years to come...