What's new

Type 055 DDG News & Discussions

China is not the US. I guess you'll have to get used to the fact for the rest of your life, won't you?

What is it with your tone? I'm not here to troll, I'm asking why China needs a ship based ABM. The only thing I said China lacks is the capability to intercept ICBMs using ship based ABMs, which is a capability that no country currently holds.

055 will be where Chinese merchant ships are, where Chinese overseas national interests are, to protect at all costs according to the UN charter, unless of course you think the UN charters are interventionist?

Discounting the ridiculous idea of ballistic missiles attacking shipping, which overseas Chinese national interests are threatened by ballistic missiles?

Err... see there is a thing in the world called "analogy".

And yours wasn't a very good one.

Iran, for example!

Now you are just not being serious.

People all know it is for China and Russia, and the latter and US used to develop their ABM system during cold war era and ceased then due to difficulty of technique and finance.

Certainly in the cold war the US did develop ABMs to intercept Soviet/Chinese BMs, but at that time the main US enemy (USSR) was still operating MRBM/IRBMs, and so was the US. But the INF treaty means that neither now have MRBM/IRBMs. So US ABM capability continued and is now to be used against TBM/MRBM armed opponents of the US like Iran, China, North Korea etc.

Yes. It is obvious that the main rivalry of PLAN is US navy.

But the USN doesn't operate ballistic missiles.
 
.
only HHQ-9, YJ-18 and Y-8 at the moment, it is still not capable of launching LACM for the time being

It is not installed yet, but it doesn't mean the platform is not capable.

Just like the Atago class is more advanced than the Kongo class. However, the Kongo class is equipped the SM-3 missiles, while the Atago class is not.

But realistically, what would be the aims of the HQ-26? There is precious little that can intercept an ICBM. Certainly a ship based anti-ICBM ABM is more or less out of the question. So what would be the target of the HQ-26? An expanded South Korean missile program?

It depends, but the ultimate goal of the HQ-26 is being capable to intercept the ICBM.
 
.
What is it with your tone? I'm not here to troll, I'm asking why China needs a ship based ABM. The only thing I said China lacks is the capability to intercept ICBMs using ship based ABMs, which is a capability that no country currently holds.
But the USN doesn't operate ballistic missiles.
The SSBN could launch ballistic missiles.
As for now, China could not intercept ICBM, but we should enhance the capacility and accumulate experience,following what US is doing.
When it comes to the demand of PLAN, i have to say PLAN see USN as kind of a teacher, cause USN is the most advanced in spheres of either tech or tactics.
In the past, there is limited resource for China, so China could not develop a navy with full spectrum capability, which was pursued by Soviet Union since 1970s.
 
Last edited:
.
The SSBN could launch ballistic missiles.
As for now, China could not intercept ICBM, but we should enhance the capacility and accumulate experience,following what US is doing.
When it comes to the demand of PLAN, i have to say PLAN see USN as kind of a teacher, cause USN is the most advanced in spheres of either tech or tactics.
In the past, there is limited resource for China, so China could not develop a navy with full spectrum capability, which was pursued by Soviet Union since 1970s.

China could intercept the ICBM, but it is ground-based GMD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dong_Neng-2
 
.
What is it with your tone? I'm not here to troll, I'm asking why China needs a ship based ABM. The only thing I said China lacks is the capability to intercept ICBMs using ship based ABMs, which is a capability that no country currently holds.
.

If you're not here to troll, then it gonna be easy. Developing full spectrum capabilities, constantly making the technologies better, is the goal of a world-class navy that China aspires to. So developing tech of ship-based ABM is 1) out of the need for a technology/knowledge accumlation, since the US has it , and 2) serves a real goal should the need arises in the unforeseeable future. The same with the US navy, people frequently do things not only in response to an existing specific threat. e.g. you could ask why the US develop rail guns, or Ford Class with EMALS? where is the threat? None!

In the same vein of logic, that high speed rail analogy still holds.
 
.
What is it with your tone? I'm not here to troll, I'm asking why China needs a ship based ABM. The only thing I said China lacks is the capability to intercept ICBMs using ship based ABMs, which is a capability that no country currently holds.

As for the shipborne ABM, the US right now is the most advanced, and China is also working hard to fit the HQ-26 into the Type 055, but you may be right about no country has the de facto capability to intercept the ICBM with its shipborne ABM, since the VLS cell is simply too small to fit a large GMD interceptor missile.

As the platform per se, the Type 055 is the best platform in the world so far.
 
.
Compare this...
type055 annetane.jpg


to this.

ELEC_CG-60_AEGIS_Antenna_Suite_lg.jpg


There is no comparison.
 
. . .
Video (HD) of the launch ceremony :-)

And if you still remember about your repeated queries about its launching schedule, I once informed you that it's scheduled for launching somewhere in JULY 2017 based on the scattered info from some comrades from the Mainland China, it happened the actual realization is a bit earlier :yahoo: very pleased to watch it! Just backed from my prairie trip on 6/28, and when turned on CCTV-4 this morning watched the news about its launch :P
CONGRATULATIONS TO 'THE MIDDLE KINGDOM' for another ceaseless great work :china::china::china:... one after another... :cheers: JIAYOU !!!
 
. . . . . .
Back
Top Bottom