Type-055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

It is not a criticism... just an observation.

I am used to looking at Russian and Soviet ships, and a vessel this size would have at least four air defence gatling guns like the one fitted to this ship, but obviously a ship from the cold war period had much bigger and heavier and fewer main missiles (Sunburn for Sovs and Metel for Udaloy) and also fewer air defence missiles. If anything this ship is like the old Moskva helicopter carriers in the sense that the back end is for helicopters and the front end is for weapons...

GarryB wrote:It is not a criticism... just an observation.

I am used to looking at Russian and Soviet ships, and a vessel this size would have at least four air defence gatling guns like the one fitted to this ship, but obviously a ship from the cold war period had much bigger and heavier and fewer main missiles (Sunburn for Sovs and Metel for Udaloy) and also fewer air defence missiles. If anything this ship is like the old Moskva helicopter carriers in the sense that the back end is for helicopters and the front end is for weapons...

With the difference being that is also have vls at the back as well of course.

To be clear

Similar to a Udaloy except with the gun up front and vertical launch missile tubes for the main armament... it already had vertical launch SAMs 40 years ago.

You are reading too much into what others say... there are serious limits as to what weapons you can fit to a ship and where you can fit them amongst everything else that needs to be there... to be honest I would be more interested in the EW and sensors... which actually look rather good on this ship too.

Do you have the specs for the 130mm gun... range, shell weight etc etc?

GarryB wrote:Similar to a Udaloy except with the gun up front and vertical launch missile tubes for the main armament... it already had vertical launch SAMs 40 years ago.

You are reading too much into what others say... there are serious limits as to what weapons you can fit to a ship and where you can fit them amongst everything else that needs to be there... to be honest I would be more interested in the EW and sensors... which actually look rather good on this ship too.

Do you have the specs for the 130mm gun... range, shell weight etc etc?

Its really a big difference between a Udaloy and the type 055 when u compare thier armaments. The original Udaloy had/has 8 SS-N-14 missiles, compare that with 112 possible missiles for the 055. Of cource all tubes wont be filled with asm but even if its only a fourth it will still carry more then tripple that. Add then the CJ-10 cruise missiles it also will have and its a monster compared to the Udaloy.

The PJ-38 130mm gun was first developt for the Type-052D destroyer. They used thier knowlege from the russian AK-130 when constructing it so the specs should be very close to that.

GarryB wrote:Similar to a Udaloy except with the gun up front and vertical launch missile tubes for the main armament... it already had vertical launch SAMs 40 years ago....

Type-055 makes Udaloi look like vintage fishing boat, get serious here...

Type-055 makes Udaloi look like vintage fishing boat, get serious here...

Obviously the technology is different now, but talking about 112 vertical launch missile tubes... the Udaloy did have 64 TOR missiles in vertical tubes... simply replacing those launchers with the current model TOR (the TOR model on teh Udaloy is from the first model SA-15s with 8 missiles per vehicle... the current model carries 16 missiles in the same volume) it should be able to carry 128 missiles ready to fire easily.

The original only had 8 primary missiles which would be the equivalent of one UKSK launcher, but that would be 136 launch tubes and I am not even counting the Udaloy II with two Kashtan systems with 40 missiles each... so 176 missiles plus torpedo tubes with 8 x 91ER type missiles for anti sub use and of course the two RBU systems.

It is certainly not poorly armed.... I mean a good HATO equivalent with 8 Harpoons isn't exactly better armed at all.

The PJ-38 130mm gun was first developt for the Type-052D destroyer. They used thier knowlege from the russian AK-130 when constructing it so the specs should be very close to that.

It is single barrelled though, so I suspect they modelled it on the upgraded reduced weight model the Russians are putting on their Frigates.

They talk about joint ventures of airlines... perhaps a joint venture for a long range 203mm gun perhaps that both could use on their cruisers and the 152mm guns could be used for destroyer sized vessels...

GarryB wrote:

Type-055 makes Udaloi look like vintage fishing boat, get serious here...

Obviously the technology is different now, but talking about 112 vertical launch missile tubes... the Udaloy did have 64 TOR missiles in vertical tubes... simply replacing those launchers with the current model TOR (the TOR model on teh Udaloy is from the first model SA-15s with 8 missiles per vehicle... the current model carries 16 missiles in the same volume) it should be able to carry 128 missiles ready to fire easily.

The original only had 8 primary missiles which would be the equivalent of one UKSK launcher, but that would be 136 launch tubes and I am not even counting the Udaloy II with two Kashtan systems with 40 missiles each... so 176 missiles plus torpedo tubes with 8 x 91ER type missiles for anti sub use and of course the two RBU systems.

It is certainly not poorly armed.... I mean a good HATO equivalent with 8 Harpoons isn't exactly better armed at all.

If we are playing with numbers the type 55 can pack four medium range AA missiles per tube, 4 x 112 = 448 missiles.

Of cource the big difference is that the Udaloy only carries AA missiles in its tubes and the 55 can carry both AA, asm and cruise missiles in its vls.

The Udaloy II is just one ship, and its in refit if im not mistaken.

The modified Udaloys with 16 vls and 8 SS-N-25 is a better update.

Compared with some of the ships the British used during the Falklands war... look up the Sea Cat and Sea Slug naval SAMs and you will see the Udaloy was actually a rather good ship... the problem these days is everyone is so focussed on how many launch tubes and how many missiles can be carried... when it was doing its job a Udaloy would struggle to find a reason to launch all eight anti sub missiles and all ten torpedo launched anti sub weapons that it carries... there is a lot of confusion between the real world and computer games....

It is like someone bragging and saying an AK-47 from the 1980s is obsolete because it only has a 30 round magazine, where new weapons have backpack mounted 1,000 round feed systems. You might argue that during combat not having to worry about changing mags and knowing there is always ammo ready to fire makes it better, but I would suggest it makes it too expensive and too heavy to keep fully loaded all the time...

Second 055 destroyer commissioned.

Type 055 is China's counterpart of the US's Arleigh Burke Flight III which has been delayed by COVID.

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202103/1218908.shtml

A Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy flotilla led by the country’s first 10,000 ton-class Type 055 large destroyer sailed through the Tsushima Strait on Thursday and headed toward the Sea of Japan.

The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force spotted a PLA Navy flotilla consisting of three warships, namely the Type 055 guided missile destroyer Nanchang, the Type 052D guided missile destroyer Chengdu and the Type 054A guided missile frigate Daqing

This is the first time the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force has spotted a Type 055 destroyer, the press release said.

Third ship completing sea trials. Should be commissioned next month or so. The pace is frustratingly slow. China needs at least 10 Type 055 before the end of the decade to guard the New Maritime Silk Road.

bren_tann wrote:Third ship completing sea trials. Should be commissioned next month or so. The pace is frustratingly slow. China needs at least 10 Type 055 before the end of the decade to guard the New Maritime Silk Road.

It's time to take your pills Ultron.

Slow? How is it slow? They launched 8 cruisers of this model in like 2 years. They felt confident enough doing this despite it being the first batch.
Yet the ship type seem to be functional and already has two ships in active service.

Compare this with the Zumwalt which is commissioned but in fact not really operational.
They build three Zumwalts and have one single ship in "active" service but with no ammo available for the AGS which uses like over 1/3rd of the deck space.

This year another two Type 055 cruisers should be commissioned, next year probably another two, another two the year after that.
They are likely to double the order after rectifications are made to the design as appropriate. Even if they do not that would be enough cruisers for four carriers.

bren_tann wrote:Third ship completing sea trials. Should be commissioned next month or so. The pace is frustratingly slow. China needs at least 10 Type 055 before the end of the decade to guard the New Maritime Silk Road.

10 ships in 10 years shoudnt be a problem. They already have 2, and 4 by the and of this year.

And no the pace isnt slow, it takes the US about the same time to get an Arleigh Burke ready.

walle83 wrote:

bren_tann wrote:Third ship completing sea trials. Should be commissioned next month or so. The pace is frustratingly slow. China needs at least 10 Type 055 before the end of the decade to guard the New Maritime Silk Road.

10 ships in 10 years shoudnt be a problem. They already have 2, and 4 by the and of this year.

And no the pace isnt slow, it takes the US about the same time to get an Arleigh Burke ready.

Ideally they should have 20 Type 055 by 2030. 10 as part of carrier groups and 10 free to roam the sea to guard trade routes.

"Type 055: A destroyer or a cruiser?"
https://navalpost.com/type-055-a-destroyer-or-a-cruiser/

Type-055 and a Slava class cruiser just for size comp

Ideally they should have 20 Type 055 by 2030. 10 as part of carrier groups and 10 free to roam the sea to guard trade routes.

Not really.

A cruiser like that on its own is a powerful vessel, but it is much more powerful with airborne radar aircraft and fighters to add rings of mutual protection for each other.

Having all 20 as part of ten carrier groups makes rather more sense... in fact 6 carrier groups where two are in dry dock and four are operational all the time means you will normally only have four carrier groups at sea at any one time, though with 6 fully fitted carrier groups you could probably stretch to 5 groups... five groups with four Type 55s each would be very powerful forces, but more likely three because you don't want to wear them out and they need breaks too.

I agree with GarryB, but the Chinese are not expected to have 6 fully fledged aircraft carriers in 10 years. With the first 2 aACs they made being pretty obsolete, at best they will have 4 modern carriers and at best 2 of them nuclear.

They should be able to accompany those 2+2 groups with the respective helicopter carriers, cruisers, and nuclear submarines. This would stress USA to their limits in a region between Sri Lanka and Hawai and from Japan to Australia. With 6 AC groups they will be clearly ahead. So it is 10 plus 10 years basically.

Heh, just incase anybody around here holds a delusion that H I Sutton is some kind of OSINT god

https://twitter.com/CovertShores/status/1448902116865724420
One of the things which is really interesting about the #Chinese Navy Type-055 cruiser is that it uses both Cold launch and Hot Launch missile systems.

Basic reason is that HHQ-9 is from S-300 concept/tech and pre-dates the 'modern' VLS.

This mixing of systems may limit the options available for large Chinese warships. Can all the VLS cells accommodate all missile types? Probably not

Heck even Wikipedia knows the Chinese govt spec and that it uses concentric canister system specifically designed to allow both hot & cold launch

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_055_destroyer
The same VLS model is used on the Type 052D destroyer,[7] which is believed to be an implementation of the GJB 5860-2006 standard;[28] the GJB 5860-2006 is capable of hot and cold launches using concentric canisters.[29]

Thats even got a link to an article about the standard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GJB_5860-2006

Edit: I've been trying to remember how long ago I found out about it, I know I posted about it on here years ago somewhere (in Russian Navy section I think)

This Reddit thread from 2015 has the important info & even a decent CGI
https://www.reddit.com/r/WarshipPorn/comments/38o55a/the_planned_vls_system_to_be_implemented_on/

I agree with GarryB, but the Chinese are not expected to have 6 fully fledged aircraft carriers in 10 years. With the first 2 aACs they made being pretty obsolete, at best they will have 4 modern carriers and at best 2 of them nuclear.

Managing four carrier groups will be a task in itself... given time I am sure they will learn very quickly... honestly I feel safer with Chinese carrier groups sailing around the place than British or French of American carrier groups.

One of the things which is really interesting about the #Chinese Navy Type-055 cruiser is that it uses both Cold launch and Hot Launch missile systems.

Not interesting at all...

Basic reason is that HHQ-9 is from S-300 concept/tech and pre-dates the 'modern' VLS.

What an ignorant statement... the S-300 has always been cold launched and was one of the first VLS ever deployed on land or at sea for SAMs... the Klintok is cold vertical launched too.

The first ships with major VLS systems were the Orlans (Kirovs), but of course the Slavas had vertical launch SAMs too.

This mixing of systems may limit the options available for large Chinese warships. Can all the VLS cells accommodate all missile types? Probably not

What does that even mean?

Poor old China stuck with vertical launch missile systems that can cold launch or hot launch but can't do both... why would that even matter?

Edit: I've been trying to remember how long ago I found out about it, I know I posted about it on here years ago somewhere (in Russian Navy section I think)

But why does it even matter... it is not like there will be a combat situation where you are only able to hot launch or cold launch at a target... the method of launch is irrelevant and ridiculous...

Most hot launch systems use cannisters that the missiles are stored and carried in so they are not reused... most cold launch systems have an ejection system that blows the missile up into the air before the missiles engine is started... the missile is tested before ejection to make sure it will start its engine when launched, but sometimes when a missile solid rocket motor starts it explodes... hot launch, that means it explodes inside the launcher... which is not ideal... cold launch means it explodes in the air above the launcher or falls back down onto the top of the launcher.

Any failure is not ideal, but hot or cold launch does not make it better as long as it launches...

AFAIK Redut is cold launch and UKSK is hot launch... mainly because the missiles in the UKSK launcher are up to 10m long and can weight 3 or more tons which is a lot of weight to blow 30m into the air with a gas system or a short burn booster.

The missile launch rate or capacity to hold different types of missiles is vastly more important than the method of getting the missiles out of the tube... most are in sealed containers for transport and loading anyway...