Chinese Navy Destroyers

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
Article translated from French via Google translate:



Type 052D destroyer down in the Indian Ocean?
SEA


BY
HENRI KENHMANN

8 JULY 2017
It is most likely that Changsha will no longer be the first Chinese destroyer of Type 052D to enter the Baltic Sea, but rather one of its sisterships, the 174 Hefei .

And for good reason, it would have been broken somewhere in the Indian Ocean for two weeks.

Although this last point has not yet been officially confirmed, it is known that the Chinese fleet that will participate in the joint Sino-Russian naval exercise by the end of July no longer has the same composition as originally planned, Communications.






Departure of the initial flotilla, on Sunday, June 18, from the naval base of Sanya (Photos: PLA Navy)
Indeed, on June 18, the Chinese navy sent a flotilla composed of the destroyer 173 Changsha of Type 052D, frigate 571 Yuncheng of Type 054A and tanker-tanker 964 Luomahu of Type 903A to join the Baltic fleet of the navy Russian Sea in the first phase of the naval exercise "Joint Sea 2017" which will take place in Saint-Petersburg and Kaliningrad.

We talked about this departure of the Chinese fleet in the file " Soon a Type 1 destroyer Type 052D in the Baltic Sea ".

However, in the article published this Saturday, July 8 in the Chinese Army Journal (PLA Daily), it is written that the destroyer 173 Hefei and the frigate 571 Yuncheng , "who will participate in the Sino-Russian naval exercise" , Have just been supplied with the 26th Chinese anti-piracy escort fleet, which is currently carrying out their missions in the Gulf of Aden.

The 174 Hefei is one of the four Type 052D destroyers in service in the southern fleet of the Chinese Navy, with 172 Kunming , 173 Changsha and 175 Yinchuan .

The maneuvers of the refueling at sea took place on July 6 with the tanker tanker 966 Gaoyouhu of the 26th fleet of escort anti-piracy. The two warships fueled to "continue the road to the Baltic Sea", while the 964 Luomahu tanker , which is expected to supply the initial flotilla during the journey to Russia, did not Been mentioned in the text.

Should it be understood, then, that Changsha destroyer , 571 Yuncheng frigate and 964 Luomahutanker will not go to Europe, but only 174 Hefei and 571 Yuncheng frigate ?

And what caused the Chinese navy to make this last-minute change?






The 174 Hefei destroyer was in actual firing at the beginning of June with its 173 Changsha sistership in the South China Sea.
If one believes a source close to the sector of naval actors in China, the 173 Changsha originally planned would have suffered a breakdown of its transmission systems during its crossing of the Indian Ocean. The Type 052D destroyer would have lost all its motive power and would have been floating since.

The incident took place "before June 26", one week after the departure of the flotilla from the port of Sanya.

According to the same source, the heads of a production unit of the CSIC group, which manufactures the components of these systems, and the military representatives seconded to this entity were summoned to Beijing for an emergency meeting.

This could explain why tanker tanker 964 Luomahu could not supply the "new" Baltic flotilla - it may be that he remained on the spot with the immobilized destroyer.

Some observers speak of a possible failure at the propeller shaft, but knowing that a Type 052D destroyer has two shaft lines, it seems unlikely that both will suffer damage at the same time.

However, the PLA Daily article tells us that the initial fleet from Sanya was successively crossed by the South China Sea, the Malacca Strait, the Bay of Bengal, Maliku Kandu Strait and the Danish Sea. Saudi. The text also speaks of a very difficult sea state encountered by the flotilla at some point in transit, but it is not known if it is related to the incident.


The 173 Changsha could break down in the middle of the Arabian Sea.

We are therefore waiting for other elements to know why the composition of the Chinese fleet has changed, and whether or not the 173 Changsha is actually down.

However, if the incident did occur, it could further justify the need for the Chinese navy to have one or two naval bases located on this "Silk Road", which will undoubtedly make Sino relations Even more strained.

To be continued.

Henri K.

http://www.eastpendulum.com/destroyer-type-052d-panne-locean-indien
 

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
Last edited:

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
The 8th and 11th Type 052D hulls being fitted out at Dailan shipyard. Dailan is currently building 3 Type 0052D's.












One of the Type 052D hulls outfitting at the JCNX shipyard

 
Last edited:

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
A n aerial view of the aft VLS cluster on the Type 55 destroyer. 64 fore + 48 aft bringing the total VLS count to 112 cells.



Progress on the 1st Type 55 fitting out at JCNX, currently the only Hull in the water out of the 4 in different phases of construction.




Satellite pic of the two Type 055 hulls being assembled in the dry dock at Dailan shipyard. Courtesy of terraserva

 

tharun

Patriot
New Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
2,149
Likes
1,377
Country flag
@J20! How many active ships in PLA navy?(destroyers,frigates,corvettes,missile boats)
Last time i checked in wiki it showed 50+ destroyers but no it is showing only 6-8.
 

shiphone

New Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
2,165
Likes
2,483
Country flag
@J20! How many active ships in PLA navy?(destroyers,frigates,corvettes,missile boats)
Last time i checked in wiki it showed 50+ destroyers but no it is showing only 6-8.
do not know wheather to laugh or to cry.....LOL

funny part is when/how did the wiki say 50+ destroyers in PLAN service?

and

where is "showing only 6-8 "?
 

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
Type 055 update:

The first hull launched in 2017 is still being outfitted, but looking pretty close to completion. Trials in 2018?



Whilst the second Type 055 hull in Shanghai appears to be nearing launch:

 

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
do not know wheather to laugh or to cry.....LOL

funny part is when/how did the wiki say 50+ destroyers in PLAN service?

and

where is "showing only 6-8 "?
Mate, I don't think there's any need to be unkind here, uninformed or not he did ask for more information. So I guess he really does want to know....

@J20! How many active ships in PLA navy?(destroyers,frigates,corvettes,missile boats)
Last time i checked in wiki it showed 50+ destroyers but no it is showing only 6-8.
Hi @tharun , to get data as accurate as possible on that will take me a bit of time, but i'll provide it as soon as I can.
 
Last edited:

Adioz

शक्तिः दुर्दम्येच्छाशक्त्याः आगच्छति
New Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
1,419
Likes
2,819
Hi @tharun , to get data as accurate as possible on that will take me a bit of time, but i'll provide it as soon as I can.
@tharun seems to be on a mission lately. I think he is trying to form an independent assessment of China's military might. I remember him asking for details about PLA ground forces mechanized formations' organisation. Still, I wish more of us would do this, instead of chest thumping like brats. Good job @tharun

BTW, when was the Chinese UVLS developed?
 

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
The Chinese Navy has installed a prototype electro-magnetic gun system on a modified Type 072 III hull in Wuhan for at sea testing:



Would love to know the specs on this system. Power supply, range what kind of projectiles it launches, rate of fire etc.

Here's a write up on it from navyreco...

https://www.navyrecognition.com/ind...na-s-plan-about-to-test-a-railgun-at-sea.html
Is China's PLAN About to Test a Railgun at Sea ?
February 2018 Navy Naval Defense Industry News
POSTED ON WEDNESDAY, 31 JANUARY 2018 23:23
Ship spotters from China released several pictures of what appears to be an electromagnetic (EM) railgun. The pictures released on January 31st show the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN or Chinese Navy) Type 072 III landing ship Haiyangshan (hull number 936) fitted with the suspected railgun at its bow and several ISO containers amidship.

Chinese ship spotter picture showing the PLAN Type 072 III landing ship fitted with a large turret which could be a railgun

At least three containers seem to be placed on the landing ship, likely for power supply and control. The shape of the turret itself is in line with what a railgun turret could look like. The shape of the barrel itself shares some similarities with BAE Systems' railgun (in its turreted variant) with a large diameter on one half and a smaller diameter on the second half.

The location where those pictures were taken has not been disclosed, but it could be in Wuhan in central China (on Yangtze river).

Chinese ship spotter guestimation on the nature of the various elements fitted aboard Type 072 III landing ship Haiyangshan (translation by Navy Recogintion).

A total of ten Type 072III-class landing ship (NATO designation Yuting-II class) were commissioned with the PLAN from 1992 until 2002. They have a length of 119.5 meters and a displacement of 4,800 tons. They are usually fitted with three H/PJ76F twin 37mm gun system (including at the bow where the suspected railgun is not fitted). All of 072III landing ships were built by Shanghai Zhonghua Shipyard.

Type 072 III landing ship Haiyangshan underway

Later in the day on January 31st, a picture emmerged showing the landing ship underway showing that the program is likely mature enough to enter a phase of testing at sea. If this turns out to be an actual EM railgun, China would become the very first country to test such a system at sea.

Chinese advances in the field of EM railguis should not come as a surprise however: According to a Popular Science article published recently (December 2017), China is the nation producing the most unclassified, peer-reviewed electromagnetic launch research in the world. It's the type of public science that suggests China could field a range of military electromagnetic technologies in the future.

Our video on BAE Systems' railgun at Sea Air Space 2016

About railguns
Railgun technology relies on a massive electrical pulse, rather than gunpowder or other chemical propellants, to launch projectiles at distances over 100 nautical miles – and at speeds that exceed Mach 6.

The military applications for this technology are many:
- Long range artillery (in excess of 200 Km)
- Anti-surface (naval)
- Increased penetration thanks to high impact speed
- Anti air and anti missile defense (including against hypersonic threats)
- Simultaneous impacts thanks via rate of fire and velocity control
- No powder (no prytechnic risks)


The U.S. Navy, along with the Office of Naval Research (ONR) and BAE Systems has been working on the technology for several years. Last summer, the ONR demonstrated the ability to conduct "multi shot salvo" (with two projectiles are fired in a 12 seconds span or about 5 rounds per minute). But this was at the Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division, a land based facility.

US company General Atomics is also working on the technology.

Other countries countries currently conducting research on railguns include Japan, France and Russia. But those countries are still at "in laboratory testing" stage. Again, if this turret aboard the landing ship is confirmed to be a railgun, China would definitly be ahead with the technology.
 

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
@tharun seems to be on a mission lately. I think he is trying to form an independent assessment of China's military might. I remember him asking for details about PLA ground forces mechanized formations' organisation. Still, I wish more of us would do this, instead of chest thumping like brats. Good job @tharun

BTW, when was the Chinese UVLS developed?
I'm really sorry for forgetting to get back to you wrt the universal vls. Totally slipped my mind mate.

The first mention of the CCL UVLS as is seen on the Type 052D and Type 055 destroyers today is from the National Military Standard document from 2006, i.e. GJB 5860 2006.

Under the title “surface ship missile universal vertical launcher general requirements” it detailed the requirement of a VLS capable of launching four different types of missiles: anti-aircraft, anti-surface-ship, antisubmarine and land attack cruise missiles.

Interestingly this new VLS would be capable of both hot launch and cold launch (i.e. ejection from the vis canister via compressed gas before the missile's booster rocket ignites).

The first example of this UVLS was seen during trials on test ship 891, equipped with both the VLS and a single AESA panel array, the type 348A that would equip Type 052Ds.






The UVLS then made its debut with the launch of the 1st Type 052D in August 2012



Good reference resources on the UVLS and other naval launchers here:

https://www.afcea.org/content/china’s-navy-deploys
-three-tier-defensive-weapons
https://plarealtalk.com/chinese-navy-vls-75c0de25545d
 
Last edited:

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
More detailed pics:

It's rectangular barrel probably rules out the coil gun theory..



Text translates to: "Building first class naval weapon for world's first class navy". Electrical warnings everywhere...


 

undeadmyrmidon

New Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
548
Likes
872
More detailed pics:

It's rectangular barrel probably rules out the coil gun theory..



Text translates to: "Building first class naval weapon for world's first class navy". Electrical warnings everywhere...


I not railgun what is the big gun for? Is it a 300mm mortar?
 

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
I not railgun what is the big gun for? Is it a 300mm mortar?
It's most likely not a COIL GUN. The rectangular barrel and power generating equipment on-board point to it being a RAIL GUN.

Coil guns and rail guns are not the same thing mate.
 

undeadmyrmidon

New Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
548
Likes
872
It's most likely not a COIL GUN. The rectangular barrel and power generating equipment on-board point to it being a RAIL GUN.

Coil guns and rail guns are not the same thing mate.
I've been thinking, rigging a railgun to a boat and taking it out, firing a few shots and dismantling it back to a land site is wasteful. The US are rigging the White Sands facility for the full 100 nm range of their design. And going by early signs we are not going to get these babies before 2025 - ish. By next year US will develop HVP projectiles, turning all existing weapons able to fire like railguns.

What do you think?

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/us-navy-railgun-tests-“blow-the-top-mountain”-14869

https://breakingdefense.com/2017/05/navy-railgun-ramps-up-in-test-shots/

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/us-navy-rail-gun-test-rapid-fire-move-closer-combat-23699
 

rone

New Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2016
Messages
951
Likes
3,108
Country flag
why every one negligence to accept the fact yes its a rail gun..but its application in real battle scenario doubtful also as a coastal artillery becoz of large amount of are needed for its power auxiliary .. even us navy ditch it becoz of shear amount of auxiliary platform they needed same time navy can do same damage by stealth strike aircraft .. the only thing cheep in rail gun its ammunition according to us officials its 45k dollars but its components are highly costly, unlike rifle action rail gun produces lot of heat and emp during friction action (rail gun based on sliding movement bw to electrodes)which may cause fast degradation in life cycle and after each shots the capctive banks to get recharged to particular level it also time taken from 30 to 60 sec...like this there will be lot of hurdles before it to became an operational weapon.. any way for china its a achievement ...
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,558
Country flag
I've been thinking, rigging a railgun to a boat and taking it out, firing a few shots and dismantling it back to a land site is wasteful. The US are rigging the White Sands facility for the full 100 nm range of their design. And going by early signs we are not going to get these babies before 2025 - ish. By next year US will develop HVP projectiles, turning all existing weapons able to fire like railguns.

What do you think?

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/us-navy-railgun-tests-“blow-the-top-mountain”-14869

https://breakingdefense.com/2017/05/navy-railgun-ramps-up-in-test-shots/

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/us-navy-rail-gun-test-rapid-fire-move-closer-combat-23699

It's more for propaganda points that any practical consideration. They want to claim the mantle for the first country to put railgun on a ship even for only a couple of shots.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,558
Country flag
why every one negligence to accept the fact yes its a rail gun..but its application in real battle scenario doubtful also as a coastal artillery becoz of large amount of are needed for its power auxiliary .. even us navy ditch it becoz of shear amount of auxiliary platform they needed same time navy can do same damage by stealth strike aircraft .. the only thing cheep in rail gun its ammunition according to us officials its 45k dollars but its components are highly costly, unlike rifle action rail gun produces lot of heat and emp during friction action (rail gun based on sliding movement bw to electrodes)which may cause fast degradation in life cycle and after each shots the capctive banks to get recharged to particular level it also time taken from 30 to 60 sec...like this there will be lot of hurdles before it to became an operational weapon.. any way for china its a achievement ...

The USN did not ditch railgun, they just put it in second priority for now while their scientists mature the systems needed to make it work. Besides, the Americans are concentrating at the moment on hyper velocity projectiles which are cheaper to develop and induct and can be used on existing naval guns.
 

J20!

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,546
Country flag
It's more for propaganda points that any practical consideration. They want to claim the mantle for the first country to put railgun on a ship even for only a couple of shots.
I've been thinking, rigging a railgun to a boat and taking it out, firing a few shots and dismantling it back to a land site is wasteful. The US are rigging the White Sands facility for the full 100 nm range of their design. And going by early signs we are not going to get these babies before 2025 - ish. By next year US will develop HVP projectiles, turning all existing weapons able to fire like railguns.

What do you think?

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/us-navy-railgun-tests-“blow-the-top-mountain”-14869

https://breakingdefense.com/2017/05/navy-railgun-ramps-up-in-test-shots/

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/us-navy-rail-gun-test-rapid-fire-move-closer-combat-23699
I think good for BAE and the US Navy.

Correction though, the US navy ditched at sea testing because of budget reasons, not because its "wasteful" or useless... Rail guns are being developed for at sea deployment - ie. shore bombardment and anti-air capability,

Both of which will be used at sea. At sea testing in real-world conditions is a MUST, not a luxury. The medium-voltage, direct-current transmission network replacing an alternating current based system must be tested in at-sea conditions. Risk assessments must be conducted in real-world testing. ie. AT SEA. If the US Navy is to ever deploy rail guns at sea, they too will eventually test their prototype at sea. Hyper-velocity rounds or no.

+ Who said land and at sea tests were conducted with a single prototype?
 
Last edited:

Articles

Top