Chinese class destroyer 052D Xining conducted live firing

56
The fifth Chinese 052D class destroyer has demonstrated its combat capabilities, the portal reports. "Warspot" with reference to the report of the Chinese military TV channel CCTV-7.

Class 052D destroyers are the latest warships in the Chinese Navy. Their construction started in 2012, and before the end of 2018, the military plans to adopt 12 (according to other sources - 13) ships of this type. Xining (tail number - 117) is the fifth and by far the newest destroyer in the Chinese naval fleet.
Xining was put into service in January of this year and, in total, has already made four combat-training exits into the sea. During the last maneuvers, the crew of the ship hit targets with artillery mounts H / PJ-38 (130 mm) and H / PJ-12 (30 mm), unguided missiles, and also launched a torpedo Yu-7. In addition, the speedboats and the Z-9C helicopter with which the destroyer is equipped were involved in the exercises.



The 052D class destroyers have a displacement of 7500 m, a length of 156 m, a width of 18 m and a draft of 6,5 m. On the deck of each of them there is a platform for one Z-9C helicopter. The maximum speed of the ship is 30 nodes (55,5 km / h), the crew consists of 280 people. According to unofficial data, in their capabilities, the new Chinese destroyers are comparable to the American Arleigh Burke, equipped with the combat system Aegis.

The hull of the Xining destroyer is shaped and coated, which provides it with minimal radar visibility. The destroyer is armed with 130 mm caliber artillery mounts, 30 mm caliber anti-aircraft mounts, missiles capable of hitting air, surface and ground targets, as well as mines and torpedoes. The ship is driven by a combined diesel-gas turbine unit consisting of two QC-280 gas turbine engines and two Shaanxi diesel engines.

56 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +8
    April 17 2017 14: 38
    What a handsome man ... !!!!!!!! I'm talking about the SHIP now, and not about the guy with the video ... And then everything needs to be clarified ... feel
    1. +6
      April 17 2017 14: 40
      It’s even enviable how to bake pies ...
      1. 0
        April 17 2017 14: 42
        Well, the fifth ship is clearly not like pies, here the United States is just like baking pies.
        1. +5
          April 17 2017 14: 45
          Quote: _Ugene_
          Well, the fifth ship is clearly not like pies, here the United States is just like baking pies.

          The Chinese, in addition to the destroyers, and aircraft carriers are building much faster than the United States. Gerald Ford, what year do they adopt?
          1. +1
            April 17 2017 14: 46
            Yes, only these aircraft carriers are of completely different technological levels.
            1. +4
              April 17 2017 14: 54
              Quote: _Ugene_
              Yes, only these aircraft carriers are of completely different technological levels.

              Perhaps this is so, but it is only better to have two aircraft carriers operating and combat-ready available than a more high-tech wunderwafel, which is only a thunderstorm and power on a piece of paper. the same period was built by US Burke.
              1. 0
                April 17 2017 15: 18
                Quote: NEXUS
                it’s only better to have two aircraft carriers operating and operational in stock than the more high-tech wunderwafel, which is only a piece of thunder and power.

                How many aircraft carriers are there in the United States?
                1. +3
                  April 17 2017 15: 21
                  Quote: Großer Feldherr
                  How many aircraft carriers are there in the United States?

                  So what? And how many of them are against the wall? Now look at how much time period China has become an ocean power, with which even the USA is already reckoned with.
                  1. 0
                    April 17 2017 16: 03
                    Everyone began to reckon with China immediately after the celestial economy reached the top, i.e. for a long time already.
                2. 0
                  April 17 2017 20: 02
                  Großer feldherr

                  How many aircraft carriers are there in the United States?

                  Taki 11 AVM (10 type "Nimitz" + 1 "Enterprise"), will soon come 1 AVM type "Henry Ford" instead of "Enterprise", something like that ....
            2. +4
              April 17 2017 15: 33
              The Chinese simply follow the method of successive approximations - from TAVKR with a springboard to classical AB.

              Considering the 11436 they got is a perfectly reasonable solution.
          2. +3
            April 17 2017 15: 02
            Quote: NEXUS
            The Chinese, in addition to the destroyers, and aircraft carriers are building much faster than the United States. Gerald Ford, what year do they adopt?

            I looked at the TTX 052D, it’s quite worthy of the armament, too, and the price is probably not sky-high, why not buy three, four destroyers, for the TF, or else there will be some ....
            1. +4
              April 17 2017 15: 07
              Quote: Pirogov
              I looked at the TTX 052D, it’s quite worthy of the armament, too, and the price is probably not sky-high, why not buy three, four destroyers, for the TF, or else there will be some ....

              The TTX is good for the Chinese ... but I don’t think they will sell it to us. In addition, we are rapidly developing the project of the frigate (destroyer) of project 22350M, which will be 1000 tons “heavier” than the base 22350. That is, given the modularity of the design, which was said a lot there, in this case there is a place to be. So, I think, very soon these heavy destroyer frigates will begin to be laid with us.
              1. 0
                April 17 2017 15: 23
                Quote: NEXUS
                The TTX is good for the Chinese ... but I don’t think they will sell it to us. In addition, we are rapidly developing the project of the frigate (destroyer) of project 22350M, which will be 1000 tons “heavier” than the base 22350. That is, given the modularity of the design, which was said a lot there, in this case there is a place to be. So, I think, very soon these heavy destroyer frigates will begin to be laid with us.

                Andrew is the point that they will begin to lay ........, and when will they be in the Navy? God grant that all the problems with testing the weapons would end on Frigate Gorshkov.
                1. +2
                  April 17 2017 15: 28
                  Quote: Pirogov
                  Andrew is the point that they will begin to lay ........, and when will they be in the Navy? God grant that all the problems with testing the weapons would end on Frigate Gorshkov.

                  Do we have a choice? While we are building frigates, not without problems, but we are building. Polement-Redoubt we plan with obscenities and songs. But the Chinese we won’t build destroyers for the order ... and we don’t need them either, because the performance characteristics are lower than those of our Gorkov-Ms. At the same time, one must understand that Chinese destroyers are built under the Chinese arsenal, and not under our Caliber, Onyx, etc. ...
                  1. +1
                    April 17 2017 16: 11
                    [quote = NEXUS] Do we have a choice? [/ quote]
                    There is always a choice. ))) [......................... While we are building frigates, not without problems, but we are building. [/ Quote] We are building but very slowly and such at the pace, for five fleets, let it be four without the Caspian, how long will this construction last? ............
                    But the Chinese will not build destroyers for us on order ... and we don’t need them, because the technical characteristics will be lower than our Gorkov-M’s. [/ Quote] ................ ...................
                    Controversial opinion, they can build! TTX is lower, but not by much, and I proposed the purchase of Chinese destroyers as a temporary measure.
                    [quote = NEXUS] In this case, it must be understood that Chinese destroyers are built under the Chinese arsenal, and not under our Caliber, Onyx, etc. [/ quote]
                    Build under ours, you doubt the Chinese? Moreover, they are armed mainly with copies of the Russian arsenal.
                    1. +3
                      April 17 2017 16: 19
                      Quote: Pirogov
                      There is always a choice. )))

                      In your opinion, this choice is the purchase of Chinese destroyers? lol It’s very doubtful. Besides, at what shipyards will this all be, if China has all the shipyards full of orders?
                      Quote: Pirogov
                      Controversial opinion, they can build! TTX is lower, but not by much, and I proposed the purchase of Chinese destroyers as a temporary measure.

                      The interim measure is very dubious. The Hindus, too, are building ... can they ask them for help?
                      Quote: Pirogov
                      Build under ours, you doubt the Chinese?

                      I doubt the desire of the Chinese to help us in this matter.
            2. The comment was deleted.
          3. +1
            April 17 2017 15: 18
            They are trying to take Gerald Ford not standard, but a step forward. Because of this, all the problems.
            One development of new electromagnetic catapults is worth it.
            1. +3
              April 17 2017 15: 22
              Quote: yehat
              They are trying to take Gerald Ford not standard, but a step forward.

              The main word is TRYING. Remember the saying, the best bird in the hands ....
              1. 0
                April 17 2017 16: 26
                Americans at Ford are trying to realize a more powerful catapult, trying to raise take-off weight above 40 tons, increase takeoff intensity
                and much much more - a heavy aircraft carrier is a whole city
                what they can do is not yet clear, but they are seriously trying to transfer the combat effectiveness of Avik to the next level.
                for example, their deck F-14 tomcat has a take-off weight of about 33-34 tons of hokai about 25-26 tons.
                If the Americans can operate heavier aircraft REGULARly, this will significantly increase the capabilities of the ACG.
            2. 0
              April 17 2017 16: 06
              Quote: yehat
              They are trying to take Gerald Ford not standard, but a step forward.

              Have all the polymers been promoted?
              1. 0
                April 17 2017 16: 17
                I do not understand the question
                1. 0
                  April 17 2017 16: 22
                  If ours is delaying the delivery of equipment, new, not typical - then everything was lost, everyone was stolen, all the way .... kakali. If "them" - then everything is fine, people are working and so on and so forth.
                  1. 0
                    April 17 2017 16: 28
                    unlike us, they have nowhere to rush. That's when someone builds more than 10 heavy aircraft carriers, then they scratch themselves, but for now they just do what they want.
                    In addition, if our build a small frigate in the same time frame as the Americans a new aircraft carrier, this is an indicator.
                    1. +1
                      April 17 2017 18: 49
                      Quote: yehat
                      unlike us, they have nowhere to rush.

                      We also have nowhere to rush, read about the role of the fleet in our armed forces.
                      Quote: yehat
                      That's when someone builds more than 10 heavy aircraft carriers, then they scratch themselves, but for now they just do what they want.

                      Someone will abruptly build (I hope it will be Russia) an aerospace strike aircraft, and this will be a sixth generation aircraft, and all these aircraft carriers will go down in history sharply after battleships.
                      Quote: yehat
                      In addition, if our build a small frigate in the same time frame as the Americans a new aircraft carrier, this is an indicator.

                      A missile ship is a high-tech product, and all these aircraft carriers and helicopter carriers are just barges with a flat deck.
        2. +1
          April 17 2017 14: 52
          Quote: _Ugene_

          0
          _Ugene_ Today, 14:42 ↑ New
          Well, the fifth ship is clearly not like pies, here the United States is just like baking pies.

          So when did the US and China start? Now China will give odds and America.
          1. 0
            April 17 2017 15: 09
            When will they make 70-80 pieces at such a pace? US 67th Burke adopted. When they catch up, the two main economies of the planet are competing. After the defeat in the Cold War, we fell out of this cage, maybe for the better. In my opinion, it’s better to be like it is now — the standard of living of the average Russian is several times higher than in the USSR, since the whole country was hunchbacked into service.
            1. 0
              April 17 2017 15: 27
              After the defeat in the Cold War, we fell out of this cage, maybe for the better. In my opinion, it would be better if it were like now - the standard of living of the average Russian is several times higher than in the USSR


              Well, well, healed well ... laughing Quietly so, we are not chasing anyone. Yes, only after some time one or the other of these two will come and say - "Guys, your gas station needs our roof, otherwise you never know ..."
            2. 0
              April 17 2017 15: 29
              Quote: _Ugene_
              In my opinion, it’s better to be like it is now — the standard of living of the average Russian is several times higher than in the USSR, since the whole country was hunchbacked into service.

              Libya was not hunchbacked on armaments under Gaddafi, wasn’t hunchbacked, ...... the standard of living was growing, growing, but suddenly a couple fell ....
              1. +1
                April 17 2017 15: 36
                In my opinion, there is a certain balance now - and on average people are not begging and the army has been actively updated in recent years.
        3. +2
          April 17 2017 15: 02
          Quote: _Ugene_
          Well, the fifth ship is clearly not like pies, here the United States is just like baking pies.

          The fifth ship is only 052D. And before them there were six more 052Cs - also with stationary HEADLIGHTS on the superstructure and SAM air defense systems.
          EMNIP, the difference between C and D is that on type D they abandoned drum launchers of missiles and separate launchers for missile systems - and switched to universal cells of the type Mk41.
          1. 0
            April 17 2017 15: 08
            Yes, and the states of the 67th Arleigh Burke have adopted. And it will be 75.
        4. +2
          April 17 2017 15: 12
          The Chinese are building destroyers faster than the Burke Americans. Just the Americans have a head start in 50 ships.
          1. 0
            April 17 2017 15: 13
            Such a handicap is not weak; you can destroy any fleet with destroyers alone.
            1. +2
              April 17 2017 15: 37
              Quote: _Ugene_
              Such a handicap is not weak; you can destroy any fleet with destroyers alone.

              It doesn’t work out - there are only 8 “Harpoons” on “Burki”, and even not on all. smile
              For until recently, all the KR, EM and FR USN in the battle at sea were only an escort for His Majesty the Aircraft Carrier.
          2. 0
            April 18 2017 07: 52
            what's the point of comparing a number? China only needs to go to Africa for coastal waters or to the maximum in the Indian Ocean, and Americans need berks everywhere
            If you compare, then the number of burks should be divided by 2 or 3 at least.
    2. +1
      April 17 2017 14: 42
      China is strengthening right before our eyes!
    3. +2
      April 17 2017 14: 44
      Quote: MPK105
      I'm about the ship now, not about the guy with the video ...

      But the subfield from the first frames of the video is also nothing ... pretty feel
      1. +4
        April 17 2017 14: 47
        good Look ... And then here with a sense of humor, right BYADAAA for many .... laughing laughing laughing hi
    4. +1
      April 17 2017 14: 52
      Quote: MPK105
      What a handsome man ... !!!!!!!!

      Well, I see ... FROM BEGINNING there, BEAUTY says so funny ... That's just in the guise of their destroyer that the English shipbuilding school is already visible, but I like ours more.
      And they noticed that they have women on warships.
      1. +4
        April 17 2017 15: 02
        Turned ... For a long time already ... hi And this does not prevent them from ruining the Seas ... And this seaman proverb - "Baba on the SHIP-unfortunately" - has not bothered anyone for a long time ... EVERYONE solve their problems, no matter what and no one ... wink
      2. +2
        April 17 2017 15: 18
        American same. The British left for the pagodas.

        There is also a functional superstructure with fixed canvases + 2 of the UVP block + their analogue of RIM-116 in the stern according to the new American fashion (while the Europeans put which Goalkeeper - that is, MZA).
        1. +2
          April 17 2017 16: 00
          Quote: donavi49
          American same. The British left for the pagodas.

          The Island Empire, rather, does not have pagodas, but rather very tower-like masts. smile

          For "pagodas" they have too few different bridges and platforms. And there is no reverse bias.
          1. +1
            April 17 2017 16: 14
            Quote: Alexey RA
            The Island Empire, rather, does not have pagodas, but rather very tower-like masts.

            Pagodas are more like a promising Leader.

            But I like this project of our corvette, it’s a pity that most likely it will remain so ...
  2. +3
    April 17 2017 15: 13
    April 23 launch aircraft carrier. They’re already sending out the invitation. The ship was painted and the forests were being dismantled.
  3. +2
    April 17 2017 15: 58
    How do you like a Chinese aircraft carrier?

    In fact, this is not a ship - it is a ship-style building of the Naval Museum in Shanghai.
    Inside there is an exposition of mock-ups of military equipment (though there are real samples).
    A moored next to the submarine is real.
    1. +2
      April 17 2017 16: 09
      After the Japanese built for the movie a 1: 1 scale model of the bow and middle of the Yamato, I was no longer surprised. smile Computer graphics? Oh well - cheaper to build the scenery.
      And in the museum in Kura there is the whole Yamato - though, on a scale of 1:10.
      1. +2
        April 17 2017 16: 38
        Frankly, I accidentally found this museum on Google maps - it was very curious how they could drag a submarine and an aircraft carrier into this puddle (although there are plenty of channels). But the account for the Chinese carriers acquired by the Chinese did not fit :).

        I looked.
        Here inside (Solidly made layouts)
    2. 0
      April 18 2017 07: 45
      aircraft carrier in the "steppes" of China :)
  4. +1
    April 17 2017 16: 10

    And this is the aircraft carrier cruiser Kiev studied and delivered in Tianjin.
    1. 0
      April 18 2017 07: 56

      Aircraft cruiser Kiev.
      "Cherry" on the cake in the naval amusement park in Tianjin.

      And I would like so much that the bulk of the cruiser Kiev could be admired not only by Chinese, but also by Russian children.
      Unfortunately, few think about the Russian children from those who have raped.
  5. 0
    April 18 2017 00: 36
    I repeat, in fact, the successes of the Chinese are not fantastic, as many write here - they copy the same ship, plus they still have neither light carrier-based fighters, nor airplanes or AWACS helicopters (except for our four things). By the way, I’m sure that in the next decade they will not have all this in service. And from launching to delivery to the fleet, even the PRC will take 1,5 years minimum. In addition, this aircraft carrier (the past generally went no further than 500 km from the shore like a training boat for pilots) would not go to full-fledged combat duty with long-range ocean deployment for several reasons, and one of them was the lack of full-fledged MAPL cover. Nevertheless, the synanthropes have successes, however, they are primarily associated with the fact that Ukrainians and we sold them a huge bunch of critical technologies, plus a huge amount of China in the 90s - early 2000s we stole. Why build faster? The population is 9 times more than ours, so the merit is small. If we take an example from anyone, it’s from cursed mattresses, these bastards have both technology and terms.
    Ps No 36 fighters will be based on the Liaoning replica. The maximum is the same as ours. Everything is logical.
    1. 0
      April 18 2017 07: 18
      Quote: P36М2
      I repeat, in fact, the successes of the Chinese are not fantastic, as many write here - they copy the same ship, plus they still do not have any light carrier-based fighters


      Yes, at least you repeat yourself - I regularly visit the PRC and see what they don’t write about in the press.
      I watch CCTV-7 regularly and 5 years ago I saw a program where Chinese military analysts discussed and showed prototypes of a promising Russian bomber, which was mentioned in the Russian press two or three years later.
      If you follow the developments of the PRC, then note that when they take a finished product for a prototype and copy it, they gradually bring it to perfection - for example, on tanks they now have better suo than on a prototype taken for copying, which is evident from the shooting.
      Similarly with ships.
      They disassembled the equipment from Kiev and also from Liaoning, which gave them basic equipment - motors, compressors, gearboxes, avionics. Electronics they have much better. Iron copy - not at all difficult. Equipment too.
      With the financial investments that China makes - they are quickly catching up, somewhat ahead of the development of military equipment and electronics - the same reconnaissance and shock drones that we do not have yet.
      Chinese copy of the Humvee with a turret mount for a heavy machine gun or automatic grenade launcher.
    2. +1
      April 18 2017 10: 41
      Quote: P36М2
      plus still have no light carrier-based fighters

      Why do they need them? All our dances around the MiG-29KR are just a palliative solution to the eternal problem 11435 with boilers and speed, due to which heavy Su has problems with take-off.
      China, judging by the photo of their pr.956, has no problems with a power plant - which means that their AB can easily carry heavy Sukhoi IS (or their clones).
      Quote: P36М2
      no planes or AWACS helicopters (except for our four things).

      EMNIP, China has 9 Ka-31. Plus, they are sawing their helicopter AWACS - Z-18J (Chinese "Super Frelon"). They, the EMNIP, have already made the ship anti-submarine based on Z-18 - Z-18H.
      Quote: P36М2
      lack of full-fledged MAPL cover

      What do you dislike Type 093 and 095 with? According to rumors, 095 is being built just as an escort for AUG.
    3. +1
      April 18 2017 10: 50
      Quote: P36М2
      Ps No 36 fighters on a copy of Liaoning will not be based. The maximum is as much as ours. Everything is logical.

      If we take a real Kuznetsova air group, the number of 11435 fighters based on them is determined not by tactical considerations or technical characteristics, but by the banal presence of airborne and pilots for them. Mayo sho mayo. ©
      According to Soviet standards, the 11435 air group was to consist of 50 aircraft:
      26 deck fighters (Su-27K or MiG-29K), 4 helicopters Ka-252 RLD, 18 Ka-27 or Ka-29 and 2 Ka-27PS

      Basically. if you throw out a clearly excessive amount of Ka-27 (the Chinese AB does not need to catch "moose" at the PLO line in front of the SSBN deployment area) and shift the AUG PLO to an escort, then 36 cars will fit the Chinese.
  6. 0
    April 18 2017 08: 54
    Quote: Pirogov
    Quote: NEXUS
    The Chinese, in addition to the destroyers, and aircraft carriers are building much faster than the United States. Gerald Ford, what year do they adopt?

    I looked at the TTX 052D, it’s quite worthy of the armament, too, and the price is probably not sky-high, why not buy three, four destroyers, for the TF, or else there will be some ....

    we already ordered 2 helicopter carriers