Military Review

Fourth Destroyer Type 052D Launched in China

33
Fourth Destroyer Type 052D Launched in ChinaIn China, the fourth rocket destroyer Type 052D "Chengdu" class "Kunmin" was launched, reports wantchinatimes.com 21 November.


Destroyers Type 052D are the most powerful warships of the PLA Navy, are a further development of the ships Type 052C. The new destroyers are equipped with 130 mm universal gun mounts, ship-to-air and ship-to-ground missiles, a multi-function radar with an active phased array.

The Chengdu is the 10 of the Chinese Aegis system ship. Destroyers of this class have UVN with 64 missile cells (transport and launch containers) and, in their combat power, are comparable to American ships of the Arly Burk type, are armed with long-range air defense systems HQ-9 and long-range cruise missiles DH-10.

The lead ship "Kunmin" (pictured) completed tests of the propulsion system during sea trials in the East China Sea.

Currently, the Chinese Navy can simultaneously deploy two or three Ajis destroyers, while Japan is only one. In addition, China is developing a new generation destroyer Type 055, which will be analogous to the American stealth ship Zumvalt. Ships Type 055 will be equipped with a rail gun and a HQ-26 air defense system, and will form the basis of the combat power of the PLA Air Force between 2020 and 2030 for years.
Originator:
http://www.militaryparitet.com/
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Poruchik 90
    Poruchik 90 22 November 2013 11: 54
    +2
    Whatever it was, in heavenly fellows.

    Key Features:
    - standard displacement more than 6000 t
    - length 160 m
    - width 18 m
    weaponry
    - Artillery: a new 130-mm AC type PJ-38 and MZAK type 730;
    - Missile: universal vertical launch launchers (64 cells), designed for the simultaneous loading of 4 different types of missiles, HQ-9B SAM systems, anti-submarine and anti-ship missiles YJ-62, long-range missiles of the DH-10 type for attacks on coastal targets;
    - Anti-aircraft: SAM HQ-9V, SAM short-range FL3000;
    - Radio-electronic: Type 346 radar with an active phased antenna array and Type 518 L-range early warning radar.
    1. Kibalchish
      Kibalchish 22 November 2013 11: 57
      13
      Well done, well done, no doubt, but this is nothing good for us.
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 22 November 2013 12: 05
        +5
        It remains only to envy the pace of construction of new ships. Unfortunately, we are lagging behind.
      2. donavi49
        donavi49 22 November 2013 12: 40
        +6
        On the contrary, this is good for us, because the PLA does not pose a particular threat to us from the sea, unlike land and air. The PLA priority is now a large ocean fleet and leadership in the Asia-Pacific region; we are far from being in the top five in turn.

        But the growing possibilities of the PLA make the Japanese accommodating, who no longer have the Kuril Islands, to keep their own. They give the Americans a headache, which are forced to hold in the region those forces that could put pressure on Iran or Syria.
        1. avg
          avg 22 November 2013 12: 56
          +1
          we are far from the top five in turn.
          Actually, we are the second in the combat power of the fleet, after the United States.
          They are sixth in number, with China (972 units) first, followed by North Korea (708 units), Thailand (596 units), Iran (408 units), the United States (290 units) and Russia (224). )
          Yes, and I don’t know what kind of Aegis China has.
          1. donavi49
            donavi49 22 November 2013 13: 03
            +1
            Fleet total SF + BF + Black Sea Fleet + CFL + Pacific Fleet. The PRC and the Japanese have deployed the entire fleet in the region. Well, and in terms of influence, there the United States and China are essentially sharing now.
          2. 10kAzAk01
            10kAzAk01 22 November 2013 14: 59
            0
            Actually, we are the second in the combat power of the fleet, after the United States.
            They are sixth in number, with China (972 units) first, followed by North Korea (708 units), Thailand (596 units), Iran (408 units), the United States (290 units) and Russia (224). )
            Yes, and I don’t know what kind of Aegis China has.

            .......... and how many more "Joooooooooooonok" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! wink
        2. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 22 November 2013 16: 03
          0
          Quote: donavi49
          On the contrary, this is good for us, because the PLA does not pose a particular threat to us from the sea, unlike land and air.

          I see nothing good in this. In the Far East, we have a vast coastal zone, and the Pacific Fleet is much inferior to the Chinese. in case of conflict, the transfer of assistance will be very difficult. Now they are kind of friends, smiling, but Ribentropp also once smiled, so it is better to be friends, being equal in strength.
          1. Odysseus
            Odysseus 22 November 2013 17: 53
            0
            Quote: Ingvar 72
            I see nothing good in this. In the Far East, we have a vast coastal zone, and the Pacific Fleet is much inferior to the Chinese. in case of conflict, the transfer of assistance will be very difficult.

            donavi49 is absolutely right. We have a large land border with the PRC, with absolute superiority of the PLA in the ground forces. But at the same time, the PRC is very vulnerable to nuclear attacks.
            With such a balance of forces, the power of the Chinese fleet does not matter to us. Moreover, the Chinese fleet "covers" us from the Japanese, in the sense that all Japan's attention is focused on the PRC.
            But Japan is a real threat to us - their fleet and aviation are much stronger than ours, but nuclear weapons cannot be used against it.
            1. Ingvar 72
              Ingvar 72 22 November 2013 19: 06
              0
              Quote: Odyssey
              With this balance of power, the strength of the Chinese fleet does not matter to us

              What is the ratio? Count the number of people and equipment in our country beyond the Urals, and in China. They have many times more aircraft and tanks, and given the difficulties of deploying troops beyond the Urals, we have few chances in the event of a conflict. The fleet is of great importance in the transfer of troops. But I do not believe in the possibility of using nuclear weapons; our leadership is likely to fall asleep. They agree on some kind of Brest type of the Lithuanian treaty.
              First of all, it’s advantageous for the United States to pit us and China; our goal is not to succumb to provocations.
              So I believe that you still need to be friends with them, but build up your muscles, and sell less to China the latest models for copying.
              1. Odysseus
                Odysseus 22 November 2013 19: 49
                0
                Quote: Ingvar 72
                What is the ratio?

                The PRC has an absolute superiority in conventional weapons, but Russia can make sense of the invasion with a nuclear strike.
                Quote: Ingvar 72
                The fleet is of great importance in the transfer of troops

                Which one? How can the fleet transfer some substantial forces to the Far Eastern theater ?. Especially considering the state of our fleet.
                Quote: Ingvar 72
                And I don’t believe in the possibility of using nuclear weapons; our leadership is likely to fall asleep

                Our leadership will not apply nuclear weapons in Western countries because their capitals, their children, etc. are not applicable in Japan because it is an ally of the United States. But our leadership and Chinese people don’t give a damn about the high bell tower, so China nuclear weapons it will apply.
                Quote: Ingvar 72
                Bringing us with China is beneficial primarily to the United States, our goal is not to succumb to provocations

                I agree that one should not succumb and frighten with the mythical “Chinese threat.” The conflict between the PRC and Russia is beneficial only to the United States.
                1. Ingvar 72
                  Ingvar 72 22 November 2013 20: 21
                  0
                  Quote: Odyssey
                  Russia can use a nuclear strike to make sense of the invasion.

                  Only for invading troops, i.e. in their territory, otherwise they can answer.
                  Quote: Odyssey
                  . Especially considering the state of our fleet.

                  Speaking of the fleet, I meant the fleet of China, i.e. troop transfer to the region of Vladivostok and higher on the map.
                  Quote: Odyssey
                  so just according to the People's Republic of China nuclear weapons it will apply.

                  My personal opinion is. China also has.
                  Quote: Odyssey
                  do not give in and frighten with the mythical "Chinese threat." The conflict between the PRC and Russia is beneficial only to the United States.

                  But you need to be friends with caution, sometimes the weakness of one friend can be a temptation for another. hi
      3. Grandson of Veteran
        Grandson of Veteran 22 November 2013 12: 47
        -1
        Today is "China Day in Russia"! All news from China.
    2. Siberian German
      Siberian German 22 November 2013 20: 01
      0
      Yeah, which is alarming
  2. Kibalchish
    Kibalchish 22 November 2013 11: 55
    +1
    In general, it becomes clear why the Americans are building up their forces in Asia. The Chinese encroachment on the sea needs to be repulsed, otherwise no one will put America in anything.
  3. Assistant professor
    Assistant professor 22 November 2013 11: 57
    +2
    Here it is an arms race! I think Japan will soon increase the number of such ships. While China is far behind, given the fact that Japan is behind the United States. In this situation, Russia should reasonably increase the power of the army and navy, as well as look for allies with whom we have common interests. But in no case do you need to compete with these countries yourself, getting involved in a crazy arms race! You do not need to step on the same rake.
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 22 November 2013 12: 46
      0
      I do not agree, the Japanese now have 6 ships with Aegis, the rest of the ships have only ESSM or even the old Sparrow in 8 / 16 pieces per ship. Only Akizuki from non Aegis more or less.

      The PRC already has a preponderance in ships with copies of the C-300F, the preponderance in frigates, which are for the most part stronger than the classmates of light destroyers of Japan (with 8 equal to anti-ship missiles of the Harpoon class, the Japanese lose in the same SAM, MZA).

      Here under water, while the Japanese are more advanced, at the expense of Soryu, but the Chinese have more submarine + submarines.

      However, if you enter the United States for the Japanese, then it’s understandable.
      1. Guun
        Guun 23 November 2013 06: 24
        0
        The Japanese submarine fleet is a huge danger to the PLA Navy, the Soryu submarines can cause terrible damage.
  4. Stiletto
    Stiletto 22 November 2013 11: 59
    -1
    Once I bought a Chinese lantern, pontoon in appearance, like a ship in the picture. He put it in his pocket, and after an hour of shuffling through the bushes while fishing, he only scooped out a bunch of spare parts from his pocket. laughing
    And since then, I have to admit, I am somewhat prejudiced against Chinese "high technologies", although I have heard a lot about high-quality, factory China ...
    1. Kibalchish
      Kibalchish 22 November 2013 12: 01
      +4
      In China, they also make fairly high-quality things. The days of "consumer goods" are over.
      1. mambito
        mambito 22 November 2013 12: 15
        +3
        In China, they really know how to do quality things, but there is one but, or even several. Firstly, most of the production is made according to Western technologies, on Western machines, according to Western standards and not the Chinese are at the head of such industries. All that China basically represents is cheap labor, somewhere you can sympathize with the Chinese.
        1. Guun
          Guun 23 November 2013 06: 26
          +1
          China wins due to cheap labor. But the sword and shield of China are forged by OUR specialists for their big money, do not forget about it and the Chinese teach this.
  5. major071
    major071 22 November 2013 12: 00
    +5
    055 type ships will be equipped with a railgun gun

    This is by chance not the two guns that we recently discussed? wassat
  6. Poruchik 90
    Poruchik 90 22 November 2013 12: 08
    +3
    Quote: Stiletto
    although I heard a lot about high-quality, factory China ...


    I can say with confidence that China can do very high quality, this is a fact. They drive us this bullshit, but for the West and Americans, they do very high-quality things.
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 22 November 2013 12: 20
      +3
      quote-Destroyers Type 052D are the most powerful naval surface ships of the PLA Navy, are a further development of Type 052С ships
  7. Onyx
    Onyx 22 November 2013 12: 16
    +1
    The Chengdu is the 10th Chinese ship of the Aegis system.
    I do not understand, where does China and the Aegis system? The article is some kind of nonsense
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 24 November 2013 22: 44
      +1
      Quote: Onyx
      I do not understand, where does China and the Aegis system? The article is some kind of nonsense

      This refers to the Chinese version of Aegis or Zhonghuashendun. The Chinese are far advanced in this matter. For example, they created their own version of Link 16, JSIDLS (Joint Service Integrated Data Link System). They created an analogue of the UVP Mk-41, diameter 850 mm., Three options for the length of 9,7 and 3,3 m. It is possible to launch any rocket with a hot start.
  8. The comment was deleted.
  9. Kair501
    Kair501 22 November 2013 12: 26
    0
    He’s like a hike with Arly Burke. He is at least very similar in appearance.
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 22 November 2013 12: 52
      +3
      No, it was stripped from 052С, only they threw the С-300Ф drums replacing the UVP with 64 cells (in the 96 burke).

      Also replaced the radar blades, the old ones stood on the 052С, and ours helped them to create. On 052D, new, purely Chinese development. Well, the architecture itself has changed.

      By the way, the gun they have 1 barrel with a recoil mechanism from AK-130. At first they just wanted to shove the AK-130, making it a fashionable stealth case. But then they changed their minds. Although they bought a license to issue AK-130 from Arsenal.
    2. sasska
      sasska 23 November 2013 17: 37
      +1
      how elegant the EM type "Modern" is and - how much this china looks like a chest ...
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 24 November 2013 22: 46
        0
        Quote: sasska
        how elegant the EM type "Modern" is and - how much this china looks like a chest.

        EM type "Modern" is no longer modern. And the question of elegance is quite controversial, everyone has their own opinion on this issue ...
  10. masterovoy
    masterovoy 22 November 2013 12: 28
    +1
    China is rapidly building up its naval grouping, primarily to create superiority in the South China Sea, in five to six years it will achieve this goal and seize all the disputed islands and the shelf. And even the combined forces of the South China Sea countries will not be able to resist it, and the United States, as always, will "throw" its satellites. This will certainly happen if China is not blown up from the inside ...
  11. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 22 November 2013 12: 37
    +3
    Railgun again! Well, there are no real working versions in the world and in the near future at least in the next 30 years it will not appear. All there are are multi-ton monsters powered by individual power plants and a rate of 1 shot per day. That is, if you put it on a ship, you will have to do the guidance the entire hull of the ship and nearby should be a floating power plant.
  12. indiggo
    indiggo 22 November 2013 15: 50
    +1
    China has an understanding of where to move, gradually from a very backward Navy they have become a force to be reckoned with, they are not embarrassed to adopt other people's experience. namely, the airborne firefighting system, which makes it possible to carry a combat load at a smaller size, while they took the first steps based on the Russian understanding of the Navy, it’s no secret that we are behind many of the Navy.
  13. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 22 November 2013 16: 26
    0
    HQ-9 copy of the S-300 PMU 1. The development of the early 90's with a range of up to 100 and a height of up to 30 km and with Aegis and the rocket the standard has little in common, although the original is somewhat superior to it.
  14. indiggo
    indiggo 22 November 2013 16: 50
    +2
    it is China that does not sit still. and HQ-9 modern air defense. which can make a noise, and the ships from China with HQ-9 are many times more than ours,
  15. alone
    alone 22 November 2013 22: 14
    +1
    China is a very dangerous country. Even if friends always need to be on the alert. They are not in vain arming themselves at such a pace. There is clearly something going on in the region.
    1. Guun
      Guun 23 November 2013 06: 31
      0
      He starts to fall. It is called the United States creeps into all the cracks, even in the ass to another state, just to be there and screw up. If something does not happen with China in the next 5-10 years, the Dragon will become a headache for everyone who is more someone less. Do not underestimate the power of China!
  16. mountain
    mountain 23 November 2013 09: 45
    0
    As far as I remember from history, ships not only need to be able to build, but also learn how to fight. And this is another topic.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 24 November 2013 22: 49
      +1
      Quote: mountain
      As far as I remember from history, ships not only need to be able to build, but also learn how to fight. And this is another topic.

      Well, if you have something to learn, then the rest is a matter of time, but if only intentions and big words, then everything else is empty ...