Sunday, 31 August 2014

Placing China's Type 055 cruiser in perspective

In an earlier report we mentioned China planning to build a cruiser, the Type 055. At the time the main speculation was about what kind of role this Type 055 cruiser would play in future operations and whether the Chinese would go for a defensive setup in which the Type 055 would protect capital ships or whether China would still deploy the ship in accordance with Soviet naval tactics and use it as an offensive weapon releasing a large amount of missiles on enemy ships.

Recent statements by Mister Fang Bing, a military expert from PLA National Defense University, have given us new insights on how China plans the shape its navy. At the moment China’s most modern destroyer, the Type 052D, serves as the warship the People Liberation Army Navy (PLAN, Chinese Navy) is using to protect its capital ships. Even though the Type 052D guided-missile destroyer is an impressive opponent for China’s enemies to be faced with it still lacks the capacity to carry a lot of firepower. The Type 052D only has 64 vertical launch systems (VLS) compared to 96 on an US Navy Arleigh-Burke class destroyer and a Japanese Kongo class destroyer, and compared to the South Korean Sejong the Great class destroyer with 128 VLS .

Type 055: The design resembles a US Navy Arleigh-Burke class destroyer

These figures makes it painfully clear that China’s main rivals all have destroyers that are better armed. As such, China seeks to build warships with a bigger missile capacity. A 10.000 ton destroyer is proposed, compared to the 7.500 tons of a Type 052D class destroyer. These figures coincide with the speculated numbers of China’s Type 055 cruiser. The Type 055 should weigh around 12.000 tons and have a missile capacity of 128 VLS, giving it the same capacity as the Sejong the Great class.

Although at 12.000 tons, the Type 055 qualifies more as a cruiser then a destroyer, it should be noted that all of the mentioned destroyers, except for the Type 052D, weigh above 10.000 tons when fully armed and loaded. As such, a Type 055 can be also be called a destroyer, albeit a very large one but then again, the US Navy Zumwalt class destroyers come in at 14.500 tons .

Comparing weight and missile capacity with other ships it seems that China’s Type 055 cruiser concept is more of large modern destroyer. Even more important is the recent news that China not only plans to build a 10.000 ton destroyer but that these ships are meant to replace the Type 052D destroyers. The Type 052D currently serves to protect the PLANs capital ships, such as aircraft carriers and they are speculated to be the core of China’s carrier battle group. As such, the Type 055 would serve as a defensive warship, protecting capital ships against incoming threats like missiles, aircraft, submarines and ships. This shows that China is changing its tactics and doctrines and is copying the US Navy style of how to make and operate carrier battle groups. This also means that China would appear to abandon the Soviet missile doctrine in which destroyers and cruisers are meant to be offensive units to charge at enemy warships and unleash a large barrage of missiles once within range.

Conclusion
China’s Type 055 cruiser design turns out to be more of an attempt to build a large and modern destroyer. When compared to similar vessels of the US, Japanese and South Korean navies the Type 055 has both the same weight as missile capability. Although initially reported to be a cruiser its weight of 10.000 or even 12.000 tons makes it balance somewhere between a destroyer and a cruiser. Still, the Type 055 might be the final step that China needs to take to design warships equal to its rivals and therefor close the technological gap between the PLAN and its main rivals.
Intended to be the replacement of the Type 052D, the Type 055 might become the backbone ship in a carrier task force to protect China’s aircraft carriers against enemy threats. As such, the PLAN is mimicking the US Navy in how to set up a carrier battle group and marks the shift between an offensive Soviet missile tactic to a more modern western style of naval tactics.

3 comments:

  1. More modern western naval tactics?! What do you mean by that?
    Does this mean you implying that the Soviet naval tactics are obsolete in regard of naval surface combatant? How come? All I see is the Soviet/Russian are more sensible than western one on which the west typically place more importance on AAW instead of ASuW Ops.. Take for example; Type 45 Destroyer of the Royal Navy, last thing I heard these ships are not fitted yet with anti ship missile, then how come they fight off enemy warship with only aster missiles? They do not have carrier as of yet which means its a toothless destroyer.. I think Soviet missile tactic are useful especially if they have wide array of long range missile strike capabilities which means it is not "obsolete", just tailored to their needs..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It should be noted that naval tactics rarely become obsolete.But when we llok at the Soviet doctrine that China inhereted we can say safely that these will not match the reality that China will encounter in the future.
      Soviet doctrine is aimed at defending coastal bastions (i.e. military ports) with land based aircraft, missisle batteries and coastal defence forces in the form of a brown or green water navy.

      As China will start to project power further in the Pacific and in the Indian Ocean it will move out of the bastions and will find the need to have ships capable of AAW to confront and protect their ships against aircraft and these are capabilities the Soviet doctrines have been neglecting because they never needed them in the Bastion doctrine.

      It will be interesting to see how China will adapt its tactics and doctrines once it becomes a blue water navy. It seems likely that they will find a certain blend where frigates and destroyers will be the shooters and depoying large amounts of anti-ships missiles and where small carriers and cruisers will provide AAW over the own task forces and the attacking frigates and destroyers as they close in on their enemy.

      Delete
  2. what is realy obsolete are the terms "destroyer" "frigate" "corvete" etc,

    ReplyDelete