Help support TMP


"China’s most advanced destroyer - The Nanchang" Topic


8 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2009-present) Message Board


Areas of Interest

Modern

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Ruleset


343 hits since 13 Jan 2020
©1994-2020 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP13 Jan 2020 3:14 p.m. PST

"China officially commissioned its first Type 055 guided missile destroyer, the Nanchang, on Sunday in what it hailed as a "leap forward" for its naval modernisation programme.

A grand ceremony was held in Qingdao, a major naval base in the eastern province of Shandong, on Sunday morning, state news agency Xinhua reported.

The Nanchang was launched in June 2017 and made its public debut in a naval parade to mark the 70th anniversary of the PLA Navy in April last year…"

link


Main page

link

Amicalement
Armand

arealdeadone13 Jan 2020 4:52 p.m. PST

Meanwhile the US Arleigh Burke program is looking at being cut down from 2 ships per annum to 1 and current US ships are lacking in anti ship capability.

The PLA probably has complete dominance in the first island chain and can probably do a lot of damage to the second island chain and increasingly the third island chain.

The US navy on the other hand is dying a slow death of lack of training, lack of investment and convoluted design processes.

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP13 Jan 2020 8:33 p.m. PST

Yea, I saw someone float an idea of mothballing a bunch of our Burkes – more than 50% of them, IIRC.

A really stupid idea given the current world situation, and the need for vessels to possibly take down MRBMs, IRBMs, ICBMs, not to mention their normal sea-going duties as well, with a growing Chinese navy, and ongoing threats in the Middle East from Iran.

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP14 Jan 2020 11:35 a.m. PST

Glup!….

Amicalement
Armand

arealdeadone14 Jan 2020 2:06 p.m. PST

Thresher01, and to make matters even more ridiculous Congress is prohibiting the Navy from retiring a number of old Ticonderoga-class cruisers, which means lots of resources dedicated to keeping old maintenance heavy ships in service when the USN is lacking in manpower and facilities to maintain such a fleet.

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP14 Jan 2020 8:25 p.m. PST

I think they need a "GoFundMe" page, since I also agree with not retiring the Ticos too.

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP15 Jan 2020 11:24 a.m. PST

(smile)


Amicalement
Armand

arealdeadone15 Jan 2020 3:39 p.m. PST

Thresher, the Tico's are increasingly maintenance heavy (as are all ships) and the USN no longer has the capacity to maintain it's current fleet. The number of navy yards has shrunk and most haven't seen any significant investment since WW2 and are crumbling.

link

Keeping old maintenance heavy ships in service when the current infrastructure is barely coping or in some cases not coping just means making the system even more unsustainable.


Numbers of hulls and hypothetical capabilities might bring joy to armchair generals, politicians and wargamers alike but they are meaningless if these systems aren't functional.

Then there's issues with staffing and training. Again numbers of hulls and hypothetical capabilities mean squat if crews aren't adequately trained. And last few years have seen a number of incidents that reveal poor crew training ranging from CH-53 collisions to 2 destroyers being colliding with civilian ships.


The Navy has to get basics right before ramping up hull numbers.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.