Chinese Type-054A Frigate compared

[Aamir Hussain]

Thank you. This is exactly what I was pointing out as well in my earlier post and I believe Penguin was going in the same direction.

 

[rcrmj]

So, if I understand your use of the term correctly, fully indigenous refers to production rather than development. Well, that's one way of looking at it.

well according to ur standard, virtually nothing in this world is indigenous! every bit of development of technology nowadays in this world is somehow based on others. so the only viable definition of indigenous is by the production but not development.

 

[Penguin]

well according to ur standard, virtually nothing in this world is indigenous! every bit of development of technology nowadays in this world is somehow based on others. so the only viable definition of indigenous is by the production but not development.

Well, there is a difference between a full domestic development, such without or with foreign components, licence produced versions, and domestic developments of licence produced foreign gear, I would think. THis whole 'indigenous' discussion seems rather silly. Domestic production is domestic production, it is not necessarily indigenous development. Let's call an apple an apple and an orange and orange.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

Well, there is a difference between a full domestic development, such without or with foreign components, licence produced versions, and domestic developments of licence produced foreign gear, I would think. THis whole 'indigenous' discussion seems rather silly. Domectic production is domectic production, it is not indigenous development. Let's acall an apple an apple and an orange and orange.

None of the parts in the 054A is foreign produced or licensed. We can produce it whenever we feel like it.

You keep trying to prove it is but there is no evidence.

 

[Penguin]

I think you're missing the point. I'm not trying to prove anything, least of all what China CAN or CANNOT produce. However, we are discussing when and when not the term indigenous is appopropriate.

Now, if none of the parts are foreign or licensed, why are e.g. the engines listed as 4 x SEMT Pielstick 16 PA6 STC diesels?
e.g. here: Type 054A frigate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

China imported the 16 PA6V-280 STC diesel technology in the late 1990s and is now producing the diesel locally under license at Shaanxi Diesel Factory

.
Type 054A Jiangkai-II Class Missile Frigate - SinoDefence.com

 

[tanlixiang28776]

I think you're missing the point. I'm not trying to prove anything, least of all what China CAN or CANNOT produce. However, we are discussing when and when not the term indigenous is appopropriate.

Now, if none of the parts are foreign or licenced, why are e.g. the engines listed as 4 x SEMT Pielstick 16 PA6 STC diesels?
e.g. here: Type 054A frigate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

.
Type 054A Jiangkai-II Class Missile Frigate - SinoDefence.com

You also realize that site says there are only 6 type 054A when there are actually ten right? Sinodefence hasn't been updated in at least half a decade.

Actually they were bought. Enough for 12 type 054 or type 054A. That has been used in the two type 054 and 10 type 054A in service. Yet they're are still being cranked out.

 

[applesauce]

You also realize that site says there are only 6 type 054A when there are actually ten right? Sinodefence hasn't been updated in at least half a decade.

Actually they were bought. Enough for 12 type 054 or type 054A. That has been used in the two type 054 and 10 type 054A in service. Yet they're are still being cranked out.

this is a good point, china only has a limited amount of the engines however that amount has been reached, no new orders have been placed, yet they are still making more 54A's meaning they either have completely replaced the engines or have mastered how to build them at home

 

[Jigs]

Well, there is a difference between a full domestic development, such without or with foreign components, licence produced versions, and domestic developments of licence produced foreign gear, I would think. THis whole 'indigenous' discussion seems rather silly. Domestic production is domestic production, it is not necessarily indigenous development. Let's call an apple an apple and an orange and orange.

There is barely any country in the world in naval shipbuilding that has fully indigenous ships. U.S. and Russia are the only ones that come to mind.

 

[Penguin]

You also realize that site says there are only 6 type 054A when there are actually ten right? Sinodefence hasn't been updated in at least half a decade.

Actually they were bought. Enough for 12 type 054 or type 054A. That has been used in the two type 054 and 10 type 054A in service. Yet they're are still being cranked out.

It is irrelevant.

Didn't you say earlier : "None of the parts in the 054A is foreign produced or licensed."? The above statement would suggest that to be inaccurate.

Irrespective of the number of Tpye 054A, those particular SEMT-Pielstick engines are made under license by Shaanxi Diesel Engine Works, China
SEMT Pielstick - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[us1956]

It is irrelevant.

Didn't you say earlier : "None of the parts in the 054A is foreign produced or licensed."? The above statement would suggest that to be inaccurate.

Irrespective of the number of Tpye 054A, those particular SEMT-Pielstick engines are made under license by Shaanxi Diesel Engine Works, China
SEMT Pielstick - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

so which country China gets the license to build 054A and 054A-II ?
HHQ-16 is a join research/development by China and Russia; HHQ-17 has a better range (80 km), i am wondering what stopping them from fielding on 054A series ?
what most people know about 054A is just speculated from some pictures from the net; so far, no official confirmation or specs for it

 

[applesauce]

It is irrelevant.

Didn't you say earlier : "None of the parts in the 054A is foreign produced or licensed."? The above statement would suggest that to be inaccurate.

Irrespective of the number of Tpye 054A, those particular SEMT-Pielstick engines are made under license by Shaanxi Diesel Engine Works, China
SEMT Pielstick - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

then he is wrong, though we have no "official" sources at least the engines for the earlier units are not chinese

nothing wrong with acknowledging this weakness, it is well known anyhow, the hope is that they have overcome this though

 

[Penguin]

SEMT Pielstick was acquired by MAN, it is now a brand of the MAN Diesel Group
GSG - S.E.M.T. Pielstick, a brand of the MAN Diesel Group

MAN licensee page: MAN Diesel & Turbo - LICENSEES
Lists Shaanxi among other (chinese) producers

Propulsion 052b/052c
2 x Zorya-Mashproekt DN80 gas-turbines
2 x MTU Friedrichshafen 12V 1163TB83 diesels
i.e. 4x2=8 of the 12V 1163TB83 diesels

Propulsion 052
112 Harbin - 2 General Electric LM2500 gas-turbines, 55,000 hp (41 MW) + MTU Friedrichshafen 12V 1163TB83 diesel, 8,840 hp (6.5 MW)
113 Qingdao - 2 x Ukraine GT-25000 gas turbines, 48,600 hp (35.7 MW) + MTU Friedrichshafen 12V 1163TB83 diesel, 8,840 hp (6.5 MW)
i.e. 2x2=4 of the 12V 1163TB83 diesels

Propulsion 054/A
4 x SEMT Pielstick 16 PA6 STC diesels

In April 2002, the Franco-German company SEMT Pielstick announced that China had licensed 8 x Type 16 PA6 STC marine diesel engines for 2 new frigates. These 8 engines were built under licensed by Shaanxi Diesel Engine Works, and used to equip the 2 Type 054 Frigates, #525 Ma'anshan, and #526 Wenzhou.

The same engine is used in India's P17 Shivalik class, built under license in India by Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. (KOEL) since 2000, which has been a licensee for (other) S.E.M.T. Pielstick engines since 1982. The company has a manufacturing plant a Nashik, Maharashtra. It provides propulsion engines to the Indian Navy and Coast Guard.
http://www..com/articles/-Naval-Con...Kirloskar-Oil-Engines-Limited-KOEL-India.html

For the Shivalik's diesels, the arrangement was that the first two engines were to be manufactured in France by S.E.M.T. Pielstick, while the subsequent engines would be manufactured in India by KOEL in their Nasik engine plant.
Bharat-Rakshak.com :: NAVY - Project 17 (Shivalik) Class

It is (very) likely that a similar deal was struck between S.E.M.T. Pielstick and Shaanxi. It's a popular diesel engine family for frigates: while LaFayette used SEMT Pielstick 12 PA6 V 280 STC, the derivative Saudi Al Riyadh class uses the 16 PA6 STC diesel engine as well.

Now, check with the SIPRI Trade register
SIPRI Arms Transfers Database — www.sipri.org

Ask for exports by France and Germany to China for 1995 through 2009: you will see exact exports and while they include 14 diesels (MTU-1163) in the 1994-2005 timeframe "for 4 Luyang, 1 Luhai and 2 Luhu destroyers produced in China", there are no - zero - SEMT Pielstick 16 PA6 STC exports to China registered. Which suggests all diesels of that type used by China were license built ...

That's just engines ... We've already talked about electronics. And it applies to arms as well: both the compact 100mm of 054 and the 76mm gun of the 054A for example are licensed products, as are the Type 630 gatling guns. They may be locally built but they most certainly were not locally designed originally.

Don't get me wrong, they are great (and original) ship designs but many of the subsystems are not indegenously developed. That actually applies to ships of most modern navies. And there is no shame in that. It just means that the chestpounding about indigenousness in most cases is appropriate only in as far as production is concerned. It is great if you can make stuff at home, but it doesn't automatically mean you are or will be continuing to move forward (witness earlier phases in the Chinese military, where stuff was made under license and then nothing new happened for many decades)

 

[Beast]

SEMT Pielstick was acquired by MAN, it is now a brand of the MAN Diesel Group
GSG - S.E.M.T. Pielstick, a brand of the MAN Diesel Group

MAN licensee page: MAN Diesel & Turbo - LICENSEES
Lists Shaanxi among other (chinese) producers

Propulsion 052b/052c
2 x Zorya-Mashproekt DN80 gas-turbines
2 x MTU Friedrichshafen 12V 1163TB83 diesels
i.e. 4x2=8 of the 12V 1163TB83 diesels

Propulsion 052
112 Harbin - 2 General Electric LM2500 gas-turbines, 55,000 hp (41 MW) + MTU Friedrichshafen 12V 1163TB83 diesel, 8,840 hp (6.5 MW)
113 Qingdao - 2 x Ukraine GT-25000 gas turbines, 48,600 hp (35.7 MW) + MTU Friedrichshafen 12V 1163TB83 diesel, 8,840 hp (6.5 MW)
i.e. 2x2=4 of the 12V 1163TB83 diesels

Propulsion 054/A
4 x SEMT Pielstick 16 PA6 STC diesels

In April 2002, the Franco-German company SEMT Pielstick announced that China had licensed 8 x Type 16 PA6 STC marine diesel engines for 2 new frigates. These 8 engines were built under licensed by Shaanxi Diesel Engine Works, and used to equip the 2 Type 054 Frigates, #525 Ma'anshan, and #526 Wenzhou.

The same engine is used in India's P17 Shivalik class, built under license in India by Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. (KOEL) since 2000, which has been a licensee for (other) S.E.M.T. Pielstick engines since 1982. The company has a manufacturing plant a Nashik, Maharashtra. It provides propulsion engines to the Indian Navy and Coast Guard.
http://www..com/articles/-Naval-Con...Kirloskar-Oil-Engines-Limited-KOEL-India.html

For the Shivalik's diesels, the arrangement was that the first two engines were to be manufactured in France by S.E.M.T. Pielstick, while the subsequent engines would be manufactured in India by KOEL in their Nasik engine plant.
Bharat-Rakshak.com :: NAVY - Project 17 (Shivalik) Class

It is (very) likely that a similar deal was struck between S.E.M.T. Pielstick and Shaanxi. It's a popular diesel engine family for frigates: while LaFayette used SEMT Pielstick 12 PA6 V 280 STC, the derivative Saudi Al Riyadh class uses the 16 PA6 STC diesel engine as well.

Now, check with the SIPRI Trade register
SIPRI Arms Transfers Database — www.sipri.org

Ask for exports by France and Germany to China for 1995 through 2009: you will see exact exports and while they include 14 diesels (MTU-1163) in the 1994-2005 timeframe "for 4 Luyang, 1 Luhai and 2 Luhu destroyers produced in China", there are no - zero - SEMT Pielstick 16 PA6 STC exports to China registered. Which suggests all diesels of that type used by China were license built ...

That's just engines ... We've already talked about electronics. And it applies to arms as well: both the compact 100mm of 054 and the 76mm gun of the 054A for example are licensed products, as are the Type 630 gatling guns. They may be locally built but they most certainly were not locally designed originally.

Don't get me wrong, they are great (and original) ship designs but many of the subsystems are not indegenously developed. That actually applies to ships of most modern navies. And there is no shame in that. It just means that the chestpounding about indigenousness in most cases is appropriate only in as far as production is concerned. It is great if you can make stuff at home, but it doesn't automatically mean you are or will be continuing to move forward (witness earlier phases in the Chinese military, where stuff was made under license and then nothing new happened for many decades)

China Air and Naval Power: Response to recent UPI articles by Andrei Chang

As for this claim "Along with the Type 956E/EM missile destroyer, the Chinese navy received subsystems from Russia including the Fregat M2EM 3D radar and MR-90 tracking radar and sonar. The same radar system has been seen on China’s domestic Type 054A missile frigate (FFG)."
For the "Fregat clone" Sea Eagle search radar, what the Russians and Andrei do not seem to realize is that this series has been in service since the 90s with DDG 167. Although the earlier version is a single faced radar, one can clearly see the similarities between that radar and the current Sea Eagle. If you look closely at the rotating arms and radar faces (Sea Eagle has far more rows of antenna), you can see clear difference in both part. Looking at some recent Chinese sales brochure, the latest version of Sea Eagle seems to be operating on H band, compared to E band for top plate and C band for earlier Sea Eagle. In fact, a recent article says that the recent Sea Eagle radar is the culmination of a 10 year project going through the most intensive testing procedure of any Chinese naval radar.

As for MR-90 tracking radar, there are less information on this, but looking similar in the exterior does not mean it works the same way on the inside. The sensors used on 054A has higher requirements than their Russian counterparts. The Russians are simply over flattering themselves to assume that China would copy the systems as they are.

Sometimes, appearance may count little in some circumstances.. If you open up the equipment and observe it. You will find eveything inside is unknown to the orignal thing. How can you called something is copy when the complete set has its internal different?

As I am not trying to imply the info you provide now is wrong.. But previous stance that you claim China copy Russian Fregat system is unfound.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

SEMT Pielstick was acquired by MAN, it is now a brand of the MAN Diesel Group
GSG - S.E.M.T. Pielstick, a brand of the MAN Diesel Group

MAN licensee page: MAN Diesel & Turbo - LICENSEES
Lists Shaanxi among other (chinese) producers

Propulsion 052b/052c
2 x Zorya-Mashproekt DN80 gas-turbines
2 x MTU Friedrichshafen 12V 1163TB83 diesels
i.e. 4x2=8 of the 12V 1163TB83 diesels

Propulsion 052
112 Harbin - 2 General Electric LM2500 gas-turbines, 55,000 hp (41 MW) + MTU Friedrichshafen 12V 1163TB83 diesel, 8,840 hp (6.5 MW)
113 Qingdao - 2 x Ukraine GT-25000 gas turbines, 48,600 hp (35.7 MW) + MTU Friedrichshafen 12V 1163TB83 diesel, 8,840 hp (6.5 MW)
i.e. 2x2=4 of the 12V 1163TB83 diesels

Propulsion 054/A
4 x SEMT Pielstick 16 PA6 STC diesels

In April 2002, the Franco-German company SEMT Pielstick announced that China had licensed 8 x Type 16 PA6 STC marine diesel engines for 2 new frigates. These 8 engines were built under licensed by Shaanxi Diesel Engine Works, and used to equip the 2 Type 054 Frigates, #525 Ma'anshan, and #526 Wenzhou.

The same engine is used in India's P17 Shivalik class, built under license in India by Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. (KOEL) since 2000, which has been a licensee for (other) S.E.M.T. Pielstick engines since 1982. The company has a manufacturing plant a Nashik, Maharashtra. It provides propulsion engines to the Indian Navy and Coast Guard.
http://www..com/articles/-Naval-Con...Kirloskar-Oil-Engines-Limited-KOEL-India.html

For the Shivalik's diesels, the arrangement was that the first two engines were to be manufactured in France by S.E.M.T. Pielstick, while the subsequent engines would be manufactured in India by KOEL in their Nasik engine plant.
Bharat-Rakshak.com :: NAVY - Project 17 (Shivalik) Class

It is (very) likely that a similar deal was struck between S.E.M.T. Pielstick and Shaanxi. It's a popular diesel engine family for frigates: while LaFayette used SEMT Pielstick 12 PA6 V 280 STC, the derivative Saudi Al Riyadh class uses the 16 PA6 STC diesel engine as well.

Now, check with the SIPRI Trade register
SIPRI Arms Transfers Database — www.sipri.org

Ask for exports by France and Germany to China for 1995 through 2009: you will see exact exports and while they include 14 diesels (MTU-1163) in the 1994-2005 timeframe "for 4 Luyang, 1 Luhai and 2 Luhu destroyers produced in China", there are no - zero - SEMT Pielstick 16 PA6 STC exports to China registered. Which suggests all diesels of that type used by China were license built ...

That's just engines ... We've already talked about electronics. And it applies to arms as well: both the compact 100mm of 054 and the 76mm gun of the 054A for example are licensed products, as are the Type 630 gatling guns. They may be locally built but they most certainly were not locally designed originally.

Don't get me wrong, they are great (and original) ship designs but many of the subsystems are not indegenously developed. That actually applies to ships of most modern navies. And there is no shame in that. It just means that the chestpounding about indigenousness in most cases is appropriate only in as far as production is concerned. It is great if you can make stuff at home, but it doesn't automatically mean you are or will be continuing to move forward (witness earlier phases in the Chinese military, where stuff was made under license and then nothing new happened for many decades)

Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. (KOEL) has had a long relationship with SEMT Pielstick. KOEL's original plant is in Pune, India from 1958. Actually KOEL is part of the Kirloskar Engineering group that was started in 1888. This plant in Nashik is dedicated to the higher power engines. These Pielsticks are based on SEMT Pielstick' s original design in the medium speed range. It was only later that MAN-B&W took over the company. These engines have the feature of being very compact for their power range. But the earliest Pielsticks were hard to maintain/overhaul because of size/compact design issues. Which got ironed out later. Some Deutz and MAN marine engines were also part of the KOEL range.

There have been other licencees of Pielstick world-wide:
Colt-Pielstick — Fairbanks Morse — United States
Crossley-Pielstick — Rolls-Royce — United Kingdom (sold under the Crossley name)
Doosan-Pielstick — Doosan Heavy Industries Construction Co (DHICO) — Republic of Korea
Hyundai-Pielstick — Hyundai Heavy Industries — Republic of Korea
Kirloskar-Pielstick — Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. — India
Lindholmen-Pielstick — Lindholmen Motor AB — Sweden
Pielstick — Shaanxi Diesel Engine Works — China
Wärtsilä-Pielstick — Wärtsilä Turku Factory — Finland

Wartsila India is another company in India that makes Marine diesel engines in a similar range as Kirloskar Pielstick.
Smaller High speed Diesel engines for Patrol craft etc are made by Ruston and Hornsby (India) which includes MWM engines.

All the above are licensed manufacture by either Licencees in JV or Local subsidiary companies.

 

[Penguin]

China Air and Naval Power: Response to recent UPI articles by Andrei Chang



Sometimes, appearance may count little in some circumstances.. If you open up the equipment and observe it. You will find eveything inside is unknown to the orignal thing. How can you called something is copy when the complete set has its internal different?

As I am not trying to imply the info you provide now is wrong.. But previous stance that you claim China copy Russian Fregat system is unfound.

Listen, I'm not going to do a line by line item comparison or discussion. It is besides the point. I've illustrated the engine issue. I could go on about torpedoes and SAMs. And sensors. Or ship helicopters. I've not suggested its all copies, but Chinese ships - including Type 054 - do make use of license produced equipment. But then, so do India's indigenous P17 Shivalik. and South Korea's indigenous KDII. I have not issue with that, so long as one doesn't pretend to have invented the wheel (rather than having borrowed the design)