Talk:Type 054A frigate

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Split from Type 054 frigate because the Type 054A is substantially different.

Specifications[edit]

Why is the Specifications section still around when there is already a infobox? If there is no objections I will remove specifications.

Koxinga CDF (talk)

12 Frigates[edit]

Type 54A: 529 舟山 /Zhoushan, 530 徐州 /Xuzhou, 538 烟台 /Yantai, 546 盐城 /Yancheng , 547 unknown, 548 益阳 /Yiyang, 549 常州 /Changzhou, 550 四平/Siping, 568 衡陽 / Hengyang (formerly known as 巢湖 /Chaohu), 569 玉林 / Yulin, 570 黃山 / Huangshan, 571 運城 /Yuncheng and 572 unknown

¿¿¿¿546 盐城 /Yancheng,550 四平/Siping, 547 unknown and 572 unknown???? 2011

http://www.jeffhead.com/TYPE054A/index.htm

¿¿¿and 586 unknown??? Improved Variant

4 Frigates[edit]

Type 54B

Number active - 5 August 2015[edit]

This Janes article is being used to claim 20 ships are in service. The article says:

The PLAN is expected to operate a class of up to 22 ships and, according to IHS Jane's , Huanggang is the 20th vessel.

From previous articles, Janes does not track ships by the order that they are commissioned. They track them by the order that they are noticed (presumably close to their laying down order.) Without further qualification, it would be speculating to say that "20th vessel" means "20th commissioned", as opposed to "the 20th ship we noticed is now commissioned."

I welcome other sources that would shed light on the status of ships 1-19. If it can be shown that they are all commissioned, then there would be no doubt about Huanggang being the 20th commissioned. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 22:59, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Number active - 5 Agust 2015[edit]

This official Chinese source [1]

The above Chinese source clearly stated that 20 054A were delivered to the Chinese navy as of 07/03/2015. There were still one under going sea trail. This confirmed the Janes statement as well, that Huanggang is the 20th vessel being commissioned. Janes article

Also, (RevelovingPersonalityConduct) your source from US DoD uses information from 1/1/2014 to 12/31/2014, which does not include 1/1/2015 to 8/1/2015. During this time, 3 more 054A were commissioned which was pointed out by Janes but your source did not catch it.

At last, [2]

Visit the above Chinese source, it clearly stated how many 054A were build, they also have source attached to them. You will just argue that it is just like Wikipedia, but go read the source attached them !!


--199.116.175.123 (talk) 23:04, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's nowhere near to being an official Chinese source; it's not published by an organization, or written by person, that could be called experts in the sibject area. Janes is more authoritative, and you are misinterpreting it, as is often the case with you. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 23:10, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Baike Baidu is a wiki. As per WP:USERGENERATED, it is not a reliable source. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 23:14, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is official source, you just can not argue with it. Also, the material confirm what Jane stated !!!

As for Baike. The source I attached is the Chinese equivalent of English 054A page. Just go read the Chinese Baike [3], it has all the 054A ship commissioning information backed up with actual source just like Wikipedia. I ask you to read them !

Please.

--199.116.175.123 (talk) 23:17, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And another thing, using http://www.janes.com/article/48139/china-commissions-type-054a-frigate-into-east-sea-fleet to justify listing the other ships as "active" is irresponsible, not only because of the above concerns, but also because the other ships aren't even mentioned in the article. It's extrapolation on a grand scale. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 23:46, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Saying "read another wiki" is not a substitute for sources on Wikipedia. If you think the individual sources used by Baike to mark each ship as "active" are good, then you should add them, each of them, to the Wikipedia table. That would resolve the problem.

Say, do that in the next 24 hours. Because as things are now the sources on Wikipedia do not support what you claim and I will revert the current version. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 13:04, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken this to WT:SHIPS. I have also discovered that the Jane's article China adding towed sonars to Type 054A, Type 056 vessels by Andrew Tate (31 August 2014) states:

The images, published on the cjdby.net website, show a large aperture cut out of the transom and installation of mechanical handling gear on Type 054A hulls 19 & 20 (Pennant number 576, Huangshi and 577, Huanggang ).

This backs up the interpretation that the "20" in the Jane's article China commissions Type 054A frigate into East Sea Fleet means "20th hull" not "20th commissioned.

Furthermore, the Chinese "source" is a redirect of a user post on a Chinese forum. [4] redirects to [5], which is the mobile version of [6]. Therefore, the Chinese-language source is not WP:RS due to WP:USERG.

I am now waiting for thoughts on WT:SHIPS before proceeding. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 05:25, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] 

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I have reverted RevelovingPersonalityConduct's last edit. The reasons are clearly stated as below.

Adding additional reliable Chinese source to back up the truth.

[7] This source is from Chinese news media and it is original not some redirected stuffs.

The above source clear says that there are in fact more than just 20 054A active in the Chinese navy. "中国海军装备的054A型护卫舰数量已经超过了20艘，成为当仁不让的主力舰艇." Translation: " Chinese navy has commissioned more than 20 054A, 054A has become the work horse of the navy."

This material confirmed what Janes source stated. See Jane's source [8]

At last to debunk "RevelovingPersonalityConduct's" argument. His source is from the Dod Annual report. Which is from 2014, as its materials repeated stated:

1. "Preparation of this report cost the Department of Defense a total of approximately $92,000 in Fiscal Years 2014-2015. This includes $3,000 in expenses and $89,000 in DoD labor."

This clearly means that this report covers stuffs from 1/1/2014 to 12/31/2014. Yet RevelovingPersonalityConduct stated that as of May/31/2015, which is clearly not true.

2. At page 5 of the DoD report: "During 2014, the PLA continued to improve its capabilities for theater contingencies, including: cruise missiles; short- and medium range ballistic missiles; high performance aircraft; integrated air defense; information operations; and amphibious and airborne assault. "

Once again, it says that it is from 2014 no where near did it mentioned May/31/2015. As we all know by know, China commissioned additional 3 054A by June, 29/2015 as it was stated on multiple reliable Chinese and western English source ! Yet, he keeps arguing.

3. At page 12 of the DoD report it once again stated: "In 2014, China started reclaiming land and building enhanced infrastructure at its outposts in the Spratly Islands. When complete, these facilities could include harbors, communications and surveillance systems, logistics support, and at least one airfield. "

Throughout the DoD annual report. It mentioned the year 2014 countless amount of time, but NEVER once did it mention May/2015. Yet he keeps trying to push his agenda through. The same behavior can be found on the Type 93 submarine page as well. He keeps using outdated source to vandalize the 093 article as well by say that there are only 2 093 active as of May/29/2015, where there are sources proving the otherwise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.116.175.123 (talk) 12:46, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yet with overwhelming evidence, RevelovingPersonalityConduct keeps deleting recent, updated, and reliable source and only keeps his own source. More importantly, he lied about the time and date of his source by stating that: "As of May/31/2015." When the truth from his own source clearly stated that the materials he present was only valid from 1/1/2014 to 12/31/2014.

Therefore, with the above overwhelming evidence. I reverted his edit. But I did not remove his source, simply corrected it.

Thank you.

--199.116.175.123 (talk) 12:32, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  1. 199.116.175.123 continues to misinterpret the contents of Jane's article "China commissions Type 054A frigate into East Sea Fleet" (see above for quotation from article and supporting quotation from Jane's article "China adding towed sonars to Type 054A, Type 056 vessels".)
  2. The qq.com article "蓝水海军的中坚：054A护卫舰" claims 20 are commissioned. As seen above, this is not the same thing which is said by the Jane's article "China commissions Type 054A frigate into East Sea Fleet" (again, see above) so using both to support the idea that 20 are commissioned is inappropriate.
  3. The qq.com article "蓝水海军的中坚：054A护卫舰" is severely lacking in expert credentials. (Who are the authors? What are their sources? These things are conspicuously missing, as is often the case with random articles from the Chinese web.) "Newer" has nothing to do with reliability; indications of journalistic integrity, academic rigour, and editorial review do. An old reliable source is superior to a newer source of dubious provenance. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 23:55, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You continue to argue with bad errors. To point out your mistakes from beginning.

1. According to your own source which is only valid up to 12/31/2014. There are 17 054A active at the time which is true. According to Jane, the 20th 054A was active since 7/2015, this means that even if the 18th and 19th 054A were still on sea trail, there should be at least 17+1=18. 18 054A active. However, you continue to make mistakes stating that there are only 17 054A active. You made a very bad calculating mistake !! I am sure you have been to grade school right?

2. You remove recent and update source including the Jane's source, while claiming that only your own source is reliable and also stated that Jane is reliable as well, but you ended up removing them many times. Most important of all, you got caught lying about your own source! More importantly, I added another reliable and update source confirming what Jane's source. You never the less call it "unreliable", despite the fact that you got caught lying.

In the light of all this, you should already be dismissed.

However, we need to reach a consensus about the content. That is the status quot. Both your outdated and my recent and update source should be kept as the way it is, with date clearly stated.

Thank you, and please stop reverting this page. I will add sources later on to provide detail commissioning and building information for each 054A

--199.116.175.27 (talk) 13:13, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are not addressing my points.

  1. You have failed to make a reasoned argument against why the two Jane's articles point to the conclusion that Huanggang is the 20th hull, not the 20th commissioned.
  2. Which in turns makes it impossible for you to reconcile the qq.com article with the Jane's sources.
  3. You have failed to show why the qq.com article should be considered a reliable source. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 01:45, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: number of commissioned Type 054As[edit]

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
There is consensus that 20 refers to the number of ships made by the date of the source. AlbinoFerret 15:02, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Jane's article "China commissions Type 054A frigate into East Sea Fleet" by Ridzwan Rahmat (20 January 2015) reports the commissioning of Huanggang, and says:

The PLAN is expected to operate a class of up to 22 ships and, according to IHS Jane's , Huanggang is the 20th vessel.

Should this quotation be used to support the position that there are 20 Type 054As commissioned? - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 01:45, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

  • Oppose, see my reasoning in the discussion below - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 01:45, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Assuming that the article is a WP:RS, I think the information it provides is quite clear. It says that Huanggang was commissioned on January 16, 2015, that it's the first of this class commissioned in 2015, that there are expected to be 22 ships of this class and that Huanggang is the 20th. I see it as a sufficient support to the statement that as of January 2015 20 ships have been commissioned. 5 Jiangkai II-class ship are to join the East Sea Fleet, the rest presumably are assigned elsewhere. “WarKosign” 05:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Partial support. The Janes article clearly states it is the 20th vessel, and I don't see clear reliability problems at first glance. That part of the content is fine. With WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NOTNEWS in mind though, I don't think it's important to mention the expected number of ships until they are actually completed. Kingofaces43 (talk) 17:56, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Threaded discussion[edit]

The images, published on the cjdby.net website, show a large aperture cut out of the transom and installation of mechanical handling gear on Type 054A hulls 19 & 20 (Pennant number 576, Huangshi and 577, Huanggang ).
This suggests in the Rahmat article, "20" refers to the hull number, not the number of ships commissioned.- RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 01:45, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • At best, the Jane's article can only imply that there were 20 last January, even setting aside Roving's doubts. This will change; who is committed to coming back and updating this article when the run of 22 is finished? It is best to avoid using now about things not now fixed. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:20, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The source says that the hull was laid down in 2013, and by 2015 the ship was complete. It makes sense that in August 2014 it's still referred to as hull #20, it doesn't contradict the fact that on January 2015 it was the 20th commissioned ship. “WarKosign” 05:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

"Airplaneman ", please stop RovingPersonalityConstruct from vandalizing this article. Keep kept trolling this article for over a month. Please see the above contents for reasons. He was proven wrong on many occasions yet he kept on going. His most laughable and lame excuse is to call other people's source unreliable and remove them all together, even with highly reliable source such as Jane's. He was proven wrong and made major mistake on the content's date information yet he did not even bother to explain, also. It seems that he has problem counting from 1 to 18.

Please stop him from vandalizing this article.

Thank you,

--199.116.175.73 (talk) 12:55, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been fully protected until the end of the month. Airplaneman ✈ 14:32, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Thank you Airplaneman for stopping RovingPersonalityConstruct, however, if you could please take a close look at his behavior. I am afraid that once the article is unlocked. He will be right back and vandalizing them again.

I will be taking a close look and watch him closely from now on, once he starts his trolling and vandalizing behaviors. I will notify you.

Have a nice day.

--199.116.175.73 (talk) 18:39, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19th and 20th 054A commissioned, according to Jane's Defense[edit]

Hello, the 19th and 20th 054A have been commissioned. The source is provided.

Thank you.

--2602:306:B8BF:C0:7D22:6BA9:4B09:DFBC (talk) 05:12, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Type 054A frigate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:51, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Type 054A frigate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:56, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"OTH"?!?[edit]

"Type 344 Radar (Mineral-ME Band Stand) OTH target acquisition and SSM fire control radar" OTH means "over the horizon". This radar is not an OTH radar, especially not with I/J band wavelengths. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over-the-horizon_radar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_344_radar How did this get into the article? Is there any other reason why it would be "OTH" with some other meaning? 13:08, 19 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lastdingo (talk • contribs)

"C-803"?[edit]

I know nothing about Chinese navy designations, but according to the page on the missile, there is no such missile as the "C-803", and that it is an "erroneous speculative designation for export versions of the C-802". Unless that is wrong, it shouldn't be "803" on this page, because we are not referring to export weapons here, and according to that the designation never existed anyway.


Idumea47b (talk) 05:39, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Type_054A_frigate&oldid=1213164641"