FFG-500 Fletcher Class -- Advanced Frigate

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: FFG-500 Fletcher Class -- Advanced Frigate
dwightlooi 10/20/2007 12:34:28 PM

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/5466/revolutionen6pv1.jpg">

http://img105.imageshack.us/img105/6273/ffgxfrontqrtqy8iz9.jpg">

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/1955/sonarcloseupzg5un1.jpg">

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/8421/undersidejn5gk6.jpg">

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/601/frontweapcloseupld5ie9.jpg">

http://img105.imageshack.us/img105/4201/exhaustcloseupcj1lk5.jpg">

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/5650/rearweapcloseupcn0pg0.jpg">

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/2954/lineartbs2ad2.gif">

http://img105.imageshack.us/img105/1844/ffgxlineartvq2uv9.jpg">

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

BLUIE006 10/27/2007 10:03:50 PM

SPY-3

+ The Aussie CEAFAR Active Phased Array Radar and CEAMOUNT Active Phased Array Target Illuminator

Quote Reply

Herald1234 10/28/2007 1:57:54 AM

Hmm i would be surprised if SPY-3's volume search range was beyond SM-2 ER's max range. Perhaps it is for sector search.

The DBR brochure lists SPY-3 as having "limited volume/sector search" capability.

DBR Brochure

So Raytheon at least thinks this is a limitation.

AAW frigates carrying APAR typically have a long-ranged radar to supplement it. (e.g. SMART-L on the F124)

AMFRS (which is based on SPY-3) has a 70+km detection range, according to the Sea TENTACLE thesis I posted previously. I don't know if it's the same size and power output as SPY-3 though.

You misread the brochure, I suspect in that you misinterpreted sector isolate as meaning limited tracking area coverage. i also suspect that you are underestimating the dual band radar MER.

That's fine, as I suspect that if you are confused here, then so are our enemies.

And that is a good thing.

Herald

Quote Reply

WarNerd dwightlooi 10/28/2007 5:10:48 AM

Otto cycle is spark ignition..

Diesel cycle is compression ignition.

Gas turbines are Rankine cycle.

Steam turbines use any of a number of permutations of the basic Carnot cycle.

Quote Reply

B.Smitty 10/28/2007 10:14:31 AM

I was just reading the brochure. VSR has a check box in "Volume Search/TWS", SPY-3 doesn't.

So do you believe it's reasonable to expect a 3 panel SPY-3 to simultaneously perform all of these tasks more effectively than a dual-band solution? I suspect it'd be better to build a smaller SPY-3F and add a high power aperture S- or L-band radar for volume search. That way SPY-3 can focus on it's strengths.

Quote Reply

B.Smitty 10/28/2007 11:09:51 AM

If the common use case for this frigate's radar is to spend its power budget like so, (i'm making these numbers up)

- 60% Volume Search/TWS
- 20% Surface Search/Periscope detection, NSFS support
- 20% Reserved (illumination, ESSM uplink, sector search, etc.)

Then why not realize that 60% as an S-band AESA array optimized for volume search?

Quote Reply

dwightlooi 10/28/2007 11:56:40 AM

(1) The SPY-3 has to be able to reach a range equal to or greater than the range of the SM-2ER. The SM-2ER is a semi-active homer and the SPY-3 is the only illumination asset for the SM-2 on the DDG-1000.

(2) On the DDG-1000, the SPY-3 and an S-band VSR (Volume Search Radar) is integrated at the waveform level. The reason for the S-band array is to support extremely long range air search -- probably to support a secondary anti-ballistic missile role.

(3) Perhaps you should consider this... a fighter X-band AESA is typically around 0.7m~1m in diameter. The SPY-3 has an aperture 7 to 14 times larger than that and has -- unlike a fighter -- practically unlimited power supply and cooling resources. Now ask yourself what the effective range of the latest fighter AESA is. Take that number and at least double it and you have a reasonable estimation for the SPY-3.

(4) European ships use that use the APAR usually pair it with a SMART-L mechanically rotating long range air search radar. The reason is that the APAR is a 1m class X-band. The SPY-3 is practically a magintude larger. The advantage of an X-band radar is that its resolution is much higher than with an L-band which greatly benefits target discrimination and tracking accuracy.

(5) The DBR, SPY-3 annd VSR, are all 3-panel solutions. The DDG-1000 uses 3 VSRs and 3 SPY-3s.

Quote Reply

B.Smitty 10/28/2007 5:01:05 PM

(1) The SPY-3 has to be able to reach a range equal to or greater than the range of the SM-2ER. The SM-2ER is a semi-active homer and the SPY-3 is the only illumination asset for the SM-2 on the DDG-1000.

SPY-3 has to be able to ILLUMINATE out to the max range of SM-2ER. It doesn't have to provide volume search out that far. That's a big difference.

(2) On the DDG-1000, the SPY-3 and an S-band VSR (Volume Search Radar) is integrated at the waveform level. The reason for the S-band array is to support extremely long range air search -- probably to support a secondary anti-ballistic missile role.

As far as I've read, DDG-1000 doesn't do the ABM mission. Of course that could change.

(3) Perhaps you should consider this... a fighter X-band AESA is typically around 0.7m~1m in diameter. The SPY-3 has an aperture 7 to 14 times larger than that and has -- unlike a fighter -- practically unlimited power supply and cooling resources. Now ask yourself what the effective range of the latest fighter AESA is. Take that number and at least double it and you have a reasonable estimation for the SPY-3.

Fighter-class radars aren't designed for volume search either. That's why we have AWACS (which don't operate in X-band). Plus, fighter radars aren't designed to detect very small RCS cruise missiles. They're designed to detect 1m^2 RCS, fighter-sized targets.

(4) European ships use that use the APAR usually pair it with a SMART-L mechanically rotating long range air search radar. The reason is that the APAR is a 1m class X-band. The SPY-3 is practically a magintude larger. The advantage of an X-band radar is that its resolution is much higher than with an L-band which greatly benefits target discrimination and tracking accuracy.

X-band wins in resolution but loses in atmospheric absorption. Plus, since APAR is a 4 panel array, SPY-3 is "only" a bit more than 4 times the size.

Another reason to stay away from one frequency band is that it complicates the enemy's ECM task.

Quote Reply

dwightlooi 10/28/2007 5:28:33 PM

SPY-3 has to be able to ILLUMINATE out to the max range of SM-2ER. It doesn't have to provide volume search out that far. That's a big difference.

Actually, the search range will be more than the fire control tracking range. That is the case for EVERY radar up to this point

As far as I've read, DDG-1000 doesn't do the ABM mission. Of course that could change.

The DDG-1000 will nonetheless be capable of the task. The SPY-3 + VSR combo is not just intended to be a DDG-1000 "thing". It is the next generation standard US radar for naval ships with an air defense role. The intent is to use the same setup on the CGX and the CVN-21. Depending on the maturity of the system in about 2 years, it may also be fitted to the transitional CVN-77 USS George Bush.

Fighter-class radars aren't designed for volume search either. That's why we have AWACS (which don't operate in X-band). Plus, fighter radars aren't designed to detect very small RCS cruise missiles. They're designed to detect 1m^2 RCS, fighter-sized targets.

Fighter radars perform volume search with and can detect and track fighter sized targets out to 200+km. If the cruise missile has an RCS 1/10th that of a fighter the search range such a radar against such targets is around 100km. The THAAD radar is an example of a very high power, and long range X-band radar. This is a 25,000+ element (typical fighter AESA is ~1500 element) AESA operating on the X-band and is capable of tracking ballistic missiles with great accruacy and resolution out to about 600~700km. It supports the THAAD missile system which has an intercept range of about 200km. The Sea Based X-band radar is capable of "several thousand kilometers" and is X0band as its name suggests.

X-band wins in resolution but loses in atmospheric absorption. Plus, since APAR is a 4 panel array, SPY-3 is "only" a bit more than 4 times the size.

??? The number of panels has nothing to do with the range or the aperture. The APAR used 4 panels because it is unable to provide 120 degree coverage. For the same reason 4 SPY-1s are used on current AEGIS ships. The power and aperture of the radar is only dependent on the aperture of EACH panel regardless of how much area it covers. A radar say twice the power of the APAR, but using just one panel is still twice as powerful as the APAR because only ONE of the four APAR arrays can be used on any one vector at any one time.

Another reason to stay away from one frequency band is that it complicates the enemy's ECM task.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/library/news/2007/space-070308-mda01.jpg">
^ THAAD X-band radar ^

http://www.murdoconline.net/pics/sbx-thumb.jpg">
^ Sea Based X-band Radar (SBX) ^

Quote Reply

B.Smitty 10/28/2007 6:32:25 PM

What do either of those radars have to do with frigate-based volume search radars?

Quote Reply

B.Smitty 10/28/2007 6:46:42 PM

The THAAD radar is nearly twice the size of a SPY-3 panel and only has one mission - BMD. It doesn't have to multitask with all the other missions that SPY-3 does and I wonder about it's coverage area.

SBX is a monster - the active aperture is 248 m^2 (vs 5.7 m^2 for a SPY-3 panel). It has the rotating mass of a small frigate!

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT