X-band frequency radar does offer higher resolution by default but there's a lot that can be done with advanced wave forms and detection algorithms. This is how Artisan and SAMPSON with S-band can detect threats to the size of a cricket ball - depending on range. RN don't seem to be too fussed by this and seem to be confident threats can be dealt with. Also, despite the smaller size of GaN modules, everyone seems to be mounting them at the same height as the heavy PESA units - so not much benefit seems to be gained by the technology. The AMDR SPY-6 stack includes both S-band and X-band - exactly the same as the current setup with SPQ-9B sitting at the top providing horizon scan in X-band. X-band is not new for USN warships - just an update to technology.[/quote]
'The AMDR SPY-6 stack includes both S-band and X-band' AN/SPY-6 is only S-band
jimthelad wrote:Currently SPY-6 only is working in S band. There are software and hardware faults on the X band unit.
AN/SPY-6 is S-band, there is not nor ever has been an X-band version with "software and hardware faults on the X band unit" , original plan for the AMDR was for both new X and S band radars for the Burke III, the X-band was cancelled to keep within budget at the time and continue to use the X-band AN/SPQ-9B until later, now proceeding with the new FXR
Old RN wrote:
The current X-band radar on USS Fitzgerald failed to see a massive merchant ship bafore
they collided near Japan in 2017!
The investigation into the Fitzgerald collision conducted by Rear Adm. Brian found that the X-band radar switch that toggles between short to long pulse was inoperable and left fixed in long pulse mode. Radar should have been in short pulse mode for higher-fidelity view of what’s closer to the ship to aid the watch standers. Seven sailors died, not something to make like of.
shark bait wrote:
NickC wrote:Reminds of the old saying spoil the ship for a ha'pworth of tar, they spoil something completely by trying to make a small economy
Not really true, Artisan is a perfectly capable radar for the intended role. The RN's T26 is not intended to have broad area air defence capabilities, the RN have little requirement for more of that thanks to the highly capable T45.
For detecting sea skimmers, or other threats within visual range Artisan should be highly capable mainly thanks to some state of the art signal processing and software derived from the Sea Viper system. Artisan should require fewer scans to create a high quality data point sufficient for weapons release, coupled with the extra height thank to the low weight it gives the T26 crucial extra seconds to counter a sea skimmer.
You raise interesting point that if Artisan not for broad area defence why use S-band, you can apply to the same "state of the art signal and processing requiring fewer scans to create a high quality data point sufficient for weapons release, coupled with the extra height thank to the low weight (X-band would be lighter) it gives the T26 crucial extra seconds to counter a sea skimmer" to a X-band radar which has twice the definition of an S-band radar.
No doubt as always a trade off and value judgement, S-band as a better as a long range and all round radar , though perhaps use the intermediate C- band as all round radar or X-band with its higher definition for surface radar. Artisan as smaller lower cost derivation of the Sampson S-band which is designed for broad area defence, or a more expensive dual radar system with S and X-band radar? Other navies using dual radars eg USN S and X, Italians with the PPA full with C and X and similar with Japan with their FCS 3 again with C and X, whereas French FTI with new SeaFire 500 is a GaN four panel array S-band.
The French Horizon AAW class Forbin destroyer with its EMPAR C-band radar and PAAMS shot down a US Coyote Mach 2 sea skimming missile target in 2012, as far as know no Artisan/SeaCeptor equipped frigate has been tested to prove its capability against Mach 2 sea skimmers, so have to take on faith its effective.