Air Battlespace & Remote Radar Heads

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
Post Reply
BlueD954
Member
Posts: 233
Joined: 02 Oct 2020, 05:11
Singapore

Air Battlespace & Remote Radar Heads

Post by BlueD954 »

https://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTIC ... HTML&src=0

II.1.5)
Short description of the contract or purchase(s):
Repair and maintenance services. Provide first and second line maintenance personnel capable of replacing the RAF Trade Group 4 (TG4) personnel supporting the three T101 radars in the FaIklands and the T102 radar at RRH Portreath. The radars and Air Battlespace Management (ABM) equipment must be maintained to the level and standard currently provided by military technicians. Additionally, all associated tasks currently carried out by TG4 personnel must be provided as a service by the contractor.

II.2.1)
Total quantity or scope:
Provide first and second line maintenance personnel capable of replacing the RAF Trade Group 4 (TG4) personnel supporting the three T101 radars in the Falklands and the T102 radar at RRH Portreath. The radars and Air Battlespace Management (ABM) equipment must be maintained to the level and standard currently provided by military technicians. Additionally, all associated tasks currently carried out by TG4 personnel must be provided as a service by the contractor.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Air Battlespace & Remote Radar Heads

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

BlueD954 wrote:personnel supporting the three T101 radars in the Falklands and the T102 radar at RRH Portreath.
Looks like we have them (the improved Giraffes) in abundance.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

BlueD954
Member
Posts: 233
Joined: 02 Oct 2020, 05:11
Singapore

Re: Air Battlespace & Remote Radar Heads

Post by BlueD954 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
BlueD954 wrote:personnel supporting the three T101 radars in the Falklands and the T102 radar at RRH Portreath.
Looks like we have them (the improved Giraffes) in abundance.
I think the radars aren't giraffes.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Air Battlespace & Remote Radar Heads

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

BlueD954 wrote:the radars aren't giraffes
If they are not Saab... they are?
- Oz got theirs (the AMBs) slightly before us
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Air Battlespace & Remote Radar Heads

Post by Lord Jim »

I thought the Radars were Giraffes, procured specifically for the Falklands, where as the make up of the remaining Land Ceptor systems has yet to be determined. By the way aren't those in the Falklands Army and the remaining ones are likely to be also as we have not sufficient units on order to protect the Army when deployed and RAF Stations. Hence the need to order more or have the RAF Regiment retain the Rapier FSC which is still a good system for point defence. As per usual a "Joint" unit has become slanted towards the needs of one service through lack of capacity.

BlueD954
Member
Posts: 233
Joined: 02 Oct 2020, 05:11
Singapore

Re: Air Battlespace & Remote Radar Heads

Post by BlueD954 »

Lord Jim wrote:I thought the Radars were Giraffes, procured specifically for the Falklands, where as the make up of the remaining Land Ceptor systems has yet to be determined. By the way aren't those in the Falklands Army and the remaining ones are likely to be also as we have not sufficient units on order to protect the Army when deployed and RAF Stations. Hence the need to order more or have the RAF Regiment retain the Rapier FSC which is still a good system for point defence. As per usual a "Joint" unit has become slanted towards the needs of one service through lack of capacity.
No type shows they are not. Giraffes are part of the Sky Sabre system for Land Ceptor but the RRHs use Raytheon-made radars. The UK Air Battle Space Management radars are not Giraffes but radars at range out to 250 nm (I believe)

https://www.monch.com/mpg/news/36-radar ... %20sources.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Air Battlespace & Remote Radar Heads

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

That (link) clears it; RAF, not the army.
Finally, the RRH at Portreath is equipped with BAE Systems’ AR-327 Commander S-band (2.3-2.5/2.7-3.7GHz) ground-based air surveillance radar, which also has a circa 250nm range. All of these radars provide comprehensive coverage of almost the entirety of the British Isles.
- of the many listed, only this one made in the UK
- like the three on Falklands

Those three (not because there is anything wrong with their spec, but because of the topography down there) needed the AMBs added, so as to leave no gaps.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

indeid
Member
Posts: 271
Joined: 21 May 2015, 20:46

Re: Air Battlespace & Remote Radar Heads

Post by indeid »

The three T101 give good coverage, the G-AMBs are being added due to the change from FSC to Sky Sabre and not for broader Air Surveillance. The 303SU CRC is being upgraded with Project Guardian so hopefully that will allow the G-AMBs to brought into the picture to add some resilience.

The T101s are near the end of life so their replacement could include the Giraffes when looking at the coverage map.

A new LTR25 has just arrived at Brize and is going to plug into the UK Air Defence system, replacing the TPS77 that moved back to Saxa Vord. No idea if that is an indication of future purchases to replace the T101s.

Post Reply