Idiot question

Somewhat interestingly in this regard, the German F125 frigates will have the planes of their MFR spread over both masts in order to both achieve full 360-degree coverage, and have redundancy in case of combat damage to one of the two masts.

The MFR will be optimized for short- to medium-range high-resolution surveillance, backed up by a 360-degree EO/IR system to reliably spot small-signature targets. All effectors will have their own EO/IR systems in addition to that, and not rely on the main radar systems.

Wan: Thanks mate, I do remember the trials and them being successful but the pic I saw recently had the CEA-FAR mounted in a diamond fashion rather than Squar fashion in the pics here and they were not add ons but actually built into a module right where the fire control radar is in those pics and the FCR was moved atop this module, I will look for it harder when I get some time (hahaha yeah good joke, me with time on my hands 🙁 )

As for the old Gift Fleet River class Destroyer, yes it is still there, I saw it last week end when I went to my dad’s place. The bow of this vessel is at the jetty entrance of Fleet Base East right on Sydney Harbour- I remember seeing it there when I was in the navy. The stern of the same vessel is preserved on the Parramatta River at Parramatta and you pass it when you catch the Rivercat from Circular Quay to Parramatta, I used to live just around the corner from it and some times sitting under it reflecting on my life- this was before I was in the navy. If you are interested, I’ll head up there and get some pics, it really is rather interesting, just wish we could put all the pieces back together and bring her back to life as a museum ship, there aren’t many vessels around today from that era and none of the Gift Fleet exist today which is really sad.

2005_S1401_01
HMAS Arunta installed with trial version of CEA phased array radar

(Date taken: 09 September 2005)

http://www.defence.gov.au/media/download/2005/sep/20050909a.cfm

2005? the trial is already 3 years old?????:confused:

I do have a feeling i might have read about it being fitted to one of the Anzac’s for trials…….

Oh, and there is an old HMAS Parramatta still rusting away on the banks of the Hawkesbury.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Parramatta_(D55)

Ok I can’t find the pic, but I was looking at it and thought, that’s odd, I didn’t know we had formally accepted CEA-FAR yet, can you or anyone else enlighten me?

posted on http://icc.skku.ac.kr/~yeoupx/ANZAC.htm and http://www.innovation.gov.au/…/profile_5.html

F-151 Arunta (from http://www.defence.gov.au/media/download/2005/sep/20050909a.cfm. These are the lo-res. Hi-res available too)

“HMAS Arunta was fitted with a single FAR panel for tests during 2003. It is expected to fit the completed system to ships between 2008 and 2010. Options for instillation include a multi-panel version of the trial installation, or mounting them on the mast”
www.geocities.com/randomsran/AnzacFFH.html

Obviously at odds with previous pic (unless by ‘single panel’ it is referring to a single mount with 2 panels, which appears the case here http://www.cea.com.au/products_services/phased_array/phased_array01.html)

“In completing this testing CEA has taken a significant step towards finalising the evolution of its fourth generation digital active array radar. This development commenced following trials onboard HMAS ARUNTA in 2004. The first two deliverable systems are currently in production at CEA’s facilities and are due for delivery in December 2009, with system level grooming and integration commencing in 2008.”
http://www.cea.com.au/news_media/pdfs/2007/CEAFAR_Media_Release_19Dec07.pdf

“The expected delivery date for the first of class is june 2011”
http://www.cea.com.au/news_media/pdfs/2008/CEAFAR-ADM-Dec%2007%20Jan%2008.pdf

Ok I can’t find the pic, but I was looking at it and thought, that’s odd, I didn’t know we had formally accepted CEA-FAR yet, can you or anyone else enlighten me?

I do have a feeling i might have read about it being fitted to one of the Anzac’s for trials…….

Oh, and there is an old HMAS Parramatta still rusting away on the banks of the Hawkesbury.

Ok I can’t find the pic, but I was looking at it and thought, that’s odd, I didn’t know we had formally accepted CEA-FAR yet, can you or anyone else enlighten me?

Uni: Mate I was looking at a pic the other day of HMAS Parramatta and it looks like CEA-FAR is already fitted to it, I’ll see if I can dig out a pic.

Which is precisely why the RAN is evaluating CEA-FAR for future deployment across the fleet.

Unicorn

Thinking in RN terms, why not fit multiple phased arrays on the type-45 to eliminate this problem?

How would it solve the problem, they would be unlikely to have a larger range then the existing Sampson, they would add unneeded topweight and they wouldn’t have the resolution of the Sampson either.

Just to those who think Aegis is better because “aster sucks” or some other reason, if you have a look at all the new build european ships they all have one thing in common, with the exception of the F100’s. This one common thing is either an AESA or small phased array radar being mounted on a radar tower above the bridge at a fair height. The advantage of this is that you extend your radar horizon, giving you a longer engagement time against sea skimming targets, for example the T45’s have their radar at twice the height above the water as the USN has the phased arrays on their burkes.

If it were a big problem, it wouldn’t have been standard on a lot – and I do mean a lot – of ships to have main search air/surface radar sitting lower and either to the front or rear of a secondary air search radar. It’s been common practise forever.

Thinking in RN terms, why not fit multiple phased arrays on the type-45 to eliminate this problem?

In a word yes. The air plot is generally assembled from various different sensors local and offboard. It isnt necessary for the MFR to emit to ‘gap fill’ for the superstructure masked arc usually though. This is because the LINK picture from another vessel, whos masked arc will differ, would fill in the blanks.

This seems like a pretty major design limitation.

On an advanced AAD warship like the Type-45, can radars like SAMPSON also be used for air-search to cover the forward arc when it’s not being used for engagement?

Well as you can see the answer has been covered, now to delve back into my memory to give rough specs…

IIRC, the arch blinded is usually only about 6*-8*, now in close terms, this doesn’t amount to much, but spread that out over 200Nm and the gap not covered equates to a fair distance. This then becomes an operational requirement for the fleet (or just the ship if operating alone), to change it’s heading roughly every half hour.

You can counter this with either dual air search radars or have a forward mounted search radar finally you can have a “Minimal Structure” mast allowing for minimal interferance with the radar such as what is on our FFG’s down here

HMAS Sydney

They don’t. That’s why you should really go on diet for your NavCom mast.
And don’t fall into the all-in-one trap (e.g. F100 class). One hit there and you’re blind, deaf, and mute.

Just wait ten years, till all the fancy future stuff, that Signal writes about comes on line. 😀

With warships where the search radar is mounted at the rear, how does the radar see through the mast to scan forwards?

Turn to port. The mast only covers a little arc.

They don’t.