The potential AEGIS futre and possible upgrades.

I have been flicking through a book called “Navies in the Nuclear Age by Conways” In the section about naval radars and command systems it mentions that in the Kongo the Japanese use their own fully distributed command management system called OYQ-6. The section goes onto say that European designers regard this system as being superior to its US counterpart whilst US sources feel it was just a job creation exercise for the Japanese electronics industry. Does anybody have any idea which perspective is correct or is it a mix of both?

Furthermore (and seperate from the above mentioned book) I am intrigued as to whether there has ever been any consideration given to the idea of upgrading the AEGIS system by fitting it with AESA antennaes or would this provide insufficient enhancment to justifie the expense?

Also how does this http://www.cea.com.au/products/cwi/ceamount.html compare to the SPG-62 directors currently used bu AEGIS ships?

Thanks in advance sealordlawrence.

I think you may agree also that it is software and newer/faster computers that are really making sensors live up to the promise. Do some research on what the Super Hornet ( AESA air to air and air to ground ) is doing and where the Aussie Wedgetail ( AESA/MESA ) is going. Where we are still discovering what AESA can do and how new faster computers allow for more progress. AESA tech just isn’t a sensor. One would think especially with a larger number of sets that can be on a destroyer or larger class ship that with it’s power generation ability available, you will see soft kill at range and hard kill in close becoming a reality someday. Not to mention AESA for example will be a high bandwidth transceiver for full motion images between platforms when needed and a jammer. One would think if the advances go well, todays legacy anti-ship missiles would have a hard time performing their mission after having their sensor burned up/suppressed-jammed or the airframe itself destroyed close in a la Phalanx. All with a concept that started out to be just a sensor.

The indigenous development of OYQ-6 battle management system is redundant but that’s the case in many Japanese weapons procurement. We can go as far as to say it’s a tradition.

The OYQ-6 system manages Link-11/14 data and ORQ-1 data from helicopters through a set of UYK-7 and a set UYK-20 computer. It is interfaced with various UYA-4 consoles.

Newer ships have been upgraded with the OYQ-7 system based on the UYK-43 computer and UYK-4 fire control computer. Consoles been upgraded with colour display UYQ-21/OJ-194.

What’s funny is that the whole system is still based largely on American made components i.e. the computers.
Sounds like a rip-off to me… but qute a few different surface platform use the same system.

Japanese use their own fully distributed command management system called OYQ-6. The section goes onto say that European designers regard this system as being superior to its US counterpart whilst US sources feel it was just a job creation exercise for the Japanese electronics industry. Does anybody have any idea which perspective is correct or is it a mix of both?

The Japanese have some slightly different equipment than what the US has, their consoles are different (same with all the other foriegn Aegis buyers, just about everyone chooses to go with home grown consoles) and their SPY signal processor is different, other than that the CND program should be roughly the same though they don’t have some of the features the USN has (I don’t know what the exact differences are, sorry).

the SPY3 will be aesa. and have common backend to sensor fusion the separate search and attack function front ends.

the illuminator you posted does look better than the old round dishes the DDGs use today. one of these maybe able to guide multiple SM2 continuously unlike the current ones. 32 SM2 down the throat of a inbound Mirage-III strike would be gud :diablo:

The Japanese are quite proficient at specifying indigenous equipment to do a similar or inferior job to currently available foreign military equipment, at a quite scandalous mark up.

Cases in point include the F1 and T2, the F2, the Type 90 MBT and various other items.

Cost effectiveness tends to go out the window in Japanese procurement.

But then they are hardly Robinson Crusoe in that regard

Unicorn