tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post5087112397105344937..comments2024-03-28T07:56:09.239-07:00Comments on Navy Matters: Dual Band Radar ReviewComNavOpshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-62166942557784578182022-05-14T06:38:00.539-07:002022-05-14T06:38:00.539-07:00Most radars are classified by band (S, X, etc.) an...Most radars are classified by band (S, X, etc.) and most modern radars can use multiple frequencies within that band. The TPQ-37 Firefinder radar, for example, is an S-band with 15 frequencies.<br /><br />Additional information is readily available from Internet searches.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-11291923073501186942022-05-14T01:24:37.880-07:002022-05-14T01:24:37.880-07:00Hello sir can someone share any data on missile ra...Hello sir can someone share any data on missile radars being fabricated with two different frequency bandsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-14895007902933990072019-08-09T19:01:41.740-07:002019-08-09T19:01:41.740-07:00Sadly, and repeatedly, the Navy seems bereft of an...Sadly, and repeatedly, the Navy seems bereft of any ability to learn lessons. You'll recall that many of these lessons are identical to those learned (and forgotten!) from the original Enterprise (CVN-65) 'beehive' radar which wound up being removed from the ship. The lessons also duplicate lessons from the LCS program and others.<br /><br />So, yes, the Navy has had ample OPPORTUNITY to learn the lessons but adamantly refused to actually learn from their mistakes and seems intent on repeating the mistakes over and over.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-68071893224029913522019-08-09T18:57:37.764-07:002019-08-09T18:57:37.764-07:00You list five very important "lessons to be l...You list five very important "lessons to be learned from the DBR program." Didn't the Navy already know these lessons before the Ford was designed?<br />WMillardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12561616098371488685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-90766067078842927742017-05-11T10:13:55.486-07:002017-05-11T10:13:55.486-07:00A bit off topic:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.co...A bit off topic:<br /><br />http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-calls-for-ditching-new-launch-system-aboard-aircraft-carriers/article/2622772<br /><br />Could EMALS be going the same way? <br /><br />"President Trump has expressed his displeasure with a new system for launching planes from the next generation of Navy aircraft carriers, and said in an interview that he's ordered the Navy to scuttle the high-tech electromagnetic system in favor of an old-fashioned steam catapult."JFWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16095723023404412328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-20314025367359256542017-05-11T10:01:11.586-07:002017-05-11T10:01:11.586-07:00"So PLAN is evidently comfortable "overs..."So PLAN is evidently comfortable "overspeccing" its carriers in this respect."<br /><br />Or, they may have a different tactical use in mind for their carriers. US carriers don't need high tech radars because they're surrounded by Burkes and Ticos for defense and Burkes, Ticos, and Hawkeyes for linked radar pictures. The Chinese are not at this point yet and may believe that their carriers will have to actively engage in sensing and fighting for the foreseeable future until they can build up a fleet of their own Aegis escorts. Just speculation on my part.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-15293732476466385952017-05-11T09:53:28.650-07:002017-05-11T09:53:28.650-07:00See: http://imgur.com/a/ToCbB
1. Varyag as she ar...See: http://imgur.com/a/ToCbB<br /><br />1. Varyag as she arrived in China.<br />2. CV-16 Liaoning today.<br />3. CV-17 Shandong at launch,Leviathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08956710013916432106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-41168486098092363942017-05-11T09:36:40.547-07:002017-05-11T09:36:40.547-07:00PLAN fit CV-16 Liaoning with Type 346 APARs as on ...PLAN fit CV-16 Liaoning with Type 346 APARs as on its Type 052C destroyers (albeit only 3 faces rather than 4, dictated by island configuration I imagine). CV-17 Shandong has four Type 346A APARs, same configuration as its latest Type 052D destroyers. As AESAs, both systems are arguably superior to the SPY-1s fitted to existing Burkes and Ticos, and more closely resemble the forthcoming SPY-6 for Burke III.<br /><br />So PLAN is evidently comfortable "overspeccing" its carriers in this respect. Of course you could argue that they are simply following another of the suggested tenets: that one-off systems are a bad idea.Leviathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08956710013916432106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-76830440507645509172017-05-10T19:18:39.884-07:002017-05-10T19:18:39.884-07:00"As much as possible you want to have multipl..."As much as possible you want to have multiple valid designs from multiple suppliers for leverage and certainty."<br /><br />That's what I was getting at.<br /><br />Yet, we have been going in the other direction. Led by people who are meant to be quite intelligent.<br />- Less diverse fleets of aircraft and ships (and no alternate engine for the 'single aircraft solution = F-35', since F-136 was quite deliberately cancelled, probably due to P&W lobbying),<br />- Less prime contractors with all the consolidation that has been going on for decades. Leading to less competition. And less capacity to expand in a contingency.AMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00469631687812986881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-83332691326860138402017-05-10T14:01:35.167-07:002017-05-10T14:01:35.167-07:00Consider the "shining" example of the LC...Consider the "shining" example of the LCS. You'll recall that the LCS was touted as being heavily automated and requiring a quarter or third of a similar, older ship. However, once we account for the specialized shore-side technicians and whatnot, we realize that for all the automation the LCS has (and it has a lot) we haven't actually decreased the crew size - we just based a significant portion of the crew ashore. I've documented this in multiple posts. It's fact. Likely, if we accounted for all the LCS related personnel required to operate the LCS fleet, we'd have more "crew" than for a Perry!<br /><br />Jobs are neither created nor destroyed, they're just moved ashore!ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-87023899381286282272017-05-10T13:56:10.959-07:002017-05-10T13:56:10.959-07:00I have a personal theory about jobs that's an ...I have a personal theory about jobs that's an adaptation of the old adage, Matter Can Be Neither Created Nor Destroyed, It Merely Changes Form. As technology changes, jobs are neither created nor destroyed, they just change their functions.<br />ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-30248648554146136852017-05-10T13:14:35.617-07:002017-05-10T13:14:35.617-07:00Fair point.
It would be better to say the jobs w...Fair point. <br /><br />It would be better to say the jobs will change. What required a riveter or a paint sprayer before will require a technician, code specialist and pipefitter now. JFWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16095723023404412328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-89190839884350823922017-05-10T07:19:13.388-07:002017-05-10T07:19:13.388-07:00Remember, as a generalized statement, for every jo...Remember, as a generalized statement, for every job lost to automation, another job is gained supporting that automation. Automation requires programmers, engineers, electronics techs, mechanics to keep the robots operating, etc. Same number of jobs, just different. I've seen exactly that scenario play out in industry, repeatedly. Industry automates, thinking they'll cut jobs and costs, but find out that they need more workers who are higher skilled and cost more! Product quality and (sometimes) throughput improve but not costs or labor requirements.<br /><br />This is a generalized statement. I'm sure you can find some example, somewhere, where jobs were actually lost on a net basis.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-79674801241674495062017-05-10T05:57:40.205-07:002017-05-10T05:57:40.205-07:00It depends on what you mean by 'large'. Wi...It depends on what you mean by 'large'. Will it be like the 70's? No. But it will still employ a lot of people, and generally pay them well. Even if GM has a 70% reduction in manufacturing jobs, but productivity increases, those jobs will still be important. And the more we can increase productivity the more manufacturing jobs we can attract back home. There's more to it, obviously. But that is a key component. <br /><br />Manufacturing is a key strategic industry. High tech manufacturing even more so. We should encourage it as much as possible, IMHO. <br /><br />I'd love to find a way to get more manufacturing prowess in shipyards here; but I don't understand the industry enough to figure out ways to do it other than outright subsidies to offset cost. And those are frought with problems themselves. JFWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16095723023404412328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-75122426859983897272017-05-09T19:42:45.750-07:002017-05-09T19:42:45.750-07:00Manufacturing is returning to the US, but it isn&#...Manufacturing is returning to the US, but it isn't bringing with it many jobs. Most manufacturing is switching to increasing automation and is one of the reasons that China is very concerned that the majority of their manufacturing sector will disappear. You are starting to see some manufacturing return to the US because machines are simply cheaper than cheap chinese labor and shipping. <br /><br />Basically, modern manufacturing is not a large labor employer and likely won't ever be one again. atshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11410880091736531848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-23407293055928122152017-05-09T12:12:46.552-07:002017-05-09T12:12:46.552-07:00Some of these comments make me wonder how these fa...Some of these comments make me wonder how these false signals are dealt with. Consider that the AEGIS is also an anti ballistic missile shooter does this issue affect it still and how so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-11577121758984738642017-05-09T11:40:51.627-07:002017-05-09T11:40:51.627-07:00Without a doubt, we are not properly positioned to...Without a doubt, we are not properly positioned to fight a strategic manufacturing war. It's something we should be addressing right now.<br /><br />Our military is cognizant of the strategic value of preserving shipyards, even at the cost of higher than "normal" construction costs, and yet we ignore our overall manufacturing in areas like raw materials, as you point out.<br /><br />We are at war with China and they are using every means at their disposal while we engage in denial of reality and appeasement.<br /><br />Trump has talked about bringing US manufacturing jobs home which would be a good first step. We'll see whether that happens or if it was just a campaign sound bite.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-32735504157302318312017-05-09T09:48:15.551-07:002017-05-09T09:48:15.551-07:00Another consideration when it comes to American pr...Another consideration when it comes to American production is materials. We have plenty of oil and steel, but for electronics you often need rare earth metals. Unfortunately the US gets most of theirs from the very nation we would most likely to fight in the Pacific: China. Last year China mined 105,000 metric tons and the US mined none. The previous year we mined 4,100 tons but those mines have been shutting down due to foreign competition. Our ally Australia also produces Rare earths but most of their mining operations have been bought by companies in...you guessed it, China.John Zolmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11257809336107728415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-58231561126718186782017-05-09T09:32:49.371-07:002017-05-09T09:32:49.371-07:00Fascinating. Thanks for sharing.Fascinating. Thanks for sharing.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-87494417885852156502017-05-09T08:21:37.883-07:002017-05-09T08:21:37.883-07:00Just that dependent upon the meteorological condit...Just that dependent upon the meteorological conditions (colloquially called SPY sunrise), the phased array would generate tracks that weren't there. As SPY is the only Air Search radar on a DDG, assumptions had to be made based upon things like air speed, altitude, location and squawk whether the track was legit or not. <br /><br />On the CG, all that was needed was to check with the SPS 49. I haven't been in since 2008 so maybe this issue with phased array radars has been resolved via upgrades since then. I don't know how atmospherics will affect an X band radar, just that this did happen within the S band on the SPY-1 and SPY-3.Jay Nixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05031750833658933314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-57796989384613210142017-05-09T07:32:42.345-07:002017-05-09T07:32:42.345-07:00Fascinating. What do you mean by false track data...Fascinating. What do you mean by false track data, aside from the obvious? How/why would a similar/duplicate false track be generated by two different radars operating in two different frequency ranges? Are you suggesting that two phased array systems will interfere with each other?ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-38459304088728855192017-05-09T06:40:09.026-07:002017-05-09T06:40:09.026-07:00I got the chance to serve on a DDG and a CG. Havi...I got the chance to serve on a DDG and a CG. Having the SPS-49 onhand to provide additional track resolution was a enlightening experience. My issue with the dual band radar is that two phased array systems might end up generating similar false track data.Jay Nixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05031750833658933314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-87649637191442924162017-05-09T06:05:37.642-07:002017-05-09T06:05:37.642-07:00CNO; good point about the problems other nations f...CNO; good point about the problems other nations face. When I was in China (10 years or so ago) corruption was a major issue for their economy. If it still is, than that could be a cancer eating them that we do not see. <br /><br />Still, while I take your point about production, the WWII miracle isn't likely to happen now simply due to the fact that we no longer have the 'slack' in production capacity that we did entering '41. This is good in an economic sense (a manufacturer with an idle plant is a sick manufacturer). But it doesn't give us the 'ramp up' capability. Another major issue that I see is that we don't have the basic skilled trades being replaced as fast as needed. In an admittedly ad hoc example, a friend of mine who lives in Ohio was saying that the Lima tank plant was trying to hire; but had positions go vacant because they couldn't find the skilled trades. <br /><br />There is a website I read long ago that had an interesting write up on our production capacity from WWII:<br /><br />http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm<br /><br />Basically, it suggests that so long as we desired to stay in the war, and had even a modicum of luck, there was no way Japan could beat us from a military/logistics point of view because we were building and manning things at a faster rate than they could sink them. <br /><br />Back to the original point, I think that the (re)creation of a general board might not only have a good instant effect, but it might also have the ability to look at current industrial capacity and current designs and try to strike a balance between what we *can* build, and what can be built robustly and easily. If we could strike a middle ground it would create a situation where we can play to our technological and productivity strengths when needed in time of war. JFWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16095723023404412328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-30143039424115892112017-05-09T02:58:16.070-07:002017-05-09T02:58:16.070-07:00Hmm, any reasonably intelligent business person kn...Hmm, any reasonably intelligent business person knows that single design/single supplier is a major and significant issue. As much as possible you want to have multiple valid designs from multiple suppliers for leverage and certainty. atshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11410880091736531848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-70139360876359910622017-05-09T02:55:25.403-07:002017-05-09T02:55:25.403-07:00I'm pretty sure we have just as much space tha...I'm pretty sure we have just as much space that can be converted as we did in WW2, not that it really matters for modern production. WW2 production was largely by hand so it really didn't matter what a factory was, all you needed to covered open space. Modern manufacturing relying significantly on automation and converting from one product to the next esp from say car to aircraft would be incredibly difficult. <br /><br />As far as shipyards, I'd say we have plenty of facilities that can be converted to ship production if needed. The core of a shipyard is a dock and structure crane. We have facilities like that in spades called ports. atshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11410880091736531848noreply@blogger.com