# Navigation radar



## RC (24 Feb 2011)

Not sure if this is the right place to ask this, but can anyone tell me if an X-band combined search radar meets the regulatory requirements for an x-band navigation radar?

In other words, if you have a combined search radar and an S-band, would you need another X-band to be legal or does the combined search radar qualify?

Also, are CF ships normally fitted with GMDSS?


----------



## NavyShooter (24 Feb 2011)

Honestly I don't know.

I would suggest checking Janes Fighting Ships, they have a public list of the radar systems fitted on CF Ships.

As for regulatory requirements, I would suggest perusing the Coast Guard's website and checking with them.  I believe that they, or Transport Canada (or perhaps the International Maritime Organization) would have the answer you seek.

NS


----------



## Torlyn (24 Feb 2011)

Combined as in x & s, or combined as in surface / air?

SOLAS requires that we have 2 RADARs for a ship our size.  Vessels over 300 tons require an X band, vessels over 3000 tons in addition to an X band require an S band.  There's nothing on SOLAS or COLREGs that says they may (or may not) be combined.  (If that's what you mean by combined...)

As for GMDSS, yeah, all CF ships are fitted.  (EPIRBs, etc.)

Hope that helps.


----------



## RC (24 Feb 2011)

Part of my problem is that Navy vessels have no need to be compliant with IMO regulations if they don't feel like it, but civvy ships almost never have combined search radars, so if I look at a frigate and it has no X-band, it doesn't necessarily mean it's rule compliant and I likely won't find a civilian reference with the search radar.

IMO regs just say something like it must have x and s band radars, but since I don't really know what a combined search radar does, I'm not sure if it qualifies as the x-band nav radar.

I guess I'm hoping someone who has used one can explain to me using nice simple words I can understand what a combined search radar is for.  Can it interface with civilian ARPA and AIS or is it only useful for combat systems?

edit:  Thanks for the answer Torlyn.  I mean combined surface / air search.


----------



## NavyShooter (24 Feb 2011)

I'll put a little more thought into this response...sorry for being a bit "obtuse" with the last one.

An open-source quote on sensors:



> Two Thales Nederland (formerly Signaal) SPG-503 (STIR 1.8) fire control radars are installed one on the roof of the bridge and one on the raised radar platform immediately forward of the helicopter hangar. The ship is also fitted with Raytheon AN/SPS-49(V)5 long-range active air search radar operating at C and D bands, Ericsson HC150 Sea Giraffe medium-range air and surface search radar operating at G and H bands, and Kelvin Hughes Type 1007 I-band navigation radar.



Here's a blurb on the KH-1007:

http://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/karte504.en.html

And, with respect to ARPA:

http://www.kelvinhughes.com/upload/pdf/brochures/ntd-arpa.pdf

I will not speak as to what systems it may have integrated, or what combat systems it's connected to.  That info might be open source on the net, but I did not see it.

I hope this helps with your query.

NS


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (25 Feb 2011)

RC: Your question is legal more than technical. The short answer is, the Navy is not subject to the Canada Shipping Act or regulations made there under other than as the Navy elects to conform to it. That is why, for instance, we can run darkened with no navigation lights showing and that possibility is indicated in the Annual Notice to Mariners (of course, we then assume responsibility for collision avoidance). This is also why the rules of the road have been incorporated into our CHP pubs - we took that regulation on ourselves. Remember that if it was not for regulation forcing them to have radar for navigation and collision avoidance (not surface search - which Merchant ships do not do), those cheap ship's owners would probably not bother providing them to their crew.

On the technical aspect of your question: While the band of a radar has influence on how accurate its picture/measurement is or how far it can scan at speeds fast enough to detect x/y/z type of contact, it is irrelevant to its employment onboard a warship: If it was all I had left, I would use my fire control radar to navigate. Many years ago, before GPS (God! Am I that old?), the coast guard decided to do maintenance on the Loran C system in the south of Nova Scotia. As a result, only one LOP could be gotten from the Loran C system for a few weeks. We were way off Yarmouth, in rain and fog for days (no astro fix), so we used that single LOP, combined it with long range bearing and distance of the tip of N.S. through our air/surface search radar (SPS 502) and used depth on ES to confirm position. In navigation, you use what you have.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (2 Mar 2011)

Most if not all of the ships also have an "extra" basic commercial X-band nav radar fitted. Submarines have one too, but it's on a temporary mount and has to be manually rigged. Those radars rarely get into "Janes Frightening Slips".

ARPA/AIS for military systems is normally a JR NCIOP. They can not only calculate CPA almost as fast as a civilian nav radar, they can do cleaning stations.


----------



## aesop081 (2 Mar 2011)

drunknsubmrnr said:
			
		

> Most if not all of the ships also have an "extra" basic commercial X-band nav radar fitted. Submarines have one too, but it's on a temporary mount and has to be manually rigged. Those radars rarely get into "Janes Frightening Slips".



Not to mention that they dont show up as a tell-tale submarine radar on people's ESM sets  >


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (2 Mar 2011)

Well....the temp radar on a boat only works if the boat is already surfaced. The power cable had to be run into an open (or at least open a couple of inches) hatch...tends to let water in the people tank if the boat is dived at the time.


----------



## aesop081 (2 Mar 2011)

drunknsubmrnr said:
			
		

> Well....the temp radar on a boat only works if the boat is already surfaced.



Yes i know. But if the boat is on the surface outside of an aircraft's radar horizon, ESM can still pick up emissions comming from the sub. Now if an LA shines its BPS-15..........If it shines a commercial radar...........


----------



## Torlyn (2 Mar 2011)

drunknsubmrnr said:
			
		

> ARPA/AIS for military systems is normally a JR NCIOP. They can not only calculate CPA almost as fast as a civilian nav radar, they can do cleaning stations.



You mean an automatic function of CCS or the KH for ARPA, and AIS?  That's a JR Mars bar on the bridge!  

By "extra" X-band, are we talking about the furuno (Sea chicken)?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (2 Mar 2011)

Torlyn said:
			
		

> You mean an automatic function of CCS or the KH for ARPA, and AIS?  That's a JR Mars bar on the bridge!
> 
> By "extra" X-band, are we talking about the furuno (Sea chicken)?



Well we have feed from the KH to the CCS in the Ops Room and yes NCIOPS and not just the junior ones keep an eye on it. As for the Furono, thats a bridge thing.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (2 Mar 2011)

It's the Sea Chicken.



> Well we have feed from the KH to the CCS in the Ops Room and yes NCIOPS and not just the junior ones keep an eye on it.



The KH just sends raw video, not ARPA though. ARPA messages are just tracks, not video.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (2 Mar 2011)

drunknsubmrnr said:
			
		

> It's the Sea Chicken.
> 
> The KH just sends raw video, not ARPA though. ARPA messages are just tracks, not video.



Agreed.


----------



## RC (3 Mar 2011)

Thanks for the responses all.



			
				drunknsubmrnr said:
			
		

> Most if not all of the ships also have an "extra" basic commercial X-band nav radar fitted. Submarines have one too, but it's on a temporary mount and has to be manually rigged. Those radars rarely get into "Janes Frightening Slips".
> 
> ARPA/AIS for military systems is normally a JR NCIOP. They can not only calculate CPA almost as fast as a civilian nav radar, they can do cleaning stations.



This is sort of what I expected and I suspect the extra X-band is to conform with IMO rules, not because the Navy has to, but simply to set the example that the Navy is equal to and better than civvies, not just different.  But if it's unnecessary redundance, simply there for cheap optics, I'd prefer to avoid it rather than further clog the navcom forest.

Navies nowadays frequently seem to ask for SOLAS compliance and then have silly fights with IMO (such as arguing for certification despite painting their rescue boats grey instead of orange) or silly solutions (such as manually folding forward nav masts that obstruct the main gun when they are up).

I am trying to figure out whether the extra x-band is really necessary or whether it is a silly or outdated solution to a perceived problem.

Really, I should be able to ask my C4IS integrator this question, but they have proven to be remarkably ignorant on the subject of civilian regulations.  It's like military and civilian navcom specialists speak a completely different language, can't understand each other, and I can't understand either of them (/whine off).

PS. Out of curiosity, why do you call the Furuno a sea chicken?


----------



## Torlyn (3 Mar 2011)

drunknsubmrnr said:
			
		

> It's the Sea Chicken.
> 
> The KH just sends raw video, not ARPA though. ARPA messages are just tracks, not video.



Yes, the CCS gets a feed from the KH, but we still get ARPA information from the KH directly on the bridge.  The KH unit on the bridge itself doesn't receive a feed from CCS, rather it feeds in, right?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (3 Mar 2011)

Torlyn said:
			
		

> Yes, the CCS gets a feed from the KH, but we still get ARPA information from the KH directly on the bridge.  The KH unit on the bridge itself doesn't receive a feed from CCS, rather it feeds in, right?



Careful....we are starting to get into the realm of capabilities and limitations of the CCS.

Milnet.Ca Staff


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (3 Mar 2011)

> This is sort of what I expected and I suspect the extra X-band is to conform with IMO rules, not because the Navy has to, but simply to set the example that the Navy is equal to and better than civvies, not just different.  But if it's unnecessary redundance, simply there for cheap optics, I'd prefer to avoid it rather than further clog the navcom forest.



The Furunos *seem* to be sited to cover real or perceived "blind spots" in the nav radar coverage. There would have to be a lot of testing to confirm their actual ability to do that though. They're just mounted on a welded stand....not much clogging going on, and EMI usually isn't too bad.



> Yes, the CCS gets a feed from the KH, but we still get ARPA information from the KH directly on the bridge.



ARPA data comes from processed video added to the KH PPI. All of the ARPA processing is done in the KH.


----------

