Author Topic: Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ  (Read 418882 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 897
Re: Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ
« Reply #1525 on: May 16, 2019, 15:59:59 »
I thought this image was interesting.  I had not seen this configuration.

Australian version of the Type 26 with their CEA radars. 

From everything that I can gather the CSC will be getting a version of the Lockheed Solid State Radar. It's already beaten the SPY-6 technology based radars in three separate competitions for very large shore based radar systems.  It's therefore probably safe to assume that its at least as good as the SPY-6 technology.

All of which means the CSC will be getting a very good radar system dependent on the face size of the radar itself.  I don't expect it to be the 4.3m diameter as the SPY-6 but closer to a 3.7m diameter of the SPY-1 from the Flight 1 Burkes, which would only give it 8 times the sensitivity of current SPY-1 systems.  Which is nuts.**

I suspect this radar is one of the reasons that the Type 26 was the only compliant bid

Solid State Radar

** rough calculations, big assumptions**

Offline RDBZ

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 2,820
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 85
Re: Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ
« Reply #1526 on: May 17, 2019, 04:27:11 »
Australian version of the Type 26 with their CEA radars. 

From everything that I can gather the CSC will be getting a version of the Lockheed Solid State Radar. It's already beaten the SPY-6 technology based radars in three separate competitions for very large shore based radar systems.  It's therefore probably safe to assume that its at least as good as the SPY-6 technology.

All of which means the CSC will be getting a very good radar system dependent on the face size of the radar itself.  I don't expect it to be the 4.3m diameter as the SPY-6 but closer to a 3.7m diameter of the SPY-1 from the Flight 1 Burkes, which would only give it 8 times the sensitivity of current SPY-1 systems.  Which is nuts.**

I suspect this radar is one of the reasons that the Type 26 was the only compliant bid

Solid State Radar

** rough calculations, big assumptions**

Looks like a very similar technology to the CEA radars, at least in terms of scalability through the use of "tiles" or "bricks".  This discusses CEA's first generation CEAFAR as fitted to the RAN ANZACs under the ASMD upgrade: http://www.cea.com.au/News+Media/Attachments/2011-0009.pdf
« Last Edit: May 17, 2019, 07:06:44 by RDBZ »

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 897

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 897
Re: Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ
« Reply #1528 on: May 25, 2019, 22:46:05 »
Lockheed PPT on some of the CSC requirements.

Some acronym help

CIADS = Close in Air Defence System
TCM = Torpedo Counter Measure
FCL = Fire Control Link?  Link is a guess, but it makes sense if you want to update missile with new information in flight
IRST = Infra Red Search and Track
LFA = low frequency active

Full PPT link here


« Last Edit: May 25, 2019, 22:54:34 by Underway »