- Reaction score
- 22,655
- Points
- 1,360
I thought we were talking about an unserious nation?FYI
New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
- Thread starter GAP
- Start date
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,308
- Points
- 1,160
Took this today
- Reaction score
- 1,498
- Points
- 1,160
Guess what replenishment ship is in this video @ 2:20 and again later.
- Reaction score
- 22,326
- Points
- 1,260
I’m not sure what I’m seeing? Yes I know it’s a ship or part of one, but what type?
MTShaw
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 197
- Points
- 580
OOSV with the JSS behind.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,308
- Points
- 1,160
big one in the back is the new supply ship. Red/white on is the new science vessel
- Reaction score
- 6,295
- Points
- 1,090
I friggin hate that mast (on the JSS). The hockey stick is not going to work IMHO.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,308
- Points
- 1,160
What is the idea on that?
- Reaction score
- 6,295
- Points
- 1,090
It clears some recieve antenna away from being blinded from emmissions from transmit antenna. Mast design is very hard. In this case I think they chose wrong. Its a very "we only understand structures and not antenna's" approach.
Spencer100
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,202
- Points
- 1,040
The "carrier" crew at that scene is a RCN frigate crew but close enough, right? LOL
- Reaction score
- 22,326
- Points
- 1,260
Most people go up or out (or both). Canada seems to have a novel approach there…
I don’t know enough about the competing devices, but knowing a bit about antennas, I don’t see any reason to go with the double elbow on the JSS (your hockey stick) unless it’s incomplete and doubling up forward, but that seems to be what they are trying to avoid…
Well when it doesn’t work, you can use it to support a higher mast and separate antenna structure
- Reaction score
- 6,295
- Points
- 1,090
I'll walk back my initial statement, this will work. And it will likely work well for the short term. But there is probably a reason no one else in the world has ever used this sort of design before.
So there are some design constraints/restraints two of which we can talk about here.
First is blind area for the radar below the hockey stick. The further away you can move that mast the smaller the blind area. So that's why the C shape. To push that blind spot to be smaller. There is always a blind spot on single source radars, and this is a AOR so a small arc covered by other sensors is not a huge issue. That's a restraint so you minimize the blind spot.
The second is ensuring what goes on the top of the hockey stick doesn't get blinded by the radar emmissions. So if its above the radar itself then it will never be blinded. The radar is a Saab SG AMB which has a look up angle, so being directly above it will ensure no stray signals get there. That's a constraint so you never blind your own sensor.
So this is very much an "up" approach to borrow your term @KevinB . There is an out on that mast as well as some sensors/tx get pushed the corners of the house or the yardarms (the navigation radars as an example will be on the corners of the bridgetop, being combined together to create a full 360 degree nav picture).
My concern is that the hockey stick is going to likely need guide wires to stop vibration and flex. You can get some fairly permissable cabling that doesn't interfere much with radar emmissions (kevlar as an example), but it remains to be seen how effective that will be. Second is that I expect even with those the stuctural life of that stick will be short. The other concern is that there are other solutions available that would have worked better IMHO but were either a) more expensive or b) not within Nav Arch understanding (they don't have combat systems folks working at VSL).
So there are some design constraints/restraints two of which we can talk about here.
First is blind area for the radar below the hockey stick. The further away you can move that mast the smaller the blind area. So that's why the C shape. To push that blind spot to be smaller. There is always a blind spot on single source radars, and this is a AOR so a small arc covered by other sensors is not a huge issue. That's a restraint so you minimize the blind spot.
The second is ensuring what goes on the top of the hockey stick doesn't get blinded by the radar emmissions. So if its above the radar itself then it will never be blinded. The radar is a Saab SG AMB which has a look up angle, so being directly above it will ensure no stray signals get there. That's a constraint so you never blind your own sensor.
So this is very much an "up" approach to borrow your term @KevinB . There is an out on that mast as well as some sensors/tx get pushed the corners of the house or the yardarms (the navigation radars as an example will be on the corners of the bridgetop, being combined together to create a full 360 degree nav picture).
My concern is that the hockey stick is going to likely need guide wires to stop vibration and flex. You can get some fairly permissable cabling that doesn't interfere much with radar emmissions (kevlar as an example), but it remains to be seen how effective that will be. Second is that I expect even with those the stuctural life of that stick will be short. The other concern is that there are other solutions available that would have worked better IMHO but were either a) more expensive or b) not within Nav Arch understanding (they don't have combat systems folks working at VSL).
- Reaction score
- 4,292
- Points
- 1,120
The tensioning cabling on the CEROS 200 (fire control) feed horn (for lack of detailed name of it) is made of Kevlar. Most ship's guardrails are also now of kevlar.
The other concern about guy wires would be sympathetic RF if the wavelength of the guy wire (metal) is similar to the period of the RF signal. It could end up causing interference, or acting as a re-transmitter.
(Steps back into the shadows as a no-longer current RF Radhaz RCN guy.)
The other concern about guy wires would be sympathetic RF if the wavelength of the guy wire (metal) is similar to the period of the RF signal. It could end up causing interference, or acting as a re-transmitter.
(Steps back into the shadows as a no-longer current RF Radhaz RCN guy.)
The feed horn on the CEROS is for the CWI and yes it's Kevlar the wires. It doesn't really affect the radar performance. That being said, I've had to replace a couple of those now and it's a pain in the a**. The CWI was an afterthought for Saab as they never intended it to do missile illumination unlike the STIR. As a co-worker of mine said when they first got CEROS, it looks like it was duct taped on. No way it's going to last and he was right. The things are ten years old and we are already having problems. No way they last until 2046.
Uwish
New Member
- Reaction score
- 18
- Points
- 180
also lots to do with the Spy x type radar but agree it looks goofy...silly guppies and their weird stuff..
- Reaction score
- 22,655
- Points
- 1,360
NS, you mean the guy who would sit in the background and tell the ORO/XO that they were still transmitting on the search radar, even though they told the green helicopter approaching to land that it had been shut down (although the green helicopter knew they were lying because it kept getting a E/F-band hit every ~5 seconds on its RWR as it approached…?
- Reaction score
- 4,292
- Points
- 1,120
Also the guy who who was watching the CIWS - CMS330 integration trial and realized that the reason we had no paint on the CIWS RADAR screen was because the Armament Techs hadn't thought to enable it at the mount when we left the harbour....I figured it out after the 2nd pass by the jet and there was no tracking....not bad for a SONAR guy.
I think that was the fasted Personnel Aloft chit I ever saw happen...
I think that was the fasted Personnel Aloft chit I ever saw happen...
- Reaction score
- 6,295
- Points
- 1,090
Lol, that's a classic one. Same thing for why the laser wasn't working. Hey guys... did anyone take the laser safety device off before we left?
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,161
- Points
- 1,010
Yep, watched two ADATS thunder in because the operators were used to seeing warning about no laser on their screen.
Training scar.
10 years apart.
Similar threads
