Japan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Discussion in 'World Armed Forces' started by FuManChu, Sep 30, 2006.

  1. bd popeye
    Offline

    bd popeye The Last Jedi
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    29,148
    Likes Received:
    22,678
    I did read it. I was just trying to fuel a conversation. Enough said.
     
    Jura and antiterror13 like this.
  2. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    2,882
    My understanding is that STIR also has search or surveillance, acquire or detect and tracking functions (TWS). STIR 2.4, which is the model used on the Korean ship, happens to have a large diameter which is meant not only for fire control, but also for search and track functions. It isn't just a fire control radar, or something completely dedicated to being an FCS.

    http://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/07.naval/pubs/Datasheet_STIR_2_4HP_DS168_10_12 _HR.pdf

    If there is a camera attached to the radar like on ---

    http://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/07.naval/pubs/Datasheet_STIR_2.4_HP.pdf

    That means if the camera is used to look at the plane, the radar would have to face the plane. This isn't one of those setups where the optics are in a separate stem from the radar and can be used independently of the FCS radar movement, like on PLAN ships.
     
    ougoah likes this.
  3. taxiya
    Offline

    taxiya Major
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Messages:
    3,496
    Likes Received:
    7,635
    Did anyone here paid any attention to where the recent "radar luminating" incident happened? It is near "Takeshima/Dokdo" islets. It is a disputed islets, therefor the surrounding waters. From either sides, it is in their sovereign waters. Dismissing a potential conflict between the two because they are both US allies (therefor US controlled) is over simplistic. For one reference, look at Turkey and Greece or Britain and Spain.

    Of course US will try to mediate and the two would try to calm down for the common purpose (alliance), but none will backdown from the position of sovereign rights. The best would have been neither sides enters the water, but once they are there, radar luminating is the least dangerous and I am sure both sides are willing to do the same.

    P.S. there is no reason to remain in an alliance if that alliance is not serving the purpose of territory integrity of the country. NK may be a threat to SK from land, Japan can be equally a threat to SK on the sea.
     
  4. antiterror13
    Online

    antiterror13 Colonel

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,089
    Likes Received:
    4,450
    you did, after somebody wondering whether you read it? .. just admit it ... nothing wrong with that :)
    From the graph it is absolutely clear what is predicted the Japanese population in 50-60 years ;)
     
  5. Jura
    Offline

    Jura General

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    21,624
    Likes Received:
    26,831
    congrats LOL!
     
  6. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    2,882
    I don't think both sides are arguing about territory this time. They are arguing which side is less 'professional' during the incident.

    At first glance the Korean side might be on the wrong side, but after taking a look at what the STIR 2.4 radar does, there might be merit with the Korean excuse. The capabilities of STIR 2.4 goes beyond being just a fire control radar that it includes both search and track, including early detection of targets. STIR 2.4 has much more power at 220kw and search range than the mast head G band search radar the KDX-1 uses, which is an MW08 search radar with 50kw in comparison. This is further incentive that the STIR 2.4 is going to be used for search and track while scan.

    The whole thing will blow over, and it looks more and more like a misunderstanding.

    However it may not be wise to illuminate a patrol plane in the first place with a fire control radar, even with one that has multiple role capability. If this was a PLAN plane that was shone upon, that would be god send because the PLAN plane would have acquired the STIR's waveform to add to the SIGINT database, one step to make it easier to jam in the future. It so happens that there might be a PLAN Y-9 ELINT that patrols the area within that time frame.

    https://twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/status/1078885565011963904
     
    taxiya and antiterror13 like this.
  7. taxiya
    Offline

    taxiya Major
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Messages:
    3,496
    Likes Received:
    7,635
    Let's say you are right that "STIR was doing searching", shouldn't it point its beam on the sea surface rather than higher up in the air to the Japanese plane? To me that looks more "deliberate" than "unprofessional" because it is a mistake too simple. Another thing is "unprofessional" is used frequently in contested waters and airspaces that makes it more like a cover word for "your fault to be here in the first place", example is the "PLAN's unprofessional acts in SCS against "Freedom of Navigation"". My bottom line is that if there was no dispute of the rock and its surrounding water, there would not have been TWO countries competing administrative rescue operation. The owner country will invite the other when help is needed, and the invited party would not have complained at all if their plane got some radar beam.
     
  8. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    2,882
    There are some possible scenarios.

    If the STIR is scanning the sea surface, the patrol plane can still be flying low in the water to get scanned on.

    The ship may have detected the plane via its longer frequency search radar (L-band SPS-49) but is uncertain of its nationality or intent, whether its North Korean, Chinese or Japanese. It cues and brings around the STIR for more precise tracking. And/Or it tries to identify the plane via its electro-optics, which happen directly to be attached right on the STIR. So where the optics are pointed out, so is the STIR. Japanese pilot sees the STIR pointed at them, and assumes the STIR is trying to lock onto them.

    See the camera right next to the STIR array.

    images (5).jpeg

    PLAN ships have a different layout.

    The EO, which is the ball there, is on a separate stalk and moves independently from the gun FCS radar, which is the center of this picture. This from a Type 054A that visited Turkey.

    Close up photos of PLA Navy 054A - Linyi - 547 4.jpg


    Note that STIR serves as both fire control for missiles, which the STIR light ups targets for SARH guidance, and also serves as a gun fire control radar. Gun FC and missile target illumination would have their own separate mode with CWI for the missiles and high PRF for the guns. The Type 344 you see there on the PLAN ship is similar to STIR and is used for gun fire control, and both may have a common French ancestor. But Type 344 does not do target illumination for missiles.
     
  9. SamuraiBlue
    Offline

    SamuraiBlue Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2013
    Messages:
    2,038
    Likes Received:
    1,934
    If you haven't seen it yet, here is the official vid that was uploaded by MoD themselves concerning the incident;


    You can see that the weather was fair and they were already nearing the NK vessel so the ROKN ship did not need to use any search radar.
    The problem is, the P-1 tried to communicate with the ROKN vessel transmiting at three different frequency including the emergency frequency that all naval vessel is required to monitor without response.
    You can also see that the ROKN vessel is not raising it's national flag which is required by international law when transiting through open sea and other nation's EEZ.
    Basically the ROK government was lying through their teeth with a straight face which was exposed with this vid for all to see.
     
    #3249 SamuraiBlue, Dec 31, 2018
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2018
    Mr T likes this.
  10. Tam
    Offline

    Tam Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    2,882
    You would still need the search radar to get bearing and measure speed of the plane. From the video, its clear the search radars were at work and this was mentioned by the P-1's crew, and observable that they were rotating which was also mentioned. Its also mentioned and observed that the guns were not pointed at the plane's direction, but the FC radar, the STIR, is following them. The plane checked for the ship's guns because what the plane was detecting from the FC is not the mode for target illumination for missile, but a high PRF mode that might be used for gun targeting. However, the STIR also has search and track functions and when tracking a target at close range, it would revert to a high PRF mode which is what any radar would do for short range tracking otherwise short range tracking won't work at all. Because both the short range search and gun control modes of the STIR will use high PRF, discerning one from the other is not so clear.

    The destroyer or the coast guard vessel should have called out the plane in the first place as soon as the plane arrived. One problem I have with the video is that the sound track is obviously censored and edited for national security reasons and you can hear the blanked out parts, and the question is what are behind those censored portions.
     
Loading...

Share This Page