It could be a number of reasons for a larger panel. Greater resolution and greater utility are likely among them. The more T/R modules you have the more you can subdivide into specific tasks, for example.then, why "wasting" so much money on large radar panels when other nations seem to use much more practical designs without a drop of efficiency ?
They don't necessarily agree with the same path to achieve he same result. The same thing happens with air defense systems.Hello.
why so many different designs ?
When you have more and equal number of phase shifters in elements in X and Y axis, you can tighten the main lobe, and that results in greater transmit gain and less side lobes. You get greater detection range, better angular resolution from better directivity from narrower beams, and less sidelobes, which is wasted energy that is detectable by enemy passive detection systems. So yeah, the bigger the better. Plus more elements means power per element and more overall power. Those FCRs serving S-300 and S-400 systems have as much as ten thousand elements, AN/TPY-2, which is used for ballistic missile intercepts, has as much as 25,000 elements.okay thanks you, but I still don't understand why the americans and chineses are installing impractical large radar panels on their ships when european shipbuilding companies just put smaller radars on the top of the last of their ships.
A rotating Radar seems much more practical even if lose surety and gain mechanical stress. How can a tiny rotating radar be comparable in performances with 4 large panels (what is the advantage of more T/R) ?
Does the Type 055 have such secondary AESA radars? It’s mast has four panels on them in addition to the “normal” radars on the side of the ship.The Chinese and the US do have secondary sea skimmer spotting radars on their ships but these are mechanical rotating radars that don't have the full advantage of AESAs to their role. Eventually these secondary sea skimmer spotting radars will be replaced by AESA designs.
Nobody on the internet really knows what those 3 integrated panels on each facing of the 055's mast are for. The standard guess is that the lowest and largest panel is an X-band AESA used for precision search, horizon search, and target illumination, while the 346X panels on the hull are S-band for volume search, tracking, and maybe midcourse guidance ala SPY-1, having perhaps shed the C-band component present on earlier iterations of the 346. The 2 higher, smaller panels are harder to guess at IMO. My guess is comms antenna judging by similar panels on the Zumwalt, like Ku-band T/R panels, or maybe a datalink like the CEC, or maybe ESM. In addition there are 3 additional smaller objects on the mast below the largest panel. It's likely there is some combination of E/O sensor and navigation radar in those modules, along with something else.Does the Type 055 have such secondary AESA radars? It’s mast has four panels on them in addition to the “normal” radars on the side of the ship.
Yes as previous post explained. In addition, there are those above the bridge. Note #4, plus #8 and #9.Does the Type 055 have such secondary AESA radars? It’s mast has four panels on them in addition to the “normal” radars on the side of the ship.
Is it actually possible to subdivide a single radar panel into different surfaces to multiple the number of tasks executed at the same time ?The more T/R modules you have the more you can subdivide into specific tasks, for example.
So the size of a T/R module depends of its frequency ?The smaller size of some European radars, are due to a higher frequency band, like Thales APAR, which is X-band, and Leonardo Kronos and Cassidian TRS-4D are C-band. Element spacing is about 1/2 the wavelength used, so if you use 10 cm S-band wavelength, your element spacing is 5 cm in the side facing the array. If the element is 5 cm C-band wavelength, the element is 2.5 cm. If the wavelength is 3 cm X-band, the element is 1.5 cm.