The Ford only has 3 arrays, each face covering 120 degrees, while the mockup still looks like it has 4 arrays.
CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Dual X and S band arrays? Also, the lower array seems to remain at the same level as on 01A, while the upper array is stacked on top. this makes the island much taller. Any pictures from the side or behind?
3 On the ford, yes. But I believe the same arrays were intended to be 4 to a ship for the zumwalt
Last edited:
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Each DBR panel provides 120 degrees so only 3 are needed for complete spherical coverage.
Ironically the DBRs on the Ford will be more capable than subsequent ships in her class. I believe CVN 79 onwards will have a less capable DBRs.
Ironically the DBRs on the Ford will be more capable than subsequent ships in her class. I believe CVN 79 onwards will have a less capable DBRs.
The direction a scanned Electronic arrays can look is determined purely phase angle differences in the emission of the different individual emission elements in the array, so you can change the angle of view purely by changing software that controls the emission elements.
However, the the greater the angle between the angle of the beam and the perpendicular axis of the array, the smaller the effective aperture of the array in the direction parallel to that angle, and worse the resolution and sensitivity of the radar along the direction of the beam.
So there is no question any AESA can cover either 90 or 120 Degrees. There is also no question the quality of coverage will decrease for any AESA if the coverage is expanded from 90 to 120 degrees.
However, the the greater the angle between the angle of the beam and the perpendicular axis of the array, the smaller the effective aperture of the array in the direction parallel to that angle, and worse the resolution and sensitivity of the radar along the direction of the beam.
So there is no question any AESA can cover either 90 or 120 Degrees. There is also no question the quality of coverage will decrease for any AESA if the coverage is expanded from 90 to 120 degrees.
It's a matter of tradeoff between capability and cost, of course. And in smaller ships like the Flight III AB, weight, space, topside stability, and power requirements as well.
as that Tweet contains two separate pictures)The Ford photo is a stern view. The mockup photo is a bow view. Completely opposite sides here.
We have yet to see what the rear side of the mock up will be -- so I wouldn't be so quick to compare with Ford.
More important, is that this isn't "interesting" -- the purpose of a three array arrangement is to provide three 120 degree coverage for 360 degree coverage that can be done with phased array radar, and that is how the arrangement of some ships like Ford does.
However, in the case of 002, I would not be surprised if they continued the Liaoning and 001A arrangement and maintain four arrays to provide overlapping 360 coverage by four 120 degree arrays.
If anything this likely dual band radar arrangement of 002 should probably be seen as an evolution of 001A's array of arrangement, but merely with an additional radar set (likely X band) on top in addition to the existing likely S band radar.
What I would be interested in is whether the dual band arrays on 002 are the same as what 055's mock up shows/what 055 may have.