TR Naval Programs

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,056
Solutions
2
Reactions
94 22,442
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
To me, i still would want that third radar group. For conduct extreme level of jamming.

Some Arleigh Burke's have these afaik. Those latest ugly looking ones ? After the mod. ?
The AYR is (was) identical to the CFR. Therefore their orientation was 45 degrees apart. If you are referring to the use of higher power for better penetration of the jamming barrier, nobody uses wide sprectrum brute force jamming in the 21st century.

What looks like radar on AB are actually jammers, planar array electronic warfare antennas.

Too much information 😞..
I barely understand

So Türkish AESA radars are not 2 axis?
Cenk-S and MAR-D?

Here is how the dual axis scan looks like! I would love to see how our radars working and emitting signals

Allah rızası için biri iki AESA radarın farkını çocuga anlatır gibi anlatsın.

Neden bize iki tane radar paneli lazım?
O zaman Cenk-S veya mar-D surface tarama yapamıyor? Tüm AESAlar multibeam ama en son teknoloji AESAlar dual axes multi beam.




View attachment 65753
MAR-D is 1 axis scanning aesa, another axis is what is mechanically steered. (Vertical axis is scanned electronically).

CENK-S is 2 axis electronically steered, with one axis also mechanically steered.

Both can scan the horizon surface, the vertical electronic steering makes it better.

You need at least 3 radars for 360 degree coverage (it's also about the side lobes, but not my field, I don't know).
 
Last edited:

Aqerdf

Active member
Messages
77
Reactions
5 193
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Yep, i meant those jammer antennas, sorry. :/

@Heartbang that's the one, yep. :p

I read or watch somewhere, it was about last Siper-1 test afaik. The search radar guided the missile alone. At that time, it was said that the radar is so capable that: for these ranges (100km) it can give weapon grade track and guidance.

Maybe same thing is also happening for TF-2000.
 
Last edited:

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,113
Reactions
26 3,752
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
AYR is ( was ) identical to the CFR. Therefore their orientation was 45 degrees apart from each other. If you are referring to use of higher power for better penetration through jamming barrier, nobody uses broadband brute force jamming in 21st century.

What looks like a radar on AB is actually jammers, planar array electronic warfare antennas.


MAR-D is 1 axis scanning aesa, another axis is what mechanically steered. (Vertical axis is electronically scanned).

CENK-S is two axis electronically steered with one axis being steered mechanically as well.

Both can scan the horizon-surface, the vertical electronical steering makes it better.

You need minimum 3 radars for 360 degrees coverage (also is about the sidelobes but not my field, i don't know)

Still i cant understand what is difference between ÇAFRAD ( without AYR) and SPY-6? How SPY-6 could cover horizon-surface?
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,056
Solutions
2
Reactions
94 22,442
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Yep, i meant those jammer antennas, sorry. :/

@Heartbang that's the one, yep. :p

I read or watch somewhere, it was about last Siper-1 test afaik. The search radar guided the missile alone. At that time, it was said that the radar is so capable that: for these ranges (100km) it can give weapon grade track and guidance.

Maybe same thing is also happening for TF-2000.
I must have said it somewhere in the earlier pages, just because it can be done doesn't mean it's adequate. There is bare minimum and then there is the optimum point. Bare minimum is providing mid-course guidance via data links and tracking via UMAR; ideal point is using UMAR for long range detection, classification, using CFAKR for tracking, observing for munitions separation, also classification and providing mid-course guidance and alternatively tracking for low altitude small RCS targets such as gliding munitions or cruise missiles. The later is what an MFR does.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,056
Solutions
2
Reactions
94 22,442
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Still i cant understand what is difference between ÇAFRAD ( without AYR) and SPY-6? How SPY-6 could cover horizon-surface?
SPY-6 is Yaprak sobiyet
CAFRAD is Baklava
Both have pistachio, one has cream in it, but yields to be more expensive and requires mastery.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,113
Reactions
26 3,752
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
SPY-6 is Yaprak sobiyet
CAFRAD is Baklava
Both have pistachio, one has cream in it, but yields to be more expensive and requires mastery.
Bilal'e anlat demedim yav :p

Screenshot_2024-02-20-23-13-53-220-edit_com.android.chrome.jpg


images.jpeg


Mastery of Waveforming or beam forming?
Is it?
air-and-missile-defense-480x330.png

The difference is Adaptive digital beam forming?
 
Last edited:

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
3,749
Reactions
62 6,605
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
nobody uses broadband brute force jamming in 21st century.

Wait what? I thought noise jamming is the only practical option against modern AESA. (Due to their ability to switch frequency 1000 times per second, deceptive jamming/DRFM Jamming isn't very practical, no?)

Isn't that why AN/ALQ-249 has several hundreds KW power output?
 

uçuyorum

Contributor
Messages
600
Reactions
9 992
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Wait what? I thought noise jamming is the only practical option against modern AESA. (Due to their ability to switch frequency 1000 times per second, deceptive jamming/DRFM Jamming isn't very practical, no?)

Isn't that why AN/ALQ-249 has several hundreds KW power output?
Normally F18 should have 140 kVA total, unless pods have extra power source
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,056
Solutions
2
Reactions
94 22,442
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Bilal'e anlat demedim yav :p

View attachment 65764

View attachment 65761

Mastery of Waveforming or beam forming?
Is it?
View attachment 65763
The difference is Adaptive digital beam forming?
This is how @AlterUnd (and yes, we are not the same person) explained the differences between some radar systems that appear to be the same to me. Beamforming things are beyond my knowledge but I googled to find out SPY 6V1 has a fair amount of cabinets with each holding several racks, can not imagine the cooling capacity combined with radar and these cabinets. I don't know the processing power of the TF-2000.

Wait what? I thought noise jamming is the only practical option against modern AESA. (Due to their ability to switch frequency 1000 times per second, deceptive jamming/DRFM Jamming isn't very practical, no?)

Isn't that why AN/ALQ-249 has several hundreds KW power output?
Spreading a few hundred Kw over a wide spectrum results in a small amount of power at each frequency, and this would do nothing for a clutter-handling AESA radar. Just making a wild guess here, 'flattening the curve' would make it easier to handle.

Or isn't it the other way round? DRFM is the novel and evolving technique that reads the received signal and generates a false signal to deceive the radar, making it less susceptible to being detected as jamming (although nowadays there are ways to detect, and there are new ways to generate a false response).

And I think more than the noise itself, it is about randomising the jammed channel, or jamming several narrow channels at once and hopping between frequencies in a random way to render radar useless. It also evolves at both ends, radars can follow, guess the possible free channels and try to operate there.
 

Aqerdf

Active member
Messages
77
Reactions
5 193
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Yep, now i understood more, thank you for the effort. :p

What would be your comment about this new ÇAFRAD's weight and cost figures ?

Although AYR(?) is looks like gone, the total package still having same weight just as before. And now it is cheaper.

If AYR was gone, there's less modules so less costly that's okay.

But weight should also be down ? How the total package has still has same weight i couldn't understand.
 
Top Bottom