Questions to ARIA ( Opera's CHAT GPT) about naval warfare

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Having double CIWS instead of one would be better for a light frigate which has 8 cell VLS in case of naval combat?

Having double CIWS instead of one can offer certain advantages for a light frigate with an 8-cell VLS in naval combat. Here are some reasons why:

1. Increased Defensive Coverage: Having two CIWS systems positioned strategically on a frigate can provide a wider defensive coverage area. This helps in minimizing potential blind spots and gaps in the frigate's defense, increasing the chances of intercepting incoming threats.

2. Redundancy and Reliability: Naval combat can be intense and prolonged, and systems can experience malfunctions or technical issues. Having two CIWS systems offers redundancy, ensuring that even if one system encounters a problem, the other can continue to provide defensive capabilities. This enhances the frigate's overall reliability and ability to sustain a high level of defense.

3. Simultaneous Engagement: With two CIWS systems, the frigate can engage multiple threats simultaneously. This is particularly important in scenarios where the frigate faces multiple incoming threats, such as missiles or small craft. The ability to engage multiple targets simultaneously increases the frigate's effectiveness in defending against multiple simultaneous threats.

4. Defense in Depth: Naval combat often requires a layered defense approach. By having double CIWS systems, the frigate can complement the capabilities of its 8-cell VLS, creating a more comprehensive defense system. The combined capabilities of the VLS and CIWS systems provide a layered and multi-dimensional defense, increasing the frigate's survivability in high-threat environments.

5. Flexibility and Adaptability: Having two CIWS systems provides flexibility in terms of engagement options. The frigate can employ different engagement strategies, such as using one CIWS for short-range threats while the other focuses on longer-range threats. This adaptability enhances the frigate's ability to respond to different types of threats effectively.

While having two CIWS systems can offer advantages, it is important to consider factors such as space, weight, and integration with other systems on the frigate. These factors need to be carefully balanced to ensure optimal performance and operational effectiveness. Additionally, the specific requirements may vary based on the frigate's mission, operational context, and the evolving nature of naval warfare.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
8 cell VLS and CIWS would be enough for a frigate in case of naval fights?


Having an 8-cell Vertical Launch System (VLS) and a Close-In Weapon System (CIWS) on a frigate can certainly enhance its defensive capabilities in naval fights. However, it is important to consider that the effectiveness of a frigate in combat depends on various factors, and the presence of these systems alone may not guarantee sufficient defense. Here are a few points to consider:

1. Multi-Mission Capability: Frigates are designed to perform a range of missions, including anti-air warfare, anti-surface warfare, and anti-submarine warfare. While an 8-cell VLS can provide surface-to-air missile defense capabilities, it is essential to have a balanced suite of sensors, weapons, and systems to effectively counter different types of threats.

2. Threat Environment: The effectiveness of a frigate in naval fights depends on the specific threat environment it faces. Modern naval warfare involves a wide array of threats, including missiles, aircraft, submarines, and small craft. While an 8-cell VLS can launch surface-to-air missiles for air defense, additional systems like anti-ship missiles, torpedoes, and anti-submarine warfare capabilities may be necessary to counter different threats effectively.

3. Integration and Coordination: The key to an effective defense is the integration and coordination of various systems on the frigate. This includes sensors, command and control systems, and weapons. Seamless integration allows for better situational awareness, target detection, and engagement, enhancing the frigate's overall combat effectiveness.

4. Redundancy and Resilience: Having redundancy in defensive systems is critical to ensure resilience in combat. While an 8-cell VLS can provide a solid foundation for air defense, having multiple launchers or additional defensive systems can help compensate for failures, provide overlapping coverage, and increase the frigate's survivability.

5. Training and Crew Capability: The effectiveness of any weapon system depends on the training and capability of the crew operating it. Adequate training and proficiency in utilizing the 8-cell VLS and CIWS are crucial to maximize their potential in combat scenarios.

In summary, while an 8-cell VLS and CIWS can significantly enhance a frigate's defensive capabilities, it is important to consider a comprehensive approach to naval combat. This includes a balanced suite of systems, effective integration, redundancy, and well-trained crew members. The specific requirements may vary based on the frigate's mission, operational context, and the evolving nature of naval warfare.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Oerlikon Millennium Gun and RIM-116 could work together effectively in light frigates which have 8 cell VLS? what would be the role of such frigate in naval conflicts?


The Oerlikon Millennium Gun and RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) could potentially work together effectively in light frigates with 8-cell Vertical Launch System (VLS). Here's how they could be used and the potential role of such a frigate in naval conflicts:

1. Oerlikon Millennium Gun: The Millennium Gun is a naval close-in weapon system (CIWS) designed to provide last-line defense against anti-ship missiles and other threats. It has a high rate of fire and can engage multiple targets simultaneously. It is effective at short-range engagements and provides point defense for the ship.

2. RIM-116 RAM: The RAM is a lightweight, quick-reaction, surface-to-air missile system. It is designed to engage incoming anti-ship missiles, aircraft, and helicopters. The RAM system utilizes a radar-guided missile that can intercept and destroy threats at close range, providing another layer of defense to the frigate.

3. Working Together: The Oerlikon Millennium Gun and RIM-116 RAM can complement each other in terms of coverage and engagement range. The Millennium Gun provides close-range defense, while the RAM extends the defensive perimeter and engages threats at slightly longer ranges. Working together, they can enhance the frigate's overall defensive capabilities against a wide range of threats.

4. Role in Naval Conflicts: A light frigate armed with the Oerlikon Millennium Gun, RIM-116 RAM, and an 8-cell Vertical Launch System (VLS) can have several roles in naval conflicts, including:

- Anti-air Warfare (AAW): The frigate can engage and destroy enemy aircraft and incoming missiles, providing air defense for the fleet or other assets.
- Surface Warfare (SUW): The frigate can engage surface targets such as enemy ships, patrol boats, or small craft using its guns and missiles.
- Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW): The frigate can employ sensors, sonar, and torpedoes to detect and engage enemy submarines, protecting friendly assets from underwater threats.
- Maritime Security: The frigate can be deployed for patrol and surveillance missions, enforcing maritime security and conducting anti-piracy operations.

It's important to note that the effectiveness of any naval platform depends on various factors like crew training, tactics, overall ship capabilities, and the specific operational environment.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
How should be positioned RIM-116 and Millenium gun on light frigates for maximum efficiency?



The positioning of the RIM-116 RAM and Oerlikon Millennium Gun on a light frigate can vary depending on the specific design and layout of the ship. However, here are some general considerations for their placement to achieve maximum efficiency:

1. RIM-116 RAM:
- The RAM launchers should ideally be placed on elevated platforms or masts to provide a clear line of sight and maximize the radar coverage for target detection and engagement.
- It is common to position RAM launchers near the ship's superstructure or on the edges of the main deck to ensure a wide coverage area.
- The launchers should be strategically placed to provide overlapping coverage, minimizing any potential blind spots and maximizing the defensive capabilities against incoming threats.
- Adequate spacing between the RAM launchers should be maintained to allow for simultaneous engagements and to avoid interference between missiles.

2. Oerlikon Millennium Gun:
- The Millennium Gun is typically positioned to provide close-range defense against threats that have penetrated the outer layer of defense.
- It is often mounted on a stabilized gun platform, such as a remote-controlled weapon station or a manually operated turret.
- The gun should be placed in a location that allows for a wide field of fire, covering all potential threat angles.
- Consideration should be given to the gun's coverage in relation to the RAM launchers to ensure effective coordination and coverage across different engagement ranges.
- The gun should be placed near critical areas of the ship, such as the main deck or superstructure, to provide protection to vital systems and personnel.

It's important to note that the specific placement of these weapons may vary depending on the ship's design, size, and other operational factors. The placement should be determined by naval architects and experts who consider factors like weight distribution, stability, and overall ship balance while ensuring optimal coverage and protection against threats.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
One CIWS would be enough for a frigate in case of naval war?



Having one Close-In Weapon System (CIWS) on a frigate can provide a certain level of defense against incoming threats, but it may not be sufficient on its own in a naval war scenario. Here are a few reasons why:

1. Simultaneous and Multiple Threats: In naval warfare, a frigate may face multiple threats simultaneously, such as anti-ship missiles, aircraft, and small craft. One CIWS alone may struggle to engage and intercept all incoming threats effectively. Having multiple CIWS systems can provide better coverage and increase the chances of successfully defending against multiple simultaneous attacks.

2. Redundancy and Reliability: Naval warfare can be intense and last for extended periods. Having redundancy in defensive systems is crucial in case one CIWS encounters technical issues or malfunctions during combat. Multiple CIWS systems provide backup and help maintain a continuous defensive capability.

3. Area Coverage: A single CIWS may have limitations in terms of the area it can effectively cover and defend. Naval frigates typically have a considerable surface area, and a single CIWS may not be able to provide comprehensive coverage for the entire ship. Multiple CIWS systems positioned strategically can help in minimizing potential blind spots and gaps in defense.

4. Enhanced Defense in Depth: A layered defense approach is often preferred in naval warfare. Multiple defense systems, including CIWS, surface-to-air missiles, and other countermeasures, working together can provide a more robust and comprehensive defense against various types of threats. This approach improves the overall survivability of the frigate in a high-threat environment.

While a single CIWS can contribute to the frigate's defense, it is generally recommended to have multiple CIWS systems or a combination of different defensive systems to enhance the frigate's overall defensive capabilities in a naval war scenario. The specific requirements and capabilities may vary depending on the frigate's mission, size, and operational context.
 
E

Era_shield

Guest
My question to ChatGPT about a non-existent CIWS:

What's the most effective positioning of the TurboLol CIWS on a light frigate?


The positioning of the TurboLol CIWS (Close-In Weapon System) on a light frigate should take into account several factors, such as the vessel's layout and mission requirements. However, there are some general principles that can guide the positioning of the CIWS.
Firstly, the TurboLol CIWS is an anti-aircraft and anti-missile system that is designed to provide close-range defense against incoming threats. Therefore, it should be positioned in a location that offers a clear field of fire in all directions, with minimal obstructions that could interfere with its operation.
Secondly, the CIWS should be positioned in a location that provides maximum coverage of the ship's vulnerable areas, such as the bridge, engine room, and weapons systems. This will help to ensure that any incoming threats can be detected and engaged as quickly as possible.
Thirdly, the placement of the TurboLol CIWS should take into account the weight distribution of the ship, as well as its stability and maneuverability. The CIWS should be positioned in a way that does not significantly affect the ship's balance or maneuverability, and that allows for easy access for maintenance and reloading.
Taking all these factors into account, a typical arrangement for a light frigate might be to mount the TurboLol CIWS on a raised platform at the aft end of the ship, providing a clear field of fire in all directions. Alternatively, the CIWS could be mounted on a pedestal on the ship's superstructure, providing a higher vantage point and better coverage of the ship's vulnerable areas. Ultimately, the positioning of the TurboLol CIWS will depend on the specific requirements of the ship and its mission, and should be determined through careful analysis and testing.

Stop treating these things as though they have intelligence. They have none, they are just a sophisticated autocomplete.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Uncrewed surface vessels (USVs) may use multiple aperture sonars instead of synthetic aperture sonars (SAS) due to several reasons:

1. Cost: Multiple aperture sonars tend to be less expensive compared to synthetic aperture sonars. USVs are often deployed for various purposes, including reconnaissance, surveillance, and research, and utilizing multiple aperture sonars can offer a cost-effective solution.

2. Simplicity: Multiple aperture sonar systems are generally simpler in terms of hardware and processing requirements compared to synthetic aperture sonars. This simplicity can lead to easier operation, maintenance, and integration with USV platforms.

3. Real-time processing: Multiple aperture sonars capture and process sonar data in real-time, allowing for immediate analysis and decision-making. On the other hand, synthetic aperture sonars require complex post-processing techniques and significant computational resources to generate high-resolution images, which might not be feasible or necessary in certain USV applications where real-time feedback is critical.

4. Flexibility: Multiple aperture sonars can have adjustable beamwidths and operating frequencies, providing flexibility in adapting to different operational scenarios and water conditions. This adaptability is particularly useful in USV missions that require versatile sensing capabilities.

That being said, the selection of sonar systems for USVs depends on various factors, including mission requirements, budget constraints, target detection needs, and operational constraints. Synthetic aperture sonars can be advantageous in specific applications that demand high-resolution imaging or detailed seabed mapping, but multiple aperture sonars offer a practical and cost-effective solution for many USV missions.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Using synthetic aperture sonar (SAS) for shallow water patrolling and Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) missions can offer several advantages due to its advanced imaging capabilities. However, the effectiveness of SAS in such missions depends on various factors, including the specific characteristics and capabilities of the Navy's Tuzla class patrol boats and the operational environment they would be deployed in.

Here are some factors to consider:

1. Mapping and surveillance: SAS can provide high-resolution imagery and detailed mapping of the seafloor, which can enhance situational awareness during shallow water patrolling. It can help identify underwater objects, potential threats, and variations in the seabed, thereby aiding in mission planning and decision-making.

2. Detection of submerged objects: SAS can be effective in detecting submerged objects such as underwater obstacles, mines, or suspicious targets. The detailed imaging and target identification capabilities of SAS can assist in locating and classifying underwater objects, enhancing the effectiveness of patrolling and ASW missions.

3. Environmental considerations: Shallow water environments may present challenges for sonar systems, including issues related to bottom reverberation, clutter, and acoustic interference. These factors can impact the performance and effectiveness of SAS. Conducting thorough environmental surveys and calibrations specific to the operational area are crucial to optimizing the performance of SAS systems.

4. Platform integration: The successful integration of SAS onto Tuzla class patrol boats is essential. Factors such as vessel stability, power supply, sensor positioning, and data processing capabilities should be considered to ensure optimal performance and seamless integration with the patrol boat platform.

5. Training and expertise: Effective utilization of SAS requires well-trained personnel skilled in interpreting and analyzing the complex sonar data. Adequate training programs and continuous skill development should be implemented for operators and analysts to maximize the effectiveness of SAS in shallow water patrolling and ASW missions.

Ultimately, the effectiveness of SAS for shallow water patrolling and ASW missions depends on the specific operational requirements, the capabilities and limitations of the patrol boats, and the overall strategy and resources dedicated to these missions by the Turkish Navy. Conducting thorough evaluations, testing, and ongoing assessments of the system's performance within the intended operational context would provide a clearer understanding of its suitability and effectiveness.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Both Synthetic Aperture Sonar (SAS) and Multiple Aperture Sonar (MAS) are relatively advanced and newer technologies in the field of underwater sensing. In terms of cost and usage in ASW (antisubmarine warfare) by warships, here's a breakdown:

1. Cost: Generally, SAS tends to be more expensive than MAS. SAS systems require sophisticated computational and signal processing capabilities, along with advanced hardware components, which contribute to higher costs compared to MAS.

2. Common Usage: MAS is more commonly used for ASW by warships. MAS has gained popularity due to its ability to provide a wider coverage area, improved target detection capabilities, and reduced blind spots. MAS systems enable warships to efficiently scan larger areas, detect submarines, and enhance underwater situational awareness.

While SAS offers high-resolution imaging and detailed target identification, its usage for ASW is more limited due to factors such as cost, operational considerations, and the specific needs of different naval forces. However, it's important to note that the choice between SAS and MAS depends on specific mission requirements, available resources, and technological capabilities. In some cases, a combination of both technologies may be utilized to maximize underwater sensing capabilities for ASW operations.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Synthetic Aperture Sonar (SAS) and Multiple Aperture Sonar (MAS) are both advanced technologies used in underwater sensing and imaging. Here's a breakdown of their differences and their potential contributions in warship scenarios:

1. Synthetic Aperture Sonar (SAS):
- SAS uses advanced signal processing techniques to generate high-resolution images of the seabed or underwater targets.
- It provides excellent image quality and range resolution, enabling detailed mapping and identification of underwater objects.
- SAS can penetrate various seabed types, such as mud, sand, or vegetation, providing valuable information for mine detection and classification.
- In antisubmarine warfare (ASW), SAS can aid in detecting and tracking submarines by detecting their wakes or other disturbances in the water column. It offers long-range performance and the ability to create detailed target images.

2. Multiple Aperture Sonar (MAS):
- MAS combines the data received from multiple sonar sources or apertures distributed over a physical or synthetic array.
- It enhances the resolution and coverage of sonar images by utilizing interference patterns and waveform processing techniques.
- MAS can provide a wider field of view and increased angular coverage, enabling rapid area coverage and target detection.
- In ASW, MAS can improve the detection and tracking capabilities of warships by providing a larger coverage area and reducing blind spots.

In war scenarios, both SAS and MAS can have significant contributions:

- Synthetic Aperture Sonar (SAS):
- SAS can enhance the warship's ability to detect and classify underwater threats, such as submarines, mines, or other hostile objects.
- It enables accurate mapping of the underwater environment, identifying potential obstructions or hazards.
- SAS can aid in planning and executing precise mine countermeasures and search and rescue operations.
- It can supplement intelligence gathering by providing detailed information on enemy naval activities underwater.

- Multiple Aperture Sonar (MAS):
- MAS can augment the warship's surveillance capabilities, allowing for comprehensive underwater situational awareness.
- It improves the efficiency and speed of target detection and classification, reducing the chances of missing crucial underwater threats.
- MAS enhances the effectiveness of ASW operations by providing a broader coverage area, enhancing the detection range and accuracy.
- It assists in distinguishing between various targets and mitigating false alarms.

The choice between SAS and MAS depends on factors such as specific mission requirements, budget considerations, and technological capabilities. In many cases, a combination of both technologies may provide the most comprehensive and effective underwater sensing capabilities for warships.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Yes, it is possible for a warship to have two different sonar systems working simultaneously, such as a hull-mounted direct sonar and a synthetic aperture sonar (SAS). However, there are a few considerations to keep in mind:

1. Sonar Interference: When two different sonar systems are operating simultaneously, there is a potential for interference between the two systems. This interference can occur due to the interaction of acoustic signals or noise generated by the sonars.

2. Noise Sources: Different sonar systems may have different noise sources, and these sources can potentially interfere with each other. For example, the hull-mounted sonar may generate noise from the ship's machinery and propellers, while the SAS may be affected by self-noise from the sonar system itself.

3. Sonar Design: To minimize interference, sonar systems are usually designed to operate at different frequencies or with different signal processing techniques. This helps reduce the chance of one sonar system interfering with the signals of the other system.

4. Noise Cancellation Techniques: Advanced sonar systems may employ noise cancellation techniques to mitigate interference. These techniques involve analyzing the received signals and canceling out unwanted noise or interference.

5. System Integration: Proper system integration and coordination are crucial when operating multiple sonar systems simultaneously. This includes managing the power, bandwidth, and frequencies allocated to each system, as well as ensuring that the data from both systems can be processed and presented effectively to the operators.

In summary, while it is possible for a warship to operate different sonar systems simultaneously, careful consideration must be given to minimize interference and optimize performance. Sonar design, noise cancellation techniques, and system integration play important roles in achieving effective simultaneous sonar operation.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Adding a Synthetic Aperture Sonar (SAS) to Tuzla class Turkish patrol boats that already have a commercial sonar, such as the Simrad SP92 Mk II, can provide several additional capabilities. Here are some potential benefits:

1. High-Resolution Imaging: SAS technology can provide high-resolution, detailed images of the seafloor and underwater objects. This can enhance the patrol boat's ability to detect and classify underwater targets with greater precision.

2. Increased Mapping Capability: By combining the data from the hull-mounted sonar (SP92) and the SAS, the patrol boat can generate more comprehensive and accurate maps of the underwater environment. This can aid in navigation, route planning, and situational awareness.

3. Improved Target Discrimination: The additional capabilities of SAS can help distinguish between different types of underwater objects, such as mines, submarines, or other vessels. This can enhance the patrol boat's ability to identify potential threats and take appropriate actions.

4. Extended Range and Coverage: Synthetic Aperture Sonar systems typically have a longer detection range compared to hull-mounted sonars. This can expand the patrol boat's area of coverage and increase the effectiveness of its surveillance and search operations.

5. Enhanced Search and Rescue Operations: The combination of SAS and the existing hull-mounted sonar can improve the patrol boat's search and rescue capabilities. SAS can provide detailed imaging of the underwater environment, helping locate and identify objects or individuals in distress.

It is important to note that adding a Synthetic Aperture Sonar to a patrol boat that already has a commercial sonar system like the Simrad SP92 can provide valuable additional capabilities. While the existing sonar system may still serve its purpose, the SAS can enhance the patrol boat's overall underwater sensing capabilities and improve its effectiveness in various operational scenarios.
1689093867966.png


Simrad's image!
1689094108048.png


1689094185793.png


1689094228107.png


SAS images
 

Attachments

  • 1689094447519.png
    1689094447519.png
    694.1 KB · Views: 83
Last edited:

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
@Afif what is your opinion about following answer?


Yes, Synthetic Aperture Sonar (SAS) generally offers more advanced capabilities compared to Variable Depth Sonar (VDS). Here are some reasons why SAS is considered more capable:

1. High-Resolution Imaging: SAS provides high-resolution imaging capabilities, allowing for detailed and accurate mapping of the seafloor and underwater objects. It generates high-quality images with fine details and improved clarity compared to traditional sonar systems, including VDS.

2. Enhanced Target Detection: SAS can detect small or stealthy targets more effectively. Its advanced signal processing techniques and imaging algorithms enable the detection of submerged objects with higher accuracy and improved target discrimination capabilities.

3. Larger Coverage Area: SAS systems can cover larger areas in a shorter amount of time compared to VDS. This is particularly beneficial for wide-area surveying, underwater mapping, and target search operations.

4. Operational Efficiency: SAS can operate at higher speeds, allowing for faster data acquisition and surveying capabilities. This efficiency can result in reduced mission durations, improved productivity, and enhanced operational effectiveness.

5. Advanced Signal Processing: SAS utilizes sophisticated signal processing algorithms to generate detailed images. It compensates for motion-induced distortions and improves the signal-to-noise ratio, resulting in clearer and more informative sonar images.

6. Complex Environments: SAS performs well in various underwater environments, including shallow waters, deep seas, and cluttered or complex seabed conditions. It can handle challenging environmental factors such as background noise, reverberation, and interference, providing reliable imaging in these conditions.

While SAS offers these advantages, it's important to note that it also comes with some considerations:

- SAS systems are generally more complex, expensive, and require specialized equipment and training.
- They may have higher maintenance and operational costs compared to VDS.
- The specific operational requirements and objectives of the navy, as well as budget constraints, should be carefully considered when deciding whether SAS is the most suitable choice.

In summary, SAS is generally considered more capable than VDS due to its high-resolution imaging, enhanced target detection capabilities, larger coverage area, operational efficiency, and ability to perform well in complex environments.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,284
Reactions
68 7,961
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
I don't have enough knowledge about functioning characteristics of SAS.

But i can confidently tell you is when it come to Submarine detection, It doesn't matter how high resolution imagin SAS can provide.
Medium frequency (bow mounted) sonars, and (specially) low frequency (VDS) sonars practically offer much longer detection range than high frequency sonar.


For example, iirc Thales new gen CAPTAS low frequency VDS has frequency range of 0.9-2.1kHz. (CAPTAS-4 has a detection range up to 150km)
Or Atlas Elektronik developed 'Active Towed Array Sonar' (ACTAS) has a frequency range of 1.4-2.4 kHz. (And has a detection range up to 60km. Similar to CAPTAS-2)

On the other hand AFAIK SAS usually has frequency range of 30-100kHz or higher.

Read the brochure below, you have an idea how SAS operates.


Although SAS can be used to detect mines at close ranges.
But I am not sure if navies actually uses it.


And no matter what, Variable Depth Sonar (VDS) will always be indispensable part of ASW missions.

Because, sound waves bounce up and down and bend through different layers of temperature and salinity in the water. A submarine can “hide” under a layer of cold water where an active hull-mounted sonar (HMS) can’t reach since the sound wave will bounce off the layer up against the surface. For this reason, surface ships have variable depth sonars (VDS) that they can dip below the layers and search.
 
Last edited:

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Yes, synthetic aperture sonar (SAS) technology can provide advantages in detecting submarines that are hiding beneath layers of cold water. Here's how synthetic aperture sonar can offer benefits similar to variable depth sonars (VDS):

1. Improved Resolution: SAS systems use advanced signal processing techniques and longer integration times to achieve high-resolution imaging. This enhanced resolution allows for better detection and classification of submerged targets, including submarines hiding under cold water layers.

2. Increased Range: SAS systems can operate at longer ranges compared to traditional sonar systems. This extended range enables the detection of submarines hiding at greater distances, even under challenging environmental conditions.

3. Enhanced Imaging Capabilities: SAS produces detailed images of the underwater environment, allowing operators to analyze the data and identify submarines that may be concealed beneath cold water layers. The synthetic aperture processing techniques help compensate for the effects of scattering and attenuation in the water column.

4. Wide Swath Coverage: SAS systems can provide wide swath coverage, meaning they can survey a larger area in a single pass. This capability allows for efficient and comprehensive search operations, increasing the chances of detecting submarines hiding beneath cold water layers.

5. Flexibility and Adaptability: SAS systems can be integrated into various platforms, including surface ships, unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs), and towed arrays. This flexibility enables deployment in different operational scenarios and enhances the overall capabilities of the naval forces.

While synthetic aperture sonar technology offers advantages in detecting submarines hiding beneath cold water layers, it is important to note that both SAS and VDS technologies have their own strengths and limitations. The selection of the appropriate system depends on specific operational requirements, environmental conditions, and platform capabilities.




Regarding the specific scenario of detecting submarines hiding beneath cold water layers, both synthetic aperture sonar (SAS) and variable depth sonar (VDS) technologies have their respective strengths and limitations:

Strengths of SAS Technology:

1. High Resolution Imaging: SAS provides high-resolution images of the underwater environment, allowing for detailed analysis and detection of submerged targets.

2. Wide Swath Coverage: SAS systems can survey a large area in a single pass, offering efficient coverage and increasing the chances of detecting submarines hiding beneath cold water layers.

3. Longer Range Operation: SAS can operate at longer ranges compared to traditional sonar systems, enabling detection of submarines at greater distances, even under challenging environmental conditions.

4. Synthetic Aperture Processing: SAS utilizes advanced signal processing techniques to compensate for scattering and attenuation in the water column, enhancing image quality and target detection capabilities.

5. Flexibility and Adaptability: SAS can be integrated into various platforms, such as surface ships and unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs), providing flexibility in deployment options.

Limitations of SAS Technology:

1. Cost and Complexity: SAS systems can be expensive to develop, procure, and maintain. Additionally, the advanced signal processing algorithms and hardware required for SAS can be complex, requiring skilled operators and specialized training.

2. Environmental Factors: While SAS can compensate for some environmental factors, it may still be affected by other conditions such as turbidity, temperature gradients, and salinity variations, which can impact detection performance.

Strengths of VDS Technology:

1. Direct Contact with Water Layers: VDS systems can physically dip below the layers of cold water, allowing for direct contact with the underwater environment and potentially detecting submarines that are hidden beneath.

2. Simplicity and Reliability: VDS systems are generally simpler in design and operation compared to SAS, making them reliable and easier to maintain.

3. Real-Time Operation: VDS can provide real-time sonar data, allowing for immediate detection and response to potential threats.

Limitations of VDS Technology:

1. Limited Range: VDS systems typically have shorter detection ranges compared to SAS, which can limit their effectiveness in detecting submarines that are farther away.

2. Narrow Coverage Area: VDS systems have a narrower coverage area compared to SAS, requiring more time and effort to survey a larger area.

3. Vulnerability to Countermeasures: VDS systems can be susceptible to countermeasures employed by submarines, such as deploying decoys or noise-generating devices to confuse or evade detection.

It's important to note that the effectiveness of both SAS and VDS technologies in detecting submarines hiding beneath cold water layers can be influenced by various factors, including the specific operational conditions, environmental factors, and the capabilities of the platforms on which they are deployed.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,418
Reactions
28 4,263
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
İt seems SAS is much more cheaper than VDS.


Based on the real-time information, here are the approximate costs of synthetic aperture sonars and variable depth sonars:

Synthetic Aperture Sonars:
- The world's first synthetic aperture sonar by Kraken Sonar Systems Inc. was priced under $150,000.
- Kraken Sonar Systems Inc. received $1.5 million in orders from a US defense customer for their AquaPix® synthetic aperture sonars (SAS).
- Kraken Sonar Systems Inc. also received a $1.3 million purchase order for their AquaPix® synthetic aperture sonars (SAS) from an unnamed customer.
- The cost of acquiring Geocento's synthetic aperture radar (SAR) satellite data image was $3,300 per scene for an image with less coverage.

Variable Depth Sonars:
- Raytheon was awarded a $28 million contract by the U.S. Navy for the development of their variable depth sonar (VDS) for littoral combat ships (LCS).
- Thales Group has remodeled their variable-depth sonar systems, but specific pricing information is not available.

Please note that these are approximate costs and may vary depending on specific models, configurations, and additional features. It is always recommended to contact the manufacturers or suppliers directly for the most accurate and up-to-date pricing information.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom