| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 kennym |
SAMPSON vs SPY-3 |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 109 (11-Apr-2008 09:39:54) |
A bit of digging around on google to find info on the SPY-3 (the S/X-band radar to be fitted to USN DDG-1000) turns up precious little interesting information.
I was interested to see how it compared to SAMPSON, but the exercise was not illuminating.
I'm assuming SPY-3 will equal or match SAMPSON's performance? |
||
|
Phil Gollin |
|||
|
Registered Member
Posts: 3374 (11-Apr-2008 12:42:59) Banned User |
You will not get the real facts from public sources.
All that will be published will be "headline" figures which may, or may not, have some senblance to the truth in certain circumstances. . |
||
|
Jim WH |
|||
|
Posts: 875 (11-Apr-2008 14:33:44) |
They're actually doing slightly different things in a slightly different way kennym although they are both AESA:
*SAMPSON is an extremely high fidelity Horizon Search Radar cued onto targets by the S1850M Volume Search Radar. By virtue of being relatively light, SAMPSON is elevated a lot, which means that it has a far greater radar horizon than SPY-3, and in turn allows greater reaction time for a Type 45 compared to a DD21 (without outside sensor input and data fusion). *SPY-3 is an extremely high fidelity combined HSR/VSR, it's also a target illumination radar (SAMPSON doesn't have this function as Aster is an ARH). It is lower down, which reflect the preponderances of AEW in the USN. Comparisons beyond that probably aren't possible in the public domain without attracting the attention o the fun police (although Goodness only knows I'd love to know more!). The take home message kennym is that it is Apples and Oranges. |
||
|
kennym |
|||
|
Posts: 110 (11-Apr-2008 23:48:26) |
I suppose my curiosity comes from the fact that by this point in the Type 45's development, what feels like years ago, information of what SAMPSON was
supposed to be good at was fairly widely known, but even now that the first 2 DDG-1000 have had their keels' laid down, all the attention is going on the
Big Gun and the Funny-Shaped Hull, and pretty much nothing on the sensor fit.
|
||
|
Jim WH |
|||
|
Posts: 879 (12-Apr-2008 02:49:09) |
Fair point kennym, possibly that relates primarily to the fact that SAMPSON is a revolutionary capability for the UK where as SPY-3 is evolutionary for the US.
So far as differences between SPY-1 andd SPY-3 go the main ones are:
-SPY-3 is an AESA where as SPY-1 is a PESA -SPY-3 is better suite to working in littorals, mainly because it is an AESA -SPY-3 can act as an illuminator where as SPY-1 needs seperate illuminators (the Mk.99 FCR) -SPY-3 uses more COTS components |
||
