Patriot SAM Developments

Cordy

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
5 November 2019
Messages
413
Reaction score
438
Anyone know if AN/TPY-5(V)1 is a marketing exercise to rename the latest variant of the Marine AN/TPS-80 Ground/Air Task-Oriented Radar (G/ATOR) or is it a new radar?
 
Anyone know if AN/TPY-5(V)1 is a marketing exercise to rename the latest variant of the Marine AN/TPS-80 Ground/Air Task-Oriented Radar (G/ATOR) or is it a new radar?

It is an upgraded (hardware, software and cooling) version of the TPS-80 that is scalable to a long range radar.
 

WASHINGTON, August 2, 2022 - The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia of PATRIOT MIM-104E Guidance Enhanced Missile-Tactical Ballistic Missiles (GEM-T) and related equipment for an estimated cost of $3.05 billion. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale today.

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has requested to buy three hundred (300) PATRIOT MIM-104E Guidance Enhanced Missile-Tactical Ballistic missiles (GEM-T). Also included are tools and test equipment; range and test programs; support equipment to include associated publications and technical documentation; training equipment; spare and repair parts; New Equipment Training; Transportation; Quality Assurance Team support; U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance; engineering, and logistics support services; Systems Integration and Checkout (SICO); field office support; International Engineering Services Program Field Surveillance Program; and other related elements of logistics and program support. The total estimated cost is $3.05 billion.
 
I can't imagine how the SPY-6 is going to be mobile/relocatable. Even the FFGX sized variant would be problematic to truck/trailer mount.
 
I wonder why Aegis is being used vice the THAAD radar? More flexibility? Easier to scale and integrate?
THAAD will also be there, in fact it's already in place. AN/TPY-2 is an X-band radar optimized for the ballistic threat. Great in that role, but Guam's facing a very complex threat environment including sea-skimmers and hypersonic gliders. SPY-6 Is an S-band VSR which can better cover the range of threats.
 
I can't imagine how the SPY-6 is going to be mobile/relocatable. Even the FFGX sized variant would be problematic to truck/trailer mount.

They say trailer. I'm thinking that the array doesn't necessarily have to be octagonal. (V)2 is already just a 3x3 RMA array about 6-foot on a side. Going to 5x5 is 25 RMAs and only 10x10, which is a wide load but still easily roadable. Even the standard octagonal 24 RMA array is only something around 12 feet wide, which is roadable with some planning.
 
They say trailer. I'm thinking that the array doesn't necessarily have to be octagonal. (V)2 is already just a 3x3 RMA array about 6-foot on a side. Going to 5x5 is 25 RMAs and only 10x10, which is a wide load but still easily roadable. Even the standard octagonal 24 RMA array is only something around 12 feet wide, which is roadable with some planning.
If they've already messed with a 4x4 RMA array, that's the limit I'd want to put on the road.
 
I can't imagine how the SPY-6 is going to be mobile/relocatable. Even the FFGX sized variant would be problematic to truck/trailer mount.
TPY-6 is a variant of LRDR, not SPY-6, which in naval applications is type classified as SPY-7. The configuration will be a large rectangular array mounted to a trailer, similar to the TPY-X array in this graphic.

1000000914.jpg

I wonder why Aegis is being used vice the THAAD radar? More flexibility? Easier to scale and integrate?

TPY-2 is not ideally suited for the role of a primary surveillance radar, largely due to its narrow field of regard of about sixty degrees. Multiple TPY-6, with their larger field of regard, should be able to achieve full 360⁰ coverage of the island provides they are located correctly.
 
They say trailer. I'm thinking that the array doesn't necessarily have to be octagonal. (V)2 is already just a 3x3 RMA array about 6-foot on a side. Going to 5x5 is 25 RMAs and only 10x10, which is a wide load but still easily roadable. Even the standard octagonal 24 RMA array is only something around 12 feet wide, which is roadable with some planning.

I think there's no way it is octagonal nor would it need to be. But it still must be a heavy install and a power hungry bitch. I am very curious to see how they can come up with a mount for it in the next several years - that seems like a very quick development time.
 
I think there's no way it is octagonal nor would it need to be. But it still must be a heavy install and a power hungry bitch. I am very curious to see how they can come up with a mount for it in the next several years - that seems like a very quick development time.

Check the post above by Totallyaverage, where he quite rightly pointed out that TPY-6 is not a SPY-6 derivative. It's an LM radar more related to LRDR and SPY-7. There are SPY-7 variants in all sorts of shapes.
 
Check the post above by Totallyaverage, where he quite rightly pointed out that TPY-6 is not a SPY-6 derivative. It's an LM radar more related to LRDR and SPY-7. There are SPY-7 variants in all sorts of shapes.

I'm aware is a different animal than SPY-6 (though I was initially confused due to the common "6" designation) and I'm aware both are module and come in different scales of size. But it still seems like any configuration that would be the volume upper tier counterpart to the LTAMDS would be a large, power hungry installation. The "lower tier" radar itself is no small piece of equipment and is covered in cooling fans.
 
Oh, sure. Just was pointing out that my idea that the array would be octagonal was wrong, because I was thinking it was related to SPY-6.
 
It’s about a foot shorter than an SM-6 stack, but I’m not sure its rocket motor would be compatible with Mk41. As for integration, I think Patriot and THAAD can be coordinated using the Army’s new IBCS, but I do not think Patriot directly supplies guidance commands to THAAD. I think it would require separate integration. For whatever reason I’ve not heard of any plan to integrate THAAD, where as Lock Mart is apparently self funding PAC3 compatibility presumably to increase sales. I presume MSE is an easier integration effort or else better fills a gap in capability.
 
Last edited:
Actually reading this older article linked off the first, it looks like a THAAD battery can control a Patriot launcher with no other equipment. But not the other way around, so it seems unlikely MSE integration with Aegis would allow the latter to use THAAD.

 
It’s about a foot shorter than an SM-6 stack, but I’m not sure its rocket motor would be compatible with Mk41. As for integration, I think Patriot and THAAD can be coordinated using the Army’s new IBCS, but I do not think Patriot directly supplies guidance commands to THAAD. I think it would require separate integration. For whatever reason I’ve not heard of any plan to integrate THAAD, where as Lock Mart is apparently self funding PAC3 compatibility presumably to increase sales. I presume MSE is an easier integration effort or else better fills a gap in capability.
I think MSE fills a gap in budget. The missile itself is cheaper than SM6 by a significant amount, and possibly cheaper than SM2Active.

In any event, if you have a missile with more range than SM2 and is cheaper than SM6, you get some sales just to fill the AA missile cells.
 
I think MSE fills a gap in budget. The missile itself is cheaper than SM6 by a significant amount, and possibly cheaper than SM2Active.

In any event, if you have a missile with more range than SM2 and is cheaper than SM6, you get some sales just to fill the AA missile cells.

If MSE is less expensive, it is marginally so. A quick google search displays $4 million, which is about the SM-6 cost. Even the PAC3 CRI I think is two million. IMO the reasoning would be for increased divert - the MSE has maneuver thrusters and a dual pulse motor; I suspect it can turn on a dime compared to SM-6 at higher altitudes with thin air, since Standard is wholly dependent on control surfaces. Having an alternate hot production line also might be attractive.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom