• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Patriot SAM replacement

AN/AWW-14(V)

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
May 18, 2019
Messages
121
Reaction score
141
If it rotated why would you need three arrays?
instant situational awareness, critical for hypersonic threats and orientation main mast always on the most dangerous direction
imho azimuth turn ability is necessary (as on legacy radar)

 
Last edited:

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,954
Reaction score
35
As per Raytheon is not a mock-up and an actual prototype in support of the program. The article posted earlier goes into how the stabilization mechanism is different (relevant portion quoted below). I would not call this a massive radar from a logistical or mobility perspective (relative to what it is replacing). Yes it is about 2.5 meters longer than the legacy radar but you get quite a bit in return for that. And the radar meets the Army's required mobility needs and utilizes the same movers and air-lift compared to the radar it is replacing. A large GaN AESA antenna on a high performance radar is going to consume a lot of power and is going to require a lot of cooling when it is in this frequency range. There are very limited options to avoid that. You can go for a more efficient lower frequency radar, reduce the volume search, range, and other performance requirements, or use a rotating radar to achieve 360 degree. The Army had made it clear that it was not willing to compromise on performance for the sake of 360 degree coverage so Raytheon needed to achieve both as the Congress inserted a 360-degree language in the NDAA and even though the Army did not specify a 360 degree sensor it was quite clear that they would want one that could at the very least grow to meet that requirement. One way they could have made it smaller is by placing the CEU on a separate mover like they do on the TPY-2 but that would have probably not met mobility or operational needs and would have increased the airlift requirement.

The radar that Raytheon specifically designed for the Army uses next-generation gallium nitride technology and is 7 feet longer but 11 inches more narrow than the radar unit. But it no longer requires outrigger stabilizing legs. Rather, the system is held stable by jacks underneath, which means its takes up less space on the sides, according to Bob Kelley, Raytheon’s director of domestic integrated air and missile defense programs for business development and strategy.
If it rotated why would you need three arrays?
No it does not need to rotate - that is the entire point of developing a staring sensor. Raytheon has disclosed that the rear panels are designed to offer more than 2x the search range of the current Patriot radar which would be plenty of rear sector performance given the LTAMDS mission. They are sized to perform the full spectrum of PATRIOT's mission. There will also be other sensors operating as part of the PATRIOT battalion and within the broader IAMD fold covering other vectors and airspace. I did reach out to a Raytheon team member to see if the radar can slew and whether that capability will be carried over from the legacy sensor into the fielded LTAMDS sensors. Haven't heard back but I would be highly surprised if the final variant of their sensor doesn't offer that capability in some shape or form. There is some indication that the ability to slew is built into the design and may show up in the final delivered product..
 

Attachments

Last edited:

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,198
Reaction score
393
No it does not need to rotate - that is the entire point of developing a staring sensor.
Yeah, it was a rhetorical question. :) With three arrays you get 360 coverage at all times albeit more range in the direction the large array is staring.
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,954
Reaction score
35
I`m almost surprised that they just didnt come up with a railroad locomotive style turntable setup that the existing radar trailer could just be parked on and physically rotated instead.
It was a conscious decision on Raytheon's part not to go with a rotating design which would have been much simpler, cheaper but would not have performed as well. Raytheon on a number of occasions have commented that they discarded a rotator as they deemed it to be inadequate to best meet the performance requirements the US Army had set for them. They chose to go with a full mission spectrum simultaneous 360-degree capability. Hence the substantial increase in size of the rear panels compared to to what they had planned on the PATRIOT AESA upgrade or what their competition appears to have proposed. I think the question that still needs to be answered is whether this sensor can be slewed. Hopefully that will be known soon.
 
Last edited:

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,954
Reaction score
35

Mark S.

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
98
Reaction score
7
A work in progress. Slide 4 shows a more complete trailer but in it the unit is bolted to it to prevent it from being slewed. The jacks showed are the crank down variety used on the typical over the road semi trailers and the forward rails seem small when compared to the 3-axle design of the rear. Raytheon builds radars and does it well. I'm sure they'll get someone to clean up the trailer design.
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,954
Reaction score
35
A work in progress.
I thought it was obvious that this was a prototype and same would be the case with the 6 that are to be delivered to the US Army for fielding by late 2022 following which production decision would be made for follow on orders. There are graphics where the rear assembly is not bolted, hence why I dropped a query to them to clarify this point as they would have insight into what the final configuration is likely to be. They have a pretty good team on this radar and beat some of the top radar suppliers on the planet. I'm sure they know how trailers work. At the end of the day, the design represents something built to meet or exceed requirements so there is Army influence on this as well. If the Army wants the sensor to slew, like its predecessor, that's what they'll deliver.
 
Last edited:
Top