United States - SPY-1, SPY-6

claudejdev commented 10 months ago

DB Selector

DB3K

Affected DBID(s)

Sensor 417

Summary of Changes

[^WNWS]:Friedman, Norman, [i]The Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapon System[/i], Fifth Edition. 2006. p.56,104,316-317 [^C4ISR]: Jane's C4ISR & Mission Systems Maritime 2015-2016, p.557 [^BCG]: Larry Bond, Chris Carlson, & Peter Grining America’s Navy - U.S Naval Ships, 1955 - 2020, Jan. 2024

SPY-1

for each

ID 160,1507,1594,1637,1749,1894,4373,4971,5270

[ ] data
Max contacts: 200 (more than) [^WNWS]
Beamwidth (deg): 1.7 x 1.7 [^WNWS]
Peak Power (W): 4000000 - 6000000 [^WNWS] *
Processing Gain/Loss (dB): 42 [^WNWS]
Pulse Width (μs): 51, 25.4, 12.7, 6.4 (compression ratio 128.1) [^WNWS]
[ ] Range, surface [^BCG]:

Size	nm
Large, Medium	40
Small	25
Very Small	14
Stealthy	8

Range, air [^BCG]

[ ] SPY-1 A ID 1637,1749,5270

Size	nm
Large, Medium	200
Small	158
Very Small	63
Stealthy	19

on early A version: Volume-scan instrumented range reported at 175; horizon-search reported at 45 [^WNWS]

AN/SPY-1AB: lessons learned from Ticonderoga off Lebanon, where the system picked up swarms of insects, and high mountains ashore created false alarms. Upgrade installed on Tico during its 1993 overhaul [^WNWS]

[ ] SPY-1 B-D ID 160,1507,1594,4373,4971

Size	nm
Large, Medium	250
Small	158
Very Small	63
Stealthy	19

from AN/SPY-1B: New antenna design with "15dB lower sidelobes" [^WNWS]

AN/SPY-1D: The littoral warfare version, became urgent from lessons learned in the 1991 PGW. [^WNWS]

[ ] SPY-1F ID 1894

Size	nm
Large, Medium	185
Small	147
Very Small	59
Stealthy	18

Peak Power (W): 600000 [^C4ISR]

SPY-6

When it was still a project, it was expected to bring at least a 15 dB increase in capacity. And draw around three times the current of a SPY-1D(V).[^C4ISR]

Range, air [^BCG]

[ ] AN/SPY-6(V)1 AMDR ID 5360

Size	nm
Large, Medium	508
Small	403
Very Small	161
Stealthy	48

[ ] AN/SPY-6(V)2 EASR, AN/SPY-6(V)3 EASR ID 5978, 6018

Size	nm
Large, Medium, Small	250
Very Small	106
Stealthy	32

[ ] AN/SPY-6(V)4 EASR ID 6051

Size	nm
Large, Medium	450
Small	357
Very Small	143
Stealthy	43

Range, surface [^BCG]:

[ ] SPY-6s ID 5360,5978,6018,6051

Size	nm
Large, Medium, Small	45
Very Small	27
Stealthy	15

HunterDNiu commented 10 months ago

For SPY-6, #3833

LuigiP57 commented 10 months ago

Peak Power (W): 4000000 - 6000000 1 Peak Power (W): 600000 3

Which data should we refer to? Peak power 4-6MW? That's more power than some of the larger over-the-horizon radars in the database. Can the DDG-51 Blk III generate enough power to support the operation of 4-6MW each AMDR?

claudejdev commented 10 months ago

@LuigiP57 The Sensor entry form asks for Peak Power (W). Not to be confused with the Average Power often quoted. Not sure what you mean by "each AMDR?". This is the total power.

LuigiP57 commented 10 months ago

@LuigiP57 The Sensor entry form asks for Peak Power (W). Not sure what you mean by "each AMDR?". This is the total power.

Do you mean the total power of four AMDRs? That may be reasonable.

claudejdev commented 10 months ago

@LuigiP57

I prefer to give the DB manager the figures that are asked for, raw. I'm sure the DB team knows better than me how to put it into context.

LuigiP57 commented 10 months ago

@LuigiP57

I prefer to give the DB manager the figures that are asked for, raw. I'm sure the DB team knows better than me how to put it into context.

The 346 series radar in the database has a peak power of only 150kw. I don't know if the peak power in the database refers to average power or if the simulation of this game only refers to peak power.

claudejdev commented 10 months ago

Yeah. China. I have yet to find a reliable source. If there's even any public one, and not too sensitive for people to mention online.

LuigiP57 commented 10 months ago

Yeah. China. I have yet to find a reliable source. If there's even any public one, and not too sensitive for people to mention online.

But I still admire your information-gathering skills.

claudejdev commented 10 months ago

Thank you @LuigiP57 , it's my pleasure. It's my little bubble of sanity. The only frustrating aspect of it is all the time it takes to process alone hundreds of Go of resources documents there are. I've offered several times to share the raw data I'm gathering, for other datamonger to examine and formulate update suggestions, but there seems to be no interest.

And I admire your educated suggestions!

Cheers

LuigiP57 commented 10 months ago

Thank you @LuigiP57 , it's my pleasure. It's my little bubble of sanity. The only frustrating aspect of it is all the time it takes to process alone hundreds of Go of resources documents there are. I've offered several times to share the raw data I'm gathering, for other datamonger to examine and formulate update suggestions, but there seems to be no interest.

And I admire your educated suggestions!

Cheers

“Know yourself and know the enemy, and you can fight a hundred battles with no danger of defeat.” I especially like this sentence in Sun Tzu's Art of War. We should not be blinded by ignorance and arrogance, but should learn more about our potential enemies. If we don't know enough, reasonable speculation can help us improve the simulation of the game rather than doing nothing about it. The 65th Agrressor Squadron's approach is to use the F-35 to simulate the J-20, as they are both typical stealth fighters and there won't be much difference.

“Pride comes before a fall." This is another thought-provoking old Chinese saying. I have noticed that there are some overly optimistic estimates of Western weapons in the game that are unlikely to be realized in reality, so I will argue. Because I think it is wrong for us to indulge in such fantasies which can lead us to misjudge reality.

claudejdev commented 10 months ago

Let's face it @LuigiP57 , the reality is, we're in the dark about most contemporary matters. Essentially, we're just enthusiasts relying on promotional material, which, let's be honest, showcases the product in the best possible light.

For me, it's not about pride or wishful thinking. I'd love to have a comprehensive catalog for every system worldwide, but that's just not the case. Instead, we're left with data that might as well be comparing apples to oranges.

Some individuals criticize things as "biased" or "weak," to which I respond, "then provide reliable sources." I get that, in certain online spaces, sharing such information can be unwise and lead to serious consequences. Even offering guidance can be risky.

Until that changes, we're all stuck dealing with availability bias. That's just my humble opinion.

Hey, maybe that would be worth opening a discussion to have such a chat :)

PygmalionOfCyprus / cmo-db-requests