All fixed SAM batteries (SA-2, Nike, Sky Bow, AEGIS ashore) currently all have the same combat system, 'SAM (Fixed) (ex: SA-2, MiM-3 Nike) regardless of how advanced the SAM battery's electronics and combat system actually are. I don't think this is the most optimal way to evaluate the combat system of a SAM battery, as the mobility of the battery is not directly tied to the electronics and combat system.
Currently, the Sky Bow III has the combat system 'SAM (Fixed) (ex: SA-2, MiM-3 Nike). Now unfortunately, the Taiwanese are very secretive about most of the arms, so I can't find any detailed info or pictures of the Sky Bow III's control system. But according to the manufacturer of the system, the Sky Bow III's 'engagement control station' has the following features:
• Intelligence receives and exchanges
• Receiving and executing orders from higher echelon units
• GUI (Graphic user interface) with human factors
• Battery level command and control center
• Target identification
• Target threaten evaluation
• Engagement decision: manual, auto recommendation, automatic, and execution of orders from higher echelon
• Weapon assignment (TKI, II, and III missiles)
• Fire sequence control
• Kill evaluation
• Bio and chemical hazards monitor and protection
• Automatic system tests and diagnostics reporting
I would say that the features mentioned above and the general advancement in electronics would make the Sky Bow III combat system's reaction and targeting time a lot faster than that of an SA-2 or Nike.
In my opinion, it would be best to copy the combat system ratings for mobile SAM batteries to use for mobile SAM batteries as well, so for example, instead of just 'SAM (Fixed)' you would have SAM (Fixed, analog) or SAM (Fixed, digital).
This is totally fair. Fixed facilities have a distinct "CS Gen" because they have no evasion time, but why I didn't create an analog/digital version is beyond me.
DB Selector
DB3K
Affected DBID(s)
395
Summary of Changes
All fixed SAM batteries (SA-2, Nike, Sky Bow, AEGIS ashore) currently all have the same combat system, 'SAM (Fixed) (ex: SA-2, MiM-3 Nike) regardless of how advanced the SAM battery's electronics and combat system actually are. I don't think this is the most optimal way to evaluate the combat system of a SAM battery, as the mobility of the battery is not directly tied to the electronics and combat system.
Currently, the Sky Bow III has the combat system 'SAM (Fixed) (ex: SA-2, MiM-3 Nike). Now unfortunately, the Taiwanese are very secretive about most of the arms, so I can't find any detailed info or pictures of the Sky Bow III's control system. But according to the manufacturer of the system, the Sky Bow III's 'engagement control station' has the following features: • Intelligence receives and exchanges • Receiving and executing orders from higher echelon units • GUI (Graphic user interface) with human factors • Battery level command and control center • Target identification • Target threaten evaluation • Engagement decision: manual, auto recommendation, automatic, and execution of orders from higher echelon • Weapon assignment (TKI, II, and III missiles) • Fire sequence control • Kill evaluation • Bio and chemical hazards monitor and protection • Automatic system tests and diagnostics reporting I would say that the features mentioned above and the general advancement in electronics would make the Sky Bow III combat system's reaction and targeting time a lot faster than that of an SA-2 or Nike.
In my opinion, it would be best to copy the combat system ratings for mobile SAM batteries to use for mobile SAM batteries as well, so for example, instead of just 'SAM (Fixed)' you would have SAM (Fixed, analog) or SAM (Fixed, digital).
Sources
https://www.ncsist.org.tw/eng/csistdup/products/product.aspx?product_Id=11&catalog=28