We would never know the actual specs on it, but I would think on sheer power and receptivity, this might be the most powerful S-band array out there, thanks to its sheer size. Note I said S-band. There are different kinds and purposes of radars, search radars, fire control radars, etc,. We can only compare apples to apples only but not apples to oranges. Type 346A belongs to the air search radar category using S-band. Can't compare with the fire control radars using X-band, that is separate category.
052C/052D Class Destroyers
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
We would never know the actual specs on it, but I would think on sheer power and receptivity, this might be the most powerful S-band array out there, thanks to its sheer size. Note I said S-band. There are different kinds and purposes of radars, search radars, fire control radars, etc,. We can only compare apples to apples only but not apples to oranges. Type 346A belongs to the air search radar category using S-band. Can't compare with the fire control radars using X-band, that is separate category.
There's also the Ford's and 055's dual band radar. Of whom the Ford's probably is better due to being CV sized instead of DDG sized.
The 001(A) radars may also be better due to being same radar, larger size.
DDG wise, based on size and config, it would only be second to 055's radar. Maybe the Type 45's AESA could be comparable as well.
Ford's radars are SPY-3 and SPY-4, these are the same radars on the Zumwalt, not particularly meant to be CV sized and utilizing an existing part, much like 001 and 002. Except the Zumwalt removed the SPY-4 for cost purposes. SPY-3 is an X-band radar, so more comparative to Thales APAR (or the new X-band array on the mast of the 055) but SPY-4 is an S-band radar, so more comparative to Type 346A. However, both SPY-3 and -4 seems to have their issues, already superceded and maybe abandoned for the SPY-6, which uses GaN for better performance. The third Zumwalt may switch over to SPY-6 and future Ford class carriers may also switch to the SPY-6.
Type 45 radar is not comparative due to the its smaller size and weight that allows it to be placed on top of a tall mast. Its dual faced, and horizontal scanning is done by mechanically rotating the arrays.
I am not completely sure if Type 346A's dual band on the same panel still exists. The shape of the array is perfectly symmetrical, not vertically rectangular like the Type 346 which would allow you to add C-band arrays on top and bottom and still keep a perfect octagonal for the main radar. Optimally, the main search radar itself has to be equal length in all dimensions for both horizontal and vertical scans, in a perfect octagonal, and with the Type 346A, the sides of the octagonal should reach the boundaries of the square radome that covers it. That would let you put as many S-band elements as possible in equal number across both X and Y-axis to give you the best performance possible, and this would outperform the Type 346 whose layout would mean a smaller octagonal for the main radar. Giving up the C-band for more S-band elements will improve your search and acquire performance. This assumes the HQ-9 on the 052D has relinquished SARH/TVM guidance that requires a surface based fire control radar in lieu for a fully active radar homing seeker that allows it to be autonomous, and requires only midphase correctional updates which can be supplied by the search radar(s).
The IFF function would be placed outside of the main array, on the 052D, that would be the panels right on top of the array and on top of the bridge. If you look closely to the 052D, you will see it. On the 055D, these panels have become thicker, meaning they may have acquired more functions. The 052C does not have these arrays on top, so either the IFF is within the main panel or there is no IFF at all.
If the Type 346A still retains missile target illumination for SARH/TVM guidance of HQ-9 missiles, they would have to be placed on all four corners, as the octagon would leave the corners as empty spaces.
I also want to add the use of the term DBR or Dual Band Radar is quite misleading because SPY-3 and SPY-4 are two separate radars, SPY-3 with the X-band and SPY-4 with the S-band. These are not dual band in the same sense as the Type 346 that emits two spectrum bands right on the same face. Its dual band because you have two separate radars each with their own separate band.
The main array of SPY-6, which succeeds both SPY-3 and SPY-4, is S-band only. The X-band is provided by a dual faced slotted array called SPQ-9B. See the picture here.
What is SPQ-9B
SPQ-9B equips many USN ships like some Nimitz class and some Ticos and will be featured on the Flight III AB. Flight III Burke still has SPG-62 dishes for illumination and targeting, even with SPY-6. In the future, something else may replace the SPQ-9B. But they are not talking about the SPY-3 anymore which means something will replace that too.
By what definition is the Type 346B on the 055 dual band? Is it because it emits two bands on the same face? Or its single band, with the X-band provided by the arrays on the mast, which then makes it dual band? There are also arrays on top of the bridge, and these might be C-band used for surface search, which makes it a triple band?
This DBR thing is marketing lingo, otherwise, what would you call the combined radar sets on the Type 052D? You have the Type 346A providing S (and C) band, with the Type 364 on the mast providing C-band, the Type 344 and Type 366 radars on top of the bridge providing X-band.
Last edited:
So you are speaking of these panels ? For you, they should be C band radars ?
They are called 敌我识别系统 which should means "enemy identification system".
here below you can see the three layers of the type 346A, corresponding with what we already know.
What is the advantage of C band ? S band ?
Likely to be C-band radar + IFF for the Type 055, but not on the 052D, which is only IFF system.
The translation of the text yields Radar IFF.
IFF is generally placed on top of a radar. This case is consistent to general practice.
The pattern in the three layers of the array points a monopulse tracking system. The pattern of which does not indicate presence of any thing that can be construed as a C-band targeting illumination array used for missiles.
The VLS all seem to all of equal length in the front.
The theory is HHQ-9 has active radar homing, using the S-bands for mid-course correction.