Last edited:
Naval launchers, guns and others
- Thread starter FORBIN
- Start date
AFAIK there is no "HHQ-9" in the strictest sense. The HQ-9 is the original land-based version. The SARH HHQ-9A is used on the 052C/D and "HHQ-9B" is supposedly on the 055, and is the counterpart to SM-2MR Block IIIB with SARH + IR to enable OTH targeting and to help with small RCS targets or in high ECM environments.
That's just plain wrong. The panels on the 052C/D are dual S/C-band panels with two horizontal C-band panels sandwiching a middle S-band panel. The C-band panels are the illuminators for HHQ-9. I'm surprised you don't know this already since this has been discussed multiple times on SDF.
I am not agree,
I find here
HHQ-9 naval family get 3 variants but why HQ-9 used by Army and less recent have a superior range than HHQ-9 : 200* vs 125 km ... ?
*S-300PMU2 with 48N6E2 missile same 195km it is the last S-300 with S-300V4 but different.
And it is possible 052D are armed with HHQ-9B normaly in service but not certain, IOC...
The 4th destroyer Type 052D admitted to active service
Last edited:
The original HQ-9 is supposedly based on the S-300 30N6E system, which is TVM. I believe the HHQ-9A naval variant extended the range and was converted to SARH. The HHQ-9B added IR and possibly extended the range some more.
Do you even realize what C-band means? It doesn't have the resolution to actually illuminate for the HHQ-9. It is a data link sort of radar array, comparable with the S-band SPY-1's ability to provide mid course guidance to the missile itself, while the X-band SPG-62 does the actual terminal illumination. There is a reason why the SPY-1 has the Y and not the G of the SPG in the designation, denoting that it is something of an oversized radio control antenna and not a fire control radar. Same with the Type 346, whose C-band arrays are remote control radio antennae and not illuminators.
The only possibility for any sort of SAM guidance on these ships is the active radar seeker of the HHQ-9.
The only possibility for any sort of SAM guidance on these ships is the active radar seeker of the HHQ-9.
You really need to just stop talking at this point because you're digging deeper and deeper holes with your severe lack of knowledge in this area combined with your humorously pretentious bluster. C-band DOES have the resolution for terminal illumination. We know this not only because this is what the 052C/D uses for terminal illumination, but the Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapon Systems (5th edition) also lists MULTIPLE illuminators that use C-band instead of X-band or Ku-band. I have no idea where you got the idea that those C-band panels were "oversized remote control radio antennae"; I suspect it might have been pulled out of somewhere dark and damp. ROFLMAO
Also, the Type 346 ALREADY has an embedded S-band array so I have no clue why you got the idea to compare SPY-1D's S-band array to 052C/D's C-band array instead of its S-band array. The 346's S-band portion functions exactly like the SPY-1D, providing midcourse guidance, while the C-band arrays provide terminal illumination like the SPG-62. Wikipedia surprisingly has a remarkably detailed writeup on the 346. Before you poopoo Wiki in this case I suggest you demonstrate any support for your claims that do NOT actually originate from your nether regions.
antiterror13
Brigadier
Illuminators are generally arrays with similar width to height ratios.
Why are the alleged C band illuminators thin strips? (If i can tell correctly, there seem to be gaps in each strip, making up 3 smaller strips, still several times longer than they're high) If they're not separate, why have such very very long strip? If they're indeed separate, why have 6 of them for each large array? Can the quite short vertical dimension be able to offer what a C band illumination waveform needs at high angles? What if the rumors of C band are not true and it's in fact a X band array?
There are also other function array radars should have, like the MPQ53 radar set example: IFF array, sidelobe canceller/s, multiple ECCM arrays. MPQ53 also has a dedicated TVM array. Something that HH9Q may or may not have, despite using or not using TVM. (because, hey, we don't know if it has active guidance, we don't really know if it uses pure SARH or TVM either)
Only other, non organic so to say, array visible on 052c is the long rod thingy underneath the main array. People usually label it as sidelobe canceller. So how plausible is that some of the other required functions are taken by the small arrays above and below the main array?
Then again, there is SPY1 radar face, which has absolutely no other visible separate arrays besides the main array (or even additional arrays right near the main radar face) and yet it does search, track, missile comm, (possibly IFF), ECCM and sidelobe cancellation. Burke does use some IFF system that is separate from the SPY array but may well be linked to Aegis, meaning possibly no need for integrated IFF to the SPY1 array.
Why are the alleged C band illuminators thin strips? (If i can tell correctly, there seem to be gaps in each strip, making up 3 smaller strips, still several times longer than they're high) If they're not separate, why have such very very long strip? If they're indeed separate, why have 6 of them for each large array? Can the quite short vertical dimension be able to offer what a C band illumination waveform needs at high angles? What if the rumors of C band are not true and it's in fact a X band array?
There are also other function array radars should have, like the MPQ53 radar set example: IFF array, sidelobe canceller/s, multiple ECCM arrays. MPQ53 also has a dedicated TVM array. Something that HH9Q may or may not have, despite using or not using TVM. (because, hey, we don't know if it has active guidance, we don't really know if it uses pure SARH or TVM either)
Only other, non organic so to say, array visible on 052c is the long rod thingy underneath the main array. People usually label it as sidelobe canceller. So how plausible is that some of the other required functions are taken by the small arrays above and below the main array?
Then again, there is SPY1 radar face, which has absolutely no other visible separate arrays besides the main array (or even additional arrays right near the main radar face) and yet it does search, track, missile comm, (possibly IFF), ECCM and sidelobe cancellation. Burke does use some IFF system that is separate from the SPY array but may well be linked to Aegis, meaning possibly no need for integrated IFF to the SPY1 array.