Maybe they're thin strips so they can fit both types of arrays into a square shape with the S-band array roughly octagonal. This way both the S-band and C-band arrays can share the same air cooling system. Also, the alleged "gaps" are only present in the top strip, and not seen on the bottom strip, so it's possible these gaps are illusory. As for "high angles", this is not really a concern since a fighter or missile would have to be almost directly on top of the ship to achieve a high angle of incidence WRT the panel face; I'm pretty sure the radar designers have already thought about that kind of contingency. And if the "rumors" are not true and it's actually a pair of X-band illuminators, then for the purpose of this discussion, it doesn't matter at all, since then the HHQ-9A is still SARH.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?
We know for a fact that both 346 and SPY-1D do not perform IFF functions. Both ship classes have dedicated IFF arrays. As for the rest, who is to say that the S-band portion of 346 cannot perform any or all of those functions? And if it cannot, who is to say that the C-band portion cannot perform them while simultaneously providing terminal illumination? As for SARH vs TVM, both methods require a terminal radar with the resolution to provide weapons-quality tracks, which the C-band portion of the 346 can provide regardless of the tracking method.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.