Hongjian
Posts: 834
Joined: 1/2/2015
Status: offline
|
Regarding the HQ-9/FD-2000 system; in general, the official brochure posted above does indeed bring up a few new questions about the HQ-9/A/B system.
First of all, the most striking thing it reveals, aside of its anti theatre ballistic missile capability, is that it apparently has an active radar terminal seeker.
This doesnt correlate with the information that wikipedia gives us, but it is not the first time for wikipedia to have inaccurate information about Chinese systems...
My theory: There is a huge difference between HQ-9, the FD-2000, which seems to be based on an more advanced variant of the HQ-9 (HHQ-9 or HQ-9A?) and the naval HHQ-9 variants.
If we look at the land-based HQ-9 system and its HT-233 PESA engagement radar, we know from most sources that this system is basically a Chinese copy of the Patriot's AN/MPQ-53 operating in G-Band and not actually a copy of the X-band 30N6E1 Tomb Stone of the S-300P series. This indeed correlates with the information we have about the early HQ-9s being basically a Patriot-inspired system, with slanted launchers and all, until the S-300PMU sales to China changed it and helped that system to overcome its technological bottlenecks - thereby turning into a S-300 styled system with VL missiles. But it seems that the Patriot-styled G-band PESA radar was retained from the original project.
The land based HQ-9 missile is, like the MIM-104 Patriot system, a Track-via-Missile system. This has been confirmed in most sources.
Now, lets move on to the naval systems of interest:
The HHQ-9 series onboard the 052C and 052D should actually have been paired with a similiar G-band engagement radar, if they have any relation with the land-based HQ-9, that is.
But if we research about the 052C and 052D, we actually do not see any eligible FCRs that would fit the bill. Nothing, at least, like on the 051C Luzhou-class DDGs which have those imported S-300FMs onboard and that large 30N6E1 Tomb Stone on the non-functional 'helo hangar'.
That layout is quite simple and clear: The radome ontop of the first mast houses the SR-64 high-rate search radar (associated with CIWS sea-skimmer defense, hence always placed on the very top), Type 381 Rice Screen on the second mast is for the 3D air-search, and the Tomb-Stone on the rear superstructure is for the FCR:
Now, let's look at the 052C/D:
This time, there's something different:
We have the SR-64 still on the top of the main-mast, the new Type 348 (also known as Type 346 "Dragon Eye") Shipborne AESAs are for 3D airsearch, A Type 517H Yagi VHF-band volume search radar for long range 2D air-search...
But no dedicated FCR.
What happened?
IMHO, the naval HHQ-9/A/B do not actually require a FCR in the traditional sense, as they utilize a guidance mode that is completely independent of off-board targeting/illumination, as it would have been required in the TVM or SARH guidance techniques.
There are a few clues which could be the evidence for my theory:
First; the Type 346/348 Shipborne AESA's name: Type "34X" indicate that is is a radar that is capable of fire-control.
From this, unfortunately dead, webpage of the China Academy of Space Technology (CAST), we can see the meaning behind the different radar designations:
http://www.cast.org.cn/n435777/n435799/n892856/n892859/n893854/32893.html
quote:
下面是我整理的我国部分雷达型号的数字序号分类，也是我认为385雷达就是舰载三坐标警戒雷达的依据之一。
当然，里面除有个别雷达喜欢串门外，绝大多数雷达都还是遵循这个雷达分类序列的。
33X系列：航天测控雷达
34X系列：火控雷达，346型舰载多用途有源相控阵雷达使用这个序列编号说明其火控功能和搜索功能一样强大
35X系列：搜索-攻击雷达（导弹艇、潜艇的综合火控雷达）
36X系列：对海/低空警戒兼目标指示雷达，有一个512型的异类，这雷达是早期快艇雷达改进而来的。
37X系列：陆军炮兵校射侦察雷达
38X系列：三坐标警戒雷达
51X系列：远程对空警戒雷达
65X系列：敌我识别器
70X系列：未知功能舰载雷达
71X系列：测雨雷达
75X系列：导航雷达
77X系列：潜望镜测距雷达
84X系列：测台风雷达
18X系列：船载精密测量雷达
At the "34X系列" entry, it is said that it is a "fire contol radar 火控雷达".
And fortunately, they even have the Type 346 radar as an example; saying:
346型舰载多用途有源相控阵雷达: 346-Type (346型) Shipborne (舰载) Multirole (多用途) Active (有源) Phased Array (相控阵) Radar (雷达)
This correlated with what Jane's etc. say about it as well.
"34X" being the designation of a fire control radar also correlate with other 34X radars onboard Chinese ships, for example the Type 347 Rice Lamp DP-gun FCR we see in that picture of the 052C above, and the Type 344 FCR, typically associated with all PLAN CIWS systems:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_344_Radar
Now, we might say; "well, looks like the HHQ-9 indeed has an FCR, what are you talking about?"
Then, we need to see the second clue, that it might really doesnt need or have one:
The Type 346/348 Dragon Eye Shipborne Multirole AESA actually hardly can qualify as an FCR, as it is operating at S-Band (2-4 GHz).
Remember, we have established that the HT-233 and AN/MPQ-53 are operating at the more high frequency G/H-Band (4-6/8 Ghz), while the 30N6E1 even operates at X-band (8-12 GHz). It seems to be clear that the TVM/SARH variant of the HQ-9 needs a FCR operating in the higher frequency bands that are typcially associated with Fire Control Radars due to their accuracy and resolution, ideal to paint airborne targets for the SARH seekers to follow. On the other hand, S-band is kinda too low-frequency and too low resolution to generate suitable, weapon quality tracks - but it can easily have the extreme range.
So, the 3rd clue would be the range of the S-band Type 346/348 compared to the G-band HT-233: The Type 346/348 is cited to have nearly 400km range (ingame, it is 175nmi like the SPY-1 series), which is quite hard to attain with a G/H band FCR. We know as well, that the HT-233 FCR for the land-based HQ-9 has just 120-150km range, depending on source. This comparably low range is in line with the performance of some AN/MPQ-53 radars, cited with 140-170km range (90nmi in game).
Something's not right. The 346/348 radars arent too much larger than the land-based HT-233 to be able to generate FCR quality tracks at 400km or 175nmi range.
So, most sources, including the "Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapon Systems" by Norman Friedman agree that the Type 346/348 is, despite its "34X"-designation, not entirely an FCR, but infact something akin to the "SPY" designation for the SPY-1 radar.
Here, the "FCR-quality" of this radar isnt its illumination capability, but actually its two-way datalink capablity.
While the "34X" would be the Chinese equivalent to the american "SPG"-designation (example: SPG-62 FCR for SM-1/2/ESSM etc.), the Type 34X in the "346/348" here is basically the "Y" in the "SPY-1".
So, we are back to square one: The naval HHQ-9 series still doesnt have a dedicated FCR.
This brings us to one single conclusion, supported by the official data given by the brochure of the DF-2000: The HHQ-9 series are active guided missiles, supported by mid-course datalink correction (hence, the need for the 346/348 radar's two-way datalink capability).
The HHQ-9A and HHQ-9B have no other differences than that the "A" has some guidance and signal-processing improvements, while the "B" has an additional passive-IR seeker and extended range, latter according to the The 2014 U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission to the US-Congress:
http://defensetech.org/2014/12/03/report-chinese-navys-fleet-will-outnumber-u-s-by-2020/#ixzz3PP6moRE4
Conclusion:
HHQ-9A/B arent TVM or SARH, but have active radar guidance, just like their export variant FD-2000.
HHQ-9A is basically like the land-based HQ-9, just with active radar, while the HHQ-9B has extended range and is additionally equipped with an IR-seeker.
As shown on the FD-2000, all HQ-9 variants have limited TBM defense capability, hence their radars (HT-233, Type 346, 346A) should receive the [ABM & Space Search] trait as well.
In addition, the FD-2000 brochure also says that the system has 85% PoH vs Aircraft, Cruise Missiles and A-G Missiles, as well as 50% vs Theatre Ballistic Missiles. Make of it as you want, but maybe the ingame PoH could be adjusted as well from the current 80% to 85%. They would still be lower than the advanced variants of the SM-2 or SM-6, but this would reflect their active radar seekers and their improvements of guidance/software/signal-processing over the S-300PMUs imported from Russia.
Thanks for reading.
< Message edited by Hongjian -- 1/20/2015 10:49:47 PM >
|
Printable Version
[UPDATED DB v440] Chinese Surface Combattants - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread