UK Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) specialist SEA will demonstrate a software application to enhance the UK Royal Navy’s sonar systems as part of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) Spearhead defence innovation programme.
The system, which is likely to be trialled later in 2024, automatically determines the optimum deployment depth of an active sonar projector and receiving array, depending on its underwater environment.
It intends to significantly enhance the Royal Navy’s detection and tracking capability.
“Building its proven expertise in underwater environmental modelling, sonar and acoustics, SEA will not only demonstrate this software application but will also actively contribute additional concepts to the ASW Spearhead programme, working with prime contractor Thales Underwater Systems.
Such capabilities are designed to provide the Royal Navy with innovative ways to exploit both existing and enhanced systems in underwater warfare scenarios.”
Ian Cox, Head of Research & Simulation at SEA, said:
“SEA is proud to be demonstrating its leading capability for this important project with Thales, which is a continuation of our work with the Royal Navy based around trusted advice and consultancy, and the provision of leading technology. It shows SEA’s dedication to supporting the enhancement of the Royal Navy’s ASW capability. It also underscores our commitment to advancing research and development studies within underwater detection and tracking into operational capabilities for naval forces. We are proud to be pushing the boundaries of technological innovation within naval defence.”
I think that software updates are often unseen and can make a big difference to equipment above simply replacing stuff. This would seem to be one example and the ongoing Sampson radar upgrades I imagine are doing a fine job keeping what’s seen as an old radar (as it rotates, which appears to irritate people) very current.
A few hardware upgrades would not go amiss perhaps…bring back all those (stored,?) 20mm, add Martlet launchers and so on?
AA
Same goes for Artisan. Lots of software updates that have greatly increased capability.
Every system that has software running on it has updates installed on it. In most cases increase in capability is the result. Its very rare that you need to ever revert back to the old software.
I’m a bit confused about Artisan
Some seem to say that it can only steer the beam up and down, but that wouldn’t allow it to steer CAMM well enough, would it?
I find it difficult to compare radars like Artisan and NS100 without just wading through company guff. To me it looks like NS100’s hardware is better but Artisan and most British radars have better software and back ends.
CAAM like Aster is an active homer – would it need much steering after launching to a specific vector from Artisan ?.
But against supersonic ASMs the target might move further than the active search range of the missile. Aster and CAMM are command guided into the no-escape zone of the missile.
ARTISAN is, in a lot of respects, a better radar than NS100.
NS100 is cheap and was chosen to shoe horn T31 into a budget. As others have said the T31 parents class has a thumping big S1850 air search radar on it so that upgrade is also very possible.
I’d be thankful the pragmatic decisions were made to actually get T31 Contracts signed so there are two shipyards churning out frigates that everyone else wants in their real fleets. These are big upgradable ships.
CAMM, as others have said, is active homing so it tells CAMM where to go to with mid course corrections.
The NS100 is more equivalent to Artisan in terms of perfomance. However, the Thales NS200 would have been a better option. This is basically a NS100 with a larger area array. They are both AESA based mechanically rotating “single panel ” radars, using the same transmitter-receiver modules (TRMs). Thales have showcased a fixed panel arrangement that uses the NS100/200 architecture. The NS200 will have a greater detection range than the smaller NS100.
The NS100 is a more efficient radar than the Artisan. It is some 20 years newer. So makes uses of better (newer) technology. It should have a similar detection range to Artisan. Though both Thales and the RN won’t give away anything specific. I would also say based on the antenna array shape, is that the NS100 can provide a more circular and narrower beam pattern. Which will give you better target resolution.
Camm is to a large extent sensor agnostic.
It needs target data and isn’t bothered where that comes from.
It needs a sensor to tell the system where the target is.
it needs a sensor to tell it where the missile is.
It calculates the vectors to get the missile close enough to where it goes active.
Updates calculated in the CAMM system are sent up via a separate data link aerial to the missile.
Artisan capabilities and how it does certain things are not public knowledge
Artisan is rotating so when it is not looking it is not detecting in that sector. So time lost.
Every little helps
Stored? I doubt it, everything gets scrapped or flogged off almost immediately!
I’m surprised at how much lighter, high-mounted radars seem to be falling out of favour.
The large fixed arrays are better suited against ballistics and space-based threats, and they’re mechanically simpler which eases maintenance in that regard, but they’re also heavier and more expensive. Mast-mounted arrays, whether rotating or fixed, but they’re cheaper and offer a better radar horizon.
The latter part in particular would seem to be particularly important in countering not just sea-skimming cruise missiles (which are still far more prevalent than ballistic missiles, especially as anti-ship weapons), but also drones of the type that Ukraine has been using very effectively against Russia.
As for those hardware upgrades though, while I wouldn’t suggest bodging old 20mm cannons on as an effective solution to any problem, the footage we’ve seen of Ukraine’s drones penetrating the inner defences of Russian warships suggests we should consider heavier CIWS for ships going forward? T31 can bring a pair of 40mm and the 57mm to bear against a side-on target, incorporating similar broadsides alongside lasers into future vessels would seem prudent.
Perhaps the best of both worlds could be used with radars. The high mast mounted radar I presume only needs to be able to get a good picture out to the horizon where a large long range radar is looking further than the horizon in the sky.
My knowledge of radars is limited.
If we have useful in storage, then in the current climate, they should be available the Thai has upgraded their own Type 2 river With a 76mm rapid fire gyn, twi extra DS30 aft aff of the bridge wings a are now fitting harpoon adt if the funnel the rivers are highly capable ships, hadding another arrow to the bow will make them even more useful the equipment is already available from Monmouth and Montrose inventory. The same opportunity exists to weaponise echo and the enterprise it’s all hands to the pump at the moment and the navy will need every hull it has.everything we might need us in storage behind the fountain lake jetty in Pompey naval base.
Have you disabled your spellchecker?
Yes
I would rather hear that something is being done about the ridiculous lack of sonar in other escorts – as I understand it, non functional in the 45s, none to be fitted in the 31s.
Agree with that but the come back is manning.
I agree they say it comes down to cost , but for the sake of the losing a vessel ? Which is more costly 🤔 🇬🇧
It’s their peacetime thinking, makes sense in that environment great looking ships to impress the public and foreign onlookers on World cruises while on on display but far less so during conflict when beauty pageants have little relevance to effectiveness as do even numbers when they can’t actually fight.
T31 is a peaceful warship…
Halfpenny worth of tar…….
I was under the impression the new version if the same TASS from the 23s were being added to the 31s
T31 won’t have Sonar – they are limited to the SSTD System ,nothing more.
I have no idea if S2150 can be fitted to T31, but if it can the sets from the T23s will probably be fitted. RN ordered 16 of them, 8 for T26 and 8 for T23, the latter of which will have a very short life if they aren’t fitted to T31s, with Westminsters never even being fitted.
The ship the T31 is based on, the Iver Huidfeldt does have a SMART-L mounted on top of the hangar. The S1850M is a derivative of the SMART-L radar. As part of Babcock’s demonstration at DSEI a few years ago. They showed the A140 model, this is the export version of the T31. The model had lots of design options that you could swap around. One of these included the SMART-L radar. So in essence the T31 could have a SMART-L or S1850M radar fitted.
S2150 is the upgraded and revamped S2050 which to all intents and purposes is a new build sonar from the wet end to the display. The original S2050 remains fitted to the remaining T23s and is an active bow dome hull mounted sonar. As T23 leaves service it should become available for overhaul and at a subsequent refit fit to T31. It would require some extensive rework though to mount a bow done on a T31 that isnt there from build and I am not convinced it would be cheap and easy to do.
No reason a POD S2087/CAPTAS could not be fitted to a T31.
S2087 is LF active. Its got a listening tail yes, but the transmitter part is needed to give it its performance advantage over a passive tail equipped vessel. It’s going to be towed thousands of meters behind the ship and it’s going to be below the thermocline. Self generated ships noise is less of an issue on an LF Active tail than on a pure passive tail such as S2031 was which was the tail T23’s had at build.
I can only see s refurbish like that in a war situation.
I think all future RN combat ships have capabilities mistakes/mismatch.
Carriers without missiles and only with short range Phalanx that USN is even replacing in old ships. Not ready for combat.
T26 with only 1 Merlin helicopter, non planar radar, no Area AAW capability. No good gun for anti drone. Good only for ASW and land attack eventually.
T31 no sonar, only 12 CAMM, non planar radar. Good guns for anti drone.
T45 no sonar, no good gun for anti drone. Good Area AAW albeit non planar radar, excuse here due to age.
This tells me the RN combat ships only make sense in an assembled fleet where all of them can cover the missing capabilities of other classes.
There is no ship that has satisfactory qualities in all domains like in other fleets.