The HHQ-9 is actually active radar guided, just like AMRAAM. The closest naval system in terms of guidence is probably Aster, used by RN's Type 45 destroyers, but HHQ-9 has longer range.
Where'd you find that. I'm curious because I know the HHQ-9s come in 3 different versions and you could be referring to the B version, only got the A for the 052C.
@@Firestorm2900 All HQ-9 variants are active radar guided. The fact that the type 346 radar operates in S-band is a dead giveaway because it cannot offer enough accuracy for terminal guidance, and no other types of missile fire control radar are present on the ships. The AN/SPY-1 of Aegis system is also a S-band radar, so it also cannot control SM-2 missiles on its own. AN/SPG-62 fire control radar is used for terminal guidance.
@@thunderboltlightning6010 Did a double check, and the Type 346 uses the same C-band as the Patriot for TVM homing. Some of the radar panels are C-band units sandwiched in-between the S-band trackers. The fact it's an AESA array allows you to go nuts like that. Other than that, it's mostly the same as the AN/SPY-1
@@Firestorm2900 Believe or not, a friend of mine is an officer who operates the air defence system on a type 052D destoryer. So, I'm quite confident about my source. Also form what I've heard, the HHQ-9 system is still not quite reliable, when it works it's fantastic, but malfunctions are somewhat frequent. Which is to be expected since it only had been fully operational for a few years.
@@thunderboltlightning6010 I think I got what's going on. The HQ-9 family's been around since 1997, but has had alot of developments over the years. HHQ-9A has better software and electronics for higher accuracy. HHQ-9B is hot launched, lighter for longer range, and has semi-active and IR seekers added. HHQ-9C is a fully active missile which was still in development in atleast late 2016. It sounds like your friend is operating a Type 052D and is acting for a testing platform for the 9C. Which would be great for the 052D if it succeeds, since it would allow you to remove the radar panels for the C-band. Meaning you can have more S-band panels giving you more power to use in the S-band search.
If you thought 7000 tonnes was heavy for a destroyer you should take a look at the new 13,000 tonne Type 055s, the Chinese still classify them as 'destroyers' but the USN deems them cruisers.
That's why we don't have VHF and UHF TV anymore, they want the bands to be open for military use! Another good ship vid lads! Pretty much everyone in Canada in the country side now has satellite TV or internet if there lucky enough to get high speed! I'm no warship tactician but would they not jink in an attempt to doge some of the gun fire in real life?
Pretty sure most of those radars don't operate where those broadcast frequencies are. I know you can still get some broadcasts on those bands through some newer antennas. Granted, all of this depends where you live. Different countries tend to allocate frequencies differently.
I think the range of those IFVs are too short to fire back or just are too weak to do damage. Cap had setup a Challenger squad to fire back once and they won, they just fire way too fast. In that case you'd probably want to engage from outside their firing range.
I believe they are a type of weapons counter measures system for anti ship missiles and the like. Either similar to the mk53 Nulka Decoy Launching System on Arleigh Burke class DDGs, or other flare/inferred type system meant to confuse/distract/lure away incoming missiles from the target ship.
Or, actually, I was confused, you may be referring to the anti-submarine rocket systems, similar to the Russian RBU class anti submarine rocket launcher system.
All Modern Destroyers have VLS.. Without VLS for anti-air, we(usa) wouldnt be able to have a ballistic missile and such strong air defense with the SM3-SM6 Missiles. You clearly know nothing of the Navy as youd know that these Chinese and most modern Destroyers are modeled off the Arleigh Burk Class which is by far the most badass class of ships that ever were...
Im not quite sure your assumption apropos Diesel & Gas Turbine engines is correct. I am pretty sure and I may be wrong however principally, the ship runs off of either one or both turbines. Electrical systems, and Life support systems will run off of Diesel Engines, multiple. Each diesel engine, will be responsible for providing power to all systems on the ship, and these will be responsible for an area. For Example Diesel 1 maybe responsible for X systems, and Diesel Engine 2 will be responsible for Y systems. You will find that you will have emergency shunting cables in Emergency Stations, spaces for running power from one Diesel Engine, to systems in a space that it is not primarily responsible in an Emergency Stations situation. For example, Hit 1 takes out Diesel X, which may be running all Positive Air (Air Conditioning Systems as well as Desalination Plants, and Gyros. By running cables, you can get these systems up if that is what you need. Not saying thats realistic, but its the ability for built in redundancy. Turbines for propulsion. DE's for mains power. Just a thought.
@@grimreapers Your welcome, Im just your average Pusser. I was FFG trained so it blows my mind I can take a Huey, and land on an Oliver Hazard Perry Class (Adelaide Class) Guided Missile Frigate, and get the inverse perspective from a Huey landing on the Flight Deck, rather than standing under the blades in front of the Port or Starboard Hanger during Flight Deck evolutions. Now that is a buzz. What you may not know, is that on an FFG (I will not assume all as mine specifically was different to all of our others) towards the transom on the Port aft quadrant, we can feed a refueling hose to the Helo. (Usually a Seahawk) There are three ways from memory the Helo can be refueled. On the deck shutdown. On the Deck Engines on, and in some cases, and Ive done this, we have fed the line to the Air Crew chief who has plugged the hose into the receptical on the helo, and the helo takes off and hovers off of the Port Side Aft Flight Deck on a course parallel with the ship of course and over the water. If you have ever watched Hunt For Red October, the Earth Grounding Fibreglass covered Shepherds Crook (for want of a better term) is a real thing, as the helo is building up a lot of static, and must be earthed in RAS (Replishment At Sea) evolutions. That takes some serious piloting skills, so does landing on a moving platform that moves in pretty much 6 DOF. There is also a system on board for roughers ( High Sea State, whereby the helo can attach to a hook that sits in and through the flight deck, and will pull the helo down onto it. All these evolutions are highly dangerous. Hence Days of practice. I have mates who went down and arent here anymore and we had only been in company with their ship a few days prior. I cannot wait until the day, they add subs (if they havent already, and anti sub operations) can be executed from a Seahawk, with comms feeds from an FFG or AWD. I once without knowing whilst playing lawn bowls with my Skipper and a few Oppos and a few blokes from an Anzac class, joked that Anzacs were just Corvettes, only find out later the bloke pissing himself laughing was that Anzacs XO. My Skipper thought it was hilarious, so dont need Anzacs in DCS. Just sayin. Then again, Im still trying to work out voice attack and the Vaicom plugins and getting them to work. So no flying til I can honestly get all this comms, and voice commands working so I can just say it and have it done. I just had to order two new USB hubs to cater for all the stuff I have accrued in the last month and I have no desk space left on a 3m by 900mm desk left to put anything. I think this is becoming an unhealthy obsession.
Nope, Diesels usually also provide propulsion power - At least for speeds below 20 knots. Now, This ship is CODOG (diesel OR gas), so at full speed it probably DOES only use the turbines but 2 x 20 cylinder Diesels would be some hefty generators :) .
Burke-class destroyers. It tickles my persnickityness all the wrong ways to hear them called "Aegis destroyers", just like calling the Ticos 'Aegis cruisers'. Also, the definition of 'destroyer' over the years has been the subject of deception and politics both, so the borders get very very fuzzy. Also most fighter radars (though not all modes) are 3D - if you get height data out of it, it's 3D. (added!) ...and warheads listed as blast/frag do not fire off in a ring, that's only continuous rod, Phoenix-style. There aren't many of those these days.
Ya know, funny thing was I kept telling myself to not do that for the Arleigh Burke DDGs, but I can count atleast once I did that in this video explicitly because of that. Played myself on that one. About the warhead, wish I knew what kind it was since there's many patterns but I couldn't find any data on that. Also, I remember reading how the Tigs were supposed to be a DD until that whole "cruiser gap" prompted the Navy to redo their classifications. That did no favors whatsoever.
@@Firestorm2900 It's fine. :) I don't think continuous rod is popular at all these days, especially for SAMs due to effects on TBMs, etc. The predecessors to the Ticos were changed from DLG/DLGN to CG/CGN as part of the cruiser gap fiasco, and they slide into that same slot in the current setup. The Tico program got changed before any went in service, and it was as much a matter of the capabilities of the Aegis system as numbers. Of course in the modern era, one has to ask if a 'real cruiser hull' is even desirable. Fun!
Sure you know this but industry categorizes both as Aegis CG and DDG’s because the combat system, radars. Weapons, VLS, consoles, etc. are Aegis at their heart. Only reel difference to speak of here is the DDG has the Spy-1d, and CG’s have the a and b variants.- all with inherent BMD capability I might add. Just need some upgrades. Served on Princeton and Mobile Bay during the Gulf War as FTC and I was a training specialist working on all baselines (1 through 9) at Lockheed and Northrop for about 15 years before going civil service… experienced several other combat systems, but hands down Aegis is the most dependable and capable thanks to visionaries behind it. I’d challenge any other combat system to achieve over 65,000 radar identifications without a blue on blue engagement during the 100 hours of Desert Storm. At the same time, we discovered the BMD capability by tracking SCUDS. Wonder if that is modeled in DCS? Lol
DB link: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ipnYbZrCpGJl_65cdgTTyHkZernaeFZkQuuHsUY7Y8M/edit?usp=sharing Heya, hope I wasn't be so forceful about the HHQ-9 debate, felt it was important since an active missile and TVMs are handled differently for how to defeat them. Still, that was rather insane how quickly it was locking on and how fast it was able to launch missiles. I think the fact the track radar is part of the ASEA allows it to fire faster than the SM2s. I remember seeing something about that, but I'm not sure if the fire rate is THAT much faster. Otherwise, the way the the phased array works is that it uses constructive interference that makes radio waves stronger and destructive interference, which makes radio waves weaker like the noise canceling you'll find on headphones, it allows you to point a radio wave electronically. This is why it can scan so quickly and probably why it was picking Cap up so fast. The AESA the 052C has and PESA SPY-1 series seen on most US ships both have the same effect, it's more the AESA is easier to maintain and smaller. This is why I think the Arliegh Burkes should be similar to the 052C as far as finding a target. Not sure about the CG's SPY-1A since it has a harder time with clutter, like picking up a locust swarm as a target. The SPY-1B upgrade helps with clutter like that but isn't as good at close to shore clutter like the DDG's SPY-1D. Also, the RCS, I sorta covered it but in order to defeat a VHF or HF radar you need to have much more radio absorbing material, the reason though why the US wasn't as concerned about reports of it's F-35s being spotted on radar is because all the radar used for locking on and guiding missiles are within it's design to deflect and absorb radar. Granted it isn't perfect, you can still get a lock on a stealth ship, it's just you have to be much closer than usual, Admiral Binkov has a video that covered this in it's F-35 vs J-20 video.
I bet you can't even think of a name for Chinese espionage agency like CIA, MI6, DGSE or Mossad but you just love the conclusion that Chinese military force derives from intelligence system…
That's be nice but we only have the two Chinese DDGs, it's why we paired the frigate up against it. I heard rumors of a Arleigh Burke being added, but the only one I've seen so far has been a mod up to now.
Several nations including USA, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada, Spain, and Norway operate AEGIS equipped warships. The Chinese AESA system is akin to the early forms of the technology. The JMSDF (Japan), and USN have the latest iteration of it.
No, this ship would be bristling with 50 cal, DSUK,And troops firing rifles.. in real life.. of course expecting dcs to model this is asking alot.... Especially for their work pace... I'd love some CA tank style controls, so one can do some ship duels, Dcs could be a fun warthunder.. Without the horrible grid and unrealistic battles... This is no modern shop command sim game ... DCS SHOULD step in.. the physics are pretty dam good.. love the Vince effect on the 20mms. And that would open them up to more SIM players to sell their super expensive modules too.... Ok, The Full fidelity's Re worth it.. about Fuckin 5p bucks for a dam map... GTFO DCS! Finish a dam module first then we can talk.. and make some more dam campaigns. Multy can only be so fun. And we all kno how it deals with Latency and other internet shortcomings .. Ie notnwell. So single player should be focused.. Ca needs more vehicle updates, Idnlove to control the Samzilla s 300, and here we got 2 ships not salvoing their missles, which a player or competent AI would do... That's another thing... COMEON HET THE DAM AI UP TO SNUFF. I been PAYING, Sorry, playing ... since lock on FC 2, and The first black shark, Before the whole DCS WORLD, came out.. But all we aem to get is Early access modules pumped out. We all hope they will become, non Ea but Dcs Isngood at crying poor.... Yall are on steam... I dont wanna hear it.. Seeing these ships duking without with guns shows the possibilities... Imagine silent hunter/DCS.. eh maybe by 2030.. if the pace of Updates, staysnthebsame.. I STILL CANT KEEP MY AI WINGMEN when I go full burner.... They just cant keep up.. I need those targets for my campaigns. Theirngoodnfor attracikg missles, But still the same AI since shark 1, no Since lock on.. SAME CONTROLS, same commands ... scrips .. freaking weak dcs ... Do better or be replaced.. [ ya dream on] -thnks to self.. God the whole game industry isnfucked. Wheres the Henry ford for gaming, it's not fuckin TODD, I don't wanna hear it.. he fucked us since skyrim... Now the Russian sim Devs are playing the EARLY ACESS game.... ughh. One with half a brain can see the issues, [ if one expects a full product, after that product is sold, why work on it further... why spend more to develop it? Doesn't make sense, right? ED is a business . Unfortunately.. I wish ppl would not buy EA, it's really ruining The industry. That and multiplayer, centric Development, that's what killed Red dead 2.... rant over, ..... For now
![ARGENTINA vs. BOLIVIA [6-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 10](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/C3wPtKNbAOA/mqdefault.jpg)
The names are hilarious, rice lamp, rice bowl hahah :) and thanks for the detailed videos and your buddy finding the detailed info!
Rice bowl ?! Must be veitnam again
awesome stuff! I love the ship reviews, please do more!:)
enjoy: ruclips.net/p/PL3kOAM2N1YJfs5272P1a-PN_gtergxxu4
There are US AEGIS CG’s and DDG’s, and numerous NATO offshoots of it with VLS in Korea, Japan, Australia, Norway, Spain, etc.
The fire control system on the Oliver Hazard Perry class also has splash correction, but it has to be entered manually
The HHQ-9 is actually active radar guided, just like AMRAAM. The closest naval system in terms of guidence is probably Aster, used by RN's Type 45 destroyers, but HHQ-9 has longer range.
Where'd you find that. I'm curious because I know the HHQ-9s come in 3 different versions and you could be referring to the B version, only got the A for the 052C.
@@Firestorm2900 All HQ-9 variants are active radar guided. The fact that the type 346 radar operates in S-band is a dead giveaway because it cannot offer enough accuracy for terminal guidance, and no other types of missile fire control radar are present on the ships.
The AN/SPY-1 of Aegis system is also a S-band radar, so it also cannot control SM-2 missiles on its own. AN/SPG-62 fire control radar is used for terminal guidance.
@@thunderboltlightning6010 Did a double check, and the Type 346 uses the same C-band as the Patriot for TVM homing. Some of the radar panels are C-band units sandwiched in-between the S-band trackers. The fact it's an AESA array allows you to go nuts like that.
Other than that, it's mostly the same as the AN/SPY-1
@@Firestorm2900 Believe or not, a friend of mine is an officer who operates the air defence system on a type 052D destoryer. So, I'm quite confident about my source. Also form what I've heard, the HHQ-9 system is still not quite reliable, when it works it's fantastic, but malfunctions are somewhat frequent. Which is to be expected since it only had been fully operational for a few years.
@@thunderboltlightning6010 I think I got what's going on. The HQ-9 family's been around since 1997, but has had alot of developments over the years.
HHQ-9A has better software and electronics for higher accuracy.
HHQ-9B is hot launched, lighter for longer range, and has semi-active and IR seekers added.
HHQ-9C is a fully active missile which was still in development in atleast late 2016.
It sounds like your friend is operating a Type 052D and is acting for a testing platform for the 9C. Which would be great for the 052D if it succeeds, since it would allow you to remove the radar panels for the C-band. Meaning you can have more S-band panels giving you more power to use in the S-band search.
The 54 a frigate did better than expected
If you thought 7000 tonnes was heavy for a destroyer you should take a look at the new 13,000 tonne Type 055s, the Chinese still classify them as 'destroyers' but the USN deems them cruisers.
There's people that'll argue that the Zumwult DDGs are cruisers, too. The DD role has really gotten fuzzy over the years.
*** Lets do a video on firing the Tomahawks from the Ticonderoga. They are really force multipliers. Great Video !!! (1st) :)
That's why we don't have VHF and UHF TV anymore, they want the bands to be open for military use! Another good ship vid lads!
Pretty much everyone in Canada in the country side now has satellite TV or internet if there lucky enough to get high speed! I'm no warship tactician but would they not jink in an attempt to doge some of the gun fire in real life?
Pretty sure most of those radars don't operate where those broadcast frequencies are. I know you can still get some broadcasts on those bands through some newer antennas. Granted, all of this depends where you live. Different countries tend to allocate frequencies differently.
An air start MP mission to sink each others carrier group would be fun.
Edit: Hint hint.
Think they did something in the past like this but it was an about attacking and defending oil platforms.
By that Ohh!!!Ph..ark u scared the sheit outta me
38:50 if they shoot back what difference would it cause?
I think the range of those IFVs are too short to fire back or just are too weak to do damage. Cap had setup a Challenger squad to fire back once and they won, they just fire way too fast. In that case you'd probably want to engage from outside their firing range.
Type 45 is the Royal Navy is the Brit equivalent to an Aegis destroyer.
Your Fuhrer laughs at you for believing puny limey type 45 is equivalent to fatso yankee DDGs. How many VLS tube does type45 have compared to DDG?
@@keep22 48 vs. the Arleigh Burke's 96.
What are the 4 - 6 x 2 launcher racks aft port and starboard mortar or missile rack?
I believe they are a type of weapons counter measures system for anti ship missiles and the like. Either similar to the mk53 Nulka Decoy Launching System on Arleigh Burke class DDGs, or other flare/inferred type system meant to confuse/distract/lure away incoming missiles from the target ship.
Or, actually, I was confused, you may be referring to the anti-submarine rocket systems, similar to the Russian RBU class anti submarine rocket launcher system.
Type 055 Gaijin when?
Excellent channel it's so fucking cool
All Modern Destroyers have VLS.. Without VLS for anti-air, we(usa) wouldnt be able to have a ballistic missile and such strong air defense with the SM3-SM6 Missiles. You clearly know nothing of the Navy as youd know that these Chinese and most modern Destroyers are modeled off the Arleigh Burk Class which is by far the most badass class of ships that ever were...
Could you test the British destroyers
We don't have them yet.
Im not quite sure your assumption apropos Diesel & Gas Turbine engines is correct. I am pretty sure and I may be wrong however principally, the ship runs off of either one or both turbines. Electrical systems, and Life support systems will run off of Diesel Engines, multiple. Each diesel engine, will be responsible for providing power to all systems on the ship, and these will be responsible for an area. For Example Diesel 1 maybe responsible for X systems, and Diesel Engine 2 will be responsible for Y systems. You will find that you will have emergency shunting cables in Emergency Stations, spaces for running power from one Diesel Engine, to systems in a space that it is not primarily responsible in an Emergency Stations situation. For example, Hit 1 takes out Diesel X, which may be running all Positive Air (Air Conditioning Systems as well as Desalination Plants, and Gyros. By running cables, you can get these systems up if that is what you need. Not saying thats realistic, but its the ability for built in redundancy. Turbines for propulsion. DE's for mains power. Just a thought.
Thx Sir
@@grimreapers Your welcome, Im just your average Pusser. I was FFG trained so it blows my mind I can take a Huey, and land on an Oliver Hazard Perry Class (Adelaide Class) Guided Missile Frigate, and get the inverse perspective from a Huey landing on the Flight Deck, rather than standing under the blades in front of the Port or Starboard Hanger during Flight Deck evolutions. Now that is a buzz. What you may not know, is that on an FFG (I will not assume all as mine specifically was different to all of our others) towards the transom on the Port aft quadrant, we can feed a refueling hose to the Helo. (Usually a Seahawk) There are three ways from memory the Helo can be refueled. On the deck shutdown. On the Deck Engines on, and in some cases, and Ive done this, we have fed the line to the Air Crew chief who has plugged the hose into the receptical on the helo, and the helo takes off and hovers off of the Port Side Aft Flight Deck on a course parallel with the ship of course and over the water. If you have ever watched Hunt For Red October, the Earth Grounding Fibreglass covered Shepherds Crook (for want of a better term) is a real thing, as the helo is building up a lot of static, and must be earthed in RAS (Replishment At Sea) evolutions. That takes some serious piloting skills, so does landing on a moving platform that moves in pretty much 6 DOF. There is also a system on board for roughers ( High Sea State, whereby the helo can attach to a hook that sits in and through the flight deck, and will pull the helo down onto it. All these evolutions are highly dangerous. Hence Days of practice. I have mates who went down and arent here anymore and we had only been in company with their ship a few days prior. I cannot wait until the day, they add subs (if they havent already, and anti sub operations) can be executed from a Seahawk, with comms feeds from an FFG or AWD. I once without knowing whilst playing lawn bowls with my Skipper and a few Oppos and a few blokes from an Anzac class, joked that Anzacs were just Corvettes, only find out later the bloke pissing himself laughing was that Anzacs XO. My Skipper thought it was hilarious, so dont need Anzacs in DCS. Just sayin. Then again, Im still trying to work out voice attack and the Vaicom plugins and getting them to work. So no flying til I can honestly get all this comms, and voice commands working so I can just say it and have it done. I just had to order two new USB hubs to cater for all the stuff I have accrued in the last month and I have no desk space left on a 3m by 900mm desk left to put anything. I think this is becoming an unhealthy obsession.
Nope, Diesels usually also provide propulsion power - At least for speeds below 20 knots. Now, This ship is CODOG (diesel OR gas), so at full speed it probably DOES only use the turbines but 2 x 20 cylinder Diesels would be some hefty generators :) .
Can you do a NK air force vs USN
Burke-class destroyers. It tickles my persnickityness all the wrong ways to hear them called "Aegis destroyers", just like calling the Ticos 'Aegis cruisers'. Also, the definition of 'destroyer' over the years has been the subject of deception and politics both, so the borders get very very fuzzy.
Also most fighter radars (though not all modes) are 3D - if you get height data out of it, it's 3D.
(added!) ...and warheads listed as blast/frag do not fire off in a ring, that's only continuous rod, Phoenix-style. There aren't many of those these days.
Ya know, funny thing was I kept telling myself to not do that for the Arleigh Burke DDGs, but I can count atleast once I did that in this video explicitly because of that. Played myself on that one.
About the warhead, wish I knew what kind it was since there's many patterns but I couldn't find any data on that.
Also, I remember reading how the Tigs were supposed to be a DD until that whole "cruiser gap" prompted the Navy to redo their classifications. That did no favors whatsoever.
@@Firestorm2900 It's fine. :)
I don't think continuous rod is popular at all these days, especially for SAMs due to effects on TBMs, etc.
The predecessors to the Ticos were changed from DLG/DLGN to CG/CGN as part of the cruiser gap fiasco, and they slide into that same slot in the current setup. The Tico program got changed before any went in service, and it was as much a matter of the capabilities of the Aegis system as numbers. Of course in the modern era, one has to ask if a 'real cruiser hull' is even desirable. Fun!
Sure you know this but industry categorizes both as Aegis CG and DDG’s because the combat system, radars. Weapons, VLS, consoles, etc. are Aegis at their heart. Only reel difference to speak of here is the DDG has the Spy-1d, and CG’s have the a and b variants.- all with inherent BMD capability I might add. Just need some upgrades.
Served on Princeton and Mobile Bay during the Gulf War as FTC and I was a training specialist working on all baselines (1 through 9) at Lockheed and Northrop for about 15 years before going civil service… experienced several other combat systems, but hands down Aegis is the most dependable and capable thanks to visionaries behind it.
I’d challenge any other combat system to achieve over 65,000 radar identifications without a blue on blue engagement during the 100 hours of Desert Storm. At the same time, we discovered the BMD capability by tracking SCUDS. Wonder if that is modeled in DCS? Lol
DB link: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ipnYbZrCpGJl_65cdgTTyHkZernaeFZkQuuHsUY7Y8M/edit?usp=sharing
Heya, hope I wasn't be so forceful about the HHQ-9 debate, felt it was important since an active missile and TVMs are handled differently for how to defeat them. Still, that was rather insane how quickly it was locking on and how fast it was able to launch missiles. I think the fact the track radar is part of the ASEA allows it to fire faster than the SM2s. I remember seeing something about that, but I'm not sure if the fire rate is THAT much faster.
Otherwise, the way the the phased array works is that it uses constructive interference that makes radio waves stronger and destructive interference, which makes radio waves weaker like the noise canceling you'll find on headphones, it allows you to point a radio wave electronically. This is why it can scan so quickly and probably why it was picking Cap up so fast. The AESA the 052C has and PESA SPY-1 series seen on most US ships both have the same effect, it's more the AESA is easier to maintain and smaller. This is why I think the Arliegh Burkes should be similar to the 052C as far as finding a target. Not sure about the CG's SPY-1A since it has a harder time with clutter, like picking up a locust swarm as a target. The SPY-1B upgrade helps with clutter like that but isn't as good at close to shore clutter like the DDG's SPY-1D.
Also, the RCS, I sorta covered it but in order to defeat a VHF or HF radar you need to have much more radio absorbing material, the reason though why the US wasn't as concerned about reports of it's F-35s being spotted on radar is because all the radar used for locking on and guiding missiles are within it's design to deflect and absorb radar. Granted it isn't perfect, you can still get a lock on a stealth ship, it's just you have to be much closer than usual, Admiral Binkov has a video that covered this in it's F-35 vs J-20 video.
Thx D ensure you have that backed up please x
@@grimreapers Already saved it up.
Say what you will about the chinese,but they know how to build 'em pretty,just like the Russians(even if a lot of it is copy/pasted).
Should check out the Type055, it looks very nice.
Of course a month after the warranty runs out all the systems go wrong......:) A triumph for Chinese espionage, perhaps? P.
I bet you can't even think of a name for Chinese espionage agency like CIA, MI6, DGSE or Mossad but you just love the conclusion that Chinese military force derives from intelligence system…
Even frigates are starting to get fat...
Next USN Destroyer vs Chinese Destroyer
That's be nice but we only have the two Chinese DDGs, it's why we paired the frigate up against it. I heard rumors of a Arleigh Burke being added, but the only one I've seen so far has been a mod up to now.
The Fishies?
Several nations including USA, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada, Spain, and Norway operate AEGIS equipped warships. The Chinese AESA system is akin to the early forms of the technology. The JMSDF (Japan), and USN have the latest iteration of it.
No, this ship would be bristling with 50 cal, DSUK,And troops firing rifles.. in real life.. of course expecting dcs to model this is asking alot.... Especially for their work pace... I'd love some CA tank style controls, so one can do some ship duels, Dcs could be a fun warthunder.. Without the horrible grid and unrealistic battles... This is no modern shop command sim game ... DCS SHOULD step in.. the physics are pretty dam good.. love the Vince effect on the 20mms. And that would open them up to more SIM players to sell their super expensive modules too.... Ok, The Full fidelity's Re worth it.. about Fuckin 5p bucks for a dam map... GTFO DCS! Finish a dam module first then we can talk.. and make some more dam campaigns. Multy can only be so fun. And we all kno how it deals with Latency and other internet shortcomings .. Ie notnwell. So single player should be focused.. Ca needs more vehicle updates, Idnlove to control the Samzilla s 300, and here we got 2 ships not salvoing their missles, which a player or competent AI would do... That's another thing... COMEON HET THE DAM AI UP TO SNUFF. I been PAYING, Sorry, playing ... since lock on FC 2, and The first black shark, Before the whole DCS WORLD, came out.. But all we aem to get is Early access modules pumped out. We all hope they will become, non Ea but Dcs Isngood at crying poor.... Yall are on steam... I dont wanna hear it.. Seeing these ships duking without with guns shows the possibilities... Imagine silent hunter/DCS.. eh maybe by 2030.. if the pace of Updates, staysnthebsame.. I STILL CANT KEEP MY AI WINGMEN when I go full burner.... They just cant keep up.. I need those targets for my campaigns. Theirngoodnfor attracikg missles, But still the same AI since shark 1, no Since lock on..
SAME CONTROLS, same commands ... scrips .. freaking weak dcs ... Do better or be replaced.. [ ya dream on] -thnks to self.. God the whole game industry isnfucked. Wheres the Henry ford for gaming, it's not fuckin TODD, I don't wanna hear it.. he fucked us since skyrim... Now the Russian sim Devs are playing the EARLY ACESS game.... ughh. One with half a brain can see the issues, [ if one expects a full product, after that product is sold, why work on it further... why spend more to develop it? Doesn't make sense, right? ED is a business
. Unfortunately.. I wish ppl would not buy EA, it's really ruining The industry. That and multiplayer, centric Development, that's what killed Red dead 2.... rant over, .....
For now
Tell the non British guy to turn his effing mic down, Jesus.
Needs to turn up puberty.
SerHaHa no, turn him up
@@Gman-109 ?