Breaking Defense News report on this week’s Space and Missile Defense Symposium in Huntsville, Ala., Army Col. Chris Hill, project manager of the Integrated Fires Mission Command Project Office briefing

Anticipates fielding its first C2, Integrated Battle Command System (IBCS) in 2024. The Army then plans to begin rolling out IBCS to other Patriot units at a rate of two battalions per year. Then in the 2027 timeframe is when LTMADS [radar] should come on board.

Also mentioned was the Army passive Long Range Persistent Surveillance (ALPS), Lockheed Martin’s Remote Interceptor Guidance-360 (RIG–360) for Patriot PAC-3 integrated with IBCS, Sentinel A3 and A4 radars and the Dynetics' delayed IFPC Inc 2 prototypes.

 
Does the mpq65A array, compared to regular mpq65, have any noticeable external differences? I've tried looking for photos of the A variant but I am not sure there are any online.
 
A visualization of OTH which could be expanded to CEC based detection for ground TCT/TELs supporting 'pre-launch/boost' tgting.

will pre-boost be returning to the argument..controversial
 

will pre-boost be returning to the argument..controversial
Absolutely essential. If it's possible they should do it. You can be damn sure China and Russia will if they can.

The commands’ focus “going forward relies less on kinetic engagement, instead emphasizing non-kinetic means … such as directed energy, electronic attack, high power microwaves, to complement our direct kinetic active defenses.”
 
Last edited:
Breaking Defense News report on this week’s Space and Missile Defense Symposium in Huntsville, Ala., Army Col. Chris Hill, project manager of the Integrated Fires Mission Command Project Office briefing

Anticipates fielding its first C2, Integrated Battle Command System (IBCS) in 2024. The Army then plans to begin rolling out IBCS to other Patriot units at a rate of two battalions per year. Then in the 2027 timeframe is when LTMADS [radar] should come on board.

Also mentioned was the Army passive Long Range Persistent Surveillance (ALPS), Lockheed Martin’s Remote Interceptor Guidance-360 (RIG–360) for Patriot PAC-3 integrated with IBCS, Sentinel A3 and A4 radars and the Dynetics' delayed IFPC Inc 2 prototypes.

Brig. Gen. Frank Lozano reporting on development testing of the LTAMDS in a new two phased/wave approach :-

“Last year, when I first came on board, through some system engineering reviews, we realized that trying to do all 360 degrees of tracking was too much to take on at once // the first year of testing will focus on the main array and the second year, in 2024, will be dedicated to full-sector capability testing, incorporating the back two arrays" // Once the second phase of developmental testing is complete, the Army will conduct an operational assessment in the first quarter of FY25 that will lead to an Engineering and Manufacturing Development decision in FY25, a preliminary step toward eventual serial production."

BUT
"In order to meet congressional requirements, the Army is providing the first four LTAMDS prototypes to the formation designated as the “first unit equipped” with primary sector capability by December 2023, Lozano said. That step will provide “residual combat capability” that already “exceeds legacy radar capability,”he said.
The Army is also required to field three additional LTAMDS for the defense of Guam. The service plans to procure five total systems in FY24 to cover the Guam requirement; the other two will be test assets, Doug Bush, the Army’s acquisition chief said earlier this year."

 
Raytheon was contracted in 2019 to build an initial six radars, all of which have been produced and are now undergoing tests. The declaration of an OC level by the end of 2023 will culminate with ongoing training and soldier-conducted operational assessments.

Achieving an Operational Capability does not mean that work on the radar ceases. The testing regime continues with demanding environmental and mobility qualifications along with further integration and ‘system of systems’ evaluations. Upon completion, the radar will achieve Operational Capability in support of an Urgent Material Release.


LTAMDS will replace the existing AN/MPQ-53/65 radars used by the Army’s Patriot SAM systems. The new radar works with existing PAC-2 GEM-T and PAC-3 MSE interceptors while having the growth potential to work with new effectors as they become available.

The international community is also taking notice. Twelve countries have shown significant interest in LTAMDS. Poland has become the first international customer for the radar, approving a letter of acceptance on 5 September to expand its Wisla air defence programme with 12 LTAMDS systems.

 

A very critical test given the that winter is coming in Ukraine and we all know the Russians have been hoarding cruise-missiles for winter attack on critical Ukrainian infrastructure such as power stations and sub-stations.
 
Mobility think the opposite TPY-4 is more mobile than the LTAMDS, brochure says it can be transported by a C-130 whereas as far as know no similar claim is made for the LTAMDS and from pic it looks too large to fit inside a C-130?

Problems with the LTAMDS, the only report have seen by Jen Judson Mar 17 Defense News


As far as know Ghost Eye/LTAMDS is not a multiband radar, purely S-band using the same 2 foot cubic S-band RMA building blocks as used in the various SPY-6 radars.
LTAMDS is an C-Band Radar, SPY-6 is S-band. However, AMDR (SPY-6) is "Dual-band". The first 12 radar sets will be AMDR-S band only, and continue to use SPQ-9B for X-band use. Set 13 and beyond will feature AMDR-S and X-band in one...
 
LTAMDS is an C-Band Radar, SPY-6 is S-band. However, AMDR (SPY-6) is "Dual-band". The first 12 radar sets will be AMDR-S band only, and continue to use SPQ-9B for X-band use. Set 13 and beyond will feature AMDR-S and X-band in one...
Thanks for your correction and as you say the LTAMDS/Ghost Eye is C- band not S-band.

The AMDR SPY-6 is only S-band, the contract for the AMDR X-band radar was never placed, there is no combined S and X-band AMDR SPY-6 radar, but the Navy talking of the Future X-Band Radar program, FXR, to replace the SPQ-9B and the last news seen was Jan 2022 NAVSEA RFI requesting seeking industry inputs and interest for future development and production phases for FXR, but doubt it will replace SPQ-9B on set 13 as Navy has yet to request competitive bids from industry for the FXR.


FXR Requirements specified in RFI
  1. FXR is required to meet mission performance and size, weight, and power – cooling (SWAP-C) requirements of the following ship classes:
    1. DDG-51 FLT III ships with AEGIS Baseline 10 (BL 10) combat system.
    2. DDG-51 FLT II and DDG-51 FLT IIA ships with AEGIS Baseline 9 (BL 9) combat system
    3. Ford class carriers with SSDS (BL 12) combat system
    4. Nimitz class carriers with SSDS (BL 12) combat system
    5. Ticonderoga class cruisers with AEGIS Baseline 9 (BL 9) combat system
    6. Landing Platform/Dock (LPD 29+) hulls with SSDS (BL 12) combat system
  2. To the greatest extent possible, a common system architecture will be applied to FXR solutions across all the platforms identified in item 1 above.
  3. FXR will provide horizon search and track, surface search and track, periscope detection and discrimination, and missile communications in a wide diversity of maritime environments and conditions.

 
Dahlgren has been testing a prototype for FXR since last year, a proof-of-concept prototype, which uses what they describe as an "off the shelf antenna designed for military aircraft" modified into an X-band radar prototype. L3 Harris is involved, so I'm wondering if they're using a panel derived from the new Compass Call. It would certainly be light in weight.

Q1 2025 is the most recent target for the solicitation phase, and award in FY2026. If there's a functioning Congress to approve the money by then.
 
Defence Updates has put out a video about how the Patriot has performed in Ukraine so far:


The Ukrainian Air Force has officially stated that several Russian aircraft, downed in May inside Russian territory were destroyed by the American-made Patriot air defense system. The events that transpired on May 13 involved significant losses for Russian Aerospace forces.All 5 aircraft crashed in Bryansk Oblast, which is deep within Russian territory and located across from Ukraine's Chernihiv Oblast in the northeast. On that day, three Russian Mi-8 helicopters, one Su-34 fighter bomber, and one Su-35S fighter were reportedly lost, with no survivors. Also, there were reports that the Patriot was used to down several Kinzhal (Dagger) hypersonic & Iskander missiles a few days later.
Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Col. Yuri Ihnat at that time hinted at the use of Patriot but he has now confirmed this.
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes how the American Patriot downed Russia’s most advanced aerial assets in Ukraine?
 
Dahlgren has been testing a prototype for FXR since last year, a proof-of-concept prototype, which uses what they describe as an "off the shelf antenna designed for military aircraft" modified into an X-band radar prototype. L3 Harris is involved, so I'm wondering if they're using a panel derived from the new Compass Call. It would certainly be light in weight.
Wasn't it the SAAB fighter radar they they were testing? Actually, I think it was just the antenna with the other HW sourced from elsewhere or internally developed. Lockheed also has its eye on other applications for the Sentinel A4 product line.
 
Wasn't it the SAAB fighter radar they they were testing? Actually, I think it was just the antenna with the other HW sourced from elsewhere or internally developed. Lockheed also has its eye on other applications for the Sentinel A4 product line.
I may have missed an update, but I thought SAAB's Navy radar work concerns LCS not FXR. Sentinel isn't an aircraft radar, so I don't believe it or a derivative would be what the article is referring to.
 
I may have missed an update, but I thought SAAB's Navy radar work concerns LCS not FXR. Sentinel isn't an aircraft radar, so I don't believe it or a derivative would be what the article is referring to.
Yes SAAB supports the LCS program. But in this case, I seem to recall that the Navy specifically chose the front end (antenna) of the new SAAB AESA radar to further its FXR R&D and demonstrate something. Might have to do a bit of digging. Sentinel A4 likewise is a program that LM hopes to be used for broader applications than the current one.

 
Yes SAAB supports the LCS program. But in this case, I seem to recall that the Navy specifically chose the front end (antenna) of the new SAAB AESA radar to further its FXR R&D and demonstrate something. Might have to do a bit of digging. Sentinel A4 likewise is a program that LM hopes to be used for broader applications than the current one.


Saab did develop a prototype Gripen AESA GaN X-band radar array with1,000 T/R modules, said to give the radar a detection range of 270 km to 350 km, depending on its size, against a SU35 and was able to use the Meteor at its maximum range (250 km?). This essentially used the same GaN antenna which was developed in the 2018 contract from NAWCAD, Lakehurst, with the array being intended for the Office of Naval Research and Office of the Secretary of Defense Foreign Comparative Testing.
 

Attachments

  • Saab_AESA_GaN_Gripen_prototype_radar_2020.jpeg
    Saab_AESA_GaN_Gripen_prototype_radar_2020.jpeg
    293.1 KB · Views: 22
Germany plans to buy pac-3 MSE in the 3 digit region. This will be a big upgrade over the only 80 CRI and 50 MSE ordered until. I guess we can expect to see +200 missiles ordered tought maybe some for ukraine / sending more of the less than 130 PAC-3 in stock.
Was surprised as write up says its the PAC-2 GEM-T not the PAC-3
https://www.hartpunkt.de/bmvg-will-neue-pac-3-lenkflugkoerper-fuer-patriot-beschaffen/
 
Was surprised as write up says its the PAC-2 GEM-T not the PAC-3
PAC3 is highly specialized in ABM work, GEMT is better for cruise missiles or aircraft.



Wouldn't the purchase of 1,000 GEM-T interceptors dramatically lower the unit-price?
One would think so.
 
PAC3 is highly specialized in ABM work, GEMT is better for cruise missiles or aircraft.
Well PAC-2 GEM-T (guidance enhanced missiles-tactical ballistic missiles) is still more optemised for balistic defense as for cruise missiles a variant called GEM-C (guidance enhanced missiles-cruise missiles) was developt.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom