Comments by "Tim Trewyn" (@timtrewyn453) on "How the USS Carney Projects Power in the Red Sea | WSJ Equipped" video.

  1. Smile. I took a History of Science class at Wheaton College. My professor was Dr. Joseph Spradley, who wrote some of the original mathematics and physics of phased array radar, the basis of the SPY/AEGIS system on the Burkes. He loaned me a copy of his paper, which was more like a half-inch thick book. It was full of integral calculus and other summation equations. Later, when I was in engineering school taking things like machine language and Fortran and Pascal, I recalled some of his text and saw how the phased array system lends itself very well to computer processing of its "pencil beam" orientation and the return signals obtained from the "painted" target. It doesn't need a rotating antenna, which seems rather primitive in comparison. The faster the processor and the greater the number of fixed antennas in the system, the higher the resolution of its "imagery" and the harder it is to jam. And there's no jamming it when it's not pointed at the jamming source. And even then, a jamming signal would need to cope with the system's ability to alter transmitted levels of energy that essentially encode the bandwidth of plausible return signals. As we know, the speed of computer processing has multiplied many times over the years, making phased array radar more potent than ever. Can it still find the target? Anything can break, but it's great when it does work. Fun question.
    4
  2.  @Rob_F8F  I would think the terminal guidance of an anti-ship missile would not be electronic, as powerful ship-based ECM should be assumed capable of thwarting any radar on the missile and any electronic remote guidance the closer the missile gets to the ship. I would think the terminal guidance would be processed signals from infrared and optical sensors. The higher quality of the processing, the likelier a hit. In that sense a hypersonic would seem to be moving too fast to process countermeasures and the movement of the ship. The terminal behavior of anti-ship missiles I have seen includes an evasive climb and dive to try to evade CIWS.
    2
  3.  @D64nz  I would think the problem with a hypersonic is that its target tracking can't keep up with it when faced with countermeasures. There's a sweet spot for the guidance system's processing capacity to filter out the likely counter-measures and track the ship. That means there's a sweet spot for an anti-ship missile's speed in the terminal phase. And the defense is always going to have a last second wrench to throw in the critical window between a hit and a miss. Hypersonic speed forces a very high guidance computer processing speed that might miss the final correction needed for a hit. Now if it's a nuke warhead that just needs proximity . . . that needed to be chasing a convincing decoy some distance away.
    2
  4.  @Rob_F8F  I don't know that hypersonic speed is an advantage if it cannot be accurate or defeat countermeasures.
    2
  5. I think surface ships will need their own horde of drones in the future. Maybe different sizes and types can be packed into launchable modules in VLS tubes. They would be used to further confound the terminal guidance systems of anti-ship missiles beyond the Burkes' and Ticonderogas' current EW and other capabilities. In a peer fight the incoming warheads could be nuclear. It will be critical to have a way to confound those guidance systems, because, as you know, all the missile needs to do is get close.
    2
  6. What specifically is the AI looking for? What does it use to process smoke and chaff and flares? Can the AI work through the Faraday cage it will need to avoid EMP effects (see Ukraine). I suppose if they spread out and talk to each other and the ship isn't too far away they could get some hits. How big are their warheads going to be?
    1
  7. Adversaries, like the US, perform SIGINT missions to examine US systems. They know almost whatever the US Navy lets them see in operation. They just can't afford it in the volume we can, and they're usually behind us in the details. An AEGIS processor can have "gears" of speed and resolution that they have never seen before because the Navy never shifts into them where they might be examined. Cards to play. Secret sauce ready to go.
    1
  8. Yes it does. But it gets into a sort of gray zone of stealing/reparation seizure confusion at sea.
    1
  9.  user-tn8uu2cu8g  Whoever has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me. The one who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and reveal Myself to him.” 22Judas (not Iscariot) asked Him, “Lord, why are You going to reveal Yourself to us and not to the world?” 23Jesus replied, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word. My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him.
    1
  10. @@Brunel1859 Maybe some LCS can go to the Black Sea. I hear the Ukrainians are good at fixing things.
    1
  11.  @HKim0072  Yes. It's amazing what can be obtained through either moral authority or money or sex.
    1
  12. Those guys always had a room of their own and they never talked much about it. USAF vet.
    1
  13. Don't worry. The Russians and Chinese know a lot more about these subjects than the American public. However, as we see in Ukraine, they haven't necessarily figured out how to make and use these things as well as the highly paid US MIC. I didn't hear anything that was a serious revelation. USAF vet, Avionic Sensor Systems, Electrical Engineer, PE.
    1
  14.  @msmd3295  Check out the publicly available Aviation Week and Space Technology.
    1