Hola,
Revisión de lo que tractamos.
Considero las f100 y las Nansen, mejor que las Horizont. Las Nansen porque tienen el sistema de combate AEGIS, que lo considero mejor que el PAAMS el las Orizzonte.
El PAAMS tiene dos radares actuantes, el de detección, que és el S1850 y el EMPAR que és el radar que utiliza el PAAMS para disparo / controles / redireccionamento y seguimientos. La limitación de las capacidades de combate entan restrictas por el alcance de sus misiles y por el radar de disparo. Hay una limitación también en lo que se refiere a la correcta identificación del objeto detectado, identificación que se debe hacer si el avion, o lo que sea, objeto de los que hay en el radar (S1850) és un enemigo o és un avion del porta aviones de la armada aliada que esta cerca de tu fragata. ? Puedes entender mi colocación ? Lo ideal, pero no imprescindible, en este caso és que los sistemas sean integrados (esto lo comprobo una F100 con un P.A. de la U.S. Navy.
Sobre los datos del Web italiano que yo cole para que veas el EMPAR, és el proprio Web que Eduardo añadio en su colocación.
Cita: Kalma
Pero vuelvo a insistir que si por alcance del sistema de combate entendemos el de sus sensores y no el de sus armas como yo entendia, lo adecuado es tomar el dato del alcance de los mismos (obviamente para blancos de según qué tamaños).
R: en este Web, que és el mismo que tu colocaste, en esta pagina, veras que indican 110 Km para el MM/SPY 790 EMPAR. El alcance que se considera esta por esto 90/100/110 Km. Sobre el numero de objetvos (tracking), se refiere al radar S1850 (detección) actuando no el radar EMPAR. Sobre los 24 misiles volando al mismo tiempo, lo estraño un poco, incluso como esta colocado, "volando" ? que quiere decir esto... con objetivo de ataque determinado y disparados o capacidad parcial de partes del sistema. Pero que sea el "teorico real" después de firmados los objetivos y disparados los misiles, aún és menos.
http://www.militar.org.ua/foro/posting. ... 9b9f007721
Otro Web..
"EMPAR in the case of the Horizon. PAAMS also uses the ASTER surface-to-air missiles, which when combined with SAMPSON or EMPAR, provides an almost impervious aerial defence system, capable of protecting large fleets of vessels. Indeed, so advanced is PAAMS that it can detect and track almost every single flying object the size of a grapefruit over a radius of several-hundred kilometres. At any moment, it can fire multiple salvoes of missiles to knock numerous targets out of the sky within a radius of
one hundred kilometres from the ship."
Cita: Kalma
Vamos a ver,el RIM-156 no es otro que el SM-2 Block IV,¿no?Pues bien,no creo que alemanes,holandeses,españoles,etcetra se planteen adquirir RIM-156.Más bien van a ir introduciendo los SM-2 Block IIIB (Que por cierto,al igual que los SM-2 Block IIIA ya superan ése alcance que citas de 144 km) y en un futuro estarán más que interesados en los SM-6 porque incluyen homing terminal radárico como alternativa al CWI.Por supuesto de los noruegos Nansen de las que hablabamos originalmente no hablamos,porque aunque es cierto que pueden instalar otros tres modulos mk.41 por ahora sólo tienen uno con sus unicas ocho celdas y no les merece la pena embarcar misiles de largo alcance.
En cuanto al RIM-162 supongo que te referiras al RIM-161 SM-3,porque el RIM-162 no es otro que el ESSM y sus alcances están muy lejos de los que citas...Que a su vez están equivocados.Tanto un SM-2 Block IV como un SM-3 superan esos 144 (que ya logran los SM-2 Block IIIA) y esos 160 kilometros .
He citado el RIM-156 y RIM-162, porque me vino a la cabeza, pero hay una infinidad de otros...
Esta Web lo explica con detalles...
"In response to the changing threat, the US Navy funded the development of today’s Standard Missile-2 (SM-2). Standard-2 MR incorporates midcourse guidance, which allows programming of the missile for radar search only. The missile is redirected in midflight and then again during the terminal homing phase. SM-2 MR is installed on the DDG- and CGN-type ships and on Aegis CG-class ships.
SM-2 is deployed in several different configurations, ranging from the SM-2 Block IIIA up through the SM-2 Block IV ER for the US Navy’s AEGIS compatible ships. SM-2’s primary role is to provide area defense against enemy aircraft and antiship missiles. The current generation of SM-2 Blocks IIIA and IIIB, capitalizes on technology improvements to substantially increase performance against the advanced antiship missile threat.
The Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) is the Navy’s primary surface-to-air fleet defense weapon. The currently deployed SM-2 Block II/III/IIIA configurations are all-weather, ship-launched medium-range fleet air defense missiles derived from the SM-1 (RIM-66B). SM-2 employs an electronic countermeasures-resistant monopulse receiver for semi-active radar terminal guidance and inertial midcourse guidance capable of receiving midcourse command updates from the shipboard fire control system. SM-2 is launched from the Mk 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS) and the Mk 26 Guided Missile Launching System (GMLS). SM-2 continues to evolve to counter expanding threat capabilities, and improvements in advanced high and low-altitude threat interception, particularly in stressing electronic countermeasures (ECM) environments, are being implemented through modular changes to the missile sections.
The SM-2 is a solid propellant-fueled, tail-controlled, surface to air missile fired by surface ships. Designed to counter high-speed, high-altitude anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs) in an advanced ECM environment, its primary mode of target engagement uses mid-course guidance with radar illumination of the target by the ship for missile homing during the terminal phase. The SM-2 can also be used against surface targets. SM-2 Blocks II through IV are long-range interceptors that provide protection against aircraft and antiship missiles, thereby expanding the battlespace.
The Block II version of SM-2 includes a signal processor to provide less vulnerability to ECM, an improved fuze and focused-blast fragment warhead to provide better kill probability against smaller, harder targets, and new propulsion for higher velocities and maneuverability.
A Block III version of SM-2 provides improved capability against low altitude targets.
Block IIIA, a modification to this version, extends capability to even lower altitudes. RIM-66C Block IIIA includes a new warhead that imparts greater velocity to warhead fragments in the direction of the target.
Block IIIB is the next step in the continuing evolution of the Standard Missile family, incorporating an infrared (IR) guidance mode capability developed in Missile Homing Improvement Program (MHIP) with the radio frequency (RF) semi-active guidance system of the proven SM-2 Block IIIA. The MHIP dual-mode RF/IR guidance capability is being incorporated to counter a specific fielded and proliferating electronic warfare systems in existing aircraft and ASCM threats. OPEVAL of SM-2 Block IIIB was conducted during April 1996, with missile firings by an Aegis cruiser that was completing workup training for deployment. Based on OPEVAL results, SM-2 Block IIIB is operationally effective and suitable.
These SM-2 versions are provided as medium range (MR) rounds that can be fired from Aegis rail launchers, Aegis vertical launch systems (VLS), and Tartar rail launchers.
The Block IV version was developed to provide extended range [ER], improved cross-range and higher altitude capability for Aegis VLS ships, as well as improved performance against low RCS targets and against complex ECM. The SM-2 Block IV is a kinematic improvement beyond the SM-2 Block III, incorporating a thrust-vector controlled booster, a more robust airframe, and guidance and control modifications for improved altitude/range/cross-range coverage against high-performance, low radar cross-section threats in a stressing electronic countermeasures (ECM) environment. Standard-2 ER incorporates the same midcourse guidance as the MR version.
RIM-67E was an interim designation of the SM-2ER Block IV. The Navy initially proposed the designation RIM-68A for the Block IV missile, in sequence with the RIM-66 and RIM-67. However, the designation RIM-156A was allocated instead. The Standard Missile-2 Block IV program experienced considerable development problems and schedule delays in 1991. Primarily due to booster problems, the first successful propulsion test vehicle firing was been delayed more than a year. As a result, the initial production decision, once scheduled for the middle of fiscal year 1991, slipped until December 1992, the first quarter of fiscal year 1993. Since only early IOT&E of SM-2 Block IV was conducted to support its LRIP decision, its capability was never fully determined (capability was not demonstrated against ASCM threat representative, maneuvering targets nor against low altitude, low Doppler targets). That is, the Block IV program was restructured, with the intention to proceed to DT&E/OT&E to support a full production decision if technical problems are encountered with development of the SM-2 Block IVA that preclude its retention of Block IV capability (never fully determined) against anti-air warfare threats.
In addition to providing significant increases in ship area defense capability, the SM-2 Block IV is the developmental stepping stone to SM-2 Block IVA, the Navy’s Area Theater Ballistic Missile Defense (TBMD) missile.
Block IVA adds a dual-mode radio frequency/infrared (RF/IR) sensor, an upgraded ordnance package, and autopilot/control enhancements to the SM-2 Block IV The SM-2 Block IVA missile uses the TBMD-modified Aegis Weapon System on board Aegis cruisers and destroyers to track and engage TBMs, enhancing U.S. littoral warfare capability by allowing
Aegis ships to provide TBMD for ships at sea and ground force embarkation areas ashore, without the constraints imposed by sealift or airlift. The SM-2 Block IVA upgrade is being developed to provide capability against theater ballistic missiles, although it is planned to retain capability against anti-air warfare threats. A System Design Review for SM-2 Block IVA was conducted in December 1993 and a Risk Reduction Flight Demonstration (RRFD) program was initiated in FY 1994. An Environmental Test Round (ETR-2A) was successfully launched in the summer 1996. On January 24, 1997, the Navy successfully demonstrated a Theater Ballistic Missile Defense capability when a ballistic missile target was shot from the sky for the first time using a new version of the Standard missile family. This Developmental Test Round (DTR-1) demonstrated the imaging infrared seeker and the capability to intercept a TBM.
Full production approvals for SM-2 Blocks have been as follows: Block II was approved in December 1986; Block III in June 1988; Block IIIA in February 1992; and Block IIIB in September 1996, following the OPEVAL summarized below. Block IV was approved for LRIP in May 1995, but further development and procurement were deferred, depending on development of the Block IVA missile, the interceptor for the Navy Area TBMD program, and Block IVA retention of Block IV capability against anti-air warfare threats. On April 16, 1999 Raytheon Systems Company, Tucson AZ, was awarded a not-to-exceed $135,236,224 fixed-price with award-fee, letter contract for the procurement of 71 SM-2 Block IIIB (AUR's), 63 SM-2 Block IIIB ORDALT kits to upgrade SM-2 Block III missiles to SM-2 Block IIIB, 43 SM-2 Block IV AUR's, 100 AN/DKT-71A telemetric data transmitting sets, section level spares, shipping containers and handling equipment.
Saludos.
Aun así es cierto que el SPY-1F no tiene nada que envidiar a un EMPAR sino más bien al contrario.... 
