It turned out to be a half-denial. What the
Chinese defense ministry spokesperson told the TV News Ifeng on February 7 was that
it had used a “warning and control radar,” not a fire-control radar, on the
Japanese destroyer. So did the Japanese authorities jump the gun?
There is such a thing as an “Airborne Surveillance, Warning and
Control Radar (ASWAC)” so it would not surprise me if the PLA Navy had a surface
(surveillance,) warning and control radar mounted on its frigate. Thus, it’s plausible
that the captain of the frigate decided to do the PLA Navy’s version of giving
the evil eye by locking that radar, and not the fire-targeting radar, on the Maritime
Self-Defense Force destroyer. So two questions: a) are surveillance, warning
and control radars ever used in that manner, and b) are signals emanating from the
two types of radars when they are used in that manner distinguishable from each
other? Even if it turns out that the Japanese authorities aren’t being lied to,
they could have been punk’d—punk’d with the potential outcome just as deadly as
if the radar had been a fire-targeting radar. The matter turns on the answers
to the two questions. The story is far from over.
2 comments:
Warning and control radars and fire control radars are totally different beast that function in considerably different values of the frequency spectrum. Additionally WCR would use a relatively low pulse repetition frequency to gain detection range whereas the FCR would use a relatively high PRF to obtain to range and bearing discrimination to guide its weapon.
I would guestimate that it was highly possible for a mechanician or user to have inadvertently triggered the hot button during normal daily checks, instead of using an antenna dummy load, when the Japanese vessel was the system test target.
"Warning and control radars and fire control radars are..."
Thanks, Jacey, I needed that. In fact, we all needed that. And your take on a possible trigger for the activation is intriguing, though the (likely) occurrence of two such incidents less than two weeks apart speaks against it.
Post a Comment