Talk:Sea-based X-band Radar/Archive 1

Power
If this requires over 1 MW power, how is it powered? -- till we &#9788; &#9789; | Talk 12:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing diesel generators. --Pmsyyz 13:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * My initial thought was a gas turbine power plant.Ratsbew (talk) 03:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Quoting http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/sea-based-x-band-radar-1-sbx-1/ : Six generators but not sure which kind of fuel. However, the vessel has a capacity of fuel for 60 days. Roumen (talk) 16:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

June 2006 merge
They obviously should be merged. As for which is more appropriate, the distinction seems to be between "the Sea-Based X-Band Radar", used as a proper name (which, incidentally, does seem to be the name used by the MDA) and "a sea-based X-band radar", i.e. any particular such radar, used as a title. The choice seems to depend on the article's scope; presently it seems to be referring to the one and only SBX, so the former seems more appropriate. M0nkey 10:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Rolling Stone Article
Rolling Stone did an article on the SBX for the October 4th 2007 issue (#1036). Don't know how much of it would be relevant for the main article. —Preceding unsignesd comment added by 76.88.101.33 (talk) 07:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

June 2009 Deployment
Per the Honolulu Advertiser, Sec. Gates ordered SBX to deploy in advance of an announced rocket test by North Korea. http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090618/BREAKING01/90618053/Defense+system+headed+for+Isles+has+been+successfully+tested+at+Barking+Sands. As I don't know the typical layout for these articles, I leave the link for someone more familiar. Aloha! Srain (talk) 08:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Infoboxes
Do we use a combination of Infobox Weapon and Infobox ship? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Viriditas (talk • contribs) 08:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Translate
Can I translate this article (Sea-based X - Band Radar) into another language and publish ? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gujuhnjk (talk • contribs) 16:41, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * always. user:TeamColtra — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.196.218.197 (talk) 09:21, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Citation error
Threw in the thing about the failed missile test and how its because of the sbx. If someone could fix the citation error, that would be great, because I don't really know what I'm doing. thanks. 98.221.228.172 (talk) 21:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Fixed for ya! — BQZip01 —  talk 07:37, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

it or she
Okay this is not really to go into the debate that took place here: Manual of Style - Ships as "she", I am full support of tradition when it comes to ships, as thats what sailing is all about is traditions. However, I don't really know if this is a ship. I mean by broad definition it is, but its more like a barge, or a floating platform... with a motor. I am leaving the "she" there, because I don't think its a huge deal... but I think its odd referring to a piece of equipment as a "she" since I don't consider this a ship. User:TeamColtra —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.196.218.197 (talk) 09:20, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

recent newspaper article
Here's a recent article. http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20110123_On_the_ball.html Perhaps someone can work on a clean up? I can't since I'm too close to the subject.... - UtherSRG (talk) 13:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Radar range? 'Tracking' vs. 'Guiding'?
Under Specifications at the top, we see: "Radar range: 2,000 km"

But then later, there's this: "The radar is described by Lt. Gen Trey Obering (director of MDA) as being able to track an object the size of a baseball over San Francisco in California from the Chesapeake Bay in Virginia, approximately 2,900 miles (4,700 km) away."

So, which is it, 2,000 or 4,700?

Also curious about the sentence: "The radar will guide land-based missiles from Alaska and California, as well as in-theatre assets." Everywhere else in the article, the SBX seems to be described as only a defensive tracking radar to detect and track incoming enemy missiles. This one sentence, though, seems to be saying it's also used as a guidance mechanism for our own missiles launched from AK and CA? Guiding and tracking are two different things, right? Can someone clarify/elaborate/correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.116.173.2 (talk) 18:38, 16 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Quoting http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/sea-based-x-band-radar-1-sbx-1/ : 2500 miles ~ 4000 km. Is this source serious enough? Roumen (talk) 16:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

AESA and Aegis
The article states "The active electronically scanned array radar is derived from the radar used in the Aegis combat system". However, Aegis utilizes the SPY-1D(V) radar, which is a PASSIVE electronically scanned radar. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/SPY-1. The U.S. Navy does not yet have an operational AESA radar on deployed surface combatants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhsb98 (talk • contribs) 14:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Deploy to Japan?
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Operationsinthe

That one mention today is all I've seen on this. Anybody else got anything? Hcobb (talk) 15:09, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Conspiracy Section
I deleted the conspiracy section of the article. Wikipedia should be for well sourced information. Not the soap box of certain non-scientific wacko groups on youtube. Ergzay (talk) 04:52, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

LA Times article
An editor removed material sourced to a critical article in the Los Angeles Times, labeling it "yellow journalism" and claiming it had been "more than adequately refuted." Some kind of authoritative source describing the refutation (and any shortcomings in the cited source) would be more useful than just waving it away.  Acroterion   (talk)   01:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC)