I believe in CEC, it is a great concept. But you still have to see the target with something. If E2 is pushing it, the update is slow. About 5nm slow. But at least you know something is there. The fundamental issue remains, whatever platform takes the shot against a high speed manuevering sea skimmer needs line of sight from the engaging platform to have the best chance of a kill. The choice being illumination over mid-course updates. Granted CEC and SPY helps, but I am not sure how much we can put on the table in this forum.
SM-6 test shot using CEC and E-2D:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... -nns01.htm
Hawkeye with APS-145 and APY-9:
http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Rad ... tates.html
the ADS-18 antenna is scanned electronically in elevation and both electronically (offering instantaneous 120° sector coverage) and mechanically in azimuth
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/asse ... 9-1209.pdf
The rotodome rotates at rates of 4, 5 or 6 RPM. The
array can electronically scan in both stationary and
- so maybe better than 5nm slow, but still slow.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... -spy-1.htm
http://www.ndu.edu/CTNSP/docUploaded/Ca ... arfare.pdf
and for SM2: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... s/sm-2.htm
SM3 is addressing the BMD problem. SM2 has some nice variants that help the problem. Especially Block III a/b and IV. Throw in ESSM and RAM with CIWS as the final layer. Plus countermeasures popping in various flavors all the way down the engagement timeline, and you have a VERY robust defense, even without point defense lasers. My point here, is that lasers will not replace all that. Again, no one system is the panacea.
Also, please remember we are still talking Standard Navy Day, not a stormy one.
edit: added more depth on Hawkeye 2000