F-22 VS. Eurofighter

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NEXT

Herald1234 Reply to poseur 1 8/24/2007 3:50:30 PM

To be clear on F22:

F22 radar has a 170 to 190 km detection range on a 1 SQM RCS target (which is very good) according to public data and also a short evaluation knowing state of art technology and physical characteristic displayed (antenna surface, number of modules, power output etc..).

Public data? Your numbers incidentally are wrong.

If EF has a 0,1 sqm RCS, it reduces APG 77 range to 100 km.Of course EF radar can track only an F22 in front aspect within the 20 km range so in WVR.

By what criteria do you post this nonsense? Threshhold of signal detection, cretin. The APG 77 you seriously underrate.

However EF has sophisticated wide band digital internal ESM/ECM and ECM are likely to reduced radar range to half this value so 50 to 60 km (even for a LPI radar) but with radar F22 has still the edge.However even agaisnt LPI APG 77, EF RWR will detect APG a those range but not with a 100% probability but fighter networking help.

How does a jammer and a RWR reduce EF signal return? How do you baseline two RWRs that give you a smear bearing to give you range data? in a three body problem? How do you track a strober? How do you do this when the strober is looking down at you from altitude and from the energy advantage when you are desperately trying to escape the AMRAAMs he just lobbed at you , poseur?

However PIRATE IRST with a claimed detection range of 145 km on a conventional fighter is likely to detect a F22 between 50 and 70 km.

. There are physical as in quantum mechanical limits that make an assertion that an IRST can signal discriminate a local event [ an aeroshell] at less than 1/10000th of a lumen cm^2 perceived difference at 100+ kilometers through the Earth's atmosphere. Even if it could, you have no ranging data that you can use to do anything about it, except watch the [bearing only if you can auto slave to track the smear bearing]smear bearing maneuver way above you and drop an AMRAAM into your lap as it lobs beyond your ability to get any kind of a radar lock.

So F22 is likely to get a almost systematic detection at 60 km but EF will also often detect F22 at this range especially if several EF are there.

How cretin? By wishing? You can't network the 1-1.5 degree IRST bearing only spread data among the THREE aircraft you need to get an azimuth as well as a bearing smudge on the F-22 at 40 kilometers range, MER, in realtime to narrow down the volume of the estimated position to less than 100 kilometers cubed of SKY.

SO F22 has the edge in first detection but not always.

If it doesn't, its because a tyro flies it like poseur 1 wishes it would be flown so a Eurocarnard like a Typhoon has a fair chance.

Now let see the missiles.

Yes, lets.

F22 (as EF) use AMRAAM for BVR with EW autodirector (a small X band doppler radar of 20 to 30 km range vs a normal fighter).

Since the EF is a normal fighter, you use the actual mean radar focal field conic of 10 km+ which is the number I use when I calculate the AMRAAM no escape endgame head on aspect detect threshhold.

AMRAAM autodirector range will be reduced to a mere 3/4 km range on a F22 so probability of success is very low especially since a EF could not maintain permanent update of datalink while manoeuvering relying on its only IRST or ESM suit.Probably of few percent only (like SAM missile today vs ECM equiped aircraft!).

AMRAAM detection threshhold depends on target aspect when the RH snaps on and sees the target in its FoV for the first time. there are so many things that affect detection threshhold that to flatly say an AMRAAM will detect the target at X distance is just STUPID. However the Mean value of 10 kilometers+ against a standard target is a good estimate and 1/8th to 1/10 of that against a LO target is a fair estimate.

For the F22 AMRAAM autodirector range vs Eurofighter , its range will be reduced to 6 to 8 km (including ECM effect and I don't count EF cross eye jammer effect to get AMRAAM miss its target ) which still much better but to low to allow F22 to use it without permanent refreshing datalink until the last dozen km of missile flight using its radar.Probability of success of an AMRAAM is likely to be well under 10%.

And as you see from above this is pure BS from poseur 1 as there is a little AMRAAM [present in most quality RH A2A missiles made these days] feature called HOME ON JAM.

So fighter could get close to visual range fight to get a shot using ASRAAM or AM9X.
IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO AMRAAM ACTIVE TERMINAL GUIDANCE RH HEADS HOW FAR THE AMRAAM IS LOBBED OUT, AS LONG AS THE AMRAAM SEES ITS TARGET IN ITS FoV WHEN THE RH SNAPS ON AS ITR REACHES THE IP IN ITS DROP BASKET. So why would an updated AMRAAM have any trouble at 40+kilometers as it drops on the Typhoon? Oh yes, the Typhoon's jammer will decoy the missile off. How poseur 1? Answer, the jammer doesn't. Figure out why yet? Hint: You have discrimination in that you have two distinct signals hitting the AMRAAM'S antennaas [which work by the way for both the RH and the updating receiver.] that the AMRAAM GCU reads and homes in to hit choosing the detected threshhold signals that matches its threat library data base describing "aircraft".

Here F22 enjoys no obvious superiority.

Here poseur 1 shows his incompetence.

F22 is still the best machine but it is completely unrealistic to think it could achieve 100 : 1 victories.

Here the US exercises actually show 100-1 against the best aircraft in the West

A 4:1 to 2:1 ratio is far more realistic.

Right. This is from a cretin who doesn't even know why a smear bearing only IRST capable detection system is not a cueing lead track A2A missile updater; or why you need a MINIMUM of three aircraft and a supercomputer to even begin to IRST baseline interferometize an opposing B-52, much less an F-22.

Now replace EF by Rafale and we have even better parameters for Rafale (thank to a better RCS reduction and ESM/ECM).

Claims and assertions he makes. Consider the source in light of the above cowflop he presented.

F22 detect and launch a missile on Rafale in BVR at 40 to 50 km range with even more reduced effect than on EF with AMRAAM while Rafale enjoy MICA IR as a main BVR weapon which have the same PK than a short range IR guided missile so much better than AMRAAM since IR reduction of F22 is not in the same magnitude of its radar RCS for simple physic reason (an engine reject hot gazes).

This is absurd. The assumption is that the Squall sees the F-22 at 40 km and that it can attain a lock with its RBE2 radar; or that it can shoot uphill at a fighter that will always have the altitude and missile lobbing range advantage due to that potential energy advantage the F-22 enjoys or that the defective MICA will even update, or that the MICA even has the burntime and flyout to reach an F-22 at 70,000 meters or that the MICA IR seeker can even see the F-22 or that the MICA has any remaining potential energy to use as it climbs UP and loses velocity to try to merge with the F-22. Meanwhile the AMRAAM which will have 2x the reach of the MICA because it DROPs with far more potential energy the MICA and ACCELERATES as it drops onto the doomed Squall. Why is the Squall doomed? It isn't LO in the ventral/dorsal aspect at all. The Squall makes a HUGE return target when seen from ABOVE or below, either to the F-22's AN/APG-77, or to the AMRAAMS RH seeker.

A 3:1 to 1:1 ratio is here far more realistic.

If poseur 1 trains the Squall pilots according to his beliefs, the loss will be 100+ Rafales to 0. Fortunately for France, the French air force has highly skilled pilots and tacticians who know the truth and will use the Squall and all the systems that support it to the maximum advantage. They will use ground clutter, electronic deceptive signal radar masking, and any other tricks they know to try to get close enough to furball. they bitterly realize that some of them will be [exercise] killed in the process, but french honeur demands that they do the best they can with what they actually have. Your loss ratio if everything works and if they can use their well practiced popup swarm tactic could be as low as 8-1 if the Raptor pilots screw up.

Conclusion is that F22 need a new BVR missile ASAP (dual mode autodirector) for countering LO+ECM protected aircrafts while taking full advantage of F22 platform.

Cowflop. HoJ the experts recommended as well as a GCU threat library built into AMRAAM.

This conclusion was written as soon as 1993 by US military scientific advisors when Eurofighter and rafale were in their infancy:

"http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/taw.pdf (page 32/33)"

And of course the poseur cites this

[quoting]

TACTICAL WARFARE SYSTEMS INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE

an Architecture?

. An information architecture

- Includes data formats, protocols, message standards, interfaces, etc.

- Enables open systems - permits individually developed subsystems to interoperate

- Spans a designated user/server community

- Provides flexibility in who gets what, when, where, and why

l A communications architecture is not an information architecture

l An information architecture is designed to support the war-fighters’ information needs

An information architecture is a coherent structure of data formats, protocols, interfaces, and other

standards that guides the design and implementation of information subsystems and applications.

Adherence to this architecture allows these subsystems and applications to be conceived and developed

independently but function as parts of an integrated, open system that serves a wide variety of user needs.

Tactical Air Warfare comprises many communities and is dependent on information architectures of these

and external communities. Examples are: Services, Intelligence, Weapons, and Command and Control

(e.g., Mission Planning, Tactical Data Links). A TACAIR Warfare Information Architecture will include

a Communications Architecture.

DOD TACTICAL INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE COMPONENTS OF AN

INFORMATION

DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

Components of an Information Distribution System

Information Generation

- AWACS - TAC Recce - JSTARS

w - NTM - E2C - AEGIS - Patriot

Storage/Management

of Distributed

- DBMS Systems

Information

Longhaul Transmission - MilStar - DSCS - UHF Satcom

+ - Commercial

Shorthaul Distribution w - JTIDS - Link 11/4A - SCDL - CHBDL

Information

Presentation & Format

- Voice - HUD - Terminal - Workstation

+ - Laptops

II Security - Multi-level Security Network & Data

An information distribution system consists of numerous functional elements with corresponding system

components for carrying out the functions. Today’s military information distribution system has been

gradually built over many years, with a high sunk cost. To convert this system to one that has the ability

to handle more data and confidently distribute data while assuring quality and timeliness will require an

evolutionary process, conducted within a standard architectural framework. This framework must be

designed to allow the military to take advantage of the commercial subsystem advances in each of the

functional areas shown on this chart, while carefully managing the costs of transitioning old systems to

the new architecture, and interfacing old and new systems so that they interoperate.

So you have to wonder why he does it when he KNOWS that people check his crap for accuracy. AMRAAM B-D continue the program improvements to meet the real "threats" that FS cannot even begin to imagine that actually can be used to fox US A2A RH missiles off their targets.

You see the Russians have very SMART engineers and scientists who have a lot of EW experience.

They are not poseurs.

Herald

Quote Reply

french stratege 8/24/2007 4:06:55 PM

You can't network the 1-1.5 degree IRST

A first error, an IRST have a fraction of a degree accuracy.Even publicly, Rafale or Eurofighter designer give 0,1° accuracy order for RWR thus for IRST it is even better.

Quote Reply

french stratege 8/24/2007 4:23:30 PM

And rest is in the same bullsh@it......

You did not understood that homing on jamming work only if signal is more powerfull or returning signal can be distinguished by encoding which is even more difficult as you can close to background noise in a jamming environment.

IT is why LO matters.

I respond by FACTs because I'm fed up to see US poseurs to think we are technologically third world nations unable to make a competitive yet technology vs US equipement when I know the true better.

You decided to field top passive stealth technology (and please to your military lobby).Nice.We decided to field LO PLUS TOP ECM and the efficency gap is not a magnitude between those two solutions.

Now a F16 like fighter have a 3 Sqm RCS.Divides it by 30 to 60 and you have a 0,1 to 0,05.

A F15 fighter has a 10 Sqm RCS.Divides it by 30 to 60 and you have a 0,3 to 0,15.

Divide those value by a further 20 to 50 ratio and you have F35/F22 range.

But I would point out that a good jamming is equivalent to a 10 to 20 RCS reduction value.

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica 8/24/2007 4:30:56 PM

And rest is in the same bullsh@it......

IT is why LO matters.

Now a F16 like fighter have a 3 Sqm RCS.Divides it by 30 to 60 and you have a 0,1 to 0,05.

A F15 fighter has a 10 Sqm RCS.Divides it by 30 to 60 and you have a 0,3 to 0,15.

Divide those value by a further 20 to 50 ratio and you have F35/F22 range.

But I would point out that a good jamming is equivalent to a 10 to 20 RCS reduction value.

FS give it up man. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself. At least have the professionalism to admit when you are wrong.

-DA

Quote Reply

Phaid 8/24/2007 4:31:21 PM

A first error, an IRST have a fraction of a degree accuracy.Even publicly, Rafale or Eurofighter designer give 0,1° accuracy order for RWR thus for IRST it is even better.

Could you clarify: do you mean the OSF that was declared obsolescent by DGA and thus only 48 examples were procured, or do you mean OSF-NG which does not exist yet even on paper?

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica 8/24/2007 4:34:20 PM

And rest is in the same bullsh@it......

IT is why LO matters.

Now a F16 like fighter have a 3 Sqm RCS.Divides it by 30 to 60 and you have a 0,1 to 0,05.

A F15 fighter has a 10 Sqm RCS.Divides it by 30 to 60 and you have a 0,3 to 0,15.

Divide those value by a further 20 to 50 ratio and you have F35/F22 range.

But I would point out that a good jamming is equivalent to a 10 to 20 RCS reduction value.

FS give it up. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself. At least have the professionalism to admit when you are wrong. Jamming can do many things FS but it is an EMITTER and a source that is readily exploitable. How do you propose to jam a seeker with an undetectable jamming signal? Does that make sense to you? Jammers are not stealthy by nature. They also require extensive knowledge of the threat. I work with things like this everyday so dont try to BS me kid.

-DA

Quote Reply

displacedjim 8/24/2007 4:44:19 PM

A first error, an IRST have
a fraction of a degree accuracy.Even publicly, Rafale or Eurofighter
designer give 0,1° accuracy order for RWR thus for IRST it is even
better.

Could you clarify: do you mean the OSF that was declared obsolescent by DGA and thus only 48 examples were procured, or do you mean OSF-NG which does not exist yet even on paper?

*SNAP!*

Quote Reply

french stratege 8/24/2007 5:19:34 PM

OSF was declared obsolescent for two reasons:

A: today best or future captors (from french Sofradir) and signal processors are even better by a magnitude - In ten years a lot of progress!Generation 3 on the way!

B: DGA want to renegociate contract with putting again in competition Sagem and Thales or force them to merge their optronic activity like it did for RBE2 between Dassault electronic and Thales.

With OSF2 I guess we could even detect a F22 in the 100 km range and a conventional fighter at 150 km with better scanning speed!.

When JSF will enter service in 2011.2012 Rafale will have further RCS reduction, standard post F3, AESA and OSF2.

All fully funded!

There is no way Rafale would have an obsolescent avionic when JSF will enter service if we want to compete with.

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica 8/24/2007 5:27:28 PM

OSF was declared obsolescent for two reasons:

A: today best or future captors (from french Sofradir) and signal processors are even better by a magnitude - In ten years a lot of progress!Generation 3 on the way!

B: DGA want to renegociate contract with putting again in competition Sagem and Thales or force them to merge their optronic activity like it did for RBE2 between Dassault electronic and Thales.

With OSF2 I guess we could even detect a F22 in the 100 km range and a conventional fighter at 150 km with better scanning speed!.

When JSF will enter service in 2011.2012 Rafale will have further RCS reduction, standard post F3, AESA and OSF2.

All fully funded!

There is no way Rafale would have an obsolescent avionic when JSF will enter service if we want to compete with.

FS you are digging your credibility grave deeper and deeper. Do you not know that no one on these boards takes you seriously?

Quote Reply

Herald1234 Don't confuse actual FoV with discrimination FoV 8/24/2007 6:02:16 PM

CRETIN.

Herald

Quote Reply

french stratege 8/24/2007 6:07:27 PM

My credibility.Who are you to judge since you never provide any link to back your rants?

Prejudice vs European technology and lack of understanding do not bring you any credibility.

Britain, German, France have no incompetent MOD, only less money.

Dutch have evaluated Rafale 2012 vs JSF 2012 and rate them identically: 6,95 vs 6,97.

Are Dutch an incompetent nation?

My credibility is fact based.

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica 8/24/2007 6:22:12 PM

My credibility.Who are you to judge since you never provide any link to back your rants?

Prejudice vs European technology and lack of understanding do not bring you any credibility.

Britain, German, France have no incompetent MOD, only less money.

Dutch have evaluated Rafale 2012 vs JSF 2012 and rate them identically: 6,95 vs 6,97.

Are Dutch an incompetent nation?

My credibility is fact based.

No its not. A poll of this forum will show your credibility seriously lacking. FS ECD are good platforms but they arent F-22/35 period. They are roughly on PAR with most other 4th Gen platforms except in the role of precision all weather strike where they lag behind all operational U.S. fighters.

-DA

Quote Reply

french stratege 8/24/2007 6:51:22 PM

-DA

Poll mean nothing in technical matters.You are not my peers.

ECD are closer to F35/F22 than teens fighters since they have a magnitude superiority in stealthiness and survivability vs teens (LO, ECM, datafusion, ESM, multicaptors...)

Without F22 been introduced in USA now, our current french planned fleet of top line air superiority fighters M2000-5 and rafale F2/F3 alone (roughly 155 fighters in 2011) , would have excedeed the whole USAF dedicated air superiority power in 2010/2011 (its 4 air wing F15C fleet) since you would have only obsolete F15 C (except an AESA F15 squadron) and F16 (since F35 IOC is in 2011).

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica 8/24/2007 6:58:06 PM

-DA

Poll mean nothing in technical matters.You are not my peers.

ECD are closer to F35/F22 than teens fighters since they have a magnitude superiority in stealthiness and survivability vs teens (LO, ECM, datafusion, ESM, multicaptors...)

You are right. I am not a nationalist fanboy so no we are not peers. I also source what I claim and make arguements based on common sense. The only thing you ever do to back up your claims is type in bold print. You have no technical or military background and thats obvious judging by your post. I doubt you are even out of high school or early college years. Professionals dont do the things you do FS. I know too many from all over the world so don't ever try to BS me. Make all the nationalist claims you want idiot.

-DA

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica How obsolete is the F-15 platform... 8/24/2007 7:04:02 PM

...so obsolete that South Korea and Singapore selected it instead of Rafale as a next generation fighter...LMAO. F-15s and F/A-18E/F can be had today that are more capable than the planned upgrades for Rafale in 2011 FS keeps ranting about.

-DA

Quote Reply

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NEXT

	News As History - November 23, 2009
	Home News How to Make War Wars Around the World Austin Bay's On Point Dirty Little Secrets Features Al Nofi's CIC Prediction Market Wargames Measure of Respect On War and Warfare Videos Photos Jokes Community Military Discussion Boards Military Jokes Military Photos Military Book Reviews Military Movie Reviews Military Links Wargame Store StrategyPage Subscribe Login Feedback About Us Search Account Manager Advertise With Us