Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Rafale Thread
Softwar    3/9/2009 9:47:25 AM
Started with hope that BW will limit his comments here instead of in every other Fighter thread. I'll start off with: 1 - no export sales 2 - no laser designator 3 - no AESA 4 - overpriced 4th gen fighter
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
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 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53   NEXT
DarthAmerica       3/17/2009 2:25:35 AM

Herald, Darth




Both of you have had confirmation of where I work now.  So, with a high degree of impartiality I can say from my neck of the woods, touchscreens are certainly more and more frequent in the warfighting world. (and air/land/sea)  quite a few are being used in DA situations
At first, I was a skeptic. However, after more than a year of using and witnessing them in various forms in use in an extremely hostile environment I'm a true believer. Not one time did the OEM ever recommend any caution or special care instructions. Very very robust kit. Amazingly, the fist CAS sortie I called in was via touch screen, pure data tx and the rx was using tough screen as well. I'm calling it death messaging! 

The real gem of touch screens is in battle management applications in the field. Ironically, and GF please don't laugh at me. I think the iPod touch/iPhone is going to inspire some of the future designs as well as these systems get smaller and more man portable once the power requirements are acceptable. I can think of about 3 to 5 different systems that could be usefully combined into a handheld touch sensitive device.


-DA 

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

leroy       3/17/2009 3:04:20 AM
"Do you honestly think that IF the Rafale was even close to the jet you make it out to be that even in spite of the mean ole US government that it would not be selling? The Rafale has been in every major competiton for the last 10 years or so that every US a/c, Typhoon, Gripen etc. has been in and not ONE nation has chose it. No one in their right mind can honestly chalk that up to price and the big bad USA playing rough. Bottom line is if it really was all you make it out to be someone would have purchased it. Even the F22 as pricey as it is if the export restriction were lifted would have nations chomping at the bit to get it. They would be doing so because the F22 is exactly as awesome as advertised and everyone knows it and the price be damned for many."
 
This pretty well sums up the situation.  Bluewings wants to make pretend that his favorite airplane is the "best" in the world.  The problem is that the only people that agree with him are just as ignorant as he is.  It is a solid plane, but nothing special compared to other top of the line 4th generation aircraft and far too expensive for what it offers.
 
Bluewings and the other fanboys would like to pretend that the big mean USA is undermining their efforts to sell the Rafale, but the truth is we are just beating them over and over again.  The Russians have no problems selling large numbers of Su-27 and even Mig-29 variants.  The Gripen has won a number of sales in and outside of Europe.  The Eurofighter has also proven to be competitive.  Even the Chinese have found markets for their aircraft in Pakistan and Africa. 
 
Where does that leave the Rafale?  Who honestly believes the US is wasting its time trying to prevent the Rafale from being sold anywhere?  Do they honestly believe that is somehow the US's top priority?
 
In a specific case it is possible for politics to influence a procurement decision or maybe the country in question works closely with the US and wants similar hardware, etc, but over and over and over again for 10 years?  If the Rafale was even half what bluewings claims it is, it would have been sold several times by now, at a minimum.
 
Instead even the French are buying as few of them as possible.  They have reduced their prdouction rate to the lowest possible, and are mothballing early model Rafales rather than attempting to upgrade them.  What does that tell you?  That the Rafale is a wonderful aircraft at a great price? 
 
At some point France is going to have a very very difficult choice to make.  Admit the Rafale is killing their airforce and abandon it... or keep producing an overly expensive aircraft that they don't have enough money to keep up to date.
 
Quote    Reply

leroy       3/17/2009 3:09:37 AM
Bluewings... you are an idiot.
 
Posting pictures of cockpits?  This is your expert critique of the F-22 and Rafale's "man-machine interfaces?" 
 
How about you write us up a nice little description of how the Rafale and F-22's man machine interfaces are similar, and how they are different.  Please be detailed kid, we all think that would be amusing.
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       3/17/2009 3:14:48 AM
Ironically, and GF please don't laugh at me. I think the iPod touch/iPhone is going to inspire some of the future designs as well as these systems get smaller and more man portable once the power requirements are acceptable. I can think of about 3 to 5 different systems that could be usefully combined into a handheld touch sensitive device.


already happening....  next gen comms is already being downsized as much as possible because the soldier is part of the comms grid - weight is the enemy, energy supply is the enemy.  the tech exists already, the issue is sustaining the tech in the field long enough so that its not an embuggerance.  There are a few vendors who are now looking at common battery/energy interfaces.  One of them uses SONY camcorder batteries.  A few years back I saw some tricky fuel cell technology that the french had developed. Iit has now been surpassed by other solutions.(nextgen Ni and Li based solutions)  ironically it was obsolete before it even had the chance to get into production.  Pity, as it was innovative.  In the end it was just too far behind the curve to be used in a typical environment.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       3/17/2009 3:26:37 AM
Thalès has been looking at how to use a long range AESA radar as an active jammer for a long time now and I bet my coffee mug that the rest of Europe and the Russians are behind .

The US has how many AESA sets currently in active aircraft in service?  There are over 100 '79's in service - let alone anything else.

Thales has how many AESA sets in active aircraft? 

At the Growler and JSF briefings last week the AESA set was discussed as a weapons system in its own right.  Thales might be talking theory - the US has been doing it and developing real production systems for a few years. 

The US is doing it today, everyone else is developing technical white papers..... 
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Blunt reply.   3/17/2009 11:16:41 AM










He and some others have a lot of technical knowledge and that is to be respected. But all too often some people forget that there is a difference between theory and practice. I'm staying away from subjective judgements of the Rafale. However, I will from time to time inflict myself on the thread with things I know for certain when I can. Im not taking any sides. What's right is right and whats wrong is wrong. Its just that simple. Having used tough screen technology in combat, I can now appreciate the benefits of it when properly implemented.






















-DA 






Like I said you don't know what you discuss. Your opinions mean nothing IN THE AIR or when it comes to physics or ENGINEERING choices.



 



Example that you can duplicate: Take a car. Using a laptop computer mounted on the dash, while driving, try to touch the screen icons or trackball at arm's length while you are a passenger and while the driver turns, making sharp S turns. That is two dimensions at low force loadings.



 



When you have something to say when I can respect your opinions I'll listen. Until then keep your ignorance to yourself.



 



Herald












I don't need to do that Herald. Again, you are letting your ego get the better part of your judgement. I'm going to keep this objective and not personal and insulting so that maybe we can learn something and remain cordial. Almost every Humvee, Tank, Brandley ect has whats called Blue Force Tracker mounted inside. A lot of our allies have it as do a lot of our ATTACK HELOS. The interface is touch sensitive. It isn't just two dimentional either. The vehicles sit on springs and shocks which move in the vertical plane very violently over terrain and when doing offensive/defensive driving and it goes without saying that the helos arent 2D limited either. The application is battle management focused. There is no reason a fighter can't benefit from this as well. The turning fight and hard manuvering is only PART of the flight profile and then you have other controls on the stick for the basic immediately needed functions. We aren't the only ones either. Look at Helic3om as well. 




Again, Herald, your technical knowledge is respectable. As an engineer I can appreciate that. However, you have no field experience and your operational and tactical knowledge is severely wanting. That I don't come in here insulting you the way you do others when you make these mistakes doesn't mean you are correct. It's just not always worth it to me to go around correcting people. I take exception here because I'm working on a civilian project that used a touch screen interface and this error by you caught my attention. So have a bit of class, say you didn't know, and move on to other things. You were wrong, it's been conclusively demonstrated, move on and get over it...







Regards

-DA 

     






 



 



 



 






There is a reason a button is more reliable than a touch screen when you are under acceleration. A ground vehicle is NOT an aircraft. I just used a ground vehicle under shifting acceleration as an experiment so that you could educate yourself, but apparently you missed the Human factors POINT for a positive mechanical feedback in a switch as opposed to tapping and MISSING the hotspot on the screen..

One last time, don't try to compare apples and oranges.
 
GF, I'll give you an e-mail soon. 
 
Herald
 
 

 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    Utter inexperienced rubbish...   3/17/2009 11:45:49 AM

There is a reason a button is more reliable than a touch screen when you are under acceleration. A ground vehicle is NOT an aircraft. I just used a ground vehicle under shifting acceleration as an experiment so that you could educate yourself, but apparently you missed the Human factors POINT for a positive mechanical feedback in a switch as opposed to tapping and MISSING the hotspot on the screen..




One last time, don't try to compare apples and oranges.

 

GF, I'll give you an e-mail soon. 


 

Herald


 

 


You don't know what you are talking about Herald. You missed the part where I mentioned using it personally from AIRCRAFT, I SAY AGAIN AIRCRAFT. I've done this many times. Seen it done by others even more. I even referred you to a foreign platform so you would know that there are others using it too.  You also missed where I mention that it also has significant battle management capability. Again, something I have had the pleasure to experience. I know the UK and Australians are using it too because I've seen mounts in their platforms. All of this was in a combat environment and in an extreme weather environment that is so utterly hostile to electronics that I'm amazed I never saw one hardware related failure. Why don't you take some of the same advice you give to Bluewings. If you aren't familiar with something, don't pretend to be competent. Some of us are not discussing theory. When OIF/OEF ends and things get declassified you are going to get a lot of egg on your face regarding these statements as videos start showing up on the web of ground and air forces using technology you are calling impractical. 

Herald, here is a hint for you. I'm an instructor for my unit on the technology we are talking about so you really need to consider the difference between theory and practice.We have solved this problem for some time. You are definitely wrong about this.

-DA 

 
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    I didn't miss a damned thing.   3/17/2009 12:00:38 PM





There is a reason a button is more reliable than a touch screen when you are under acceleration. A ground vehicle is NOT an aircraft. I just used a ground vehicle under shifting acceleration as an experiment so that you could educate yourself, but apparently you missed the Human factors POINT for a positive mechanical feedback in a switch as opposed to tapping and MISSING the hotspot on the screen..










One last time, don't try to compare apples and oranges.



 



GF, I'll give you an e-mail soon. 






 



Herald






 



 





You don't know what you are talking about Herald. You missed the part where I mentioned using it personally from AIRCRAFT, I SAY AGAIN AIRCRAFT. I've done this many times. Seen it done by others even more. I even referred you to a foreign platform so you would know that there are others using it too.  You also missed where I mention that it also has significant battle management capability. Again, something I have had the pleasure to experience. I know the UK and Australians are using it too because I've seen mounts in their platforms. All of this was in a combat environment and in an extreme weather environment that is so utterly hostile to electronics that I'm amazed I never saw one hardware related failure. Why don't you take some of the same advice you give to Bluewings. If you aren't familiar with something, don't pretend to be competent. Some of us are not discussing theory. When OIF/OEF ends and things get declassified you are going to get a lot of egg on your face regarding these statements as videos start showing up on the web of ground and air forces using technology you are calling impractical. 




Herald, here is a hint for you. I'm an instructor for my unit on the technology we are talking about so you really need to consider the difference between theory and practice.We have solved this problem for some time. You are definitely wrong about this.




-DA 



 










You just walked into a Herald TRAP. What aircraft? Under 50+m/s/s side shove acceleration with a moment arc of greater than two meters? Who are YOU trying to kid. RUBEN?
 
Now then. Apples and oranges: helos and airliners are NOT fighters.
 
Herald
 
 
Quote    Reply

Softwar       3/17/2009 12:01:26 PM





There is a reason a button is more reliable than a touch screen when you are under acceleration. A ground vehicle is NOT an aircraft. I just used a ground vehicle under shifting acceleration as an experiment so that you could educate yourself, but apparently you missed the Human factors POINT for a positive mechanical feedback in a switch as opposed to tapping and MISSING the hotspot on the screen..










One last time, don't try to compare apples and oranges.



 



GF, I'll give you an e-mail soon. 






 



Herald






 



 





You don't know what you are talking about Herald. You missed the part where I mentioned using it personally from AIRCRAFT, I SAY AGAIN AIRCRAFT. I've done this many times. Seen it done by others even more. I even referred you to a foreign platform so you would know that there are others using it too.  You also missed where I mention that it also has significant battle management capability. Again, something I have had the pleasure to experience. I know the UK and Australians are using it too because I've seen mounts in their platforms. All of this was in a combat environment and in an extreme weather environment that is so utterly hostile to electronics that I'm amazed I never saw one hardware related failure. Why don't you take some of the same advice you give to Bluewings. If you aren't familiar with something, don't pretend to be competent. Some of us are not discussing theory. When OIF/OEF ends and things get declassified you are going to get a lot of egg on your face regarding these statements as videos start showing up on the web of ground and air forces using technology you are calling impractical. 




Herald, here is a hint for you. I'm an instructor for my unit on the technology we are talking about so you really need to consider the difference between theory and practice.We have solved this problem for some time. You are definitely wrong about this.




-DA 






OK - now that fits.  So name one US Army air vehicle that can pull a 8+ G turn. 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    Case Closed...   3/17/2009 12:05:16 PM


h*tp://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/fa18ef/video/ckpt05.htm
 
...Herald repent. 


-DA 
 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy