Read it. Notice this part which reads a lot like my last post...

 

...quite a bit different from what a radar can do. Also note the vulnerability.

Now read this:

 

 ht*p://www.aviapedia.com/video/new-mig-35-ols-video

-DA

 

"Yes , with SPECTRA , TV cam and MICA ."

 

Yes, from ranges around the edges of visual range, against targets that would have detected the Rafale a long long time ago.  

 

An IRST will not provide a sufficiently high quality track to launch the sorts of long range attacks you like to dream about.

 

What the heck is the point of trying to be "silent" when you aren't even flying a stealthy aircraft?  Your opponent will have detected you long before you could take your shot anyways.

 

"Check the nose cone size . Is the RBE2 as small as some internet addicts seem to think it is ?"

 

 Yes kid...  it is.

Once again - parading what "could be" as what is...  Coming soon does not count.

The AESA could happen depending on whether the UAE decides to cough up the money but clearly Paris is not interested in boosting the defense budget on their own.  So whether the rest of the Rafale fleet (if the export happens) gets the upgrade depends greatly on politics and profits.

 

Well, BW is completely mischaracterizing the UAE situation here.  In real life, what has happened is that the UAE has indicated that it would be willing to buy around 60 Rafales if two conditions are met: 1) that the aircraft feature an AESA, Meteor compatibility, and uprated engines, and 2) that France buy back the 60 Mirage 2000-9s that the Rafales will be replacing.  The deal could well fall through, because as you say France has to figure out who to sell the Mirages to (the AdlA have already stated they will not take them into service) and because of the question of who will finance the development of the AESA and engines. France has already indicated it will not finance the M88-3, and the UAE has not indicated that it is willing to do so.

 

And no, just to head that nonsense off: neither the engines nor the AESA are actually developed at this point; studies of the engine and prototypes of the radar are not fully-funded and operational systems.

 

 

2012 is the earliest that the UAE could possibly get the Rafales with AESA assuming all of the required deals go through smoothly.  Good luck with that.  There is no indication that the AdlA would backfit its current and on-order batches of Rafales with any new systems.  BW is trying to put an optimistic spin on the harsh reality that the UAE will not finance the AESA and Meteor for Rafale, so France will, which I suppose will then give them "the opportunity" to install those systems on their own Rafales.  It's rather like saying that because the Block 60 has AESA and 32,000 lb engines, so does every other F-16.  Not quite.

 

Here is the article... that BW is sourcing all of this misconstrued information from, BTW.  The title says it all:  To Sell Rafale to the Emirates, Paris Forced to Finance a New Version.

Also, regarding all of the current nonsense about the "OSF nouvelle generation"

 

Yes, SwissOptic is involved, to the extent that they have been sourced as a supplier for some of the optical components.  The fact that France is trying to sell the Rafale to Switzerland played more of a role in that than any specific technical capabilities.

 

The new OSF will still not have an IR channel.  The new OSF that is to be backfitted into the current production F3s is TV-only.

h*tp://img8.imageshack.us/img8/9484/080808redflag3.jpg

 

Why, yes.  Yes it is:

 

 

Look where the OSF is.  You can clearly see the nose cone in front of that.  Compare that to the F-16's nose and you clearly see that the F-16's aperture is wider than the Rafale's.  As I stated before, Rafale's radar is circular with an array diameter of 550mm.  The F-16's nose is elliptical with max dimensions of 740 x 480 mm.  That works out to an area of of 0.238 m² for the Rafale versus 0.279 m² for the F-16.  Compared to an area of about 0.385 m² for the F/A-18 and Typhoon, 0.5 m² for the F-35, and 0.785 m² for the F-22 and F-15. 

Once again... exposed rivets and seams everywhere...

 

 

Ok ignoring BW?s commentary, can someone tell me how much of a concern mach cone or any shockwaves propagating form a supersonic target is for counter detection from a IRST? I?ve heard some folks mention cone stagnation produces a fairly large IR signature but I?m not up to snuff on the topic (or how truly effective IRST really are for that matter)

 

Thx

MM

That depends on overall background contrast as the amount of excitation (HEAT) as the aircraft heats (kinetic energy imparted) to the air by its generated shockwave. Its a physical effect as the standing shockwave causes its own friction event interface air on air [or even SOUND] (acts like a solid). But then as with the aircraft heating up itself as an object, DISTANCE and local obscuration effects degrade the detector's ability to see the event as a heat source or to count it by sampling, or see it move across a "static" background..

 

Sorry but that is as simple as I can explain it.

 .