Rafale Thread

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 3/11/2009 12:13:41 AM

Eurofighter's aerodynamics are better than F-15. F-15 is probably better on offense with its fuel load but Typhoon is better on defense or the classic message board "joust over neutral territory with 50% fuel and no AWACS." F-15 with AESA will win unless Typhoon has Meteor. When Typhoon has AESA and Meteor it gets close to F-22 capability in terms of engaging Su's.

Who's aerodynamics are better is debatable and depends on the mission profile. Its like saying an Mustang GT is better handling than an H2 Hummer. Thats true on the road. But not so true on the dirt. Without specifics that statement by itself is insufficient for any objective analysis. Also, over neutral airspace with no AWACS and 50% full only happens in video games and fanboy threads. I'm always talking about operationally configured and integrated into a system. Thats how wars are fought. With regard to Typhoon and Meteor, I like it and on paper it looks formidable. But Meteor will not be the only next generation weapon system nor will next-gen weapons be limited to Typhoons. For all we know F-15s could be hauling HELLADS pods with the weapons systems operator controlling teathered UCAVs configured for air combat....

...So we cannot simply assert that Typhoon is going to be better because we know about Meteor. Because there are things that are going to be integrated into the capabilities of other aircraft that will be equally or even more deadly as illustrated above for instance.

Now having said all that I have no doubt that the Typhoon is a great fighter and properly employed would be quite a deadly opponent FOR ANY PLANE. But thats a far stretch for calling it "second best".

-DA

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica BW reply 3/11/2009 12:26:47 AM

JP , kudos for coming here from time to time . Maybe you shouldn 't ...

You could take Herald in the back seat , he still would hold the same talk and attitude . Poor him ...

Cheers .

BW,

Try not to get wrapped up in the "Herald" stuff. Just post things you know, and the stuff you don't, don't. Also, take an objective look at the situation. If X is clearly greater than Y, then simply say so. There is no shame in that. It's just when you say things like, France could integrate a complex subsystem for operational use "in hours". It makes your credibility fall. Just take a look at the computer you are reading this on. If the manufacturer decided to switch or add a major component. That could take months or more and that assumes we are talking about a part that already exist and works. Remember, this is just for a simple PC or MAC. Imagine something as complex as fighter avionics. Avoid things like that that clearly don't make sense and I think a lot of people would take your post more seriously. Your passion for the weapons your country makes is admirable. Just because you are not an expert at it technically speaking doesn't mean you can't teach us things from the French point of view. Your armed forces do have some meaningful combat operations to speak of in the last two decades to include the Rafale. If you would focus more on sharing that with your unique perspective we would all benefit.

-DA

Quote Reply

Bluewings12 3/11/2009 12:31:38 AM

JP :

""You end up getting a camel. That's what the Eurofighter really is.""

Well ... We probably understand each other on some points but I really would like you to say a bit more .

As an exemple , DEFA on Airdefense.net is sometimes ... abrupt (!) but he talks the talk . Why do you employ the word "camel" ?

From your point of view , where the "camel" is lacking ?

Cheers .

Quote Reply

Bluewings12 3/11/2009 12:34:04 AM

DA , I copy you loud and clear .

Just let me do my stuff .

Cheers .

Quote Reply

Bluewings12 3/11/2009 12:48:45 AM

Since we all want to keep the thread nice and cool :-) , I propose an 8 minutes video of the Rafale CO1 who was the black prototype used during some of the testings . The connoisseurs will notice the overall stealthy shape when clean , as well as the manoeuvrability (8gs Max with this aircraft) .

The CO1 also had early engines but its acceleration is already , well ... quiet good (!)

ht*p://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VPEU6GlGUI

Cheers .

Quote Reply

Bluewings12 3/11/2009 2:13:20 AM

Since we have a French poster who knows obviously more than I do , the less I can do is to try to link what he said with what I

said .

JP ' post is rather long and it goes into details I wasn 't aware of , so let 's take it slowly !!!

(technical stuff)

""- no laser designator :

was right but is no more : has been integrated (BW rightly likes the Rafale but doesn't have the best source data: "can do in no time" is no more necessary).""

I was a bit late regarding the news but I was right , the Pod is under the wing .

""- no AESA:

very soon same answer. Is being developed, is performing great and will be fitted on the next batch to be ordered this year and delivered in 2012. Current jets will be retrofited (if we don't run out of money for that part of the program by then :-) ). Cannot be said of the Eurofighter's AESA Captor, which is still very far from being developed, let alone procured for frontline aircraft""

This is also what I 've always been saying . The "Camel" is showing its tail ...

""F-22 is awesome in the area of performance and stealth, but its man machine interface is far from impressive compared with that of Rafale""

That I also always said . The Rafale 's pit is more user friendly and to switch from A to Z or from X to Y is easier on Rafale .

If you can imagine how fast the situation in an air operation is changing up there nowadays , automatisms and user friendly pit can make the difference between failure and wins . The Rafale 's pit has some unique features and its avionics and FCS are really closely linked together . Of course , it still hasn 't got the full ECM suite yet (as I said earlier) and its eyes and ears are not as good as they supposed to be because of lack of funding .

When Herald says that France does not have the tech tree , he is deeply mistaking . WE could actually teach you one thing or two about electronics ...

""From the user's point of view all I can say is the FAF and FrNavy has never met anything close to SPECTRA, regardless of what you may think of its marketing prowesses, both in sensing accuracy and jamming efficiency. EW is an area where the French are top notch: anybody who has flown in Red Flag against French ECM, including older generation on M2000 and even Mirage F1 and Jaguar, will understand exactly what I mean.""

Hey ! This is exactly what I 've been saying all these years on SP . Do you remember when I was talking about the M2000 screwing up radars and FCS of about everybody including F-15s , F-16s and F-18s ?

Does the M2000 have anything like active AESA ECM antennas ? I don 't think so but the Rafale has and our radar databank is also top notch as it has always been .

""No towed decoy (unlike the F-15, F-16, F-18, EF, etc etc) I agree with BW: towed decoy is not a requirement, it's one of many possible solutions to the requirement of avoiding and deferating incoming threats.""

I might add that towed decoys only work (if they do) against EM/EW missiles , but against IR missiles they are useless . In fact , they use up two perfectly good pylons for 2 missiles . If you need a trailing ECM decoy to protect your aircraft , come to France and speak to Thalès , but come with big money and they might teach you how to do without one .

(Herald must be boiling , lol)

""No stand-off jammer capability. Can hardly blame anyone for that "lack of". Who can afford one? The US armed forces, primarily. Whole different concept in the FAF: given what I said about optimisation and our limited budgets, we dropped stand-off jamming in the '80s and developped our expertise in self protection. Hence our excellent know how in the area of EW. 99% of custome

Quote Reply

leroy 3/11/2009 3:15:26 AM

"Is being developed, is performing great and will be fitted on the next batch to be ordered this year and delivered in 2012. Current jets will be retrofited (if we don't run out of money for that part of the program by then :-) )."

"Low-rate production of the first active electronically scanned radars is now underway for the Rafale multi-role fighter.

Thales, developer of the RBE2 radar, says it's completed development work and now is starting series production. The radar should deliver around 40 percent greater range performance than the current standard, and be able to track many more targets simultaneously.

Final software validation and delivery of the first AESA system to Dassault is planned for early 2010. Low-rate production will involve only a handful of radars.

The production milestone is also key to Dassault's ambitions to sell the fighter overseas. India, where Rafale is competing, wants an AESA. The French government is also in advanced talks to sell Rafale to the United Arab Emirates, which operates AESAs on its F-16 Block 60s. UAE could mark the first export of Rafale.

In France, AESA-equipped Rafales would enter service starting in 2012. It would be the F4 standard of Rafale, which still has to be developed. The radar is not slated to be retrofitted on existing Rafales although it could be, says Pierre-Yves Chaltiel, senior vice president for Thales aerospace government programs. That could limit the French AESA force to 60-70 aircraft." - Aviation Week, Nov 4 2008

Do you have newer information than this? Everything I have read says there are no plans to upgrade existing Rafales.

"wrong. All the "gen" talk is 90% marketing BS and "my generation is longer than your generation". Yes Rafale is 4th gen, so as the Eurofighter and Grippen (only just). Anything older (including F-16B52+ or 60, F-15K or T, F-18 E/F as well as M2000-5Mk2/-9, Mig 29/35 or SU27 to 35 are 3rd generation platforms with 3rd generation systems architectures, with more or less bits and pieces recovered from 4th gen aircraft integrated into them: e.g. the modular mission computer from the Rafale serving in the Greek and UAE M2000-5Mk2/-9, or AESA radars in Hornets and Eagles."

I am not going to try to debate aircraft generations with you. These definitions are widely known and you aren't about to change them posting from a message board. The Rafale is a 4th generation aircraft, just like the F-15, F-16, Su-27, and Mig-29.

"F-22 is awesome in the area of performance and stealth, but its man machine interface is far from impressive compared with that of Rafale, its weapons (AMRAAM) are no better than 3rd generation a/c with the same or MICA."

Why don't you write us up a little comparison of the Rafale's and F-22's "man machine interface," since you clearly think you know something about them.

You need to realize that you can't just throw random crap like that out around here, people know you are lying and will call you on it.

"We were smart enough to copy the Mig 29's IRSTS, with the OSF, and add a very useful TV function to it, F22 designers surprisingly didn't."

Here you are wrong again... the F-22 was designed from the start to carry an IRST and it is still capable of receiving one. Current threats don't justify the cost.

"F-35 ought to be a quantum leap ahead of Rafale in terms of design given it is 10 years younger but I'm far from convinced that it will do as well either in the A/S or A/A arenas, given the extent of the combined design constraints imposed by stealth and STOVL."

The problem is that your opinion means pretty much nothing, you can't even get aircraft generations right. Take a look at the number of countries lining up to buy the F-35, and compare that to those waitin

Quote Reply

leroy 3/11/2009 3:29:05 AM

"That I also always said . The Rafale 's pit is more user friendly and to switch from A to Z or from X to Y is easier on Rafale .If you can imagine how fast the situation in an air operation is changing up there nowadays , automatisms and user friendly pit can make the difference between failure and wins . The Rafale 's pit has some unique features and its avionics and FCS are really closely linked together . Of course , it still hasn 't got the full ECM suite yet (as I said earlier) and its eyes and ears are not as good as they supposed to be because of lack of funding .

When Herald says that France does not have the tech tree , he is deeply mistaking . WE could actually teach you one thing or two about electronics ..."

Here is the same challenge to you fanboy...

Describe both the F-22 and Rafale's man machine interfaces, and describe how they are different.

(and no, I don't mean more of this stupid fanboy BS that you wrote above. "well gee, the Rafale's interface is like... really good... and we like it... so it must be better than that of an aircraft we have never even looked inside the cockpit of... ")

You don't have a clue what you are talking about, and it shows.

"I might add that towed decoys only work (if they do) against EM/EW missiles , but against IR missiles they are useless . In fact , they use up two perfectly good pylons for 2 missiles . If you need a trailing ECM decoy to protect your aircraft , come to France and speak to Thalès , but come with big money and they might teach you how to do without one .

(Herald must be boiling , lol)"

Not all towed decoys use pylons kid.(Do you even look this stuff up on the internet?) And no, they don't work on IR missile, just like all other self protection jammers. (Including the one on the Rafale!)

As for asking Thales about towed decoys... that would be a lot like asking Thales for an AESA ten years ago when the US started operating them. "We will have one real soon, just wait!"

"The last phrase is really important . To be able to use the US hardware , you need all the US hardware because it is intended to work as a ONE entity . Buying cheap the latest Blk 52/60 will not give you a lot if you don 't have the other air assets to go with . A "lonely" 4 F-16 Blk60s pack (understand without proper help) will do far less than 4 "lonely" Rafales ."

Kid, you are making a fool of yourself. We get it, you think your favorite airplane is really cool, but that doesn't change its real world capabilities in the slightest.

"This , I also always said . To understand the meaning , you must think as a Pilot . Do you get a warning ?.. How do you try to evade , or should you ? Should you now or later ? Are you even targeted ??? Why my EWR is not telling me anything ???

...

Just imagine .

But you have an undetected IR MICA coming at you at Mach 4.5 and its end game will be perfectly stealthy . Ouch ..."

Uh huh... now swap out "IR MICA" for virtually any other modern IR missile and you get the same thing. They are all capable of some BVR attacks, and they do offer some advantages, but MICA is nothing special, especially at long range.

"This is also what I said about the AASM and SPECTRA . Some posters should really look at the leatest RedFlag ..."

If you HAD an anti-radiation missile you would have used it. Just because you used a certain weapon for something doesn't mean it is well suited to that mission.

Quote Reply

HERALD1357 SAome more sarcastic comments. 3/11/2009 4:54:33 AM

1. Towed decoys can be built into a dedicated dispenser.

2. Towed decoys can be active as well as passive both radar and infrared.

3. Read and learn....

France isn't even fielding a team much less on the field, when it comes to CURRENT EW self defense.You want to learn how? Come visit Lockheed, BAE Sanders, or RAYTHEON. Just don't send THALES thieves. They'll be tossed out on their ears.

Man machine interface......that is a joke. An obsolete pit by 1980s standards versus 21st Century distributed information

About Typhoon. It's integration isn't complete? Further along in its role, than Rafale is in its. (Apples and oranges, Darth-dedicated air interceptor with secondary A2G (Typhoon) versus Rafale-dedicated air to ground with secondary A2A.) The Typhoon is more like an F-15 C than a Beagle, but the Rafale is more like a souped up Jaguar.

When I say its the second besat fighter flying, its because in its role it is better than its American counterparts. It has more upgrade paths open to it and its better designed for its air to air mission than the current Eagle which is the previous air superiority standard...

Don't sneer at CAPTOR either. Mechanical scan track in radars like SARH in missiles works. Its now a reliable, tested. and well understood methodology. There are still some things it can do that AESA cannot. CREF above vis the PESA discussion and sidelobes for WHY.

And of course while others concede that MICA is a missile, I concede nothing on this self propelled brick. It doesn't work.

Herald

Quote Reply

Phaid 3/11/2009 6:38:12 AM

5 - no HMS, putting it at a disadvantage against every other modern fighter in WVR.

True. One of the least satisfying compromises, which will require money and time once it is decided to go ahead with the integration. This looks unescapable, eventually, it'll become a "need to have" especially for the export market. Probably the best response (and the reason the FAF and FrNavy general staffs considered acceptable to drop the requirement), is that the SA you have before the merge and the efficiency of the data fusion, including fighter to fighter datalink (L16) are such that once friends and foes are mixed up (you're never supposed to be alone in a fight), a WVR enemy has virtually no chance to escape being tracked by at least one hence vulnerable to all the Rafales in the furball. Ever heard of the Rafale's "over the shoulder" kill? Using offboard missile cueing from a wingie during a live fire test, a Rafale actually managed to shoot down a target located 7 o'clock at several nautical miles range. Has this ever been done on a F-22 or a Typhoon? Don't thinh so

Complete science fiction nonsense. Link-16 is completely useless in a dogfight. Both the spatial and time resolutions are insufficient to support targeting object at the ranges and changing bearings that occur in dogfights. And even if it could, a pilot in a dogfight is not going to sit there and stare at icons on a display to try and figure out what is going on around him.

And yes, F-22s and Typhoons, and every other Link-16 capable system can do off board targeting.

6 - no IR optics in current production models. Obviously this can be overcome with a pod, but it's worth pointing out since the OSF is so often touted as a magical solution to all problems.

Not entirely true: the first F2 batches weere bought with IR, butr then it was dropped on the following batches waiting for a new and better sensor. The OSF's IR channel was deemed not satisfactory for imagery. Although the IRST function is not the best in the world it certainly does help in building and especially maintaining the SA on any air target once they've been picked by any sensor, via the data fusion. We probably will be missing it more than expected, and I hope the next generation will be nack on board sometimes in the next decade.

Entirely true: no IR optics in current production models. The fact that the early batches had obsolete IR components installed does not change the fact the ones currently rolling off the production line do not.

7 - defensive jammer system based on three small electronically-steered antennas, which means serious angular limitations on its DJM emitters (since it is well known that beam-steering transmitters suffer from significant reduction in power as the angle of the signal becomes less perpendicular to the array).

ECM is not my best area of expertise but with no numbers to support it, the above assertion is pointless. From the user's point of view all I can say is the FAF and FrNavy has never met anything close to SPECTRA, regardless of what you may think of its marketing prowesses, both in sensing accuracy and jamming efficiency. EW is an area where the French are top notch: anybody who has flown in Red Flag against French ECM, including older generation on M2000 and even Mirage F1 and Jaguar, will understand exactly what I mean.

Go read about beam steering instead of questioning basic physics. Go see why there have been so many problems with the 737 AEW and its attempt to use a non-rotating AESA array for 360 degree coverage. Then see why a vastly smaller array of beam-steering elements will face even worse problems.

Finally, as far as "FrNavy and FAF never meeting anything like SPECTRA", the M2000-9 already have a system that even Thales states is better than Spectra. The biggest thing SPECTRA has going for it is its cool acronym.

8 - production rate of less than one aircraft per month leading to serious quality and support supplier issues. I'm not sure about the outcome in terms of service to the customer, but it certianly sucks, plus you end up paying idle workers and the unit price might be going up again.

Several aircraft have had to be returned to the manufacturer for repairs due to defects.

9 - terrible reliability (one of the four Rafales at Red Flag had to be grounded and cannibalized for

Quote Reply

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