The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 25, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
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: usajoe 's view on the Rafale
Bluewings12    6/18/2009 12:48:33 AM
I quote him :

""Listen carefully to what I have to say and don't put words in my mouth. I never said the Rafale can't deal with Pakistan's air threat, there you go again with your selective thinking. As for China, the Rafale can't deal with the newer Chinese Sukhois in BVR or WVR combat. BVR The Sukhoi has a more powerful radar and better A2A missiles. WVR combat the Sukhoi has a huge advantage with the HMS and the R-73. This was pointed out many times over. As for the Mig 35, India already has similar fighters and it would not have that much of a trouble converting to the Mig. Plus you can by two Migs for the price of one Rafale, and have about the same kind of capabilities. The SH is not even a question, it is better then the Rafale in every single aspect. That is why there is 0% chance of the Rafale winning the competition. I will not be shocked if the Rafale is the the first fighter to be thrown out of the competition. Look the Rafale might be ok for France's needes, but most countries do not want a fighter that costs almost 100 million dollars and gets outclassed by most 4th genaration aircraft in BVR and WVR role. The Rafale might be better in EW, survivability and a better deep strike bird than most Russian fighters but that is not what most countries want. If they pay that kind of money they want the A2A capabilities to. That is why the Rafale is in this predicament and the Typhoon, SH, Sukhoi, and even the Gripen are where they are, as far as exports are concerned. Now as far as the name calling is concerned, I already told you what I think about that, only cowards talk trash when they are thousands of miles away, grow up! You know BW the diffrence between me and you is i'm not a homer like you. If you go back and look at other posts you would see that I have defended the French Navy, when 5th guards and me were going at it, and also defended the leclerc tank when people were bashing it, but when it comes to French tech. you start posting blindly, and that is why every one gets on you. If the French had made the Typhoon and the Brits and Germans the Rafale, I would be saying the same thing about the British and Germans and would give the French their dues.""

Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

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   NEXT
mustang22       6/21/2009 11:05:55 AM
Rufus,
 
Thank you for that post. It makes sense that the F-35 would be a top performer in the present and future battlefield but can the program demonstrate its ability to live up to expectations without spending $250 million per plane? The JSF's target price was originally 29-34 million. How anyone could have been led to believe that was possible is beyond my comprehension, so the questions remain:
 
1. Can its issues be resolved without sacrificing performance?
2. Will partners have the same patience as our SecDef if the program becomes delayed due to engineering concerns?
3. Will it be affordable to allies as well as the U.S. to purchase in sufficient numbers?
4. Will unmanned technology create obsolescence before the program even has a chance to mature, say around 2020?
 
Quote    Reply

Rufus       6/21/2009 2:33:40 PM
"Thank you for that post. It makes sense that the F-35 would be a top performer in the present and future battlefield but can the program demonstrate its ability to live up to expectations without spending $250 million per plane?"
 
Good question (I would be lying if I said I knew the answer for sure of course)
 
"The JSF's target price was originally 29-34 million. How anyone could have been led to believe that was possible is beyond my comprehension, so the questions remain:"
 
Well, they were basing that on a lot of different assumptions, some of which haven't come to pass and some of which might still come to pass.  It is important to remember that that number was for a full production rate F-35 in some previous year's dollars, not the initial production models in today's dollars.  The F-35 really should be a relatively inexpensive aircraft to produce when all is said and done. 
 
"1. Can its issues be resolved without sacrificing performance?"
 
Thus far the F-35 does not appear to have encountered any major performance issues besides the weight problem from a couple years ago, just cost and schedule issues.(It is generally working as planned, it is just taking them longer to get there, and thus the costs are rising.)  Of course, it is early in its testing so there is still plenty of time for issues to be uncovered. 
 
"2. Will partners have the same patience as our SecDef if the program becomes delayed due to engineering concerns?"
 
Hard to say, I suspect they will, if only because there isn't another game in town.  They could of course go with a 4th generation jet but that isn't going to get them the same type of performance.  

"3. Will it be affordable to allies as well as the U.S. to purchase in sufficient numbers?"
 
Hopefully, that depends how the remainder of the testing program goes.  The US has really bet the house on the F-35.  If things go smoothly the US will have saved a simply unbelievable amount of money and will see huge numbers of 5th generation aircraft entering service with its airforce, marines and navy.  Trying to develop multiple different 5th generation jets for each service would have been simply impossible to consider.  
 
Of course if the program runs into major performance issues it will be a disaster.
 
"4. Will unmanned technology create obsolescence before the program even has a chance to mature, say around 2020?"
 
 In the short run the F-35 is totally safe, but in the long run UAVs are going to take over a lot of its missions.
 
Future air combat will resemble something most similar to an IADS.  You will have drones with sensors, drones with weapons, tankers, and a handful of command and control nodes with human operators.  Some of these vehicles will be fast and maneuverable, but most will optimized to loiter stealthily.  It really won't be that different from an advanced SAM system in the air. 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       6/21/2009 9:25:52 PM
I don 't have much spare time before the get behind the wheel again (3 hours) . So I can 't answer everybody .
I begin with usajoe :
""The HMS is there because the SH is not a good dogfighter? LOL! The HMS is there to give the SH, and for that matter, SU-27/30/35, Mig 29/35, Typhoon, F16/15, more of an edge in WVR combat.""
 
Why do you put the SH with the SU-27/35 , Typhoon and F-16 in the same dogfighter "bag" ?
A F-16 Blk 42+ (or 50 or 52 or 60) will smack a SH in dogfight 8 times out of 10 . A Viper smack an eagle in dogfight .
Now , if you think that the F-16 can dogfight a SU-35 , Typhoon or Rafale , (or a Gripen) you are clearly mistaking .
You are even more mistaking with a SH Joe . The SH does not have the thrust and aerodynamics it needs to compete .Check the various charts .
 
""The F-35 is not even going to have a HUD, becasue of the advantage of the newer HMS being developed for that bird."" 
 
If it 's true , it is a high risk but a good thing . I 'am going to check on this .
Personaly ( I might be wrong) , an HMS can 't put on screen everything an HUD can put on screen because all the infos needed by the pilot are simply taking to much place to put on a very small "eye screen" .
 
""It proves that Rafale is all over the SH in dogfight but this has been known for ages .
Yah in your imaginary world. There is no offical proof of your misguided assumption.""
 
Listen Joe , the Super Hornet is an average dogfighter and every F-16 or F-15 Pilot will back-up my words . Then , every time the SH met the Rafale in dogfight , the Rafale did get the upper hand and rather easily . You might not like it but it is your problem . Try to find a single video where a SH has a Rafale in the crosshair ....
I quote :
"he told that when encountering F18 and F18 SH from the Roosevelt (dogfighting), the rafale didn't suffer a single loss"
 
I already posted the pdf talking about that very meeting long ago . Usajoe , if I want to be perfectly honest , the only time a Rafale has been lost in (virtual) dogfight , it was against a Harrier and it was a Rafale F1, I let you search the Net for the report ;-)

""What knowledgeable posters?""
 
The ones who know about the Rafale .
 
""the current RBE2 is the worst radar of any 4+ generation fighter.""
 
I wish that you knew what you are talking about , we could have a fair debate . Besides its average range (150km) , the Pesa RBE2 has an agility and some interleaved modes other radars are dreaming of . The fusion in between the radar and the other avionics are extremely good . Nobody in the FAF is complaining , at the contrary .
 
""Stop it with the low RCS, that argument is getting very old""
 
The Rafale has a lower RCS than the Super Hornet you want it or not . Maybe not by much but still .
We can use the available datas to try to get a picture :
-1) F-18C RCS is about 10m2
-2) M2000 RCS is about 5m2
-3) Dassault said that Rafale 's RCS is more than 10 times lower than the M2000 RCS . (0.2-0.5m2) I 'll come back later on on the specifical work done in anechoic chambers and about the different use of the chamber in between US and French engineers .
-4) What has been done on the SH to lower the RCS ?
""The F/A-18E/F's radar cross section was reduced greatly from some aspects, mainly the front and rear.The design of the engine inlets reduces the aircraft's frontal radar cross section. The alignment of the leading edges of the engine inlets is designed to scatter radiation to the sides. Fixed fanlike reflecting structures in the inlet tunnel divert radar energy away from the rotating fan blades.
The Super Hornet also makes considerable use of panel joint serration and edge alignment. Considerable attention has been paid to the removal or filling of unnecessary surface join gaps and resonant cavities. Where the F/A-18A-D used grilles to cover various accessory exhaust and inlet ducts, the F/A-18E/F uses perforated panels that appear opaque to radar waves at the frequencies used. Careful attention has been paid to the alignment of many panel boundaries and edges, to scatter traveling waves away from the aircraft.""
 
If you read in between the lines , it is a bloody good job . Since the SH only share the forward fuselage with the older C model , most of the airframe has been re-build . That 's brilliant , the SH is a very different aircraft than the much older Bug . It has to be noted and remembered , and I do not deny it .
Now , it cannot be compare with the Rafale in the same terms . Why that ?
Rafale has been tested in anechoic chamber in a very different way than any other LO or "discreet" aircraft before . I did not say in a better way , I said in a different way . To tell it bluntly , Dassault built an aircraft with very few spikes and these spikes are known and we know how to deal with them . Thalès built the counter mesure system to take care of thoses spikes directly with Dassault during the whole process . Spectra has been made (from the begining) to hide the Jet radar 's spikes from almost any bandwave and in a very discret manner (active AESA antenas precise to less than one degree and multiband shifting , unseen even on the F-22) It is the reason why Spectra can 't be fitted on another aircraft , French or not : it has been made for Rafale only .
Now , Spectra is in its 3rd incarnation (F3) and not much is known about it . We know that the newest and faster algorythms from the ICMS MkIII has been implemented , we know that a new core computer is in use and we know that a new bus (data transfer) is also in use . We might have some basic active cancellation on the main spikes (this is my view and nothing else , don 't take it for granted) .
 
""No it is not utter bs, the Mica is not the best. Where is the proof that says the Mica outperfoms the latest Russian and American AAM's?""
 
There is no proof but I dare say that I hold to what I said . We had the proof over Kosovo that we could jam a live Amraam (fortunatly for the 2 pilots from the M2000B) .
 
""The Block two SH has the best ECM suite of any 4+ generation fighter out there, the AN/ALQ-214 along with AN/ALE-55 TD, ALE-47 CFD""
 
You are mistaking Joe . Don 't get angry about it but France knows far more about ECM than the USA , this is one of our many fields . I can also say that the UK and Italy are also top notch in this matter .
The 18-G Growler will be very similar to a Rafale with Carbone Pod .
 
""It can deal with any threat out there including the Rafale. The Rafale does not even represent the greatest challange to the SH. The new Sukhois and the Typhoon present a graver challenge.""
 
Wrong , only the SU is a challenge , the other aircrafts are Allies . Now , if you wanna take your SH and go BVR or WVR against a Rafale or a Typhoon , good luck to you :-(
 
Cheers .
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Plague 043    I have no proof but...   6/21/2009 10:59:40 PM
Seems to be a common theme in your posts.
 
Quote    Reply

Das Kardinal       6/21/2009 11:07:05 PM
Yay, people, could we avoid degenrating systematically into a pissing kiddie contest with arguments like "Rafale is best plane ever ! Spectra is best ECM in the world ! Mica is best missile in the world !" on one side because to say something is best, you have to know all about it and about its competitors, which I'm pretty sure none of us here do. And from the other side the "Rafale is French so it's crap, ze evil surrender monkeys can't make anything better than America (F*ck Yeah !)" drivel. I won't name anyone, but the culprits are pretty evident. 
FFS France and the USA are allies, they're not going to make war on each other. It's also unlikely Rafales will ever fight F22s (obviously) or Typhoons. F35 might, I'm thinking about a Greece vs Turkey scenario, but even then I won't hold my breath in expectation.

Anyway. It seems that Rafale is finally getting back on track with th F3 standard in service, and various upgrades and improvements clearly on the way and budgeted (AESA, new countermeasures, new ordnance...). 
Late, sure. I blame the end of the Cold War and the stupidly short-sighted "peace dividends" thing. 
The Rafale's primary customer, that is the Frnch AdA and MN, are quite evidently happy overall. Even better, the Rafale program didn't blow its alloted budget away like others did, which is a perfomance in itself. 
It also seems its going to finally get a foreign customer. Naturaly, if/when that happens the usual Rafale bashers here will switch from their "it's not exported so it's crap compared to its competitors" routine to a "it's a political contract ! the plane itself is crap compared to its competitors !" one. It has alread started actually. I'm sure that the couple posters in question would still bash the rafale if it had an invisibilty cloak, Culture effectors, could reach low orbit and had the Death Star superlaser on it while costing the same as a Cessna 150. 
 
Quote    Reply

usajoe1       6/22/2009 12:11:25 AM
Why do you put the SH with the SU-27/35 , Typhoon and F-16 in the same dogfighter "bag" ?
A F-16 Blk 42+ (or 50 or 52 or 60) will smack a SH in dogfight 8 times out of 10 . A Viper smack an eagle in dogfight .
Now , if you think that the F-16 can dogfight a SU-35 , Typhoon or Rafale , (or a Gripen) you are clearly mistaking .
You are even more mistaking with a SH Joe . The SH does not have the thrust and aerodynamics it needs to compete .Check the various charts
 
Tell me BW, when did I mention that all of the birds were the same when it comes to dogfighting? Stop your fabricated lies. Here is what I said: The HMS is there to give the SH, and for that matter, SU-27/30/35, Mig 29/35, Typhoon, F16/15, more of an edge in WVR combat. Your first lie. The F-16 vs the SH is another one of your childish made up fantasies. How did you get the 8 out of 10 number, LOL. The SH and the newer F-16's are both very capable fighters but there is no way you can tell me that 80% of the time the F16 is going to be win. What study proves this lie. Let me answer that question none, and therefore that is lie number two. I know this much is true, A Viper with HMS and AIM9X will have a advantage over the Rafale for sure. Now as far as the Sukhoi and Typhoon, that depends on the situation. Let me also say that if the Viper is being piloted by a below average pilot than the Rafale will most likely win. BW, this is not 1965! the aerodynamic claim is old, with todays advances in ECM, Radars, HMS's and new genarations of SR AAM's the old days of dogfighting are gone.
 
 
 
""The F-35 is not even going to have a HUD, becasue of the advantage of the newer HMS being developed for that bird."" 
 
If it 's true , it is a high risk but a good thing . I 'am going to check on this .
Personaly ( I might be wrong) , an HMS can 't put on screen everything an HUD can put on screen because all the infos needed by the pilot are simply taking to much place to put on a very small "eye screen" .
No it is not a high risk, it is the future of MR Fighters. Go check up on it you might learn something.
 
Listen Joe , the Super Hornet is an average dogfighter and every F-16 or F-15 Pilot will back-up my words . Then , every time the SH met the Rafale in dogfight , the Rafale did get the upper hand and rather easily . You might not like it but it is your problem . Try to find a single video where a SH has a Rafale in the crosshair ....
I quote :
"he told that when encountering F18 and F18 SH from the Roosevelt (dogfighting), the rafale didn't suffer a single loss"
Lie number three.

How many times do people have to tell you that being the fastest and most maneuverable doe not mean much in todays world. The SH has the best Radar, ECM's, AAM of any 4+ genartaion fighter. Combaign that with HMS, AWACS, Numbers, Training and the best A2G munition out there =  the deadliest BVR/WVR/A2G 4th gen. fighter in the world.
 
I wish that you knew what you are talking about , we could have a fair debate . Besides its average range (150km) , the Pesa RBE2 has an agility and some interleaved modes other radars are dreaming of . The fusion in between the radar and the other avionics are extremely good . Nobody in the FAF is complaining , at the contrary .
The Captor is better in A2A, every American AESA is better, the Sukhoi 30/35 Bars and Zhuk radar is more powerful, so yes the Rafale has the worst A2A radar of any 4th gen. fighter.

""No it is not utter bs, the Mica is not the best. Where is the proof that says the Mica outperfoms the latest Russian and American AAM's?""
 
There is no proof but I dare say that I hold to what I said . We had the proof over Kosovo that we could jam a live Amraam (fortunatly for the 2 pilots from the M2000B) . 

Again, there is no proof that the Mica is better than its American and Russian counterparts.
 
""The Block two SH has the best ECM suite of any 4+ generation fighter out there, the AN/ALQ-214 along with AN/ALE-55 TD, ALE-47 CFD""
 
You are mistaking Joe . Don 't get angry about it but France knows far more about ECM than the USA , this is one of our many fields . I can also say that the UK and Italy are also top notch in this matter .
The 18-G Growler will be very similar to a Rafale with Carbone Pod .
Lie number four.
 
The French know far more about ECM than the US?  LOL, I almost fell off my chair when I read this funny joke. Again BW, if you do not know what you are posting, then please don't post it, it's embarrassing. Far more? what are we North Korea? I could of had more of a respect for you if you said on the same level but far more?
 
 
""It can deal with any threat out there including the Rafale. The Rafale does not even represent the greatest challange to the SH. The new Sukhois and the Typhoon present a graver challenge.""
 
Wrong , only the SU is a challenge , the other aircrafts are Allies . Now , if you wanna take your SH and go BVR or WVR against a Rafale or a Typhoon , good luck to you :-(
 
When I said challenge, I ment capabilites, plus I don't consider S. Arabian Typhoons as Allies. I already said enough on the SH, I'm not going to keep repeating myself.
 
 
 
 



 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Das Kardinal       6/22/2009 9:52:12 AM
To try and defuse the "France vs USA" pissing contest that's utterly uninteresting. I'm going to repost here some infos I saw on other forums (mostly Keypublishing) as I couldn't go to the Paris Air Show nor have access to the French magazines cited (DSI) at the moment. 

-the UAE deal which is more and more likely. If signed it will bring a significant boost for the rafale programme with the arrival of several important upgrades like : engine, new AESA modes (moving targets tracking), earlier meteor integration, new hard points and other upgrades which were mentioned like improved stealth and improved spectra.

-The french order for 60 aircrafts is expected this fall and will have many upgrades like the AESA radar, the osf-it, DDM-NG.

-The OSF-IT will be ordered for the current F3 batch which were ordered without osf.

-The imminent arrival of new hardware such as the damocles and the GBU24 plus all the weaponery of the F3 : RECO-NG, ASMP-A, Exocet and the IR ASSM.

-Other good news are the development in the pipe such as the integration of laser guided rocket pods which is schedulded in 2 or 3 years.

-then Dassault and the AdA are starting talking about the future upgrades of the batch 5 (2018) with improved AESA, new modes, side antennas. A new IR channel for the OSF with an active laser imagery with a matricial laser beam able to create a very high resolution image of the target (DSI p28)
It will have improved stealth, enhanced data fusion but also a SATCOM datalink and radar missile warning reciever fused with the infrared chanel of the DDM-NG. An helmet mounted sight could arrive sooner.

And the future "basic" CAS configuration :
3X2000L tanks
3 GBU 12
3 AASM
2 laser guided rockets pods
1 Damoclès pod
2X Mica EM/Meteor
2X Mica IR 

The 2018-planned updates are damn exciting. Side AESA antennas, a LIDAR, satcom, active missile detector (sounds a lot like Typhoon's MAWS). The new DDMs look nice too, from what I've read so far they might end up being something like the F35's DAS.
 
Quote    Reply

Das Kardinal       6/22/2009 9:56:30 AM
Oh, and I forgot : Rover capability will be built into the plane's combat system and therefore benefit from its sensor fusion, instead of on the Damocles pod.
 
Quote    Reply

Beryoza       6/23/2009 2:22:50 AM
"I wish that you knew what you are talking about , we could have a fair debate . Besides its average range (150km) , the Pesa RBE2 has an agility and some interleaved modes other radars are dreaming of . The fusion in between the radar and the other avionics are extremely good . Nobody in the FAF is complaining , at the contrary "
 
Under what conditions, against what type of target, do you cite an average range of 150km? What other avionics are you referring to?
 
I have a couple of other questions, too.
 
Why do you consider the MICA to be superior to the AMRAAM? Because of the passive/IR mode? How do you intend to exploit this feature without relying on your radar? Your OSF is a bearing-only sensor affected by atmospheric opacity. The same goes for your Damocles when it's finally is integrated.
 
Why are you employing your IR MICAs instead of your ARHs? EMCON? Because at long range you cannot properly exercise EMCON and still fully exploit your NEZ.
 
Or are you mirroring Soviet IR/SARH salvo launch tactics to maximize ECM/countermeasures resistance? Because in that case you are still range limited compared to US/Russian AAMs.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       6/23/2009 3:12:24 PM
Beryoza , I am going to try to respond to your post but without going into details . This will probably come later on .
 
""Under what conditions, against what type of target, do you cite an average range of 150km? What other avionics are you referring to?""
 
Under normal conditions (no extreme weather) . Against a 3 to 5m square target (M2000 , Super Etendard , Mig-21) . Other avionics includes long range TV , IR imaging from the IR Micas and Spectra . Since we are talking about a single aircraft , the other means (AWACs and ground based radars) are off the equation . I also talk about the sensor fusion and how the Jet is presenting the overall situation to the pilot and I remind you that the MMI is as good as the one on the F-22 (God eye view , EMCON , 360deg bubble , etc) .
 

""Why do you consider the MICA to be superior to the AMRAAM? Because of the passive/IR mode?"""
 
I (and others) consider Mica to be more deadly at range than the Amraam because it has a better resistance to jamming . Then , the IR version is indeed a very dangerous threat and can 't be dealt with easily (to say the least !) .
 
""How do you intend to exploit this feature without relying on your radar?""
 
Like everybody else : AWACs and/or Ground tracking + Link-16 , or Rafales working with each other . Nothing magic .
 
""Your OSF is a bearing-only sensor affected by atmospheric opacity. The same goes for your Damocles when it's finally is integrated.""
 
I agree . Any optical device is more or less bound to atmospheric conditions , no need to argue on this but it is better to have one (or two) than nothing . Then , may I remind you that the Damoclès pod can also be used in Air to Air (!) . Recently , the French and Swiss AF noticed the fact during various testing coming from the Swiss evaluation . It came as a shock if I may say because nobody (even in France) thought about using the Damoclès as a medium range IRST .
The FAF knew that the Damoclès pod had a AtA capability , but only to help the Rafale to come close to an Allied tanker discretly (expected range 20nm = 38km) . In fact , it seems that the Damoclès pod can do much better than that ...
 
""Why are you employing your IR MICAs instead of your ARHs? EMCON? Because at long range you cannot properly exercise EMCON and still fully exploit your NEZ.""
 
I 've never said that we are using the IR Micas instead of our EM Micas . It depends of the situation . Why are you asking such specifics Beryosa ? Since I do not know who you really are , my response will be evasive .
-1) Team work
-2) EMCON (when within enemy NEZ)
 
""Or are you mirroring Soviet IR/SARH salvo launch tactics to maximize ECM/countermeasures resistance?""
 
No , this is not the employed tactic even if we usually fire a salvo of two . Again , what the salvo is made of is depending on the situation at hand . I don 't want to say more .
 
Our actual Rafale F2s are already highly skilled in AtA (the 12-F Squadron being the best so far) and the F3 AESA will firmly position the Rafale as the best Interceptor in Europe . When loaded as long range interceptors , 4 Rafales equipped with 4 Metors and 4 Micas each could stop dead 24+ latest Russian fighters . UAE AF with 60 Rafales post F3 could stop dead any Iranian air wave and with ease .
 
Cheers . 
 
 

 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       6/23/2009 4:56:23 PM
Boris/Beryoza,
 
Forget about it.  Over the last few years several posters who each clearly knew what they were talking about have tried to explain to him what is required to achieve even a moderately good Pk at any BVR range with an IR missile, that this need includes the need for accurate range data along with azimuth and elevation data, and that optical devices like TV, IR, and laser rangefinders as well as interferometeric devices like very accurate radar warning receivers can not be counted on to give accurate enough range estimates for the context we are discussing (IR missile engagements against maneuvering targets at BVR ranges), and that still the only sufficient means for achieving a high Pk at such range is radar data from the fighter's own AI radar or in some circumstances another fighter's AI radar linked to the shooter.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       6/23/2009 5:39:48 PM
If Beryoza is indeed Boris (Hi Boris if it 's you) , he woud have clearly understand what I meant , Warpig there is no need for you to pollute the discussion .
 
""what is required to achieve even a moderately good Pk at any BVR range with an IR missile, that this need includes the need for accurate range data along with azimuth and elevation data, and that optical devices like TV, IR, and laser rangefinders as well as interferometeric devices like very accurate radar warning receivers can not be counted on to give accurate enough range estimates for the context we are discussing (IR missile engagements against maneuvering targets at BVR ranges)""
 
All of this is quite well said (and known) and it seems that the Rafale has all the gizmos Warpig is talking about , that is for a start . But this is not the most important factor and far from it , the main factor is the C4 capability , the ability to work within a huge Airweb .
Tell me Warpig , when a Rafale is firing passively a salvo of 2 Micas from the datas provided by AWACs and/or ground based radars (link-16) and is using the up-link to discretly update the missile , which missile is the deadliest , the IR or the EM version ? Which one of the two is and stay totally passive up to the hit ?
Since you guess the answer , no need to talk further about it . Do you know what it means if you are driving the adverse fighter Warpig ? It means that you do not know what is coming at you (EM , IR , both ?) and since the Rafale did not use any active means , do you think that your missile launch detector system will see the couple of Micas fired 60km away ?
If it does , how are you going to react ?
I may add that even the most powerfull AESA radar could not make a difference (if it could) because the two missiles ARE THE SAME .
 
Cheers .
 

 
 

 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    All an AWACS us going to do.    6/23/2009 6:13:55 PM

If Beryoza is indeed Boris (Hi Boris if it 's you) , he woud have clearly understand what I meant , Warpig there is no need for you to pollute the discussion .

 


""what is required to achieve even a moderately good Pk at any BVR range with an IR missile, that this need includes the need for accurate range data along with azimuth and elevation data, and that optical devices like TV, IR, and laser rangefinders as well as interferometeric devices like very accurate radar warning receivers can not be counted on to give accurate enough range estimates for the context we are discussing (IR missile engagements against maneuvering targets at BVR ranges)""

 

All of this is quite well said (and known) and it seems that the Rafale has all the gizmos Warpig is talking about , that is for a start . But this is not the most important factor and far from it , the main factor is the C4 capability , the ability to work within a huge Airweb .


Tell me Warpig , when a Rafale is firing passively a salvo of 2 Micas from the datas provided by AWACs and/or ground based radars (link-16) and is using the up-link to discretly update the missile , which missile is the deadliest , the IR or the EM version ? Which one of the two is and stay totally passive up to the hit ?

Since you guess the answer , no need to talk further about it . Do you know what it means if you are driving the adverse fighter Warpig ? It means that you do not know what is coming at you (EM , IR , both ?) and since the Rafale did not use any active means , do you think that your missile launch detector system will see the couple of Micas fired 60km away ?


If it does , how are you going to react ?


I may add that even the most powerfull AESA radar could not make a difference (if it could) because the two missiles ARE THE SAME .

 

Cheers .


 




 

 






Is tell you when it sees a Sukhoi and if you can run the numbers in your head just about how long you  have before the R-77s arrive.You see, poster, because your crap RBE2 radar (the current one) not the ons you keep promising in the future put out that beautifiul radio bullseye. Mister Russian  has already launched.. His missiles should should start falling on you just about the time a full minute after you pick him up at 100,000 meters and he closes to about his launch range  55,000 meters of separation; or well inside his headonb MER range which incidentally is well outside the effective range of your proportional lead chase missiles. His are predict lead lobbers and FAST. (Remember we had this discussion as to how a well designed SARH missile versus a badly designed ATG missile actually work?).

There is a reasonable chance that the Sukhoi Adders may miss or they may kill, (Shroedinger's Cat applies to missiles too-especially home on radiation missiles), but one thing is certaun he will turn at, 40,000 meters and escape your stern chase missiles; while some of you DIE. Your MICA IR sensors are not good enough to get a heat lock at that separation and your ATG radar homers will never see him (out of detect threshhold separation and not enough potential energy to guve successful chase. ).
 
Bad decisions that your tacticians made in the 1980s condemn you to this inferiority. Agsinst US or Israeli tech its worse. Lucky that Turkish FALCON shot down by that Greek's malfunctioning Mirage wasn't armed or looking for blood, or the Greek pilot might be DEAD, isn't it?
.   
Don't mess with adults, kid.
 
Herald
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       6/23/2009 7:14:31 PM
lol Herald ! You do not know what to invent to keep yourself alive in the discussion , it is really funny , lol !
 
Did you even read-proof what you just said ? I don 't think so .
To start with , a French AWAC will spot and track your SU-xx at a very long range (the SU-xx are barndoors) .
From there on , all your pseudo scenario is going into the bin Herald . Then , you also forget everything about RCS , tactics , countermesures , etc ... Not very serious Herald , not at all :-(
 
Your "exclusive" BS on the Turkish and Greek fighters is also very funny ! Care to back it up ? Oh sorry , you just can 't .
Tell me something clown  , when will you stop your non-sense ?
 
Just answer this one : at what range a latest SU-xx can start tracking a Rafale loaded for a CAP patrol ?
 
I tell you when : as soon as the Russian LRF can get a firing solution and NOT before (25km or so) .
Before that , the Russian made fighter will have to deal with a low RCS and extremely powerfull ECMs .
But there is one way : to explain it to you bluntly , the Russian AWAC will spot the 4 Rafales flying in formation (if the Carbone pod is not used) and will send the datas back to the SU-xx . From there on , it will be a very difficult fight for both sides . The SU-xx will probably fire from the coodinates provided by its AWAC but outside their NEZ , at this time the Rafale 's Meteor are already closing in (fired with the help from the French AWAC coordinates and using the up-link) while two Rafales are turning away then coming back 25km behind the other two Rafales who tried to gain in altitude and speed . As soon as the EM Russian missiles go "live" , Spectra fools them while the Meteors are hitting . If there is any SU-xx left , the remaining and still alive 4 Rafales will take care of them medium range with all bells and whistles (and at close range if needed) .
This is how the FAF is expecting to use the Combo Rafale/Meteor/Mica .
 
Cheers . 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    I read your so called proof.   6/23/2009 7:24:42 PM
Aside from the fact that your base assumptions on how missiles work, are totally wrong, and that you don't know how either radios or light works either, all I can say is that you must lead an interesting fantassy life, complete with made up lies and the delusion that you can pass off those lies as truth to the rest of us..
 
Learn some actual science, and then also learn when to remain silent. Right now would be a good time for such as you.
You might learn something if for once yoiu would turn off the stupid finction, and turned on the listen function 
 
 

 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.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