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
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: 2009 displays of the F-22 and the Rafale
Bluewings12    6/24/2009 5:03:48 PM
Let 's watch them first :-) The F-22 h*tp://www.air-attack.com/videos/single/cAhL7lJCk4I The Rafale : h*tp://www.dailymotion.com/user/ministeredeladefense/video/x9ma8h_demonstration-du-rafale_news Both aircrafts are pulling nice stuff . Rafale only does it twice faster . Explaination and details to follow . Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
gf0012-aust       7/18/2009 4:24:14 AM

From your last sentence, does this mean difficulties in sensor fusion especially with external data networks?


unqualified, but basically yes. 


 
Quote    Reply

enomosiki       7/18/2009 4:40:04 AM
It doesn 't have any FLIR or IRST , it doesn 't have any long range TV Cam , it doesn ' have any external IR missile seekers to rely on ...


The addition of HMD in Block 40 will enable the MLD to be expanded to have similar capability in terms of situational awareness that of DAS.
 
Quote    Reply

Rufus       7/18/2009 5:29:11 AM
"Well, except for Keltec bragging about the F-22 using its tubes in its EW suite..."
 
...and therefor that is all it uses?  Really now, you are trying to build a cake out of crumbs of information.

Even comparing the ALR-94 to a system like "Spectra" is an insult.  Spectra is a decent system, but is noteworthy far more for its marketing than its performance.   Giving a good but unexceptional EW system the name "Specta" and printing off endless brochures with its exposed components highlighted may well have been the smartest decision during the Rafale's entire design process.  The problem is there are few people in the public who have a good working knowledge of these types of systems. They read a brochure and hear the sexy name, and conclude from that that the system must be a world leading system, it simply isn't. (More on that later)
 
 
NASHUA, NH -- (March 31, 1999) - Sanders, a Lockheed Martin Company, has completed production and delivery of the first of eleven Electronic Warfare suites being produced for the U.S. Air Force's new F-22 Raptor air dominance fighter under the EW Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase of the program.

The AN/ALR-94 EW system, and related test equipment, was shipped from Sanders in Nashua, N.H., to the F-22 Avionics Integration Laboratory (AIL) in Seattle, Wash., on Feb. 15. The shipment included advanced apertures and associated electronics, a Remote Aperture Interface Unit (RAIU) and RF unit, as well as aircraft power supplies, test stands and work stations.

Don Donovan, Sanders' vice-president for F-22 programs, said that the hardware was successfully brought on-line at the AIL within a week after delivery, and "performance of the F-22 EW system has substantially exceeded the AIL team's expectations," Donovan said.

Donovan paid tribute to the combined Sanders and Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems (LMTAS) team who produced, tested and integrated more than 50 hardware items to meet the delivery deadline as "a huge accomplishment and impressive mission success."

Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin Aeronautical Systems' F-22 Program vice president, described the Sanders-built F-22 EW suite as "the most technically complex piece of equipment on the most sophisticated aircraft ever conceived."

This on-time delivery of the Raptor's EW suite culminates more than a decade of research and development by Sanders and its suppliers. While initial setup and checkout of the system was expected to take about three weeks at the AIL facility, on-site engineers actually accomplished that task in less than a week.

The F-22 EW capability is a critical element of the aircraft's advanced sensor suite which will enable Raptor pilots to achieve air dominance over any potential adversary well into the 21st century. In addition to the electronic countermeasures suite, Sanders is providing the fighter's airborne videotape recorders, Communication, Navigation and Identification (CNI) antennas, graphic processor video interface, operational debrief system, common automated test system, and mission support equipment. Value of these Sanders products to the expected Raptor production program could exceed $2 billion through the year 2013.

Sanders is an operating company of the Lockheed Martin Electronics Sector, a leader in the design, development and manufacture of electronic systems for global defense, civil and commercial markets. In addition to aircraft self-protection systems, Sanders is a major producer of tactical surveillance and intelligence systems for all branches of the armed forces. Other major business areas include microwave, mission and space electronics; automated mission planning systems; and commercial telecommunications systems. 
 
 
 
This original system, although incredibly capable, was a product of early 90s technology which imposed certain limitations(many of which are detailed below when I talk about Spectra), but the ALR-94 has since been extensively upgraded.  You are sitting here talking about the relative upgrade potential of the two systems, when in the F-22's case the upgrade has already taken place, at least in the newer airframes.
 
 
 
BAE SYSTEMS Delivers First Production F-22 Digital Electronic Warfare Syste
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       7/18/2009 5:11:03 PM
Blue Apple :
 
""BW:
With its radar of , it is as blind as a bat ! Of course its poor ECM suite might warn it that it has been detected and tracked by a mecanical radar (F-22 doesn 't have any interferometry whatsoever so AESA radars will not be detected and tracked) .
 How do you know the F-22 EW/ECM suite is poor? That's exactly the kind of stupid statement that makes you lose all credibility.
All public info show it to be avery potent suite, likely much better than the Rafale SPECTRA in raw performance .""
 
Ok , I shouldn 't have used the word "poor" as it is indeed misplaced and incorrect , my bad .
Nevertheless , the ALR-94 EW suite has indeed something "poor" regarding the overall excellent capability of the fighter (the F-22) . For a very LO Fighter , what is the point to have an EW suite only capable of broadcast jamming ??? If you want to jam an adverse radar , you are going to wake up pretty much everybody around !
Why not using AESA antennas capable to target very precisely (1 degree or less) a single target ?
 
You are going to tell me that is the job of the APG-77 , fine . But only in the frontal 120deg. Do the F-22 Pilot wants to fly toward the adverse jamming radar to be able to counter-jam it ? Well , that 's not very ... stealthy . as well as being counter productive regarding the mission flight plan .
On the other hand , a system like Spectra can jam and counter-jam within a 360deg coverage and precisely without using the RBE2 radar . There is a difference don 't you think ?
 
""The Rafale advantage is that it's based on a more future-proof design (i.e. AESA transmitters vs classic miniature TWT) so that when GaN modules are mature the Rafale can be upgraded while the F-22 will need a complete overall.""
 
Exactly .
************
Rufus , your last post is good and shows a good common sense . I am pleasantly surprised :-)
 
"Spectra" is indeed an excellent name :-) Behind the name there is also an excellent piece of kit :-)
You said to Blue Apple :
""You are sitting here talking about the relative upgrade potential of the two systems, when in the F-22's case the upgrade has already taken place, at least in the newer airframes.""
 
That 's right but Spectra is now in its 3rd incarnation . Since 1999 , the EW suite has been upgraded twice by Thalès and Dassault . They 're not not sleeping over the F1 version , far from it .
It is indeed very difficult to get a clear idea of what an EW suite is capable of as it is highly classified . Nevertheless , as I was explaining recently to a friend of mine , one must use his brain and knowledge of the various systems to read in between the lines and extrapolate what the real capabilities could be , but of course without falling into unknown territory or fantaisy land (which I 've done long ago with the "active cancellation" , my bad) .
 
When you look at what we KNOW on the ALR-94 and Spectra from various official sources , things like band coverage , computing power , output power , precision , library databank , weight of the unit , integration , etc , it is still hard to make a impartial judgement . Myself , I go the Spectra way .
I also think that in few years time , the F-35 will have a better EW suite than the F-22 and by a quite good margin .
 
Rufus , you said :
""The Rafale's issue is not once the data reaches its central computers, the problem is much earlier in the process as it is trying to identify and digitize signals.""
 
No !!  ;-) 
""Being of a modulare design, SPECTRA is controlled by the GIC computer (Gestion de l'Interface et Compatibilité) comprising 3 processors.""
Spectra has more than enough power to identify and digitize adverse emissions . It also compare the signals with its databank in real time and decides on the go which frequencies should be :
-1) left alone
-2) jammed
-3) mimicked (this is probably why Chaltiel talked about "active cancellation" btw)

The new thing I 've noted (from the
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       7/18/2009 5:35:54 PM
As you start into your latest cycle of Rafalegasm and you spin up regarding some new magical RWR capability, please try to analyze everything you read regarding finding the range to the emitter by attempting to determine whether it is a reference to increased capability against airborne emitters or only against ground-based emitters.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       7/18/2009 5:50:58 PM
Warpig :
""please try to analyze everything you read regarding finding the range to the emitter by attempting to determine whether it is a reference to increased capability against airborne emitters or only against ground-based emitters.""
 
This is a good question . I believe it works for both but the A2G capability is probably much better (weaker radars and poor LPI) while the A2A capability is probably harder to archive .
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       7/18/2009 6:01:02 PM

Warpig :


""please try to analyze everything you read regarding finding the range to the emitter by attempting to determine whether it is a reference to increased capability against airborne emitters or only against ground-based emitters.""

 

This is a good question . I believe it works for both but the A2G capability is probably much better (weaker radars and poor LPI) while the A2A capability is probably harder to archive .

 

Cheers .





Yeah, probably... <rolls eyes!>
 
Since I've got your attention at least for now, now I'll suggest you try reviewing a few of the threads from the last few years where several of us explain in great detail just how much harder it would be to get range data on an airborne emitter using an RWR--particularly if you're doing it by yourself (i.e., if there's only one Rafale doing the measuring), but also even with several linked receiving aircraft.
 

 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       7/18/2009 6:14:29 PM
I understand what you ask me Warpig , but since things have changed , apparently .
Talking about the past posts is good and it might help us not to forget the basics , but I wanna talk about today :-)
 
This is not to say that the Rafale is a better A2A platform than the F-22 (far from it) , but to still say that the Rafale is the best 4.5 Generation operational fighter . You could at least give it the benefice of the doubt , as we say in France .
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       7/18/2009 6:23:15 PM
As usual, you seem incapable of differentiating posters on SP, except I think you can tell Herald from the rest of us.  Otherwise, it appears that to you all Americans look alike.  Once again, I am the guy who has repeatedly said I'd rather have Rafales with MICAs than any current Russian fighters with any current Russian missiles, that to me the differences between Rafale, EF, and F-18E/F really just aren't particularly significant on the battlefield, and that the only fighters within the next decade that are/will be better than those three are the F-22 and the F-35.
 
I don't "bash" French tech.  I bash posters on SP that exaggerate French tech--just like I bash posters that exaggerate any other tech.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       7/18/2009 6:35:44 PM
Warpig :
""just how much harder it would be to get range data on an airborne emitter using an RWR--particularly if you're doing it by yourself""
 
I know . I always believed that it could be archived through 2 means :
-1) Library databank
-2) Superior knowledge 
 
By library databank , I mean to know everything about a said radar (range , output power , used frequencies , time-shift in between pulses , amplitude , etc ) . Training with various Airforces helps a lot ;-)
Spectra is recording everything and digitizing everything , basically it records passive and active signature management .
Of course , for later purposes . We 've even been accused of doing so at the latest RedFlag and the AdA has been bashed for , which was uncalled for . This is our business and we have the right to do so , if the others can 't , well ...
 
By superior knowledge , I mean exactly what I say . I believe French Engineers to be more more clever in this field than others .
 
Cheers .
 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics