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: 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

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest

Herald12345       7/6/2009 12:51:20 PM

Herald:

Took them two  decades and they still screwed it up

Nope, the integrated cooling of the MICA IR works fine. And of course mechanics are delighted about not having to manage gas bottles anymore. 

It doesn't matter if the chiller works as long as the chioller is inadequate to chill. 

If you want to talk about screw up, I believe the ASRAAM would be a more fitting topic (a modern IR AAM without TVC, no integrated cooling and an INS but no data link? WTF? Well, at least the seeker imaging is world class....)
 
 
The AIM-132 is a high-speed short-range rocket-powered missile with a low-drag configuration without any forward flying surfaces. The missile is compatible with all available target designation systems like radar, electro-optical sensors and helmet-mounted cueing sights, and its low-smoke solid-propellant rocket motor provides very high acceleration off the launch rail. Using its four cruciform tail surfaces, the ASRAAM can pull up to 50 g immediately after launch. The main improvement compared to the existing AIM-9L/M Sidewinder..., however, is the new Focal Plane Array IIR (Imaging Infrared) seeker, which is similar to the one used in the American AIM-9X.... This seeker has a long acquisition range, high countermeasures resistance, high off-boresight (+/- 90°) field-of-view, and the capability to designate specific parts of the targeted aircraft (like cockpit, engines, etc.). The ASRAAM also has a LOAL (Lock-On After Launch) capability which is a distinct advantage when the missile is carried in an internal weapons bay. The maximum effective range of the missile of course depends on the exact parameters (e.g. head-on or tail-chase engagement), but a figure of 15 km (8 nm) is sometimes quoted (the true figure is probably higher). Minimum range is quoted as around 300 m (1000 ft). The ASRAAM is armed with a 10 kg (22 lb) blast-fragmentation warhead, which is triggered by a combined laser proximity/impact fuzing system.
 
Explanation for a "so called expert."
 
ASRAAM IS what MICA pretends to be, a  meet to greet IR missile. The Typhoon, or in the American case, the Sparky, radar or DASS tries to get a predict track or bearing data which the computer generates and loads into the ASRAAM GCU. The ASRAAM then points along the track's future predicted line and chases to meet close enough where its imaging sensor will see the image (about 5-10 seconds flyout) where its IR camera starts looking for a close by hot image to match one in its threat libray. At the expected ranges of 5,000-20,000 meters that is quite doable for the Hughes (RAYTHEON) buolt seeker . IF MICA's designers  had been happy for a a pure IR missile , ASRAAM is close to what they would have built instead of that FALCON derived fiasco thbey eave . It, ASRAAM, also uses a Joule Thompson gas bottle supplied (Honeywell) chiller to allow it to image discriminate the object's shape.  That chiller surrounds the sensor and is not built into it as a HEAT SINK THAT design choice allows a residual insulator effect of the refrigerator loop chill down locally in case the J-T unit fails, kumquat. Its not an all or nothing FAIL like a Stirling. With a big fat missile the British could indulge in a laser ring proximity fuse, a longer burning candle, a nice big explosive warhead, and a dofferent energy use profile that didn't require the added weight of TVC since they know how to use point, cylinder  lft, and aft of CG  fin control to get what they need out of the missile inlike the fools who built MICA  Since its, ASRAAM'S fltyout is also about  15 seconds and its burnout is about six+ seconds after launch,  why does it need an update again when it will be in IR camera range of its target? What do you actually KNOW about these rockets, Chester? NOT MUCH IT SEEMS. 
=====================================================================
Nope I never actually said
 
Let's see: on the 23 March 2009 you claimed that:

"It means how long the gas flask is good before it has to be recha
 
Quote    Reply

FJV    Hmm.   7/6/2009 1:12:01 PM
Peltier cooling unit
 
Would not be my 1st choice for cooling purposes.
 

 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       7/6/2009 1:54:01 PM
Nice bla-bla Herald , do you have anything to back up your "opinion" ?..
I 'm afraid not .
 
What you think about Mica is irrelevant .
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       7/6/2009 3:04:28 PM

Peltier cooling unit

 

Would not be my 1st choice for cooling purposes.

 



Depends on what you are trying to do FJV. In some cases it, makes perfect sense.
 
Herald
 
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive    Owch   7/6/2009 3:04:40 PM
Looks like a fellow countryman got utterly bitchslapped.
 
Industry-specific knowledge always wins. Unless you really do know these systems in near schematic detail you'll have a hard time trying to win an argument by trawling press releases, editorials, etc.
 
Rufus said something that is both beautifully accurate about the village idiot.
 
This board might as well be named "Stupid crap some truck driver made up about the Rafale, and efforts to educate a truck driver who can't/won't learn."

Admin?
 
ReactivE
 
Quote    Reply

warpig    ...And Then There Was One,   7/6/2009 3:47:01 PM


Blue Apple , something is telling that you are NOT French .


Well, a few km southwards and I would be.
 




 
<sigh!>  Back to just Seagull, I see.  Well, regardless of the greeting Herald is dishing out, I hope you stick around anyway.

 
 
Quote    Reply

Blue Apple       7/7/2009 3:14:46 AM
BW:

Acceleration during cornering (dogfight) is waay in favor of Rafale .

Vs a plane with vector thrust? Are you insane?
 
Traditional dogfighting is all about energy management. The F-22 can obviously generate more, the Rafale may be able to degrade it slower. But the F-22 starts with a huge advantage and will keep it in most cases. And it won't fight at low altitudes, that's not what it was designed for and being stealthy, fast and cruising at a high altitude, it will be up to the Rafale to come and meet it (and most liekly meet its demise).
 
The best shot a Rafale would have is if it can catch a supercruising F-22 with its IRST. But to do that it would need a reliable IRST...

Herald:

It doesn't matter if the chiller works as long as the chioller is inadequate to chill. 
 
How would you know? You didn't even know MICA used a Stirling micro-cooler.
 
ASRAAM IS what MICA pretends to be
 
ASRAAM as a program is a complete failure. The USAF and Germany both rejected the missile as unable to meet their requirements, it's an IR missile with awful off-boresight capabilties and pointless extra range.
 
Well since the Stirling cryo-chiller has been around a while, what took you so long
 
??? It's not like France designs new IR missiles every other year.
 
Also how many Honeywell Hymatic patents did THALES and MBDA steal again?
 
A ridiculous accusation. Cryotechnologies is one domain where the French are at the forefront (see Air Liquide).
 
No. YOU can't read.
 
Anyone can see for themselves. You were wrong and had no clue about the MICA IR seeker cooling. Why should we believe anything you say about that missile if you can't even get the basic configuration info right?
 
Do you even kmow what the TERMS actually mean? 
 
Yes I do. Which is why your grandstanding is so funny. You've been misleading people on this forum for years, using big words like "proportional lead logic", "scalar vs vector", "meet and greet"..., all the while carefully avoiding the proper terms like "proportional navigation". Why would you do that? Is it because then people would be able to go and learn something for themselves and discover all the nonsense you're writing?
 
The fact remains that pretty every AAM and SAM uses the same basic strategy to close on their target in the end game (how they get there is different for each, depending on whether they have an INS, plane-missile data link...).
 
And it doesn't work; as the Royal Navy just discovered. Hence the rush for CAMM.
 
Of course it has nothing to do with job protection, I mean, the British already use French missiles everywhere...
 
Funny thing, CAMM is basically reinventing VL MICA (with more up-to-date seeker). Seems to validate the French MICA design too (if they had to add TVC to ASRAAM for a vertical launch version and not for the MICA, what does that tell us about ASRAAM off-boresight capabilities?).
 
Do you know if they plan to integrate a micro-cooler too? Because gas bottles and missiles in canisters don't seem like a very good idea if you want a reasonable shelf-life for the system.
 
Quote    Reply

usajoe1       7/7/2009 3:35:33 AM
ASRAAM as a program is a complete failure. The USAF and Germany both rejected the missile as unable to meet their requirements, it's an IR missile with awful off-boresight capabilties and pointless extra range.
 
Where are the documented facts that support your assertions? The whole program deal is well known, but you claiming the missile is a failure performence wise, without any facts is just meaningless noise. So either back up your claim with facts or take a hike!
 
Quote    Reply

Seagull       7/7/2009 7:37:45 AM
<sigh!>  Back to just Seagull, I see.  Well, regardless of the greeting Herald is dishing out, I hope you stick around anyway.
 
I'm not Blue Apple.
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       7/7/2009 9:22:58 AM
ASRAAM as a program is a complete failure. The USAF and Germany both rejected the missile as unable to meet their requirements, it's an IR missile with awful off-boresight capabilties and pointless extra range.
 
Given that it achieved a kill firing at a target behind the wing-line of the plane surely shows that the above isn't correct, it's actually been one several examples of native British engineering producing a world-class missile product, its off-boresight and lock-after-launch capabilities are designed to fully exploit the HMD of the EF.
 
As to pointless extra range, I've never heard any pilot refer to "extra range" as pointless in any context whatsoever.
 
The fact remains that pretty every AAM and SAM uses the same basic strategy to close on their target in the end game (how they get there is different for each, depending on whether they have an INS, plane-missile data link...).
 
even if that statement was correct (which it isn't) when a missiles seeker activates and its target is several km away outside its FOV or RANGE you would surely conceed that having a working update system is essential.
 
 
 
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