I don 't know where to start . I 've just read so many outright lies and so much incomprehension (ignorance) that my post can only be incomplete .

 

First and foremost : readers should once for all admit the fact that the Rafale is indeed a "discrete" aircraft . Its RCS is smaller than other 4th or 4.5th Gen aircraft . Since 1999 , Dassault said that its RCS is 10 times smaller than the M2000 ' RCS . This is well documented and I am not going to dig out 10 years old posts and studies . The M2000 has the smallest RCS of the 4th Gen fighters (Fulcrum , SU , Viper , Eagle , F-18 , Mig-21 Bison , etc) and is quoted at around 1.5m Square (clean) . ie : The SU-27 and the Eagle F-15C 's RCSs are 18 times bigger (22-25m Square) .

 

So , Rafale 's RCS clean is around 0.1-0.15m Square . As a comparaison , the F-16 is given for 3m Square (clean) which is already twice higher than the M2000 and 25 to 30 times higher than Rafale . Do the maths by yourselves if you want to check my numbers .

We already talked hundred times of what that means about radar detection , even against the powerfull Russian radars , a Rafale loaded as an Interceptor (6 or 8 Micas plus a central fuel tank) will detect most threats first with its "myopic" (?) Pesa RBE2 . With the new AESA , the edge range is even greater .

 

Once again , nobody ever said that the Rafale 's RCS was in order of the US stealth aircraft but most posters tend to forget the "Physics" like RCS vs Radar . 

***********

gf about the refueling probe said wrongly and with an obvious bias that :

""it's irrelevant whether its coated or not""

 

I proved that the Rafale 's refueling probe was RAM coated (I 've been asked for) , so suddently it doesn 't make any difference ??? What kind of bias and BS is this ??? Listen to me gf , you are wrong , you know it but to admit it is beyond your Ego . Fair enough , I 've got nothing to do with you anymore , bye . 

***********

Rufus is having the same bias attitude and he 's trying very hard to forget what he already knows about the Rafale to post BS . Poor him ...

Rufus , I am correct about sensor fusion while you are unable to provide anything but bla-blas . Post some relevant stuff and argue your case for God sake ! Is it up to me to post how the sensor fusion systems of the various US aircraft work ?

I can but this is your job . Educate yourself for cry out loud then we 'll have a much better discussion . The problem you have like some other posters is that you deny what I say without even checking if I am right (or wrong) . You just call me a lyier , a troll , etc , but you don 't want to make the effort to walk your talk . Please , do so :-)

 

Also , not all 4.5 Gen fighters are equals , far from it in fact . You said :

 

 

 

 

 

 

I said :

 

Since very few of you know where and what are the different components of Rafale , a picture to help you :

 

 

(if you need the full size picture , just ask)

 

Rafale ' IR signature and air compressions seen from under :

 

 

 

Usefull to hide from SAM sites , as I said before .

 

Cheers . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I already posted this excellent video :

 

h*tp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXLLBHUhbWg&hl=fr

 

It is all in English . It is marketing purposes but it shows what 3 Rafales F3s can do with the right load .

The only missing hardware not operational yet it the HMS , the rest is spot on with the actual capabilities .

Notice the sensor fusion and the ECM suite warnings ...

 

Cheers .

Excuse me to insist but there is something very interesting in the video I posted .

 

Look closely at what happens at 5:30 and after . The ECM suite is getting something .

Unlike any other actual operational ECM suite who would scream "Hostile signal detected !" , Spectra is showing the Pilot what is the thread and its position : "There is a Mig-29 THERE" . At 5:35 , the video shows the Mig on the main battle display ALREADY within the Mica NOZ and the Pilot fire straight away an IR Mica and it is game over . What the Pilot did is simple : lase-shoot .

I remind people that the Rafale did have its radar off and only relied on Spectra+OSF .

To Rufus , which 4 or 4.5 operational Fighter can do that ? Response : Rafale only .

Any other Fighter is going to try to know where the radar signal is coming from then light-up its radar to get a lock and a firing solution ...

 

Cheers .

RWRs from 30 years ago could give identification of the threat emitter.  I think there is no question at all that the RWRs in the F-15/16/18 could ID the SLOT BACK and display an indication of a MiG-29, although I admit I do not know that for sure.  It's true that the relatively new thing would be the fusing of the emitter's identification, azimuth, and elevation from the RWR with the location data of the bandit derived from the radar.  I'd guess it's extremely likely the F-18E/F does this as well, although once again I admit I do not know that for sure.  What I didn't see was whatever information you used to conclude that the Rafale was not using its radar during that engagement.  The central display looked essentially the same to me throughout the different engagements depicted, and of course I don't know what all the indications on the various displays all mean, such that I did not see what indicators might have shown the reaction to the pop-up target was radar-off.  Also, I did not recognize the information that leads you to conclude the particular MICA launched was necessarily a MICA-IR, aside from that some of the missiles being carried by the aircraft were MICA-IR.

 

I've tried poiting this out oh so many times....  and he did his usual bit by appealing to bias.  Add weapons, fly with a fixed probe, add in sensor and tracking balls under the c0ckpit, add in a slab sided tail sitting vertically up there like "proud mary" and you have a walking talking transducer.

give up on trying to explain anything to him.  he repeatedly avoids or sidesteps real world issues in the quest to be the one man all singing all dancing Rafale fan club - to make it into something it is not.

Of course he could look at other western aircraft and see that its been close to 20 years since any new build platform had a ball sensor sitting smack bang out in the open 'twixt the nose and the canopy   - but the rafale obviously has worked out how to actively manage errant signal transmission on a non asymetrical body with bibs and bobs floating all over it.

apparently its going to fight in "discrete" mode without any externally carriaged weapons so as to not dirty it up.

go figure... :) 

apparently its going to fight in "discrete" mode without any externally carriaged weapons so as to not dirty it up.

 

You do sound like a petulant, retarded child, you know (hint: try spelling the name of the plane you bash correcly, it helps a lot when it comes to being credible). Anyone with the slightest clue about processors would know that hese don't "have" MIPS and that MIPS are the single most abused processing power measurements as they're very easy to manipulate.

 

For example, I could claim that since the Rafale MDPU boards use PPC740 processors running at 200MHz, each board has 600MIPS (the PPC740 can issue two integers and one floating point operation per second). This is of course ridiculous but is often done in marketing brochures like those on Thales or Raytheon sites.

 

But in the case of the Rafale, the people programming the software layer were kind (stupid?) enough to reveal the available processing power, i.e. 65 MIPS which would include both the redundant processing (each process has to be dispatched to two boards and run concurrently, just in case one board fails - can hardly have pilot displays go blank while the sytem reconfigures itself, can we?) and a virtualisation software layer that ensure some form of hardware independance to the application running on top (this is especially important for future upgrade, you may lose 1/3 of your processing power but make sure you can easily integrate faster processors later on with minimal software retunes).

 

As I don't have any public source regarding regarding the actual CIP power, I'll give the benefit of the doubt to the F-22 and assume that the 350 MIPS general processing power for each CIP (total per plane = 700) takes into account the same margins.

 

In the end, a comparison of both systems show that similar technology, delivered around the same period (2004 for the MDPU, 2006 for the CIP-2000 F-22 upgrade) have similar levels of performance (I won't venture a guess as to which one is the most powerful, I'd say that given that in the real world neither MDPU or CIP are fully populated they both have more than enough). 

 

That's hardly suprising, nor is the fact that the F-35 will be fitted with even more processing power.

 

 

 

I'd say the S-shaped intakes and semi-recessed AAM ejectors carrying the MICA conformal to the body would give the Rafale an edge even in frontal RCS vs the Super Hornet in a pure air-air configuration. Lateral RCS is probably worse though.

 

I am all for eliminating needless complexity... but a retractable refueling probe is just no big deal. 

 

For the DGA it is. They're the ones buying the plane, they're making the requirements (even if I agree this is not the smartest one - at least it's not as bad as refusing to equip HMS).

 

 

You did not understand what I said. You interpreted it to mean what you thought it said and you LIED.

gf about the refueling probe said wrongly and with an obvious bias that :

""it's irrelevant whether its coated or not""

I proved that the Rafale 's refueling probe was RAM coated (I 've been asked for) , so suddently it doesn 't make any difference ??? What kind of bias and BS is this ??? Listen to me gf , you are wrong , you know it but to admit it is beyond your Ego . Fair enough , I 've got nothing to do with you anymore , bye . 

The data link doesn't tell you which way the signal goes or what it is, AMATEUR. The rest of your nonsense is exactly that.

You  are also wrong on the SH shock ramps.

Just TWO of your many errors.

 

Third error is this:

 

Control laws. 

 

DIFFERENT terms and logics.

 

Someone more superficial in his understanding of the way things actually work BA I would fire immediately out of our shop. 

 

Have a nice day.

 

Herald

 

 

"I'd say the S-shaped intakes and semi-recessed AAM ejectors carrying the MICA conformal to the body would give the Rafale an edge even in frontal RCS vs the Super Hornet in a pure air-air configuration. Lateral RCS is probably worse though."

 

The Super Hornet has significantly more optimized intakes for reduced RCS, and a significantly higher degree of refinement across its airframe. 

 

Really the difference between the two is minimal.  The Super Hornet is about the best you can do with a 4th generation aircraft short of grafting on internal bays like on the F-15SE concept, but its RCS advantage isn't going to give it a significant advantage over the Rafale in most real world scenarios.