...

 

Most capable, most advanced.... sorry but accusing someone for fanboyism and bringing up something like that does you no favour! Unless you can come up with concrete details it's much speculation, but no given fact. Let alone that the F-35 is years away from entering service and fielding the capabilities proposed today. 

 

And when it comes to canted twin tails Wingman is correct. They were introduced for aerodynamic reasons on airframes like the YF-17 and others and could be found on proposals from Dassault, BAe and MBB at its time, but have been rejected for the reasons Wingman pointed out.

"Most capable, most advanced.... sorry but accusing someone for fanboyism and bringing up something like that does you no favour! Unless you can come up with concrete details it's much speculation, but no given fact. Let alone that the F-35 is years away from entering service and fielding the capabilities proposed today. "

 

Honestly now... 

 

The F-35 is a completely new generation jet with a completely new generation of avionics.  There are ample threads discussing every aspect of the F-35 and I am not going to go point by point down the list trying to satisfy a fanboy who I know will refuse to be satisfied by anything without a French flag on it.  

 

If you have some specific question the F-35 shoot.

 

"And when it comes to canted twin tails Wingman is correct. They were introduced for aerodynamic reasons on airframes like the YF-17 and others and could be found on proposals from Dassault, BAe and MBB at its time, but have been rejected for the reasons Wingman pointed out."

 

What he is doing is called a "strawman argument."

 

That is where you try to argue against something your opponent never asserted. 

  

Go back and reread what I wrote and see if at any point I discussed the origin of the tail on the F-18.  You will find that I did not.

 

What I said, quite clearly I think, is that no aircraft that has received significant RCS reduction work will have a vertical tail. 

 

I never said that any aircraft without a vertical tail is stealthy, nor did I say that because the F-18 lacked a vertical tail it was stealthy, get it?

 

 

It would be like if I said "No fighters have 8 engines," and someone turned around and said "Well the A380 doesn't have 8 engines and it isn't a fighter!!"

 

 

This is really not that difficult a distinction. 

 

 

Finally, there is no fatigue related issue related to canted tails that isn't easily solved through competent engineering.  The long and successful service of the F-18, and the continued use of that configuration by the US is proof of that fact.

 

 

 

Spectra performed well , but are you sure that you 're not speaking about the Carbone system ? 

The proposed offensive jamming pod is working as a prototype but the DGA did not buy it .

 

""INCREASED ES/EA MISSION CAPABILITY THROUGH ADVANCED JAMMING FUNCTIONS
? Pod or internally mounted, for fighter aircraft, UAV, J-UCAV or mission aircraft with network centric warfare (NCW) capabilities
? Very high power main/side/scattered lobe jamming
? Unsigned raid DOA, up to RF horizon action possible
? Smart techniques / coherent waveforms / covert jamming

LOL, you really really don't want to bring the F-35 into this.  The F-35 is the plane you fanboys WISH the Rafale was. 

 

It has the world's most capable ECM suite, it has the world's most capable IRST, it has DAS, it has the world's most capable sensor fusion and man-machine interface, it has the world's most capable helmet mounted sight/display,  it has the world's most capable AESA radar, it is STEALTH, and it has numerous first-tier countries lining up to buy it.  To top it all off, the F-35 gives up nothing in speed or maneuverability to 4th generation aircraft when carrying a useful load, not that it will need to do anything so plebeian as actually point its nose at something it wants to kill

 

FOUR control surfaces as opposed to TWO.

 

The trouble with bongleurs who run off at the mouth is that they forget radio is LIGHT. Its the wing cant and the reflector edge and angle that causes the radio reflection characteristic. A vertical tail like the Rafale sports with its defective finish is the PERFECT radar reflector target

Herald , you "rivet" stuff doesn 't hold water . Your picture :

 

 

Herald , you and I both know the RCS formula and what counts or not . Do you really thing that a 0.000001 RCS rivet is going to matter ?

Then , look where the "sawtooth" are , in front of them or just behind . I know that it doesn 't matter as the rivets are invisible to radar but just to show you what kind of BS you can try but still loose the discussion .

The "sawtooth" are RAM material , of course .

 

Regarding the DAS , it is indeed the best system around of its kind .

 

Cheers .

 

Herald , if some rivets are worrying you , just don 't . They are under the RAM coating :

 

 

 

Cheers .

 

You know bull when you read it, Steve.

 

In simple English as applied to LIGHT, (this includes radio waves): interferometry is the means whereby  the receiver uses  a pair of comparators separated by a known baseline distance. The receiver points at a single emitting light source at an unknown distance away. The receiver takes the common signal from the target and that signal is split and the split signal is routed through the timed interval setup (the known baseline distance separation of the comaprators). The comparators recombine the signal after thus "maze run" and straight run, and a phase interference pattern is analyzed.That will give you a rough idea of how fast the object moves over time as the phase pattern should time change with aspect presentation and distance (if your clocks are accurate enough) as the sugnal moves across the sky. Since we can build two of these rigs with another kinown baseline and use bearing triangulation to get a very rough range we can very roughly estimate that range. Hence two values, speed and range, give us a very rough track. The problem is that IR crest trough wavelength is too imprecise to generate a firing solution over usable time. The phase smear is just too broad for a good crest count in the few seconds that you have and the range; a "blob" almost a sky second of arc across and with a time distance variant of signal that could be up to 1/50th of a light second makes close range gating useless. 1/50th of a light second bu the way is 5994 kilometers. See the problem?  

 

Herald

 

       

Very good Herald , thank you :-)

 

Cheers .

You explained the details Herald but what I said (and what you said) is correct , we 're on the same track .

 

Cheers .

Herald :

I try to educate the ignorant when I find them. The stupid are beyond my ability to teach of course. The class set the taught wind up in depends on the choice the taught make.

 

Too often they make the wrong choice. They refuse to learn. 

 

By the way the rivet dimples (plainly seen) are radar returns; a coat of "plastic" doesn't help.

 

Herald

 

 

Herald

 

 

 

Herald

 

"I am not a physicist but interferometry is a way (a technique) to analyse (diagnostic) radio (or optical) waves patterns , this allows the origine of the radio (or optical) signal to beknown . Regarding the electronic warfare suites and for the technique to work , extremely sensitive sensors are needed as well as optical and electronical devices and also a good computing power . Better the suite is , better the precision will be ."

 

LMAO!!!

 

 

No we are not. What you said was gibberish that meant nothing. What I described was process, poster, and WHY that process is actually useless to us for combat range determination.

Herald

"Herald , if some rivets are worrying you , just don 't . They are under the RAM coating :"

 

lol

 

That is paint bluewings... big difference. 

 

The "RAM coating" is what is making the "saw toothed" appearance.  You can see that it is just glued on to the edge of the wing. (you can see the rivets below clearly)

 

 

Have any of you actually been near a stealth aircraft?  Let me give you a hint, you won't see a ton of exposed rivets, gaps between panels and other irregularities.  These are all absolute no-nos, and more evidence that the Rafale's RCS reduction is extremely minimal.