Regarding the Rafale F3 in A2A , Brazil knows the futur capabilities seen there :

 

 

4 Meteors , 2 EM Micas , 2 IR Micas and extended range .

2 more Micas can be used if the double pods are used as well are conformal fuel tanks for even longer range . They only have to pay for it .

Who in South-America can or could deal with such a platform ?

Chavez with his old Russian stuff ?

 

Cheers .

 

 

 

As the idiot furiously beats one out over his life's passion he comes up with gems like this:

 

"If it 's true , this in itself (without talking about active cancellation) is giving the Rafale similar options in BVR than the F-22 : you can 't shoot what you can 't lock . " Based on an unattributed quote that he doubtless made up.

 

Once a thread gets to this stage it deserves to be put out of its misery.

There's an RF engineer for ya, all you have to worry about is the wiring between the T/R block and the control block.  What are you gonna use RG6?  Sheesh.  My RF is quite limited, but it is not the same thing as swapping between low / high impedance with a few sigcon lines thrown in for good measure.  Beam forming alone (at the high level) is handled differently. 

 

BW, no insult intended, but radio is challenging and never ever a simple fix or change over.  For an idea of the complexity of it, think of handling H20 at high pressure and in this case high volume in a compact form where 'no leakage' is tolerable.  Oh yeah, and the 'color' is dyed and cannot be mixed.  Then of course multiply your worst case estimate by...pi.*

 

*Any consultant 'knows' the true development cost is Y*pi, unless your in sales

Reactive , you 're a dollar short (or two) .

My knowledge on Rafale is better than yours and I know what I am talking about .

If you don 't know what the Rafale ' s ECM suite can do , I can 't blame you . I know more than you do but I am like you , I still wandering .

I understand that passive stealth is now an old tech but it is visible on pictures and can 't be denied . On the other hand , what electronics can do is always within the "fog of War" . I also understand that it might pissed of people to hear that a ECM suite can almost do as good as a passive stealth shape in hiding the aircraft . This is not my fault , I am not even an engineer . A radar is an electronic device and pretty much every FCS relies on it for targetting (as well as Optronics and IR means) , so an electronic device can always be jammed or decoyed with the right means .

I say that the French ECMs are at least a generation ahead of everybody else (you want it or not) and it helps the aircraft to win most engagements in A2A as well as hiding from most A2G close range radars .

 

It seems that many foreign Nations who tried the stuff we gave them agree with me .

The Rafale is not stealthy but it can fool its opponents , that 's all .

 

Neiyold , I am not a RF engineer so I can 't speak like you do , sorry .

 

Cheers .

Ah... once again we have a truck driver writing us his fantasies about what he wishes his favorite(ie French) fighter were capable of.

 

Does it strike you as odd bluewings that you, a truckdriver with no relevant experience, thinks he is qualified to talk about advanced radars and weapons systems?

 

Have you noticed that not even the other French posters take you seriously with the exception of one other French troll?

 

I mean you make things up like kill ratios for your favorite fighter versus American made fighters... but you can't even keep the facts straight on your fighter, know next to nothing about US fighters, and know nothing at all about aerial combat. 

 

I find it funny that your pride is driving you to make a pathetic fool of yourself lying on a message board all day because you think that is somehow preferable to letting facts stand. 

 

Do you follow football?  Do you insist that your favorite (undoubtedly French) club would beat any other club... not by 10-1, as you claim not to be a troll, but by 3-4 to 1 ... lol

 

 

 

Rufus the Rafale was redesigned on electronic components from F1 to deal on components obsolescence.

I'm not a fan boy (and not BW)

rest of your message is simply worthless

 

Concerning Rafale contract on Brasil I'm not optimistic at all since USA can transfer similar technologies including for nuclear subs for less price, since with FMS Pentagon can give tech for free while in France, our constructor are proprietor of the tech since unless USA, they pay by themselves R&D for a part and want to amortize that.

 

 

 

< link >

 

Boeing's offering one of its platforms as bases for KC-390 to counter French tech transfer and collaboration offer on KC-390.

We will see if Boeing comes up with a nuclear submarine from somewhere.

BW, all I can say about your politics is that you're a typical European: you seem to think that all Americans are gun-toting lunatics who would prefer to blow the hell out of opponents rather than talk to them.  I think that's fair enough, given that most Americans' opinions of the French are that they can't fight their way out of a paper bag, depend solely on the US to bail them out of trouble, and would sell their own mothers if it meant just the hint of peace.  (Memories of Munich die hard.)  I don't think your opinion of Americans is any more true than the stereotype of the French.  Hell, Sarkozy's been more hawkish on Iran than either Bush or Obama, and good for him!

 

I'm staying out of the ECM debate, because I don't pretend to know a lot about it.  I do ask this, though: if Spectra uses active ECM, wouldn't that make it vulnerable to home-on-jam radars and missiles?

 

And I beg to differ: I recall quite clearly posts you made, BW, where you claimed the Rafale was equal to the F-22, because of its use of Spectra. 

IOC in 2013 for the laser guided AASM? Wow that equals: still in development doesn't it?

 

I've explained before why I refer to Rafale as Ra "fail". If you are unable to understand this comment still, then I'd be looking in the mirror before insulting other's "mental faculties"... I've also been known to refer to the Gripen as the "Griping" because it's fanboys are just like you. They bleat and whinge when someone dares posit the (heretical) idea that perhaps their fighter of choice is nothing outstanding in comparison to other modern fighters and is in fact just one of quite a number of good modern fighters. That France has developed a good (not great) modern fighter is an achievement you should be proud of. Making it into something it quite clearly isn't shows that you are just a fanboy and one who denies reality.

 

As for Damocles, let us return to my original statement: Has it achieved IOC with it's primary user: French Air Force?

 

No. No wonder you are shouting "vive la France" to the heavens. The only 4.5 Gen fighter without an integrated, operational targeting pod. Bravo, mon ami!

 

Thales is "probably" behind Raytheon in AESA development is it? How condescendingly generous of you.

 

Raytheon has developed, delivered and reached Full Operational Capabiliy with APG-63 (V1, V2 and V3 AESA radar systems), APG-79 AESA radar systems and is currently developing APG-82v1 for the F-15E upgrade program and the RACR Raytheon Advanced Combat Radar which will be a contender (along with Northrop Grumman SABR AESA radar) for F-16 radar upgrades.

 

Thales has not yet delivered one single operational fighter sized AESA radar and Raytheon alone currently has 2x completely differed fighter sized AESA radars in development. 

 

Not a big gap? Each American AESA fighter radar developer is simultaneously developing multiple new AESA radar systems whilst Thales is trying to develop one. (Northrop Grumman - APG-81, SABR and on-going development of APG-80 and APG-77. Raytheon is developing APG-82 and RACR whilst providing on-going development of APG-63v3 and APG-79 radars).

 

Your idea of a gap and mine are somewhat different quite obviously. One manufacturer has delivered several hundred operational AESA fighter radars, which are now in-service and fully operationally AND has 2x new ones under development. The other has it's very first AESA fighter radar under development. The "gap" is not only enormous, it's actually increasing.