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: 6*F-22 vs 6*Typhoon vs 6*Rafale in the UAE?!
giblets    11/16/2009 4:48:58 AM
According to both Flight Global, and Defence News, other than attending the Dubai airshow, the USAF, RAF, and FAF each sent 6 of their finest fighter aircraft to the desert Kingdom to take part in multinational exercises. Other than adding much fuel to the fire for forum members here! It raises many questions (such as why the USAF was unable to send 1 F-22 to Paris, and can now send 6 to the UAE, despite no drop in operational tempo). And will the F22 and Typhoon not be in the air at the same time again?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
MK       11/27/2009 7:39:08 PM
 Second, since these aggressors are simulating current (or possibly near-future) threat aircraft, they would (at least mostly) be simulating RWR equipment like SPO-15 and L-150, which haven't got a prayer of detecting an AESA radars and very possibly not other modern AI radars, either, although I admit I do not know their specific capabilities in this regard.  Thus, I wouldn't be surprised at all if they did not detect Rafale's radar, just as I would not be surprised if they did not detect the radars on Typhoons, F-15s, and F-16s--or at least not in all their various air-to-air modes of operation.  However, I am again not personally knowledgable in this, so I am not sure about it.
 
Such sensors are difficult to simulate in detail, as details are usually rare, particularly when it comes to EW equipment. But there are other problems, detection is just one thing gathering the details from a the "painting" radar something else. When the iranians used their Tomcats against the iraqi fighters its radar was so powerful that some RWRs were simply overloaded and that where people think EA is new for a radar :D (joking must be^^)
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       11/27/2009 9:06:41 PM

 Second, since these aggressors are simulating current (or possibly near-future) threat aircraft, they would (at least mostly) be simulating RWR equipment like SPO-15 and L-150, which haven't got a prayer of detecting an AESA radars and very possibly not other modern AI radars, either, although I admit I do not know their specific capabilities in this regard.  Thus, I wouldn't be surprised at all if they did not detect Rafale's radar, just as I would not be surprised if they did not detect the radars on Typhoons, F-15s, and F-16s--or at least not in all their various air-to-air modes of operation.  However, I am again not personally knowledgable in this, so I am not sure about it.

 

Such sensors are difficult to simulate in detail, as details are usually rare, particularly when it comes to EW equipment. But there are other problems, detection is just one thing gathering the details from a the "painting" radar something else. When the iranians used their Tomcats against the iraqi fighters its radar was so powerful that some RWRs were simply overloaded and that where people think EA is new for a radar :D (joking must be^^)



 
Well, there's always some new system we've yet to acquire, and I don't know how many (if any) L-150s we already have taken apart and put back together again while testing them against our radars, but you can surely count on us knowing every little thing about the good old SPO-15.  Foreign Materiel Acquisition/Foreign Materiel Exploitation is a beautiful thing!  :-)
 
 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/27/2009 9:39:50 PM

Well, there's always some new system we've yet to acquire, and I don't know how many (if any) L-150s we already have taken apart and put back together again while testing them against our radars, but you can surely count on us knowing every little thing about the good old SPO-15.  Foreign Materiel Acquisition/Foreign Materiel Exploitation is a beautiful thing!  :-)

Yes the SPO-15 is indeed well known, but the L-150 is likely to be a more unknown system as it is just fitted to few newer Flankers and Fulcrums, certainly not those used/purchased by western (and somewhat eastern) countries. But who knows. It isn't the very newest and fanciest piece of kit either and the russians moved ahead, like anyone did. The L-150 is more or less in the technology capability class of the AN/ALR-56M and other compareable RWRs from the 80s vintage.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    Both missiles trace their root trouble cause to ASTER.   11/28/2009 6:32:44 AM




Ask why the French Air Force uses infra red MICA, truck driver, and considers the radar homing version useless.



 Ask why Britain develops a replacement complement for ASTER.


 

Well covered in depth and technical detail. 





They use the MICA IR to replace the Magic II as their primary WVR missile and ensure redundancy among seekers for BVR missiles, not because the MICA EMs seeker is junk as you repeatedly allege without any proper evidence. The same unproven claims which are made with regards to the Meteor.



And you know this and you know WHY..
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    That was not what you said.   11/28/2009 6:40:08 AM

What is going on ? Of course it is virtual missiles !





We 're not going to shoot at each other for real during a DACT training !!?

Are some of you acting in bad faith or you simply didn 't think about what I was talking about ?

When I said (I quote) :



""The aggressors didn 't see them coming (the Micas)""

 

I was obviously talking about RWRs and MAWSs . The Rafale did get a lock with the RBE2 and then simulated the firing of an EM Mica , twice . From what I know , if the virtual "missile" is fired within the NEZ , DACT will call it a kill . If it is outside the NEZ , DACT will time the virtual "flight" of the virtual missile to the NEZ and then apply a good PoK if the targeted aircraft did not take evasive mesures .




Please , keep up gents . Thanks .

 

Cheers .



 

And not what you claimed. If a RWR was active and the Rafale painted so that the signal was RWR received, then it was "seen". 

Want to disagree with that? Be delighted, if you dare try.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    Warpig.   11/28/2009 6:46:23 AM
I point out that a RWR can warn about some fighter air intercept radars, provided that radar is in the threat library. Its only the LPI (chirpers) radars that are supposedly completely immune.
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/28/2009 8:46:15 AM

I point out that a RWR can warn about some fighter air intercept radars, provided that radar is in the threat library. Its only the LPI (chirpers) radars that are supposedly completely immune.

A threat radar don't need to be in the threat libary to be detected, but to be identified in the first place.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       11/30/2009 2:48:15 AM




I point out that a RWR can warn about some fighter air intercept radars, provided that radar is in the threat library. Its only the LPI (chirpers) radars that are supposedly completely immune.




A threat radar don't need to be in the threat libary to be detected, but to be identified in the first place.
Some Russian EW radars were/are designed to mimic natural radio noise when received. The KIND of discriminator to see the difference is such, that it needs a sig-int footprint identifier in the library in that case. The Russians are clever. 
 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/30/2009 2:07:23 PM
It is rumored that there was some DACT between the Rafales and the F-22 today from Al-Dhafra. No details are known however.
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       11/30/2009 4:31:55 PM
It is rumored that there was some DACT between the Rafales and the F-22 today from Al-Dhafra. No details are known however.
 
Any source on this?  Was it pilots trash talking or something credible?
 
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