Rafale Proves Itself

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
Return to Topic Page

Subject: Rafale Proves Itself
SYSOP 8/7/2011 7:59:23 AM

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 NEXT

45-Shooter 12/19/2011 9:56:35 PM

@45 sh

Of course you can do that on a flight simulator, like claiming you flew on FRONT seat (aka main pilot)...

The FRONT seat is for students and the back seat for instructors! I am amazed that you did not know that?

Claims are a thing, competence another, when you mix a written ten ton class on a site with a ten ton assumption etc, how would i trust you?

I just posted a link to Dasault's home page for the Rafale and they said it was a TEN TONNE CLASS PLANE! That means it Masses MORE than ten Metric tonnes! The convention, it's like drag cars, if the car runs 11.99 seconds it's an eleven second car and 12.01 is a 12 second car like mine @ 12.10/12.25 seconds in the quarter mile! Pictures if you want. Showing the license plate, to prove ownership. Can you do that? just one more item in a long chain of things that you are completely ignorant about and wrote words on page to prove it!

Btw why do you ask ppl to claim credencies you dont? But I have in the past which none who checked have challenged!

Please stop answering to straight questions you were given by side stepping about your "expertise" and your supposed to be ability as a fighting pilot.

I never ever claimed to be a fighter pilot! Ever, just that I had time in the Goodyear Aerospace Flight sim dome.

We poor ignorant forumers rely on companies/air forces assumptions, none of ANY you gave.

Like those from the Dasault web page for the Rafale that I posted? What was wrong with those, didn't you like them? Boo HooHoo!

Quote Reply

BWisBack 12/19/2011 10:02:32 PM

Shooter , you are a sad clown .

I explain why , you said :

""If the number used was the American standard, then all the planes with fixed inlets, Rafale, F-16 and EF, that did so well at the Euro numbers would fall about 50% behind the F-15 and F/A-18E/F! ""

Are you out of your mind ??? First , the Typhoon does NOT have fixed inlets . Secondly , the SH is a snail at any speed/altitude . Thirdly , the numbers provided are correct . I admit that the Eagle has good acceleration and climb rate but it can 't match the Typhoon . The bloody thing climbs like a home sick angel and the Rafale is not far behind .

Then , you know nothing about the Rafale 's intakes . These fixed inlets can take the fighter to Mach 2 and are the best fixed inlets ever designed . I could post SNECMA's numbers but to be honest , you don 't deserve them .

You also said :

""The first tenth of a Mach number between 0.8 and 0.9 is the crunch when variable inlets can make a huge difference in the time it takes the installed engine to spool up! ""

Maybe with US engines but wrong anyway . Variable inlets only start to work over Mach 1.2/1.4 .

Even worse , you said :

""The single most telling of those numbers is that the F-15C can go from M-0.8 to M-2.5 with eight missiles and the CL tank in less time than any of the Euro canards can go from .9 to mach 1.8 Rafale or M2.0 in the Typhoon CLEAN!!! ""

Wrong again . And stop pulling numbers out of nowhere . I already told you to post credible sources or to shut up . Show me YOUR numbers and I 'll show you mine . You can even use wiki if you like ...

All in all , you keep posting BS . What the Mods are doing ?

Cheers .

Quote Reply

BWisBack 12/19/2011 10:05:04 PM

Now , the sad clown is talking about his car ...

Pathetic ...

Cheers .

Quote Reply

45-Shooter 12/19/2011 10:19:53 PM

@ halloweene : No probs , I know what you mean .

@Shooter : you wrote :

""This is BS! The Delta wing has a very small Aspect Ratio and therefore a very high Parasitic Drag! This is exacerbated by the Canards at low angles of attack, ( Cruise and Top Speed!) and helped at high AoAs! ( ACM!) Note that just because the canards help at high AoAs, do not think they make the Delta's lower AR equal to the higher AR Plane! ""

Wrong . It seems that Dassault engineers are better than you Shooter but it shouldn 't come as a surprise to anybody .

Dasault make the choice that they would trade total lift for induced drag when they went to canards! Everything I have stated was pulled from French or Janes pubs! The Canard trades induced drag from low aspect ratio for more lift at high AoAs! That is a fact of life. It is not open to discussion. Conventional planes trade down force on the horizontal stab for increased performance at low AoAs. I.e. cruise, acceleration and top speed.

I could care less what sales people say. They all have an ax to grind. But on the other hand American planes have out sold all others by some huge number to what? Before any National Air Force signs off on a new plane from some foreign supplier, they have flown it, looked at the numbers, their own ACT radar tracks to verify those numbers and talked to other nations that are currently flying that plane.

So far no Nation but France has bought Rafale. Typhoon has been bought by Saudi and is short listed by others. That means that it was better than Rafale! In the last two decades how many F-16s have been bought? I mean just since the Rafale's first service flight and firm performance number offers? How many? RIGHT!

Also :

""No one wants to take a flier on a plane with a weak engine that might have to be replaced TEN to TWENTY times before the first OVERHAUL on an American Engine! ""

No, just the numbers posted by you and the other Frog-fan-boy! 600 Hours claimed in your post, but not proven, Vs 6000 between depot inspections Proven by all foreign customers!

Quote Reply

45-Shooter From the public domane! 12/19/2011 10:49:44 PM

Shooter , you are a sad clown .

I explain why , you said :

""If the number used was the American standard, then all the planes with fixed inlets, Rafale, F-16 and EF, that did so well at the Euro numbers would fall about 50% behind the F-15 and F/A-18E/F! ""

Are you out of your mind ??? First , the Typhoon does NOT have fixed inlets . Yes it does! The drooping lip is only used at high AoAs! Other than that they ARE fixed! Secondly , the SH is a snail at any speed/altitude . Thirdly , the numbers provided are correct . I admit that the Eagle has good acceleration and climb rate but it can 't match the Typhoon. The bloody thing climbs like a home sick angel and the Rafale is not far behind. SEE> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackay_Trophy" target="_blank">link 1974! Has either plane you say is so hot posted numbers that good? NO, not even close!

Then , you know nothing about the Rafale 's intakes . These fixed inlets can take the fighter to Mach 2 Acording to Dasault, the Rafale is limited to Mach 1.8! SEE> http://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/defense/rafale/omnirole-by-design.html?L=1 and" target="_blank">link are the best fixed inlets ever designed . You are delusional! I could post SNECMA's numbers but to be honest , you don 't deserve them . They are trying to sell the things! How about posting some record or other that the Rafale or Typhoon has set with international witnesses?

Even worse , you said :

Wrong again . If I'm wrong, post the numbers that prove it! Remember the F-15 has set international records that none of the rest even tried to beat! Also note that the F-15 has an internationally accepted top speed of Mach 2.5 with weapons! It is also the only plane to have shoot down Mig-25s at speed and altitude! Rafale and Typhoon have not even tried to down a drone replicant! Right!

See my replies in red above!

Quote Reply

halloweene 12/20/2011 6:36:03 AM

Of course you can do that on a flight simulator, like claiming you flew on FRONT seat (aka main pilot)...

The FRONT seat is for students and the back seat for instructors! I am amazed that you did not know that?

ROFL Only on training jets, or were F14 as an example pilots sat on rear seat

Quote Reply

heraldabc Did that already. 12/20/2011 8:20:05 AM

Read and quoted same already. It was part of MY evidence that YOU don't know what the Chuckles did. In other words, "Don't read back to me what I already cited." Its BAD form and shows a lack of clear attention to the line ol argument. Besides sorties flown versus sorties effective is NOT the same thing.

""The War in Libya has not ended yet, but seven months after the beginning of the conflict the French Ministry of defense is summarizing the ammunition it spent through the conflict. According to the French Ministry of defense, from 19 March to 30 September 2011, the Air Force and Navy (the Charles de Gaulle carrier air group and maritime patrols) spent 20,000 operational flight hours on roughly 4,500 missions. THese missions represent 25% of the total operational missions carried out y the coalition forces and 35% of the offensive missions over Libya, hitting 750 military targets. French combat helicopters performed the majority (90%) of coalition helicopter combat missions over Libya, claiming 550 targets destroyed. According to Mr. Gérard Longuet, Secretary of Defense and Veterans Affairs, 950 guided guided bomb were dropped by French Air Force and Navy Rafale and Mirage 2000s, these included an unspecified number of laser guided bombs and 240 air-launched missiles – including 15 SCALP cruise missiles and 225 GPS guided Hammers (AASM); in addition, French helicopters have launched 431 HOT missiles. The French Navy vessels have also fired 3,000 rounds from 100mm and 76 mm guns. Other ordnance used included an unspecified number of rockets fired by helicopters and naval vessels. ""

From :

h*tp://defense-update.com/20111012_france-spent-over-1000-bombs-and-missiles-in-the-7-month-libyan-campaign.html

I don 't give you the 2380 sorties yet , find the link . You can .

Cheers .

Quote Reply

heraldabc It is also up to you to prove. 12/20/2011 8:23:53 AM

2380 sorties from the Chuckles after I showed official sources that indicated ~ 1350 total was the truth. Its your problem as usual. NOT mine to prove your claim.

The rest of your noise is NOISE.

Quote Reply

heraldabc PARASITIC DRAG 12/20/2011 9:31:18 AM

Pure deltas have some advantages over a mixed control surface aircraft:

-parasitic drag is low.

-straight line acceleration from delayed onset of wingtip vortices is good.

-good instantaneous turn rates at subsonic speeds which is where most ACM takes place.

It comes with a HIGH COST.

-poor planform for effective sustained energy.

-very high induced drag. (drag generated by lift-greater wing area to barrel lift=greater induced drag in simple English [polar drag]. ) What that means is that a plane that has to turn tight at high G will bleed energy as induced drag art incredible rates such as a Rafale compared to a Fighting Falcon.

A Delta Dart can snap turn with eye blink speed, but as it turns, it will lose energy rapidly for the sustained turn. Its great for Sidewinder missiles and a close firing pass on a Bear, but lousy for dealing with a MIG 21 where the Phantom II actually has the decisive sustained turn edge with the Sparrow, Sidewinder combo..

So the more delta you are, the lousier a close in dogfighter you are in the hosizontal and the vertical.

Now what is the Rafale again? Oh yeah, a cranked delta with canards.

For more on this:

Learn 1....

Learn 2....

Learn 3....

The Rafale was designed as a bomb truck.

Quote Reply

BWisBack 12/20/2011 10:01:12 AM

Shooter :

""Dasault make the choice that they would trade total lift for induced drag when they went to canards! Everything I have stated was pulled from French or Janes pubs! The Canard trades induced drag from low aspect ratio for more lift at high AoAs! That is a fact of life. It is not open to discussion. Conventional planes trade down force on the horizontal stab for increased performance at low AoAs. I.e. cruise, acceleration and top speed. ""

Dassault has designed a very effective airframe at all regime for the simple reason that they had to since the aircraft must replace bombers AND interceptors (while being Carrier capable = low speed approach) .

Here is a paper from J.C Hironde from Dassault aviation :

h*tp://www.icas.org/ICAS%20Congress%20General%20Lectures/2010/ICAS-2010-0.6_Hironde%20paper.pdf

""Since the beginning, the specifications of the Rafale program have been very ambitious: alone, the new aircraft had to replace six different aircraft currently in operation in the French Army: Crusader and Super Etendard in the French Navy, Mirage 3 , Jaguar , Mirage F1 and Mirage IVP in the French Air forces.

It was mandatory to imagine a new configuration able to match both the navy specificities (low approach speed, catapult with low angle of attack, high vertical speed at deck landing) and the air specifications (agility, high Mach number flight, loading capacity, low level penetration and stealth level).""

That being said , wrt canards :

""The canard geometry (surface, profile and shape) and its location with respect to wing and air intakes were mitigated to optimize the interaction on wing’s apex (lift increase +30%) and to lower the interference with air intakes in supersonic.

For Air-to-Ground missions, the canard does not hide the down visibility of the pilot.""

Now , wrt the engines , air intakes and max speed :

""Air-to-Air missions (interception and dog fight) need both use of high angle of attack till maximum lift and high Mach number. Consequently, a thoroughly optimization of the air intakes has been undertaken to achieve the required behaviour for stationary and non stationary air flows, at high angle of attack and yaw, up to the limit of available maneuverability thanks to the delta canard configuration.

This air intake had also to operate up to a Mach number of 2 and match the stealth level required for the whole aircraft by the French authorities.
The optimization, based on intensive aerodynamic computations and wind tunnel tests, converged on a very new design: air
intakes protected at high angle of attack by a special shape of the front fuselage (like a boat stem) and the canard which interact on the air flow in front of the air intake. This stem is sufficient to protect also at high yaw angle and to guarantee an appropriate independence of both air intakes, in case of flame out of one engine.
This design, which features no movable devices (shock-cone, ramp) and no devices of boundary layer’s suction, is the quite unique Mach 2 air intake of this type in the world.""

I hope that these data are going to open your eyes a little bit Shooter . You see , I don 't pull numbers out of nowhere and when I am asked to provide data , I do .

In the meantime , it does bring some light about the Rafale which is always good in on SP .

Now , let me give you the OPERATIONAL rate of climb for the three fighters :

F-15 : 254 m/s

Rafale : 305 m/s

Typhoon : 315 m/s

When an aircraft try to brake a record , it is PREPARED for . Some if not all the avionics are gone , the onboard fuel is calculated to be exactly what the fighter needs to brake the record , etc ...

Cheers .

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 NEXT