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 Thread
Softwar    3/9/2009 9:47:25 AM
Started with hope that BW will limit his comments here instead of in every other Fighter thread. I'll start off with: 1 - no export sales 2 - no laser designator 3 - no AESA 4 - overpriced 4th gen fighter
 
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   NEXT
HERALD1357    Your kidding?   3/22/2009 12:08:07 PM

"Rafale's radar is circular with an array diameter of 550mm.  The F-16's nose is elliptical with max dimensions of 740 x 480 mm.  That works out to an area of of 0.238 m2 for the Rafale versus 0.279 m2 for the F-16."


 



Wrong . To star with Phaid , since I know that you 're not a wannabe and since I respect you and your knowledge , let me bring to you a nice pdf never posted on SP before , it is in french  :




h*tp://www.unilim.fr/theses/2008/sciences/2008limo4027/estagerie_fx.pdf

 

What does a dated paper that still talks about AMSAR have to do with anything?



 

I hope that you will enjoy the paper . 

Then , some pictures to show my case :


h*tp://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4678/demonstratorrbe2radar2t.jpg




h*tp://img8.imageshack.us/img8/4124/testingphaserafale2.jpg

 

Yes?  One is a picture of a demonstrator, the other is a picture of the radar being fitted into a Rafale.  Notice that in the second picture, the radar has not been fitted into the airplane yet.  Notice the size of the pointy end that the guy on the ground is maneuvering around.  It is not large.



 

The elliptical nose of the Viper can 't have a radar the size of the RBE2 , it is as simple as that .



 

You are completely right, for once: it is impossible to fit a 550mm diameter circle inside a 740x480mm ellipse.  However, the 740x480mm ellipse has a larger surface area.


 

Other bits and pieces:

 


The UAE are using Vipers Blk 60 (and not the USA , only Blk 52s) but they still want to buy the Rafale to be their main Interceptor , how do you explain that ? The fact is that during evaluations , our Rafales smacked the Blk 60s and the UAE learned the difference .

 

Wrong. There were no competitive evaluations between the Block 60 and the Rafale.  The UAE wants the Rafale for one reason: the ability to carry Meteors.  It doesn't offer anything else they do not already have, which is why they have specified that the only way they will buy it is with Meteor capability (and the AESA required to support it fully, and the uprated engines required to support AESA).


 




 You that the Rafale can 't exploit the range , huh ??? Furthermore , Rafale RCS and ECMs give the Fighter a much better PK than any of the Teen Fighters (avoid the mistake to go against the facts) .

 ...

Over the Med sea with nowhere to hide , you should say that the best and purest Interceptor would win but it was not the case , it seems that the Rafale/Typhoon encounter was a draw . On the other hand , during the South-Korean evaluation , the Typhoon had the upper hand on Rafale with a suppositly 4-2 score . We know of a 3rd encounter but the outcome has not been published or even talked of . Again , I repeat that France has never used the active capabilities of SPECTRA yet .

 

Here, some light reading:

 



 
Quote    Reply

earlm    What's so funny Herald?   3/22/2009 1:01:05 PM
Anyone with some technical knowledge could make the case that the F-16 is more cost effective than Rafale.  You can even make the case that with AMRAAM vs MICA the F-16 is overall better than Rafale.
 
 
Meanwhile BW searches google for more off topic tangential irrelevant garbage to post in response.
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Whats so funny Herald?   3/22/2009 2:13:52 PM

Anyone with some technical knowledge could make the case that the F-16 is more cost effective than Rafale.  You can even make the case that with AMRAAM vs MICA the F-16 is overall better than Rafale.

 

 

Meanwhile BW searches google for more off topic tangential irrelevant garbage to post in response.



Is SPECTRA's failure against the APG-68(V)9.
 
That was hilarious!
 
Herald

 
 
Quote    Reply

earlm       3/22/2009 2:42:16 PM
Unless both are in wartime modes it's almost irrelevant.  But you do have a statement that SPECTRA has never been used in active mode, then you have an article in Greek that says it has and it failed.  When we will we establish the facts:
 
1.  Totally overpriced
2.  Good A2G capability with some holes
3.  Only capable in A2A against good opposition because of very good pilots
4.  Will struggle in A2A in the future unless it gets AESA and Meteor
 
Are these facts so hard to comprehend?  What's the issue here?
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    Herald is a troll   3/22/2009 3:20:09 PM


Well actually V^2.......http://www.strategypage.com/Images/emwink.gif" alt="" align="absmiddle" border="0" />

 

As for you, Darth, I see that is your physics example? :rotflmaoayid.

  


 


http://www.youtube.com/v/zMlnC3zvhKs&hl=en&fs=1">


http://www.youtube.com/v/zMlnC3zvhKs&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344">

 

There is no more than 1.7 gees positive load and no more than 1.5 gees negative load in that film clip. I can even tell you the positive and negative acceleration loads and when they occur.

 

Can you? 


 

I can also tell you that you will NOT be able to hit a 1/2 inch square on a touchscreen without your finger skittering off the hot spot under those ridiculously small acceleration loads.


 

Arrogance can only work for you; if you can back it up, junior.


 

Herald


 




WERE YOU BORN THIS STUPID HERALD?

CAN YOU READ?

Obviously you can't do the second question because if you could, you would have noticed when I said that the Touch Screens are for BATTLE MANAGEMENT and situations where the aircraft is not in the process of violent maneuver. ARE YOU DENYING I SAID THAT? IF NOT, why are you posting this stupid strawman nonsense?  It's because you have no idea what BATTLE MANAGEMENT is so when I mentioned it, you tried to hide your ignorance with a silly little strawman physics example and your usual hateful vitriolic responses. Herald, what you are going to learn, and I'm not mentioning names out of respect, but when you know something. You don't need to get arrogant and insulting. Every once and a while maybe. But this is your MO and it is to hide ignorance. The funny thing is HErald it's OK not to know something. Just ask me next time instead of posting a stupid post header like BUTT OUT. Oh let me guess, "I don't take advice from Pousers" or "I'll take you behind the woodshed" or "You are incompetent" blah blah blah. lol so freakin stupid you are. Thanks for making the already obvious even more so. Just for a recap. One you can't insult your way out of. IF YOU ACTUALLY UNDERSTOOD WHAT I SAID TO YOU...


"I don't need to do that Herald. Again, you are letting your ego get the better part of your judgement. I'm going to keep this objective and not personal and insulting so that maybe we can learn something and remain cordial. Almost every Humvee, Tank, Brandley ect has whats called Blue Force Tracker mounted inside. A lot of our allies have it as do a lot of our ATTACK HELOS. The interface is touch sensitive. It isn't just two dimentional either. The vehicles sit on springs and shocks which move in the vertical plane very violently over terrain and when doing offensive/defensive driving and it goes without saying that the helos arent 2D limited either. The application is battle management focused. There is no reason a fighter can't benefit from this as well. The turning fight and hard manuvering is only PART of the flight profile and then you have other controls on the stick for the basic immediately needed functions. We aren't the only ones either. Look at Helic3om as well." 
 

 
Now stop trolling and pretending to know everything when you don't troll.


 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    poor panel fit   3/22/2009 3:38:12 PM
another reminder:

from "The Radar Game, Understanding Stealth Aircraft and Survivability" 
 
Traveling waves create challenges on the shop floor and in future maintenance, too. As one Lockheed F-117 engineer put it, "we couldn't allow even the tiniest imperfection in the fit of the landing gear door, for example, that could triple the airplane's RCS if it wasn't precisely flush with the body. Any protrusions, such as small fairings, grills, domes, and wingtips, can project radar waves back to the sender. Even rivets and fasteners can act as radar reflectors."
 
Cross reference that hilighted line with commentary in "Bandits over Bagdhad" of how the RCS profile was raised when the retractable antennas did not seat fully (and it was discovered that it was akin to being the same profile as a "proud" rivet.)

 
  
 
Quote    Reply

gevaudan    phaid's message   3/22/2009 3:49:08 PM

phaid="The Block 52s were brand new and not fully equipped -- apparently they didn't yet have their RWRs installed. Nonetheless, they did rather well against the Rafales."

Against Rafale F-1 according to your greek document... Rafale F-1 was a substandard for the French Navy : radar rbe-2 and spectra at F-1 standard, no link-16, etc... very immature plateform TOO like the RWR-less f-16 block 52 at time of the exercise (your bias is impressive to be honest). 

The Rafale that France wants to export to Greece and to other countries is a Rafale @F-3 standard (at least) equipped with an AESA. A very different plane, the shell is the same but the inside is very different : calculators, softwares and systems from the latest batch.

Moreover, if some people think that French Air Force or French Navy are going to use their EW equipments at "full power" during friendly exercises, they are mistaken.

 

 

phaid="uprated engines required to support AESA"

wrong, the Rafale doesn't need uprated engines to operate an AESA. The Rafale demonstrated the rbe 2 aesa in switzerland in 2008 with its current m-88 engines.

 

 

earlm="4. Will struggle in A2A in the future unless it gets AESA and Meteor"

I think the same thing and i don't think anybody would dare say the contrary. This is why the rafale was designed from the outset to receive an active antenna and this is why European countries (including France) are working on the long range Meteor missile.

I also think that AESA antenna and Meteor missile are needed for export success, I don't think anybody in France or elsewhere will be surprise by this. Each time time the Rafale was offered for export, it was with an AESA antenna.

 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       3/22/2009 4:04:31 PM

 

Moreover, if some people think that French Air Force or French Navy are going to use their EW equipments at "full power" during friendly exercises, they are mistaken.

that should be self evident - but it doesn't seem to be understood that it also applies to the shoe on the other foot.  a classic example being when a swag of UK teenagers questioned how good LO was at Farnborough because a Raper Mk2 SAM locked and followed an F-117 when it did a low level fly by. (all 3 antennas were up, so blind freddy running a ground based radar would have seen it)

does anyone seriously think that all the friendlies get total view of the data in Red Flag and Blue Flag?  No one else has anything remotely close to approaching the tech foundation and infrastructure of both of these events.  There's some food for thought for the wise if they pause long enough.

 
 
Quote    Reply

earlm    Is it just me...   3/22/2009 4:08:00 PM
...or does anyone else find it strange that when a thread starts to create a place for BW's BS that mysterious new posters with French names start cropping up?
 
Quote    Reply

gevaudan       3/22/2009 4:10:05 PM

1 - no export sales -----------maybe soon


2 - no laser designator ----------- according to the schedule it should have been done in early 2009, so the damocles pod may be be integrated right now


3 - no AESA ----------- incoming, http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3800907


4 - overpriced 4th gen fighter --------- cheaper than F-22, F-35, Eurofighter, it will serve France perfectly (from military, political and economical point of views) and with its abilities, it could satisfy the requirements of a lot of countries.

 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics