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
gevaudan       3/29/2009 2:33:10 PM

gf0012-aust="F-22 and JSF are real 5th generation. They're ground up 5th gen, not retrofits. The EF was designed for a different employment philosophy. If you want to make a generational comparison at a multi-strike level, then the closest carrier based modern 4.5 gen with bells and whistles equivalency on paper is the Shornet F or Growler if you want to compare two seaters."

 

F-22 and EF are overpriced and overspecialised. JSF is full of promises and the price is already on a steep slope. Indeed the Superhornet is Rafale direct competitor.

 

phaid="No. It is a perfectly correct comparison: two not quite mature and yet obviously equivalent airplanes."

The comparison is correct and theresult is known : an immature aircraft hardly beat another immature aircraft several years ago.
The bias comes from the way you presented the exercise:&S221;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.&S221;.
You took the time to explain that the F-16 involved in the exercise were immature but you didn't bother to do the same for the Rafale involved. Bias.
Often when people mention the F-16, they specify the Block : 40, 52, 60 (like you did), the same thing should be done for the Rafale as several
Standards (ie Block) exist : F1, F2, F3, but you didn't. More bias.
It is explicity mentionned in your greek document that the Rafale involved were @ F1 standard and you chose not to disclose it.



phaid="BIAS would have been to claim that "SPECTRA has never been used in an active mode" when it clearly has, as the article I posted illustrates."

I didn't claim that, I said that nobody will reveal the full extent of their EW systems unless they really need to.
So drawing EW conclusions from an exercise is useless. 
 


phaid="Mais bien sur. Every time Rafale loses, it is because the French were holding back! Just like in Singapore, just like in Korea, just like against the Super Hornets
in JTFX, just like the Rafale killed by a Jaguar in TLP, just like in every other exercise in which the Rafale shows that it is simply a competent but very pedestrian
little 4th generation fighter.
That line is so tired, you know? At some point you're just going to have to admit that your 4th gen fighter with its DJM suite with a nice marketing name is really just a slightly more au-point F-16, and be content."

-The F-22 was killed by a F-16, a F-18 and a growler. So what ? During the same TLP the two Rafale F2 involved achieved the second air-to-air ratio despite the fact they were tasked to air-to-ground missions only .

-Videos speak louder than words, no need for excuses this time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-4qDLUHvUM
http://www.dailymotion.com/user/Mermoz29/video/x6bnpq_rafale-vs-superhornet_sport



phaid=&S220;That Rafale in the Armasuisse trials was flying a prototype RBE2-AA whose performance has not been described publicly. But doesn't it seem odd that 1) the AdlA has not agreed to re-equip its current Rafale fleet with RBE2-AA (when it becomes available of course) and 2) the only Rafales offered for sale with AESA are those that would be equipped with uprated M88s? Tiens, tiens.&S221;


Your rumour doesn't sound plausible. You believe France would develop an AESA antenna that cannot fit into a regular Rafale ? The AESA was developped and tested on a mirage 2000 test bed and on a Rafale. The Rafale was designed from the outset to operate an AESA antenna.
No credible source has ever mentionned that uprated engine were required for the AESA. The Rafale demonstrated the AESA in Switzerland with it's current engines and completed the whole evaluation.
http://www.deltareflex.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=6332&sid=4f0920075d8819fda47c3908df4aaeb3


1) No it doesn't seem odd. Budgetary constraints are most likely the real reason. Unfortunately, not all Rafale are created equal (same thing for the F-16 & F-15 & Migs & Sus), the Rafale already built will probably keep a passive antenna, the newer ones will be equipped with an active antenna in factory. The FAF should order a new batch of Rafale (@F3) somewhere in the future, those planes should be ordered with the AESA.

2) Wrong again. The Rafale offered for export are regular Rafale + AESA, in some particular

 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       3/29/2009 4:13:41 PM

F-22 and EF are overpriced and overspecialised. JSF is full of promises and the price is already on a steep slope. Indeed the Superhornet is Rafale direct competitor.


 why are you even comparing a 4th generation aircraft that only france wants with 2 aircraft that already have more sales - and in the EF's case more customers?

The US didn't build the F-22 for export - or for France. so where is any of a relevant comparison?  DO you actually understand the design and employment philosophy of the F-22.

The EF is obviously good enough for a multitude of other European buyers (and middle eastern airforces) to think that it fits their doctrine.  So what if it doesn't fit Frances - who cares?

JSF.  Having attended the briefing for JSF (and I've also attended a few EF briefings) I'm not sure what bit you don't understand about JSF pricing.  In the briefing I attended on Feb 12th LM, USG PM and RAAF PM all explained it in detail.  If they managed to get aviation and defence sector journalists to understand it, then thats the only people in an open environment that count.

again.  F-22 is not for sale.  EF has close to 870 book orders and is already employed, JSF has 13 military backers and 9 countries already on the shortlist,  with 3 countries on 2nd row.

Rafale has none.  No exports, a reduced local build, and needs modern systems fitted before export customers have indicated any desire to purchase.

and lastly, because this seems to be a common fanboy obsession - warfighting is about systems - not platforms. 

Who cares what France has if no-one else wants it.  Are you courageously telling us that there are some 20+ airforce evaluation teams who decided that EF and JSF were better platforms but didn't know what they were looking at. 

There are more F-22's in service than Rafale
There are more EF's in service than Rafale
There are more Super Hornets in service than Rafale
There will be significantly more JSF's in service even if 8 countries drop out - and to date, all participants are re-affiriming their commitment to the JSF program.


Rafale is fine for France.  Nobody else cares whether its fine for their air forces as they're voting with their Air Forces and Navy Fleet Air Arms  where  they want to go.

Nobody cares except teenagers and fan clubbers.  get over it. 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       3/30/2009 3:23:07 PM
Pfff , oh God ... Please let me be understood , let them see that there is no fight as we all agree on the main points .
 
Missile range , we both agree but you want to talk No Escape Zone (NEZ) , ok  . But we all know that it is different from max range , again we 'll most probably agree with you loosing yourself into details ... Nevermind .
 
Warpig , your last bit is irrelevant regarding AirWarfare but is it nevertheless interesting . You said :
""As an analogy to how initial conditions need to be specified, imagine a company publishing something saying, "Our 120mm tank gun can penetrate 950mm of armor."  Why, "obviously" that must mean that any tank with exactly 950mm of armor will be destroyed by a hit from this gun, right?
 Obviously not right, except under a specific set of conditions, entailing things like type of ammo used, range to the target for some types of ammo, effect of reactive armor if any, angle of incidence at impact, armor thickness of the target at the location hit vs. that type of ammo (and possibly its velocity at impact), resistance/effectiveness of the armor versus that type of projectile at that angle of incidence, and definition of penetration (amount and probability of the penetration), and probably others.""
 
While I strongly disagree on some points , you 're correct in the general meaning . Unlike you , I will not go into details but accept your post as it is . There is no need for me to win on details while you win on the main point . Do you understand that I would like you to do the same with me Warpig ? 
When Raytheon says :  AIM-120C-5 range :  105 km (65 miles) and when MBDA says MICA range : 80km+ , they 're both talking about the same thing , they 're not talking about NEZ or best conditions . Anyway , I took the 2 missiles as an exemple , I did not want to compare them . We are discussing something else for now ...
 
Leroy :
""If you want long range resolution, you will have to accept a smaller field of view.  Once again, you are simply too ignorant to even make sense of the information people have provided you.""
 
You are correct in your first sentence but you should have understood by now that the maximum detection range of a good IRST is around 150km+ (small field of view) , what you do NOT understand is that the same IRST  can easily do Search &Track in wide field of view at 100km+ . Unless you do some research on the Net and acknowledge the fact , we can 't have a discussion because I 'm going to be right all along while you 're going to be wrong the all time , sorry .
 
""Yes, IRSTs can detect and track target autonomously.  They just can't do it effectively at the sorts of ranges you wish they could.""
 
As I said , do some research first .
 
""So saying OSF's IRST can detect fighters tells us what exactly?""
 
I just said so : 100km+ S&T , 150km+ T . That goes for the OSF F1 .
 
""All this is is marketing BS.""
 
If I start to say the same with the Official US sites , I will be banned . Why don 't you accept the Official French sites ???
 
""They (IRSTs) do NOT allow an aircraft to simply fly around with its radar off, "passively detecting" enemy threats and engaging them.""
 
Yes they do and in a very efficient way thank you . The OSF is very much capable to detect threats (Air and Ground) , pass on the info to SPECTRA to try to get better coordinates and put the firing solution on screen for the Pilot , thank you  .
 
""Posting irrelevant BS that does nothing to support your position?  Nowhere in what you posted is
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       3/30/2009 3:41:09 PM


Rafale is fine for France . What could be more important gf ???

I always said that I did not want France to sell the Rafale and so far the present days are on my side ;-)


When you have your hand on a winning idea , don 't sell it until you have a better one .

 

Cheers .



OK that's fine but consider this. France HAS TRIED TO SELL THE RAFALE. Unlike the F-22 which US law forbids with regard to export. Moreover, France is trying to sell Rafale in order to fund improved versions of the Rafale. Considering the competition was other 4th Gen fighters and the Rafale can't get even one of those orders, what does that say about confidence in the programs applicability abroad? Then to cap it all off, local builds for France are effectively at a stand still. At less that 1 Rafale per month, Rafale isn't even fine for France it seems. It's clear that the Rafale is suffering some serious set backs in terms of technology and cost. And with production slowing to 1 per month. I wonder about the viability of the supply chain as well. A production rate so low is going to have serious consequences for companies that make things in support of the Rafale. For instance, I make part x for Rafale under the assumption that the French will require y number of parts per some number of flight hours as well as airframes produced. 

If I'm running the logistics side of my Airforce then I have to consider that last point too. If I need parts, I need confidence that said parts are readily available in an emergency otherwise I don't have fighters flying. It's one thing to say that you can provide the parts. It's another thing to actually demonstrate that with your own air arm. 

Just a though 
 
-DA 

 







 

 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       3/30/2009 3:50:32 PM
DA I agree with you 99,8 % . France can 't seem to be able to fund the whole program for good .
 
But it is going ahead , slowly and painfully . But Hey , the Rafale is still the best bird in Europe .
DA , the Rafale is not suffering set backs in technology . We have all the technology to make Rafale twice better than it is , it is a matter of funding .
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Softwar       3/30/2009 4:05:51 PM

DA I agree with you 99,8 % . France can 't seem to be able to fund the whole program for good .

 

But it is going ahead , slowly and painfully . But Hey , the Rafale is still the best bird in Europe .

DA , the Rafale is not suffering set backs in technology . We have all the technology to make Rafale twice better than it is , it is a matter of funding .


 

Cheers .



 
Since the Typhoon and Gripen have export sales - I would tend to think that someone with a real checkbook determined that they are better "birds" from the euro nest.  I am certain that BW would disagree but customers have a tendancy to want things that are real - not coming soon promises.  In any event - the proof is in the flying not sitting on the drawing board or proposed in some future budget plan.
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       3/30/2009 4:53:03 PM

DA I agree with you 99,8 % . France can 't seem to be able to fund the whole program for good .

But it is going ahead , slowly and painfully . But Hey , the Rafale is still the best bird in Europe .

DA , the Rafale is not suffering set backs in technology . We have all the technology to make Rafale twice better than it is , it is a matter of funding .

Cheers .


Thats not true. It does not have an AESA. Thats something that many pubs and even the potential buyers have mentioned as an issue among many others such as not being able to self designate its own LGBs. It's not that Francc cannot do this. It's that it hasn't. Why doesn't matter unless it's not a requirement and clearly these have been requirements. Then there is the issue of the Obsolete OSF which is no longer put into Rafales. Those are set backs BW by any measure. You cannot in good faith deny that when there are F-16's flying around Europe and the ME, KEY potential Rafale buyers, that have all these features and more. I realize that bites from a Rafale fan perspective. But it is established fact. Not saying the Rafale isn't a good plane or can't defend France but it has clearly had some set backs with regard to integration of existing technologies. Why is not even the issue.

-DA 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       3/30/2009 5:49:11 PM
DA , while I agree (again) with your post , your last bit is disturbing :
""Why is not even the issue.""
 
The only issue is money and we both know it . I explained while I disagree with the MoD funding , I also said that N. Sarkozy was wrong . What else do you want me to say DA ?
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       3/30/2009 6:25:45 PM
So far , I see the thread going away from "technicals" because my knowledge on  Rafale can 't be easily beaten .
I also pointed out that the F3 was going ahead (official link)  , I also talked on the newest tactics developed by the French with the new Rafales , I also talked about how the Rafale Warfare experience cannot be matched by any other European home made Fighter , I also talked about why the Rafale is probably the best Fighter you can dream of to put on an Aircraft-Carrier .
 
Remember that France is not looking at the USA as a possible enemy .
That being said , Rafale is indeed the bird France needs and it can fullfill all the possible missions , including vaporizing Cities in Russia , Pakistan , North-Korea , Iran , China , etc ... We are fine with the Rafale .
 
Regarding the Carrier Operations , Rafale is indeed an excellent bird if not the best . It is lighter than any other aircraft currently deployed on any Carrier , it has a better loading for weight ratio than any other aircraft currently deployed on any Carrier . It needs a cheaper catapult , less deck space for take off and landings and because of its extreme low speed during landing , it can bring back more stuff under its wings without troubles than any other aircraft currently deployed on any Carrier . It has one of the best range as a bomber and can be refuelled by other Rafales .  It also have the latest Exocet Blk-3 (ouch) and the Nuclear ASMP . It is also being flown by some of the best Pilots in the World who all have an extensive experience of Carrier Ops in War time .
Before to go berserk , check what I 'm saying . The French Navy and the US Navy are the only Navies capable to bring such power at Sea . The UK , Spain , Italy have decent Carriers but nothing approaching the power of the CdG . Russia and Brazil are nowhere to be seen , India is getting ready , China is lurking ...
France is fine with the Navy Rafale .
The AdA is also fine with the F2 and incoming F3s .

Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       3/30/2009 6:34:20 PM

DA , while I agree (again) with your post , your last bit is disturbing :


""Why is not even the issue.""

 

The only issue is money and we both know it . I explained while I disagree with the MoD funding , I also said that N. Sarkozy was wrong . What else do you want me to say DA ?


 

Cheers .



I merely want you to acknowledge facts. For instance, the Super Hornet has an AESA, the Rafale does not. Moreover, it is likely that the time frame for the integration of an AESA into the Rafale fleet would be likely to take a few years at least. Lets say under 5 for sake of argument assuming all the HW/SW issues have been dealt with. Thus, for the time being, while both the RBE2 and APG-79 are meeting the requirements of the user platforms, in terms of absolute performance and capability, the Super Hornet is carrying the more capable and more advanced radar. Would you agree or disagree with this post?


-DA 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics