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
Phaid       3/11/2009 6:48:37 AM
The last phrase is really important . To be able to use the US hardware , you need all the US hardware because it is intended to work as a ONE entity . Buying cheap the latest Blk 52/60 will not give you a lot if you don 't have the other air assets to go with .
 
Oh, really.  I guess that explains why Australian F/A-18s use ASRAAMs, Japanese F-15s use Japanese AAMs, and Israeli F-15s and F-16s use their respective indigenous AAMs.  I'm sure there are other examples, these are just the ones that leap to mind.  Meanwhile not a single French fighter uses a foreign AAM.
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid       3/11/2009 10:40:55 AM
Reading back, I now see I misunderstood what BW was trying to say there.  What he actually said was even dumber than what I thought he said.
 
A fleet of Block 60s has more-modern systems in every category -- radar, EW, SP jammers, working IRST and FLIR, HMS, and AESA with all of the nice navigation and automatic terrain following features, not to mention integrating every weapon in the U.S. arsenal.  They have greater range and are more surviveable due to their better weapons and sensors in BVR and WVR.  And unlike the Rafale, the Block 60s can do SEAD, OCA, and every form of strike from anti-tank to CAS.
 
Which is not to say that Block 60s are all you need -- ideally you would partner them with AEW, offensive EW, and dedicated ELINT platforms -- but that is true of any tactical fighter.  On the other hand, they can do so many more types of missions than the Rafale that the support requirements pale in comparison.
 
Quote    Reply

strat-T21C    hmmm..   3/11/2009 11:02:20 AM
I think that Blue Wings 12 works for the sales dept. for the Rafeal. That's why it's doing so well!
 
Quote    Reply

strat-T21C    hmmm..   3/11/2009 11:02:43 AM
I think that Blue Wings 12 works for the sales dept. for the Rafeal. That's why it's doing so well!
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       3/11/2009 4:49:17 PM
Slight correction, Phaid.  Older Mirage III/5s are equipped with Sidewinders, and I believe the Mirage F.1 can carry them as well (though most use Magics).  Now if you're referring to AdA Mirages, then no, but export Mirages can and do carry Sidewinders.
 
What I don't understand is, and maybe someone can correct me here, why can't the Rafale carry something besides Mica? Whatever your opinion on the Mica vs. AMRAAM, it makes sense to me to be able to carry your allies' missiles in case supplies get tight. 
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       3/11/2009 5:35:28 PM
"Low-rate production of the first active electronically scanned radars is now underway for the Rafale multi-role fighter.

Thales, developer of the RBE2 radar, says it's completed development work and now is starting series production. The radar should deliver around 40 percent greater range performance than the current standard, and be able to track many more targets simultaneously.

Good grief.  one wouldbe seriously worried that they understood the technology if they couldn't lift concurrent processing requirements.  Its good to see thta they understand the basic benefits of AESA.

Final software validation and delivery of the first AESA system to Dassault is planned for early 2010. Low-rate production will involve only a handful of radars.

Interesting, now the French have reversed the low rate production and costing process.  Low rate production is now cheaper (esp interesting considering that they have low rate "sunk" costs.  No doubt we will now get lectured on how Rafale has resolved the universal problem of keeping LRP Costs doen low due to anticipated sunk costs being amortised early in the development cycle (and all in anticipation of amortising those costs on the basis of anticipated volume sales no doubt!)

The production milestone is also key to Dassault's ambitions to sell the fighter overseas. India, where Rafale is competing, wants an AESA. The French government is also in advanced talks to sell Rafale to the United Arab Emirates, which operates AESAs on its F-16 Block 60s. UAE could mark the first export of Rafale.

This would be the same enthusiastic comments made about all the other customers lining up to buy Rafale.  Funnily enough not ONE european oe EU member has seen fit to buy this superior capability (gee, it works for Typhoon).  Then we got the other confident claims of middle eastern buyers.  Problem is that not even third tier airforces like the Moroccans have been interested. India?  I'm sure the Russians will be quaking over that brave statement to chew into an already partnered nation.

"F-22 is awesome in the area of  performance and stealth, but its man machine interface is far from impressive compared with that of Rafale, its weapons (AMRAAM) are no better than 3rd generation a/c with the same or MICA."

Excellent news.  Having been lucky enough to attend appropriate cleared briefings on JSF, Typhoon and SuperHornet, I'd love to know how a foreign national can wax lyrical about F-22 interface issues above UK and Australian cleared allies who are either embedded in F-22 Squadrons (RAF) or gone up against them and have TACTICAL clearance levels way above my paygrade.  You must be special.  Please enlighten us all as to how a french national who's country gets access levels to US technology below the UK, Aust and Canada knows so much?
 

"We were smart enough to copy the Mig 29's IRSTS, with the OSF, and add a very useful TV function to it, F22 designers surprisingly didn't."

Ah yes, this would be the ame swedish company that licenses tech to the US and France through tech sharing arrangements (hint, the swedish company now has a US parent) but who's tech release to the US is a capability set that is a magnitude order in superiroity compared to DAMOCLES (The malays will be using DAMOCLES 12-18 months ahead of the French - we all know that "tier 1" tech released to an export client as lead developer is because the foreign
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    typos   3/11/2009 6:07:31 PM
apols to all for typos/grammar/spelling and font changes - :) but patience is wearing thin...
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid       3/11/2009 7:19:25 PM
Slight correction, Phaid.  Older Mirage III/5s are equipped with Sidewinders, and I believe the Mirage F.1 can carry them as well (though most use Magics).  Now if you're referring to AdA Mirages, then no, but export Mirages can and do carry Sidewinders.
 
That's true.  I was actually trying to think of a concise way to say "recent / in-production" but was too tired so I gave up and forged ahead.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       3/11/2009 8:40:04 PM

Final software validation and delivery of the first AESA system to Dassault is planned for early 2010. Low-rate production will involve only a handful of radars.


Interesting, now the French have reversed the low rate production and costing process.  Low rate production is now cheaper (esp interesting considering that they have low rate "sunk" costs.  No doubt we will now get lectured on how Rafale has resolved the universal problem of keeping LRP Costs doen low due to anticipated sunk costs being amortised early in the development cycle (and all in anticipation of amortising those costs on the basis of anticipated volume sales no doubt!)
correction: (brain fart and a loss in translation) should be:
Interesting, now the French have reversed the economies of scale model where low rate production and high sunk costs is now a low on sell cost benefit to a low rate production platform. (Look at the break even rate on Typhoon) Apparently low rate production is cheaper than volume rate  (esp interesting considering that there are no low rate "sunk" development and production costs. 

No doubt we will now get lectured on how Rafale has resolved the universal problem of keeping LRP Costs down low due to the fact that they developed a new financial model where early de velopment and production sunk costs (traditionally high) are now able to be amortised early in the development cycle (and now apparently flow on with cost differentiation on low rate production costs and a final low rate platform cost.  (Remarkable when there is only one customer and that customer has slowed the purchase rate and can't offset it against anythingexcept anticipated volume sales)


 
 
 
Quote    Reply

JP Bergerac    Droit de réponse: warfighter vs engineer   3/11/2009 8:42:55 PM
First of all, apologise for the length of my post. But much had to be said.
 
Second: insults are not going to convince me I'm wrong, quite the opposite. Please stick to cartesian arguments.
 
Third: I gather from the comments of Herald and Co that you Rafale bashers are tech oriented (engineers etc) with access to inside info on US jets and/or Typhoon. I'm the opposite: military fighter and tester with inside knowledge of the Rafale. So I do know my stuff, with a different perspective. So you might challenge my data when we get in specific details on US hardware but I have read enormous amounts of unfounded assertions concerning Rafale's techno level, which is obviously very much underestimated. Whether by lack of recent info or straightforward hostility, I prefer not to try and guess. E.g. of course I know the difference between bolting on a pod and doing a clean integration. We have moved in recent years from solutions 1 to 2, the development is funded and well under way and =to my knowledge= (I might be off a couple of months either direction) it is qualified although not yet fielded - just a question of deliveries and fleet configuration management (not to mention ? flow).

I made a point about optimisation, any engineer will understand. My comment about antenna size was intentionally provocative. What I meant was:
1. depending on the numbers, better have a small and powerful antenna than a big lousy one. Total efficiency is what counts, not one isolated factor
2. it's no use having an antenna the size of an E-3 field if you then can't land the aircraft properly or end up having the agility of an airliner. Conclusion : the bigger the better is true only up to a point and there is no ideal size, the compromise depends on your mission requirements. Typhoon is mostly AtA focused hence big dish, Rafale is more diversified plus has the carrier reqts., hence smaller dish. Typhoon sees better at very long range (beyond missile range) but Rafale is much more comfortable at the merge, when range is not an issue but multi target tracking is.

MMI: I used to know the Rafale's inside out (including in flight, not only in ppt presentations or from aviation week) and still remember a lot. F-22 : I happened to get a ride in a demo sim at Lockheed Martin Marietta a couple of years ago. Certainly not production representative and void of any classified stuff. But it does give away the general philosophy : to me it was more an evolved version of an F/A 18 (have flown it) type, with nice big colour MFDs and a lot of pushbuttons all around, than some of the really innovative solutions tested on Rafale. In the latter case you get a much cleaner cockpit, less buttons and less screens, and a lot of work put into the way info is displayed, hence much more easy to process during fight.
 
Last comment before I go to sleep: Reco NG is NOT a laser designation pod, but a world class recce pod event he US doesn't have. Buffoonery to be avoided.
 
Cheers to all and see you all soon
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics