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
Bluewings12       3/13/2009 7:32:26 PM
I failed nothing and your are in trouble to respond to my post . Everybody can see ...
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357       3/13/2009 7:50:39 PM

I failed nothing and your are in trouble to respond to my post . Everybody can see ...

 

Cheers .


Quoting me.
HERALD1357    The Rafale is designed tyo work with HAWKEYE support.   3/12/2009 7:41:28 AM

I got lost in the techiespeak.  The Rafale isn't designed to work with the E-2?  I'm assuming that's what Herald meant.  That makes no sense at all.

 


But it is not designed to hand-off to HAWKEYE and through HAWKEYE to the task force add to the overall task force  battle-space picture. Super Hornet is designed to be eyes as well as a directed shooter..
 
To clarify:
 
The naval strike fighter always gets the biggest radar it can carry so that it can air and surface search as far as it can. So when an "expert" claims the RBE2 was chosen to maximize its performance in the mid-range merge and in the multiple target track environment  I guffaw. Interval detect threshhold is important to maximize usable fly-out of weapons. Whether or not you have HAWKEYE compatibilty you still need own tracking capability to use the A2A or A2G weapon that you launch ahaoinst a maneuvering target. For the RAFALE this means that the SARH or RS rocket is matched to the radar as it means for every strike fighter. In sum, you can look at the aircraft radar to see if it can use a certain family of weapons.  
 
The RBE2 as stated can see an FA-18 sized and shaped object at roughly 100-150 kilometers at 5000 meters altitude clear dry air. This effectively limits A2A ordnance to a designed rocket with about 8 seconds burn to velocities of 800-1100 meters per second.  Given that this yields a maximum range in  the pop-up launch of about 80,000 meters and a maximum MER of 60,000 meters head-on pass, its no wonder that the most likely comparisomn to MICA is either Python 5 or ASRAAM and that comparison to thbe MICA IR and that to MICA IR unfavorably. 
 
A2G the RAFALE comes out better, at least versus fixed targets. The RBE2 was supposed to get some help from the OSF for ground attack but that system proved degradable and inferior to the American  introduced laser targeting pods. The Rafale curiously should be able to use ATLIS and PDLCT, but I've not seen this. . 
 
Hence DAMOCLES. Decent tech. That pod will shortly show up on Russian Sukhois, probably this year. Hence THALES will profit by more STOLEN US tech and we will face our own developed tech on Chinese J-11s shortly.. 
 
Note that the Russians will have it force wide before the French will? 
 
Anyway with such avionics addons, some of the new build RAFALES will finally be able to hit moving (ship sized) targets at up to 45,000 meters from high altitude (about 15,000 meters) with their own French rocket boosted laser guided weapons. Otherwise its EXOCET, SCALP, or APACHE and its against a fixed target.. 
----------------------------------------------------------
Strategic or tactical reconnaissance imaging (RECO NG) pods, do nothing for you in this regard. In fact those are the wrong kind of tools when you seek to MAP an IADS as those do nothing to establish a signals library or allow you to plot by ESM enemy  signal emitters. SPECTRA self-protection jamming is a very poor substitute for a genuine EW system or EW aircraft (escort GROWLERs and ) . One thing is certain. RAFALES will outfly their current iteration HAWKEYE ESM coverage and will never have SENTRY support except in metro France, unless the US/NATO supplies it.
 
All, the pieces of the puzzle means all the poeces of the puzzle.  AN/ALQ-218(V)s (antennas, processors and software) +AN/ALQ 99s (offensive EW jammers and spoofers) for example in a dedicated escort EW aircraft-which is just ONE small piece of the puzzle...
   
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       3/13/2009 7:58:59 PM
Herald , stop beating around the bush with your usual BS .
 
Post something relevant and prove your case or shut up .
Don 't try to loose me into useless details , I am watching . Others are too ...
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Dodging the issue.   3/13/2009 8:31:08 PM
You claimed to be competent and able to pronounce on my abilities.

You opened the barn door on this point of technical merit and now I am attacking it on point. If you want any relevance.
 
a. stop falsifying and making things up.
b. attribute facts correctly.
c. admit your mistakes.
d. and stop trying to "BULL" your way through when you are caught lying. 

ATTEND:
 
Like on the tank issue when it was proved you didn't know the first thing about how tanks even work, you now pretend to know about aircraft function. Just the statements you made about the F-22 and the Rafale show now that you are a liar. Have you ever even been inside a military aircraft aside from a static display, you poseur?
 
"I've been with the French Air Force."  Oh really, liar? Can you proive this?
 
The answer is no. You'd know who invented the side stick controller or the voice recognition driven stores management system interface the Rafale uses. it wasn't the French.
 
Another on point illustration:
 
You might actually know something about radar if you knew QED-which is as PHYSICALLY REAL as the laser mouse I use.  .
 
You also might actually then know enough to know what the difference between a tank droop sensor and a machine gun was, truck driver, or why when I tell you side lobe interference means signal phase interference in the RBE2, that you might actually understand why the RBE2 is a piece of crap. If you knew QED, you'd  why the MICA is a piece of CRAP and why your assertions in general are CRAP. 

Relevant and on topic enough for you?
 
Herald 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       3/13/2009 9:07:36 PM
I am not surprised at all , not a bit , by your garbage .
We 're not about Tanks here Herald so stop hiding . In any case , my knowledge on Tanks goes far beyond yours , never forget that you only are an internet addict and nothing else .
 
I have posted enough stuff on SP to prove that I 've been a long time in the Air Forces and everybody who has been in knows that I 'm real , clown .
 
""You'd know who invented the side stick controller or the voice recognition driven stores management system interface the Rafale uses. it wasn't the French.""
 
Irrelevant . The Chinese invented the powder and everybody is using it , but who is using voice recognition , touch screen technology and PC mouse technology on its stick ? Well Herald ?
If you don 't have anything more relevant and clever to say , let the others speak and just shut up since you seem to be unable to respond to my long post  ...
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Got nothing eh?   3/13/2009 9:36:18 PM

I am not surprised at all , not a bit , by your garbage .

We 're not about Tanks here Herald so stop hiding . In any case , my knowledge on Tanks goes far beyond yours , never forget that you only are an internet addict and nothing else .

You claimed to be a tank expert. I used a little electronics knowledge to prove you were a liar. 

I have posted enough stuff on SP to prove that I 've been a long time in the Air Forces and everybody who has been in knows that I 'm real , clown .

You just made specific claims that I commented on directly above.. That again proves you are a liar.
 

""You'd know who invented the side stick controller or the voice recognition driven stores management system interface the Rafale uses. it wasn't the French.""

You claimed that the inventers who used the systems for decades were inferior users now to the copyists who implemented an inferior version in the Rafale;.relevant to prove your lack of knowledge on topic.

Irrelevant . The Chinese invented the powder and everybody is using it , but who is using voice recognition , touch screen technology and PC mouse technology on its stick ? Well Herald ?

CREF above, buffoon.  You might have talk to HUGHES before they became RAYTHEON.

If you don 't have anything more relevant and clever to say , let the others speak and just shut up since you seem to be unable to respond to my long post  ...

I don't have much time to waste with a someone who is not my peer and who is a proven prevaricator besides..
 

CONTEMPT 1%er..


Herald
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       3/13/2009 11:23:39 PM

I failed nothing and your are in trouble to respond to my post . Everybody can see ...

 
everyone can see that you are a liar and a wannabe.

I'm no aircraft expert, but I've worked on enough sensor projects to know that you have no idea.

you did it with the issue of irregular panel fit (I had to post a technical article to show you even though anyone with a basic clue in modern signal management would see what was self evident)

you did it with SPECTRA in early threads when you failed to comprehend what it can and can't do with respect to active asymetrical compensation

you did it with your ignorant question about 180degree offboresight shots 

you did it with your BS on how IR/IRST works.  the problem here you troll is I've been on projects that evaluated IR/IRST/FLIR systems.  You can't even tell the difference between definition and smear detection.  you think that shortening the meeting engagement is the answer when the whole opportunity of off boresight and hand off shots is that the shooter dicates the meeting conditions and doesn't need to close the gap to confirm the shot

you have no ferking idea about sensor management in gerneral and you still come in here pretending that you do.

so phuque off and stop wasting peoples time.   and stop pretending that you know about subject matter issues when its patently apparent that you can't even grasp basic RCS concepts. or even understand limitations imposed by known physics.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       3/13/2009 11:41:50 PM
btw troll, I've given you more than enough time to try and find someone in the industry in France who can explain what hot and cold imaging is - it's not on google, so you can't cheat.

I'll even give you a hand - ask someone at  SAGEM (not Thales as they don't have a clue).

I'll wait another fortnight and see if we get any closer.

once you do that then you can go and hang your head in shame for crapping on about IR sensing (It's not black and white, positive/negative imaging as you tried to indicate before - so you will have to ask someone who knows)  Once you've done that spend some time at an Ecole and do some research on the physics of the answer (which the French well know)
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid    BW nonsense   3/14/2009 10:04:19 AM
lol Herald ! Check if the F-22 has voice recognition and touch screen technology , then check how work the right stick on the F-22 , then check the one on Rafale . Does the F-22 Pilot has an integrated "match-stick" used as a PC mouse to switch from screen to screen , weapons to weapons , radar modes to radar modes , change the Autopilot on the fly , etc  ?..
Nope .
 
Rafale doesn't have voice commands either.  Oh, it was supposed to, but like many other features it was dropped.  As far as the F-22, yes, all of the combat-critical radar and avionics functions are managed via HOTAS.  Once again, BW simply assumes that because Rafale is the first French aircraft to do something, it is the only aircraft ever to do something.  This is not the case, HOTAS has been in U.S. aircraft for decades.
 
Then , the avionic integration is of the same generation on both aircrafts . The "Net Concentric Circle" managed through sensors and ECMs is present on Rafale too . We also have a 360 deg EM/EW coverage and the F3 will also bring the 360 deg IR coverage . But since we have an excellent interferrometry technology coupled with some extremely strong ECM algorythms , it 's not 2moro that a missile will hit a Rafale.
 
Babbling nonsense.   The antenna coverage on the F-22 is huge compared to that on Rafale.  And Rafale's angle-limited, short range defensive EW is no substitute for all-aspect RF stealth.

Phaid :
""Finally, as far as "FrNavy and FAF never meeting anything like SPECTRA", the M2000-9 already have a system that even Thales states is better than Spectra.""
 
The ICMS MarkIII capabilities (onboard the M2000-9) has been updated and integrated into the lastest version of SPECTRA (less than a year ago if I remember well) . I 'll look for the official paper and post it there in a short time .

 
Great, please furnish evidence of this.
 
Phaid :
""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.""
 
Unusually , you are wrong on almost all calls .
 
No, every fact I stated there is true.  Falcon Edge IEWS is newer and more modern than SPECTRA.  APG-80 is an in-production and deployed AESA.  Block 60 has working FLIR and HMS.  Block 60 has greater range than Rafale.  Block 60 has a longer range AAM and a WVR missile that can do single-ship HOBS launches.  Block 60 has the ability to carry dedicated SEAD weapons and a far greater range of ordnance types than Rafale.  Etc.  This translates into a more survivable and more flexible aircraft.
 
Phaid :
""Size of the antenna and total radiated power (and number of T/R elements in the case of a phased array, which is obviously also limited by total size) are the critical performance parameters for a radar."" 
 
True , the second factor being the quality of the components and we are doing fine in this regard . Nevertheless Phaid , you did not properly acknowledge what JP said :
""What I want of my radar, or rather : system, is a good SA at long/medium range to adopt the best tactics and a good probability of detection and accuracy within the weapons' envelope that I won't miss any shot opportunities to underperforming sensors.""
 
I didn't acknowledge it because it is nonsense.  Superior SA is gained by superior sensors.  A superior RF sensor requires superior range.  This requires aperture and power.  The notion that a radar with inferior range can have "superior mid-range targeting" is simply idiocy.
 
As far as your other nonsense, please don't attribute quotes to me that I did not make.
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid       3/14/2009 10:41:17 AM
Also, regarding your magical EW system, you might want to research what Greek pilots thought of the way the ECCM in their F-16 Block 52+ dealt with the Rafale's EW system.  Further research is left to the reader as an exercise ;)
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics