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: What is wrong with the Rafale?
Rufus    5/9/2009 10:16:10 AM
I have noticed a lot of discussion on here lately about the Rafale and its inability to compete with the various other late 4th generation designs on the market today. In an effort to shed some light on this issue I have taken a moment to list some of the Rafale's major crippling flaws and their origins. The single biggest issue with the Rafale, and the common thread throughout most of its major design flaws, is that its design team simply lacked sufficient vision of where the future of fighter aviation was heading. Throughout the Rafale's design process its designers chose to go with incremental improvements rather than generational leaps in technology. The Rafale was intended to catch up to, rather than leap ahead of, aircraft that were designed years earlier such as the F-16 and Mig-29. The end result is a somewhat refined, but badly overpriced aircraft that has struggled to even compete with the aircraft it was designed to match, and utterly lacks the potential to compete with newer designs. The most obvious area where this lack of vision is displayed is in the Rafale's overall layout and its notable lack of signature reduction design features. The Rafale exhibits numerous features that would simply never be incorporated into any design intended to have a reduced RCS, including its prominent intakes, a huge vertical stabilizer, canards, a non-retractable refueling probe, and numerous other probes, protrusions, and other serious RCS offenders. What does this mean? Late in the Rafale's design process its engineers realized that they had failed to anticipate the key role RCS reduction would play in future designs and scambled to find ways to reduce the Rafale's RCS. With minimal experience with RCS reduction and an airframe that was already too far along in its design to be fixed, the end result was of course disappointing. Shaping is the single most important consideration in RCS reduction and the Rafale has too many major flaws to ever be considered stealthy. RAM coatings and last minute saw-tooth edge features are at best minimally effective on an aircraft that is otherwise designed all wrong from the start. Not only that, but the Rafale's maneuverability proved to be disappointing, comparable to, but only marginally better than that already offered by earlier 4th generation designs and noticably lacking in comparison to its bigger brother, the Eurofighter. As the US/Israel found with the Lavi design, the improvement in aerodynamic performance available with such a design was insufficient to justfy the cost of creating an entire new airframe and a generational leap in performance would require a new approach. Like its airframe, the Rafale's pit and interfaces sought to close the gap with earlier 4th generation designs. Drawing its inspiration from the US, the Rafale design team sought to replicate the hands on throttle and stick interface the US had adopted by the time the Rafale entered its design phase. While the Rafale was largely successful in matching the interfaces seen in US fighters in the early 90s, its designers failed to see the direction future designs were heading. Today the Rafale's pit and human interface are at best mediocre in comparison to those found in other aircraft in production. It lacks a helmet mounted site, a serious flaw in a WVR fight, and numerous other advanced features such as the Super Hornet's fully decoupled interfaces. Most critically, the Rafale's man machine interface lacks the defining features of a 5th generation design, such as advanced sensor fusion and sophisticated multi-purpose helmet mounted displays. Probably the most famous and inexcusable design flaw in the Rafale is its unusually small and short ranged radar. While the US launched fully funded AESA programs and prepared for a generational leap in radar performance, for some reason the Rafale was designed with a PESA radar, a technological dead-end. Worse, the Rafale was simply not designed to accomodate a radar of sufficient size to operate effectively autonomously. Now, although France is working to retrofit an AESA antenna onto its PESA back-end in the Rafale, the nose of the Rafale will simply not accomodate a competitive radar. The best the Rafale can hope to do is close some of its radar performance gap with aircraft like the F-16, but will never be capable of competing with designs like the Eurofighter or Super Hornet. Finally, one of the most critcal flaws in the Rafale's design is its widely misunderstood "Spectra" self protection jammer and RWR suite. As was done with the F-16 and Super Hornet, the Rafale design team sought to incorporate an internal self protection jammer into the Rafale to improve its survivability against radar guided threats. The major failure of Spectra was that its development cycle was far far too long and France's semiconductor and computer industry was simply incapable of providing the necessary components to create a truely cutti
 
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 55 56 57   NEXT
Seagull       5/13/2009 4:27:56 AM
Once again, i side with DA.
 
Who in the AdA would pretend Rafale is designed to fly through highly protected air spaces ?
 
It can't. Spectra will help as much as possible to avoid radars, and the Rafale will try as much as possible to make its way out of the detection ranges of those radars. DOT.
 
Rafale has no LGB (yet, but Damocles will be operational in 2010), still no rockets etc. It uses stand-off waypons such as AASM and Scalp, again, to shoot as far as possible from the threats.

If Rafale has to jam a radar, that's only because it couldn't avoid it (surprised ?).
 
Quote    Reply

PierreLeGrand       5/13/2009 8:29:28 AM

Once again, i side with DA.

 Who in the AdA would pretend Rafale is designed to fly through highly protected air spaces ?

 It can't. Spectra will help as much as possible to avoid radars, and the Rafale will try as much as possible to make its way out of the detection ranges of those radars. DOT.

Rafale has no LGB (yet, but Damocles will be operational in 2010), still no rockets etc. It uses stand-off waypons such as AASM and Scalp, again, to shoot as far as possible from the threats.

If Rafale has to jam a radar, that's only because it couldn't avoid it (surprised ?).


If Rafale has to jam a radar, that's only because it couldn't avoid it (surprised ?).
 
  F-22 have ECMs just as well. Inform yourself.
 
You and DA make exactly the SAME mistake, you are mixing up MIN, RED, LO and VLO, as simple as that.

 Rand used these classifications as:

 Minimum, Reduced, Low observable, and Very Low Observable.

 Only VLO is ?designed to fly in higly protected airspaces?.

 As for what makes F/A-18 LO "superior" to that of Rafale, it is far from being visible and you two didn't manage to counter my points technically at all.

So let's put them DOWN again in a more elaborate way to see if you can understand this:

 BOTH Rafale and F/A-18 are NOT all-aspect VLO.

All-aspect VLO fighters known to us were the YF-24 and F-22.

F/A-18 design includes LO features which are inherited from F-22.

Rafale goes the other way with features inherited from F-23.

 FRONTAL aspect:

 

 INLETS and WING LEADING EDGE SWEEP are an important design feature and were carefully chosen in the case of the ATF contenders, YF-22 and YF-23.

 F/A-18 leading edge sweep is the result of Northrop design philosophy based on the F-5 YF-17, F-18, /F20 series, a thin wing with moderate sweep that respond to US NAVY requirements for range, Moderate Max Mach values handling and low speed flight characteristics.

 F/A-18 wing design doesn?t respond to any requierement for RCS reduction, quiet the opposite, for example they posses a dogtooth leading edge which is an EM spike trap.

 On the other hand, Rafale wings leading edge is the SAME than that of YF-22 at 48*.

 You guys still have to demonstrate that their EM reflectivity would be superior to that of F/A-18 considering that they are designed within a similar planform to that of YF-22.

 Rafale use of composite is 24%/weight vs 22%/weight for the F/A-18.

 As I was saying, structural strengthening have seen an increase in use of Titanium on the F/A-18 structure, first at design stage in view of the problems encountered in operation with F-18 (wings carrythrough bulkheads) but also vertical fins.
 
  As for design feature...
 
 

 

 
 

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r279/sampaix/raf-f22.gif" border="0" />http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r279/sampaix/YF-23-YF-22.gif" width="724" border="0" /> 

 

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r279/sampaix/fa-f22.gif" border="0" /> 
  So keep maintaining that F/A-18 is designed with "MORE" EM signature reduction features, designwise, you already are proven wrong on this axis only as well as the topic of the inlets design.

 

 

 

 



 
Quote    Reply

PierreLeGrand       5/13/2009 8:45:02 AM

Under the SAME angle the compressor blades on the Rafale inlets wouldn't be visible at all.

 


They are not visible at all on the F/A-18E/F even at that angle.  The things you see in the Super Hornet photo are not fan blades.  The angled, radiating vanes are part of the radar blocking system (reference here since you appear to be unfamiliar).  The vanes reflect RF that would otherwise strike the fan blades and redirect it into the RAM in the curved inlets.

 
As I said previously, M88 was designed with EM reduction features as well, it does posses vanes and the inlet themself are treated with serrated material to take care of the problem of returned RF, the approach is different with the advantage of a ZERO loss of dynamic pressure in the case of the French aircraft.

  Every specialists in the business are seeing the two as having an equivalent RCS.


 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       5/13/2009 10:37:44 AM
DA :
""You guys need to be objective. You can like a platform and at the same time acknowledge its limitations.""
 
I do . 
You think that I am over optimistic about the Rafale but I know that you are over pessimistic ;-)
A long time ago , many posters decided (?) that the Rafale was an average to good 4th gen jet , similar to a
F-16 blk 52 . They decided (?) without knowing enough and simply said so . Anyone coming to rectify their partial and wrong view is discarded with dedain , his posts are barely read and if he is French , he must be a troll .
Sorry Gents , but it doesn 't work this way in my world .
 
You often forget the big picture and loose yourselves into details to try to make your point about a minor thing . The Rafale has been designed to be the top of the line fighter for the FAF and the MN . France has a mjor C4 Net and the Country 's awareness in war zone is in the World top 3 . When the Rafales are working within such matrix , they can be sometimes used as if they were 5th generation aircrafts . It is not me who will teach you that when you have a complete (?) enemy EM blueprint of the zone you want to treat , things get much easier , planning gets much clearer and the Pilots feels better . In such scenario , a Rafale is as good as it can be .
The Rafale , when flew by the FAF or MN , is a formidable adversary .
As an exemple , never Lybia (?) will use the Rafale the way we do . They will never use the aircraft to its maximum possibilities .
 
To put it simply , for France the Rafale is not an average 4th generation fighter , it is a true 4.5 .
In every joint excercise the Rafale has taken part , it did its job with panache and impressed the other participants .
A F-16 blk-52 (or even blk-60) or a SH could not have done what the Rafale did at RedFlag and TigerMeet , that 's for sure .
 
We have to put things back into context . Googling hard for hours has its utility but simply looking at some known facts sometimes help us to understand how the strings are pulled in the background . By now , it should have become obvious to anyone that the sensor fusion on Rafale is more advanced than any of the F-teens .
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    BW reply   5/13/2009 11:00:45 AM

In every joint excercise the Rafale has taken part , it did its job with panache and impressed the other participants .

A F-16 blk-52 (or even blk-60) or a SH could not have done what the Rafale did at RedFlag and TigerMeet , that 's for sure .


Cheers .



 BW,

It's commentary like this that nullifies any contributions from you. You take something you google or hear from a friend of a friend and then you blow things so far out of proportion that its category error. Moreover, mentioning Rafale in this way shows a complete and absolute misunderstanding of the purpose of Red Flag which is a training event and not some grand aerial joust. The only thing Rafales do at Red Flag that makes them stand out is that they run active ELINT/SIGINT sorties against allies in friendly airspace. THATS A FACT. As to your assertion of some other things Rafales do at Red Flag or Tiger Meet, please tell me in your words what you think Rafales did so special in any Red Flag or Tiger Meet besides espionage?

And this claim from PlG that because the Rafale has a highly swept wing its now all of the sudden LO? So I guess that means aircraft like the Dark Star had RCS like a B-52 by that criteria? Look, let me make this simple. Sweeping the wing for aerodynamic purposes is not the same as building with LO capability in mind. You guys are blowing Rafale design well out of proportion to reality. If even half of the claims associated with it were true then it would not be struggling to meet even domestic orders! 

I'm going to say something about Rafale that will put into context the Rafales so-called LO capability. The Rafale is an aircraft with some moderate consideration of RCS. Its probably comparable to a Mig-21 which is also known for small RCS due to physical size and its ECM would be comparable to the ECM on the Mig-21 Bison. Against older radars who's characteristics are well known, the relatively small RCS of the Rafale would give it a bit of an edge compared to say an Mirage F1 or Super Etendard. That combined with it's Israeli ECM with good support from intel could allow it to get to the merge without being detected in some cases. THAT IS NOT A STEALTH AIRCRAFT. Thats just common sense EW capability. Many other air forces including the USAF, Russians, Indians, IDF/AF and many many many others do this. It is not new nor is it a uniquely French tactic. Please lets stop the exaggeration and focus on reality.

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

Seagull       5/13/2009 11:06:04 AM
In my opinion, BW, your message has no compatibility problem with DA's.
 
Quote    Reply

PierreLeGrand    Bluewing...   5/13/2009 11:10:19 AM
About sensor fusion and the results of Rafale during these exercises.
 
There is a good explaination for this.
 
 To reach the level of sensor fusion equivalent of that of F-22 you need the same system core architecture and processing power, Rafale have that.
 
NO other fighter in service today has it, this also mean that postser denying this FACT are telling that fiting a motherboard with Pentium IVs is the equivalent as fiting another one with Core2s of the same clock speed.
 
  Otherwise said; Buses banwidth and speeds, Memory bandwidth and speeds, processing power, multi-tasking capabilties CAN be the same for a P IV than a C2.
 
  Assumptions by the bucket here, but little understanding of what exactly is requiered for achieving this level of sensor fusion.
 
  Many posters here doesn't KNOW Rafale the slightest.
 
  End ot the story. 
 
Regards, PlG
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    PLG the amateur.   5/13/2009 12:14:14 PM




PierreLeGrand       5/11/2009 2:28:32 AM




http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/anchor.gif" alt="" /> "Weak thrust output jet engines that burn out before they were expected too was a complete surprise to me a couple of years ago as I thought the SNECMA part of the Dassault thieves brigade was actually fairly competent (they make good business jet engines). "

This is one of the most odd things about the Rafale.  I can only assume that SNECMA somehow tried to go cheap with the M88, because a reliable, long-lasting jet engine is a basic feature on any western design at this point.  If you want engines that need to be inspected every few hundred flight hours and rebuilt over and over again, buy a Russian or Chinese plane.

  M88 High pressure turbine have three time the TBO of EJ200.

False. Roughly speaking the EJ 200 has 10-15 % more operating hours between teardowns.

  You're referring to the E1 which have been replaced by the E4 since 2004 and even so are mistaking issues between them.

Nothing has been done about the combustion pot.

  For the rest it is a question of budget and part availability resulting from it, NOT an issue with the engine itself.

Wrong gas flow geometry is wrong flow geometry.

  All in all your comments shows the greatest level of lack of information we have seen for a very long time, none of them can sustain close scrutiny, please would you be kind eough as to back up your allegations with proper links to authoritative sources?

I have yet to see one correct statement from you. PLG.
  For example you totaly ignore the reality of Rafale design requierements, goals, as well as the actual roadmap and its true level of technologies and developement potential.

I called it's capabilities when I called it a bomb truck. Care to dispute that it is biased to loft and carry as opposed to maneuverability and acceleration? Look at the wing chord and crankl

   Because the most serious magazines over here are visibly disagreeing with you in all aspect and sources are LEGION to prove your claims to be all wrong.

Pardon me what magazines? What reputable TRADE journals?

Quote    Reply


Basilisk Station       5/13/2009 12:50:07 PM

.

 

 Rafale goes the other way with features inherited from F-23.

Huh? The Rafale was designed well before the F-23. What did it "inherit". I'm not seeing any similarities.


http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r279/sampaix/raf-f22.gif" border="0" />

Okay let's look at this picture for a min. The ONLY similarity is the angle of the wings.
 
Even a quick look at the F-22 shows that there are essentially NO straight panel lines, they are all sawtoothed. A very important feature for stealth. There's the oft mentioned vertical tail on the Rafale, another no-no. The Canard does not help things either.
 
By the way, if the dogtooth on the F-18's is so horrible how is the wing tip AAM mount on the Rafale not a big mistake?

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r279/sampaix/YF-23-YF-22.gif" border="0" width="724" height="578" />


Did this picture have some point?


http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r279/sampaix/fa-f22.gif" border="0" /> 

Nobody is claiming the F-18 is a "stealthy" plane. Just that it is as stealthy as the Rafale and quite possibly somewhat more so. Frankly it shares a lot more design characteristics with the F-22 than the Rafale does.
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    PlG Reply   5/13/2009 12:59:05 PM
I have no interest in changing your mind at this point. If you want to believe the things you do about the Rafale, go right ahead. I disagree and I'll just be happy to take into consideration your views and biases when we discuss this aircraft. With regard to Rafales doing better at Red Flag? Nonsense as far as I'm concerned. Red Flag isn't about that. But again, if you believe the Rafale is the supreme ruler of Red Flag, hey, no problem. I just want to see it on somebody's parking ramp outside of France. I mean, why would every air force there is not be beating down the doors to get a plane that good? But lets compare training to reality. During Desert Storm a pair of F/A-18Cs on a bombing mission actually shot down two live threat aircraft AND proceeded to bomb their targets on the same sortie. Again this is real life, not Red Flag. That aircraft has had considerable export success BTW and is still a considerably capable warplane today.

Also, I already told you what the Rand report said. Maybe you do not know what the words Classified and Subjective mean. The people who created that report are unable to report any exact data so they are doing the same thing both you and I are doing. SUBJECTIVE quantification of the RCS characteristics of said aircraft. This is different from actually knowing the OBJECTIVE PARAMETRIC DATA which is classified. In French that means it's a secret.

I already told you about Rafale. In your preferred terms, the Rafale is a RO aircraft. In other words it has some features to mitigate RCS. I fully appreciate that. But it is not a stealth aircraft and a comparison to the Mig-21 Bison is not an insult. That aircraft is known to be particularly difficult to detect at range because its RCS is low as a benefit of it's size and design and it carries a very sophisticated ECM pod designed by the Israelis who in case you didn't know tend to violate neighbors airspace at will in F-15s which have a huge RCS. I'd be happy if USAF F-15/16s could do some of that stuff but I acknowledge out doctrine is different therefore it's not for lack of capability.

What this means is the Rafale when used properly is very survivable however it lacks the latest capabilities that are present in some late model 4th Gen jets and all 5th Gen.

-DA 


 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics