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: 2009 displays of the F-22 and the Rafale
Bluewings12    6/24/2009 5:03:48 PM
Let 's watch them first :-) The F-22 h*tp://www.air-attack.com/videos/single/cAhL7lJCk4I The Rafale : h*tp://www.dailymotion.com/user/ministeredeladefense/video/x9ma8h_demonstration-du-rafale_news Both aircrafts are pulling nice stuff . Rafale only does it twice faster . Explaination and details to follow . Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Bluewings12       7/24/2009 10:24:48 PM
Basilisk :
""So explain this to me then. If the F-22's coatings are having trouble with rain, then how does the ram coating on the Raf's refueling probe deal with something like JP5?""
 
Because our RAM coating is better than yours . CQFD .
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Basilisk Station       7/24/2009 10:35:41 PM

Basilisk :


""So explain this to me then. If the F-22's coatings are having trouble with rain, then how does the ram coating on the Raf's refueling probe deal with something like JP5?""

 

Because our RAM coating is better than yours . CQFD .

 

Cheers .




And France's fully stealthy aircraft is? I mean, seriously. You want us to believe that France is the king of RAM coatings and you've never even designed a true stealth aircraft

You didn't answer my question about the weapons bays (not really surprised you didn't actually). 

Those aren't something you casually build an aircraft around and it has obvious limits on the amount of ordinance you can carry. None of this indicates that it's something that would be done if it wasn't crucial.

So, if you are trying to claim that picture above indicates that it has some sort of "reduced" RCS, you are just making yourself look sillier and sillier. The Rafale is no more stealthy with that kind of load than an Eagle or F-16.

 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       7/24/2009 10:44:37 PM
Basilisk , France doesn 't have a stealth aircraft . We are ahead in some features but the Rafale is what it is : a 4.5 generation discrete aircraft .
 
""You didn't answer my question about the weapons bays (not really surprised you didn't actually""
 
What question ? 
 
""The Rafale is no more stealthy with that kind of load than an Eagle or F-16. ""
 
This is where you are all wrong , I did not ask just for fun but to prove a case . What is the front RCS of this Rafale ?
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       7/25/2009 12:02:45 AM

Some clowns said that the Rafale 's refuelling probe was not RAM coated , they should check what BW is saying before to talk BS :

 you cannot be serious?

it's irrelevant whether its coated or not.  it is a transmitter because of its shape, size and position.  It's a flag pole sittting up in the sky - why do you think that other western airforces went to retractable probes after the early 80's ??  why do you think that proper signature managed platforms have flush mounted receptacles?

this is basic signature management - its not rocket science. 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       7/25/2009 12:10:10 AM

I can keep doing this all day long . I walk the talk .

no, the history of your engagement and the quality of that engagement demonstrates someone who is proficient at scraping the internet but often does not understand fundamental concepts.  You're not walking anything except a path of consistency that is atypical of teenagers and/or mules 

Now , you tell me what the RCS of this is from the front (I know so be clever) :

grow up.  you've got no idea.  you're not clever at all because you persist in making claims that anyone with half a clue about sig management concepts knows is unsupportable.
you've got no idea about the RCS of the platform either - a 1st year aviation engeering student will tell you immediately that there are enough projections and convergence points on that platform to make it a flying transducer.  again, look at the inlet and the fuselage convergence point.
add in a weapons load and you have an instantly dirty airframe where every mount attached to it adds another signal transducer point.
stop crapping on about these things when its patently clear that you have no idea. at 12 months you were a novelty, now you're just tiresome.

 
Quote    Reply

usajoe1       7/25/2009 2:01:24 AM
 
Read my lips Herald then put a finger up your *** :
 
The actual Rafale F3 beats hands down any F-teen in A2A and A2G .
In fact , there is nothing the USA can field right now with the capabilities of Rafale .
The F-22 is and still an interceptor and the F-35 a problem child prototype .
 
I know you don 't like it , but I , I do . lol !
 
If this those not constitute trolling then what does? You are not funny, or informing. This is utter BS! and I can't believe that this fanboy/troll has been allowed to post this much garbage for so long. It is time to throw this troll out of this informing site. There are many posters here like Herald, Rufus, Warpig, GF, Reactive etc.. that know what they talk about and are a plus to this site, and people like BW come and ruin every post with their Fanboy BS and trolling. This is getting old and needs to stop!
 
Quote    Reply

Rufus       7/25/2009 3:32:24 AM
 "This drawing is telling us much about how things are done . The F-22 and the F-35 systems work the same way , more or less . The Typhoon and Gripen are a notch under . Myself , I believe the Gripen to have a small edge over the Typhoon in sensor fusion but that 's me ."
 
That is because you are an idiot fanboy and would conclude the French system was best regardless of the facts.  You don't have a clue about the F-22, Gripen, F-35 or for that matter, even the Rafale.  You are like a kid with a favorite pro-wrestler...
 
"The "discrete" sticker is not only about passive stealth , far from it . The Rafale is not stealthy enough to do what it does without a powerfull sensor and ECM suite . Simple .
In this regard , it is more advanced than any other European air platform ."
 
They all operate the same way fanboy.  That is the whole point.  The Rafale doesn't do anything differently from any other 4th generation fighter.  There are slight differences in emphasis, the Rafale is more optimised for low altitude flight for instance, but they are the same.  If the Rafale is "discrete" then so is every other late 4th generation aircraft wth minimal RCS reduction and an ECM suite.  
 
"The actual Rafale F3 beats hands down any F-teen in A2A and A2G .
In fact , there is nothing the USA can field right now with the capabilities of Rafale ."
 
Again, more evidence that you are a troll and an idiot fanboy.  The Rafale is still waiting on a targetting pod, and that is just the start.  Why should I bother going through it all again with an idiot?  Even a parrot could eventually learn to repeat it back, but you don't appear to be up to that level.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Rufus       7/25/2009 3:47:48 AM
"You know that Cheers bit just makes you come across as smug and arrogant. Of course that could be the point.
So explain this to me then. If the F-22's coatings are having trouble with rain, then how does the ram coating on the Raf's refueling probe deal with something like JP5? Quite a number of solvents are based on hydrocarbons like you find in fuel. 
As far as the Rafale's external stores goes, Don't you think the US wouldn't have gone with internal bays on the F-117, B-2, F-22 and F-35 (IE. EVERY true stealth aircraft) without a very good reason? "

It is a French plane, therefor in his pea-brain that allows it to play by completely different rules.  If that were any other aircraft he would be demanding "proof" of all the crap he has made up, but since it is the Rafale he thinks that posting a picture of its refueling probe somehow proves it has received LO treatments... 
 
The whole discussion is absurd.  You don't try to reduce the RCS of a refueling probe, you simply make it retractable.  You simply do not leave those sorts of protrusions on a reduced RCS aircraft because there is no good way to make it work.  Imagine having that thing sticking out of the nose of an F-22 or F-35... do you think it would look a little out of place?
 
While we are once again explaining away the myth that the Rafale was designed to be stealthy... (oops, "discrete")
 
Just look at its vertical tail.  That big flat surface is EXACTLY the sort of thing you want to eliminate.  If you see an aircraft that has one, you know you are looking at an aircraft that had zero emphasis on RCS reduction in its design.  
 
Look at the F-22, F-117, F-35, B-2, look at any of the LO UAVs... look at the "Silent Eagle" mock-up... you can even look at the SR-71, probably the first operational plane to have some RCS reduction work. Find me a stealth aircraft with a vertical tail. It is simply one of the very first things you would eliminate if you were trying to make an aircraft stealthy or "discrete."  The fact that the Rafale's designers did not shows that they really hadn't given any meaningful thought to RCS reduction until the late in the design, if at all. 
 
As others have pointed out that is just one of the more obvious features that show the Rafale was not designed to be stealthy, but to a trained eye virtually nothing on the aircraft appears "right" for a stealth aircraft.
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Basilisk Station       7/25/2009 8:55:37 AM

Basilisk :


""So explain this to me then. If the F-22's coatings are having trouble with rain, then how does the ram coating on the Raf's refueling probe deal with something like JP5?""

 

Because our RAM coating is better than yours . CQFD .

 

Cheers .




And France's fully stealthy aircraft is? I mean, seriously. You want us to believe that France is the king of RAM coatings and you've never even designed a true stealth aircraft

You didn't answer my question about the weapons bays (not really surprised you didn't actually). 

Those aren't something you casually build an aircraft around and it has obvious limits on the amount of ordinance you can carry. None of this indicates that it's something that would be done if it wasn't crucial.

So, if you are trying to claim that picture above indicates that it has some sort of "reduced" RCS, you are just making yourself look sillier and sillier. The Rafale is no more stealthy with that kind of load than an Eagle or F-16.

 
Quote    Reply

Blue Apple       7/25/2009 10:28:52 AM
Beazz
 
F22 easily has twice the power of the Rafail and not even close to maxing out like the Rafail already is. EVERY F22 right now has 2 CIPs in it, not on some test bird somewhere,  and has the space already available for a 3rd if need be. Each CIP has the capacity to run 2000 MIPS if need be, unlike the Rafails 1000 and like I said, it has 2 CIPS in them all right now which means without any upgrades whatsoever they can bump it up to 4000 MIPS if need be!! Then if they wish they can stick the 3rd CIP in it and bump it up to 6000 MIPS if they wish. The Rafail is not even in this league. 
 
Get real, fanboy. Only an idiot would compare a system MIPS and claim superiority with such difference. There are so many way to cheat with these numbers (e.g. do the F-22 number count the redundant processing power of not? Does it simply make a frequency x operations per second or is it sustained achievable rate?) that you can't compare them except if they differ by more than one order of magnitude.
 
Herald:
 
No you didn't. You made a claim of what I said and not what I said
 
I quoted your exact words. So what's your excuse? Alzeihmer perhaps? Drugs?
 
You were and are deceptive. Its masked by the strakes and fins and buried exactly as I said.
 
No, you simply don't know what an antenna looks like.

 
http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz233/Blue_Apple666/120-datalink.jpg" />
 
AMRAAM
 
 
http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz233/Blue_Apple666/MICA.jpg" width="600" height="373" /> 
.
 
MICA
 
Same place, same function
 
(bonus point if you understand why the second MICA "missile" does not have a datalink antenna).
 
 No its not the same term for term.
 
Of course it is. See an an-topic reference.
 
BTW, nice touch tring to BS your way by associating APN ad IR missile. Except for the little fact that only someone really clueless would associate both as IR missile can't use APN (no range = no acceleration).
 
Did you understand what I just said? And why the terms for an industrial robot and a MISSILE are NOT the same?
 
The equations are the same. The terms are the same. Missile end games are very simple problems (i.e. single loop, single command) which are very hard to solve in the real world as most of the equation terms are variable throughout the missile trajectory. But that's not excuse for using improper terms or making things up like claiming MICA uses pronav throughout its entire trajectory.
 
Rufus:
 
The whole discussion is absurd.  You don't try to reduce the RCS of a refueling probe, you simply make it retractable. 
 
Or you simply realize that the unlike in the F-35 or F-22, the RCS contribution of the probe on the Rafale is not high enough to matter (because the main body & missile RCS is much higher).
 
Then you compare the performance impact of fitting a fixed probe vs the potential reliability issue of a retractable one. Once that choice is made, perhaps it then makes sense to manufacture fixed probes with as low as possible RCS?
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics