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: UK Pilot flight test the Rafale F3
Bluewings12    11/9/2009 1:57:05 PM
By Peter Collins : Chapter 1 , the aircraft : "Most advanced Allied air forces now have operational fleets of fourth-generation fighters (defined by attributes such as being fly-by-wire, highly unstable, highly agile, net-centric, multi-weapon and multi-role assets). These Western types include the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon and Saab Gripen NG. The Boeing F-15E and Lockheed Martin F-16 have an older heritage, but their latest upgrades give them similar multi-role mission capabilities. Of the above group, only the Super Hornet and Rafale M are capable of aircraft-carrier operations. As these fourth-generation fighters' weapons, sensor systems and net-centric capabilities mature, the likelihood of export orders for such an operationally proven package becomes much more realistic. On behalf of Flight International, I became the first UK test pilot to evaluate the Rafale in its current F3 production standard, applicable to aircraft for both French air force and French navy frontline squadrons. The "proof-of-concept" Rafale A first flew in 1986 as an aerodynamic study, leading to the programme's formal launch two years later. The slightly smaller single-seat Rafale C01 and two-seat B01 for the French air force and single-seat M01 and M02 prototypes for the navy flew from 1991. The first production-standard Rafale flew in 1998, and entered service with the navy's 12F squadron at Landivisiau in 2004 in the F1 (air-to-air) standard. Deliveries of the air force's B- and C-model aircraft started in 2006 in the F2 standard, dubbed "omnirole" by Dassault. Since 2008, all Rafales have been delivered in the F3 standard, which adds reconnaissance pod integration and MBDA's ASMP-A nuclear weapon capability. All aircraft delivered in earlier production standards will be brought up to the F3 configuration over the next two years. The French forces plan to purchase 294 Rafales: 234 for the air force and 60 for the navy. Their Rafales are set to replace seven legacy fighter types, and will remain as France's principal combat aircraft until at least 2040. To date, about 70 Rafales have been delivered, with a current production rate of 12 a year. Rafale components and airframe sections are built at various Dassault facilities across France and assembled near Bordeaux, but maintained in design and engineering configuration "lockstep" using the virtual reality, Dassault-patented Catia database also used on the company's Falcon 7X business jet. Rafale software upgrades are scheduled to take place every two years, a complete set of new-generation sensors is set for 2012 and a full mid-life upgrade is planned for 2020 SUPERB PERFORMANCE The Rafale was always designed as an aircraft capable of any air-to-ground, reconnaissance or nuclear strike mission, but retaining superb air-to-air performance and capabilities. Air force and navy examples have made three fully operational deployments to Afghanistan since 2005, giving the French forces unparalleled combat and logistical experience. The commitments have also proved the aircraft's net-centric capabilities within the co-ordination required by coalition air forces and the command and control environment when delivering air support services to ground forces. Six Rafale Ms recently carried out a major joint exercise with the US Navy from the deck of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier the USS Theodore Roosevelt. The air force's B/C fighters have 80% commonality with the navy's Rafale M model, the main differences being the latter's navalised landing gear, arrestor hook and some fuselage longitudinal strengthening. Overall, the M is about 300kg (661lb) heavier than the B, and has 13 hardpoints, against the 14 found on air force examples. Dassault describes the Rafale as omnirole rather than multirole. This is derived from the wide variety of air-to-ground and air-to-air weapons, sensor pods and fuel tank combinations it can carry; the optimisation of aircraft materials and construction; and the full authority digital FBW controlling a highly agile (very aerodynamically unstable) platform. This also gives the aircraft a massive centre of gravity range and allows for a huge combination of different mission stores to be carried, including the asymmetric loading of heavy stores, both laterally and longitudinally. Other attributes include the wide range of smart and discrete sensors developed for the aircraft, and the way that the vast array of received information is "data fused" by a powerful central computer to reduce pilot workload when presented in the head-down, head-level and head-up displays. The Rafale is designed for day or night covert low-level penetration, and can carry a maximum of 9.5t of external ordinance, equal to the much larger F-15E. With a basic empty weight of 10.3t, an internal fuel capacity of 4.7t and a maximum take-off weight of 24.5t, the Rafale can lift 140% of additional lo
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 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   NEXT
Bluewings12       11/9/2009 1:59:32 PM
Chapter 2 , the flight :
 
"My evaluation aircraft was two-seat Rafale B number B301, the first production model to be delivered, which Dassault retains for test purposes. The cockpit was to full F3 standard, with just a small additional test control panel (telemetry) fitted in the front cockpit. The sortie was flown from Istres, near Marseilles.

I did not have time for any simulator, avionics bench or groundschool training. I received a 1.5h cockpit familiarisation on the ground in a Rafale at Dassault's Istres facility on the day before the evaluation. Other than this, I would fly the complete evaluation myself from the front cockpit. The ease and success with which I could fly and cope with such a massively capable fighter would be a clear indication of the Rafale's "fight and forget" design concept.

My evaluation objectives were threefold. Could the Rafale properly be termed "omnirole" with the range of its on-board sensors and weapons? Was the aircraft truly a fourth-generation fighter in terms of performance? And would its safety features keep me safe in such a demanding flight evaluation profile having had no time for any familiarisation in the simulator?

My safety pilot for the evaluation was Dassault Rafale project test pilot Olivier "Nino" Ferrer, an ex-French navy fighter pilot and highly experienced on Vought F-8 Crusaders and Dassault Super Etendards. A chase Mirage 2000 was used to provide close formation, air-to-air refuelling and tail-chase evaluation, and was flown by Philippe Duchateau, another Dassault project test pilot.

Pre-mission planning was carried out on a standard commercial computer laptop with access to the loaded program (confidential) protected by a security dongle inserted into the laptop USB. The mission plan was then downloaded onto a solid-state mil-spec memory card and loaded by the pilot via a panel on the left side of the aircraft.

I thought this straightforward but simple planning system was a very enhancing design feature, especially when the aircraft would be detached on operations or away from its main base on land-away.

I wore standard French flying clothing, including life preserver and g-suit. With the Rafale's Martin-Baker Mk16 ejection seat raked back at nearly 30°, the French have found there is no operational need for an upper-body pressure suit. Entry and exit to the B/C models is via a ground crew-positioned vertical ladder, but the M model has an integral drop-down step. Seat height and rudder pedal adjustment is electric, and the cockpit is a classic fighter "snug" fit, but with all the required flight switches forward of the 3-9 body line, it fitted me like a glove.

The single throttle and sidestick controller contain over 34 separate switches, many with multifunctions, but the main switches such as airbrake, radio telecommunications, auto pilot and auto throttle were "chunky" and easy to differentiate.

TOUCH SENSITIVE

The left and right lateral head-down display screens were touch sensitive with additional L/R rotary and L/R finger switches to designate and control display modes. It is here, for some routine tasks, that a future direct voice input upgrade could be useful.

The head-level display (HLD) allowed for a wide-angle view of the tactical situation and is focused at infinity, so there is no need to refocus your eyes when scanning rapidly between head-up and head-level. Advances in display technology may enable a future HLD to retain the same advantages in a more flat panel display and give more cockpit space.

The wide-angle (30° x 20°) holographic HUD meant the displayed symbology was delightfully uncluttered and sharply focused and could be viewed completely without any head movement away from a design eye point position.

After the sideways-hinged canopy (designed to allow for unrestricted ejection seat removal if required) was closed electrically and with a rapid engine start using the auxiliary power unit completed, we were ready to taxi about 90s after engine stabilisation.

Taxi speed is easily controlled, because the residual ground thrust is limited by keeping both "mini-throttles" (acting as low-pressure cocks) in the "idle" position before setting them to "normal" for take-off. Ground steering was highly accurate and responsive, and the brakes were very smooth and progressive.

Our take-off mass was 16.1t (10.8t basic and 5.3t fuel) carrying one supersonic fuel tank centreline. Take-off was in full afterburner from the brakes and with a rotate of 125kt that came about 9s after brake release. Gear was retracted immediately after lift-off and afterburner cancelled at 250kt.

I was immediately aware after take-off of the sensitivity of the flight controls to any demand I mad
 
Quote    Reply

SlowMan       11/9/2009 2:11:37 PM
No comparison with Typhoon.....
 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/9/2009 2:14:14 PM

No comparison with Typhoon.....

He hasn't flown it, hence no comparison possible.
 
Quote    Reply

SlowMan       11/9/2009 2:41:08 PM
Well, a Typhoon pilot might find Rafale disappointing, since he's used to supercruise.

 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    SOME THINGS TO NOTE.   11/9/2009 2:49:37 PM
1. Transonic buffeting at that altitude? Not good at all-especially that CLEAN with an add on fuel tank.
2. Need for that fuel tank. Short ranged, appallingly so for the flight condition described.
3. Bomb truck features emphasized.
4. Afghanistan deployments (2 aircraft average) were weapon proofs and advertising stunts, not operational deployments as claimed.
5. NATO commonality is claimed with old obsolescing low data rate systems overdue for replacement. Why brag about this?
6. Note that the aircraft is actually firmly declared to be 4th generation and average? 
7. Optical systems described as bearing only ID systems.
8. Mirage 2000 picked out of the sky at 30 n. miles? Just how bad is that RBE2 radar?  
 
 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/9/2009 2:56:57 PM

2. Need for that fuel tank. Short ranged, appallingly so for the flight condition described.
 
He bascially tested the airaft through a broad envelope from manoeuvering for AA to low level terrain following. It isn't said how far they travelled so that this claim is somewhat nonsense.
 
4. Afghanistan deployments (2 aircraft average) were weapon proofs and advertising stunts, not operational deployments as claimed.
 
Supporting troops on the ground is not an operational deployment?
 
5. NATO commonality is claimed with old obsolescing low data rate systems overdue for replacement. Why brag about this?

If the compatiblity is a given, there is nothing wrong about that.
 
6. Note that the aircraft is actually firmly declared to be 4th generation and average? 

Note that he actually declared F-15, F-16 etc. not to be in that class.

7. Optical systems described as bearing only ID systems.
 
The TV-camera actually is for IDing, the IRST/FLIR is for search and track.

8. Mirage 2000 picked out of the sky at 30 n. miles? Just how bad is that RBE2 radar?  

Doesn't mean it couldn' have detected/tracked it earlier.
 
Quote    Reply

giblets       11/9/2009 2:59:22 PM
Seems Peter Collins, is an ex RAF guy,  Team leader of the Red Arrows, Lightnings, and Harrier GR3's, later a test pilot for Raytheon and now flight international, where the article can be seen in full here 
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       11/9/2009 3:23:25 PM



2. Need for that fuel tank. Short ranged, appallingly so for the flight condition described.

He bascially tested the airaft through a broad envelope from manoeuvering for AA to low level terrain following. It isn't said how far they travelled so that this claim is somewhat nonsense.

His flight description is about an hour in the air. That is rather firm.
 

4. Afghanistan deployments (2 aircraft average) were weapon proofs and advertising stunts, not operational deployments as claimed.

Supporting troops on the ground is not an operational deployment?

That is a weapon's proof of type. Two is not a real deployment.
 
5. NATO commonality is claimed with old obsolescing low data rate systems overdue for replacement. Why brag about this?

If the compatiblity is a given, there is nothing wrong about that.

Electronic obsolescence is a positive choice? What killed the F-22 again?
 
6. Note that the aircraft is actually firmly declared to be 4th generation and average? 

Note that he actually declared F-15, F-16 etc. not to be in that class.

This can be taken two ways. If he talks anything less than Block 60 F-16 or the BEAGLE then its not a favorable comment about Rafale at all..


7. Optical systems described as bearing only ID systems.

The TV-camera actually is for IDing, the IRST/FLIR is for search and track.

All that does is still give bearing only data as the target is tracked across the FoV, useless for ranging, and you know this, MK.


8. Mirage 2000 picked out of the sky at 30 n. miles? Just how bad is that RBE2 radar?  

Doesn't mean it couldn' have detected/tracked it earlier.
 
He actually describes atmospherics and flight conditions at the time of target lockup, including the aspect and clutter conditions, so just how bad is that radar? Very. It doesn't help to draw attention to its real performance parameters.

 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/9/2009 3:51:08 PM
the pilot left the RAF 16 years ago - what peer aircraft has he flown to even make a comparison against contemp peers?

its gushing schoolboy stuff if he can't provide recent comparative flight analysis.
 
Quote    Reply

StobieWan       11/9/2009 4:19:46 PM
It's a real shame the pilot doesn't have comparable experience with the Tiffy - I'd love to see some comments by someone who'd flown both types, particularly with reference to the performance of the engines, the radar and the IRST systems (not sure if OSF is on the F3 though?)
 
I do like the Rafale, it's a pretty aircraft and it's European so I've a soft spot for it. I'm just a bit tired of the fanboy rubbish from all sides :(
 
 
Ian
 
 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics