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: 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   NEXT
MK       11/13/2009 8:21:21 AM

No, the Falcon Edge uses the LR-105 RWR, it's a totally different all-digital channelized system with long- and short-base interferometry.  It is advertised as doing single-ship geolocation and ESM.

 

As far as ALE-55, it completed operational testing and acceptance in '08 and DOD placed an order for 401 of them with delivery starting in FY10.  So they are probably not flying yet but on order.

 

They are actually working on IDECM Block 4 now, with additional capabilities for ALR-67(V)3 and a new onboard jammer.  IDECM Block 4 scheduled IOC 2014 with service on both Super Bug and C model Hornets.

Thanks for the info, so the AN/ALR-56M was obviously false information. You never learn out. 
 
Quote    Reply

Kovy       11/14/2009 6:08:12 AM

The geography and the reports are against you.
 

Now do you see where this goes?   



I see.
I don't have time to lose with you anymore.
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       11/14/2009 7:48:32 AM
The French Navy currently has 16 Rafale F3s (the MN lost one not long ago in a collision) .
 
So during the next deployment over A-Stan from the CdG , Raf F3s will be used . I said "actual" Ops because the deployment is expected soon .
*****************************
On a different note , it surely looks like the Rafale is giving an astonishing "bang for the buck" . The latest estimations generally accepted are : $60 millions for the Rafale, $80 millions for the Eurofighter/Typhoon, $100-$120 millions for the JSF (the Times even quoted : At current prices, the aircraft will cost close to £90m each, but this could rise to more than £100m , around $150m) .

The Joint Team Assessment (JET) 's latest report (2009) also says the same and this pushed the LM officials to go berserk and in total denying .
The already sky high price of the F-35 at present early stage (the aircraft is still a prototypes with many problems) forced the UK to back down and review Her plans with drastic mesures . We all remember the bad news :
 
""«The Royal Navy has agreed to sacrifice one of its two new aircraft carriers to save about £8.2 billion from the defence budget. The admirals, who have battled for a decade to secure the two new 65,000-ton carriers, have been forced to back down because of the soaring cost of the American-produced Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft due to fly off them. [?]»It is too late for the navy to renege on contracts to build the two carriers, the Queen Elizabeth, due to go into service in 2016, and the Prince of Wales, due to follow in 2018. Although the second carrier will be built, it will be used as an amphibious commando ship, with only helicopters on board instead of JSF aircraft. [?] The decision to have only one new aircraft carrier will cut the number of JSFs to be flown by RAF squadrons from 138 to about 50, saving £7.6 billion. At current prices, the aircraft will cost close to £90m each, but this could rise to more than £100m.»""

Ouch ...
This has been going on for a long time now , we also remember that in 2006 the UK asked France for a possible 154 Rafale Ms package (!) :
 
""« The Euroskeptic blog EU Referendum points to (and has scanned images of) a March 26, 2006 story in The Financial Mail, noting that the ?unexpected verbal offer? to buy ?up to 150? carrier-capable Rafale-M jets ?came on 24 January when defence secretary John Reid met his opposite number, Michele Alliot-Marie, for crucial talks in London.? An early inclusion of PA2 features such as steam catapults (despite their complexity and maintenance headaches), plus elimination of the ?ski jump? ramp at the bow, would be sufficient to accommodate the fourth-generation Rafale-M.""
 
The UK wanted to put some pressure on the US but failed to do so and now , the British find themselves trapped by the US . It 's already costing them an harm and a leg just to participate at the crappiest program in history of fighter aircraft .
 
What would you do with the same budget : Buy 150 Rafale M-F3s now or bet on buying 50 F-35s around 2013-2015 with the hope that the aircraft will be a flyable machine ?
 
I think there is a reason why Peter Collins said :
 
""It is worth remembering that stealth-optimised, or fifth-generation fighters such as the Lockheed F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter are not only likely to be hugely expensive, but they can only preserve their stealth characteristics by carrying a very limited weapons load in their internal weapon bays.
Therefore, in the current and predicted financial defence climate, it could well be that so-called fourth-generation fighters will remain the aircraft of choice for most nations - perhaps even including the UK.
Moreover, the fact that the Rafale is the only European fighter in production that is carrier-capable gives it, in my opinion, a distinct advantage in any future export "fly-off" competition as a single combat type that can equip a country's air force and naval air arm.""
 
When you compare the actual capabilities of Typhoon , Gripen , F-35 (?) against Rafale 's , the difference is enormous .
Yet , the Dassault fighter is the cheapest .
In fact , the only other aircraft able to more or less compete are the SH and the F-15K . I say "compete" to not ups
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       11/14/2009 8:17:13 AM
Lynstyne :
 
""I was happily aware that you dont have to transfer 20 tonns of fuel at a time.""
 
I know :-)
But if you have to transfer 6.5 tons (!) of fuel and you don 't have an available Tanker nearby , you can use a Rafale :
 
http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/5452/rafalesupernounou.jpg" width="640" height="425" /> 
 
Two 2.000l , two 1.250l and a "buddy-buddy" refueling pod , 2 Micas . For a total take-off weight of just over 22 tons , hehe :-)
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

jackjack       11/14/2009 10:02:57 AM
now that you have been banned for being a TROLL at keypublishing for a month,
i ask again, perhaps you will have time to pick up the dassault topic and show us that it isnt a bracket, but 1/2 cm of ram as you claimed
 
can you find the thread alright or would you like me to bump it for you ?
 
Quote    Reply

StevoJH       11/14/2009 12:01:35 PM
Bluewings,
 
That Article about the RN is incorrect. The UK defense minister stated in Parliament a couple of days later that:
 
a) Both QE and PoW will be fully capable and to the same standards.
b) Planned F-35 acquitions have not changed.
 
Your trolling is getting rather annoying (if your fan boi-ness wasn't enough).
 
Quote    Reply

StevoJH       11/14/2009 12:08:52 PM


When you compare the actual capabilities of Typhoon , Gripen , F-35 (?) against Rafale 's , the difference is enormous .
Yet , the Dassault fighter is the cheapest .


In fact , the only other aircraft able to more or less compete are the SH and the F-15K . I say "compete" to not upset the US posters as the Rafale is superior to any F-teen .

Is the Rafale cheaper then the Gripen? The reason I ask is that the Gripen is the only one of the aircraft you listed that the Rafale might actually be better then.
 
F-18E/F has much better sensor integration et al then Rafale (or Typhoon and Gripen for that matter).
 
However the F-35 is in a whole new league. Especially when it comes to *offensive* air ops over enemy territory on the first day of war.
 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/14/2009 1:48:21 PM
The French Navy currently has 16 Rafale F3s (the MN lost one not long ago in a collision) .
 
Actually 2 aircraft were lost not one.

 On a different note , it surely looks like the Rafale is giving an astonishing "bang for the buck" . The latest estimations generally accepted are : $60 millions for the Rafale, $80 millions for the Eurofighter/Typhoon, $100-$120 millions for the JSF (the Times even quoted : At current prices, the aircraft will cost close to £90m each, but this could rise to more than £100m , around $150m) .

You are mistaking UPC and fly-away cost here and thereby create a false impression. Rafale's fly-away price is somewhere in the range of ~55 mln ? though the C models might be a bit cheaper, while the B and M models are bit bit more expensive. The Typhoon isn't far of by that and the Gripen is certainly cheaper than that. The final fly-away price of the F-35 has yet to be seen, albeit I'm a bit pessimistic on the cost predictions besides LM, they are very optimistic as they ever were.

When you compare the actual capabilities of Typhoon , Gripen , F-35 (?) against Rafale 's , the difference is enormous .
Yet , the Dassault fighter is the cheapest .

As said the Rafale is certainly not the cheapest and not much cheaper than the Typhoon either. It's capabilities are certainly good, but not better in all areas.
 


 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/14/2009 1:49:48 PM

 F-18E/F has much better sensor integration et al then Rafale (or Typhoon and Gripen for that matter).

While the AN/APG-79 is likely to be the better radar, I don't see the overall sensor integration being better than on the ECDs.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/14/2009 1:54:58 PM
now that you have been banned for being a TROLL at keypublishing for a month,

i ask again, perhaps you will have time to pick up the dassault topic and show us that it isnt a bracket, but 1/2 cm of ram as you claimed
can you find the thread alright or would you like me to bump it for you ?

don't worry, he will trot out the same rubbish again and again.  it took 5 years for him to stop crapping on about his view of the sensitivity of RCS on an LO platform even though I referenced 2 sources - one of them anecdotal from an operators perspective, and the other from a radar engineers reference book.  I used the same reference twice in 5 years and it was only after bumping his original thread to show that he was a liar that he conceded that he didn't know squat about the impact of poor panel fit etc.... and its impact.

his comment about RAM on the retention bracket is a pearler...  that one has done a few world tours amongst some 
of my colleagues... :)

 
Quote    Reply
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   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics