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: 6*F-22 vs 6*Typhoon vs 6*Rafale in the UAE?!
giblets    11/16/2009 4:48:58 AM
According to both Flight Global, and Defence News, other than attending the Dubai airshow, the USAF, RAF, and FAF each sent 6 of their finest fighter aircraft to the desert Kingdom to take part in multinational exercises. Other than adding much fuel to the fire for forum members here! It raises many questions (such as why the USAF was unable to send 1 F-22 to Paris, and can now send 6 to the UAE, despite no drop in operational tempo). And will the F22 and Typhoon not be in the air at the same time again?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Bluewings12       12/22/2009 5:41:25 PM
@ Hellfire :
""To summarize, the MICA-IR gives an advantage in the ~25-40km range, that's it.""
 
I would say 25-50km range . The missile cone due to the IR seeker doesn 't slow down the missile by 20% .
Then , since an IR Mica works the same as an EM Mica in BVR (uplink or not) , there are more or less equals in most situations , the IR having the edge during the end game because of passive homing .
As an example , two Rafales could fire a salvo of 4 EM and 4 IR Micas , turn away in full AB and keep updating their missiles with the L-16 from the data of another Rafale(s) flying 30nm behind , outside the enemy missile bubble .
(this can be done with any aircraft loaded with BVR missiles , good radar and link-16 (or similar intra link))
The real danger even for a experienced pilot flying a well equipped machine is to understand that some IR missiles are mixed within the salvo . Actually , it is impossible to know as we don 't have the technology .
The defenders 's Aesa Radars might pick-up some missiles , the RWRs will confirm the lock , frequencies used , bearing (if the RWR is good) , but after that the pilot and his aircraft will try to focus on the EM missiles end games (when they go "live") to take the last evasives mesures (turning hard , jamming and launching chaffs) .
The IR missiles are still an unseen quantity and they are coming , their end games will be passive and unless the pilot sees them with his own eyes , his aircraft is going to get hit .
 
Since latest aircraft have missile launch detectors , you must hide some little IR bastards within the salvo .
The uplink works the same with the EM or the IR version , it IS the same missile , only the seeker is different .
Furthermore , the IR version can lock on a LO target by itself at 25-30km .
 
Cheers .
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/22/2009 6:14:20 PM

The real danger even for a experienced pilot flying a well equipped machine is to understand that some IR missiles are mixed within the salvo . Actually , it is impossible to know as we don 't have the technology .

yes they can.  systems are sophisticated enough to start separating the leakers
 
 
The IR missiles are still an unseen quantity and they are coming , their end games will be passive and unless the pilot sees them with his own eyes , his aircraft is going to get hit .

no they're not.  see above
 

Furthermore , the IR version can lock on a LO target by itself at 25-30km .

No it can't.  it cannot discriminate on the target - it heads towards an identified source which at 30k is a blob, it does not know whether the blob is a decoy heat source, whether its a signal spoof, or whether its real.  Locking on at 30km is just idiotic as the implication is that the target is genuine and validated. In actual fact an aircraft based IRST will not get definition on what its heading towards until probably 2/3rds (and usually less) of your claimed distance - and the only way the pilot will know is if he can actually see what the weapon is seeing.
 
again I refer to what hot and cold imagers can actually do in real life, and again without going into specific measurements, on assessments that I have personally  witnessed, the advertised range of ident and engagement is usually 2/3rds of vendors claims where it becomes usable and realistic.  at 1/3rd range you can then start talking about the unimpeachability of the track and start assigning levels of confidence.
 
assigning confidence levels at 250km with IRST is just unmitigated  rubbish.
 
btw, you do realise that the brits and US have actually demonstrated  that even helos with GMTI and IRST pods can pick up missile leakers?  thats what picket duty does.
 


 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    typo fix   12/22/2009 6:26:28 PM
should be:
 
assigning confidence levels at 25-30km with IRST is just unmitigated  rubbish.
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       12/22/2009 6:32:10 PM
As an example , two Rafales could fire a salvo of 4 EM and 4 IR Micas , turn away in full AB and keep updating their missiles with the L-16 from the data of another Rafale(s) flying 30nm behind , outside the enemy missile bubble
 
Kind of, but keep in mind the aircraft-to-missile datalink on Rafale (as on most other fighters) uses the radar.  So you have to keep the missile in your radar FOV if you want to update it.  This is why SAAB/Selex are talking up the "swashplate" mount for the Raven on Gripen NG, and why some Sukhois have their PESA radars on gimbals even though they are heavy / complex / failure prone.  The bigger your FOV the better.

Also, the way you wrote the above implies that the datalink between the AC and the Mica is Link 16.  That is also not the case.
 
Furthermore , the IR version can lock on a LO target by itself at 25-30km
 
Negative.  At best it can be cued to a target at those ranges, it is not going to acquire anything on its own outside WVR.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    clarity   12/22/2009 8:33:52 PM

No it can't.  it cannot discriminate on the target - it heads towards an identified source which at 30k is a blob, it does not know whether the blob is a decoy heat source, whether its a signal spoof, or whether its real.  Locking on at 30km is just idiotic as the implication is that the target is genuine and validated. In actual fact an aircraft based IRST will not get definition on what its heading towards until probably 2/3rds (and usually less) of your claimed distance - and the only way the pilot will know is if he can actually see what the weapon is seeing. (and that may have to include complimentary systems, off and/or onboard)
 

again I refer to what hot and cold imagers can actually do in real life, and again without going into specific measurements, on assessments that I have personally  witnessed, the advertised range of ident and engagement is usually 2/3rds of vendors claims where it becomes usable and realistic.  at 1/3rd range you can then start talking about the unimpeachability of that track and start assigning levels of confidence.
 
assigning confidence levels at 25-30km by stating lockon at that range  with IRST is just unmitigated  rubbish. IRST seekers do not do what you claim at that range, they aren't discriminating enough to generate kill confidence at those ranges.  they are in effect flying morons until they close the gap - and that gap at a target identification level effectively reaches WVR numbers unless there are other complimentary assets feeding in or unless other complimentary onboard systems can assist in the validation.  By itself at 30km ie BVR track and kill ranges?  Thats rubbish.  You're steering a weapon to a blob.

btw, you do realise that the brits and US have actually demonstrated  that even helos with GMTI and IRST pods can pick up missile leakers?  thats what picket duty does.

 
Quote    Reply

warpig       12/23/2009 1:58:19 AM

@ Hellfire :


""To summarize, the MICA-IR gives an advantage in the ~25-40km range, that's it.""

 
BW:
I would say....


Knee, meet rubber mallet.
 
Q.E.D.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       12/23/2009 2:42:46 AM
Its amazing all this great stuff BW states the Rafale can do with link 16 whilst simultaneously refusing to acknowledge a miriad of other platforms are capable of  using data links. and perhaps handing off data to missiles.
 
 
 
i especially like the emphesis on link 16/jtids you know the system the rest of NATO has used for the best part of 20 yrs as though its some fantastic great system.
 
I thought link was being replaced by link 22 - or have i misunderstood
 
Quote    Reply

Hellfire       12/23/2009 5:15:55 AM
>> I would say 25-50km range . The missile cone due to the IR seeker doesn 't slow down the missile by 20% .

Look at that:

It's not sure that the drag coefficient is not increased by more than 20%. The range is going to be reduced for 3 reasons: 1) the missile will not accelerate as much 2) it will slow down faster 3) the effectiveness of trajectory algorithms to increase its range - essentially climbing - is reduced.

At that kind of range an AIM-120C will get the job done 4-8 seconds faster.





 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/23/2009 6:42:13 AM


I thought link was being replaced by link 22 - or have i misunderstood

Link 22 is intended to be a draft in complimentary system to Link 16 in the interim.
 
unfort the public links on Link22 are not  up to date. (eg participants are understated and prog status is out of date).
 
eg Aust intention is to have Link22 on the AWD's and AWACs and potentially the SHornets as part of the interim agreement 

 I did ask at the public element of the briefing for JSF in Apr 089 whether RAAF JSF was to be geared up but no commitment was made.  One would think that at an NCW level. if its going onto the AWACs and AWD's that it would also end up on the pointys.....
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/23/2009 6:56:10 AM

Its amazing all this great stuff BW states the Rafale can do with link 16 whilst simultaneously refusing to acknowledge a miriad of other platforms are capable of  using data links. and perhaps handing off data to missiles.

more so when you consider that countries like Aust have Link 16 wired for their armour, that its used by various non aviation elements, and that its regarded as getting long in the tooth (esp with the advent of Link22).  IIRC (and ber in mind the public data on L22 is out of dare) there are some 10 countries now in the dev team.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics