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       12/23/2009 12:58:03 PM
I said :
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 .
gf , you responded :
""yes they can.  systems are sophisticated enough to start separating the leakers""
 
Please , I am asking for a proof because as far as I know , it is impossible to know from BVR range which Micas have been fired at you . 
I also said :
Furthermore , the IR version can lock on a LO target by itself at 25-30km .
You responded :
""No it can't.""
 
The Magic2 already had a 20km acquisition range and has never been use as a mini-IRST like the Mica . Just to give you something to compare , -5s pilots here in Dijon train very often with the Swiss Hornets and they can see the Douglas fighter turning 10km away with their own eyes . Myself , I sometimes watch with my eyes (from the ground) a M2000-5 taking off from the BA 102 Airbase and in normal weather , I can still see it when its over Genlis , 8 km away . I 've got a good eyesight , pilots have better eyes than mine so imagine what an advanced and very sensitive IR seeker like Mica can "see" at 25-30km . If I remember well , the Mica 's seeker uses a dual band with a 128x128 pixel resolution (or is it 256x256 ? I go to check) .
The target "discrimination" is something different gf , as an example if you fire an IR Mica BVR at 4 fighters flying close arrow or close ladder formation , the Mica ~if left on its own~ will target one of the 4 . Which one is unknown .
If you want to hit (let 's say) No2 , use your radar or your LRF to tell the missile .
Nothing new here .
 
Now , when you say :
""Locking on at 30km is just idiotic as the implication is that the target is genuine and validated.""
 
Yes the target is genuine AND validated by the pilot own eyes because he 's watching it on TV (OSF) .
gf , this is the very reason why the Rafale shined at the last European TigerMeet , the fighter could kill air and ground targets (even ships) well before anyone else because the rules of the DACT were to get a confirmed ID before to shoot .
Do you want me to post the report ?
Tell me just one thing , if a F-35 detects on radar (look-down and SAR mode) a far away ship sailing in the Ormuz straight (let 's say 50km) , how the fighter can possibly know (on its own) that it is an Italian ship or an Iranian ship before to fire an Anti-ship missile ?
The Rafale knows it right away ~it is Iranian~ and fire an Excocet Blk II .
 
(back in a short time)
 
Cheers .

 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       12/23/2009 3:20:46 PM
Yes the target is genuine AND validated by the pilot own eyes because he 's watching it on TV (OSF) .
 
And the TV is cued by radar.

gf , this is the very reason why the Rafale shined at the last European TigerMeet , the fighter could kill air and ground targets (even ships) well before anyone else because the rules of the DACT were to get a confirmed ID before to shoot .

Because the TV was being cued by radar.
 
Tell me just one thing , if a F-35 detects on radar (look-down and SAR mode) a far away ship sailing in the Ormuz straight (let 's say 50km) , how the fighter can possibly know (on its own) that it is an Italian ship or an Iranian ship before to fire an Anti-ship missile ?
 
ISAR, not SAR.  And that is how the aircrew will identify the ship, by looking at the ISAR image.
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       12/23/2009 3:34:34 PM

If I remember well , the Mica 's seeker uses a dual band with a 128x128 pixel resolution (or is it 256x256 ? I go to check) .
 
 
Yes, absolutely, please go check.  Also, if you find a source on-line, please post the link to it.  Hopefully the source will be describing the missiles actually in the FAF inventory and currently in use, and not some seeker under development for potential, possible future acquisition.
 
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       12/23/2009 3:52:18 PM
Tell me just one thing , if a F-35 detects on radar (look-down and SAR mode) a far away ship sailing in the Ormuz straight (let 's say 50km) , how the fighter can possibly know (on its own) that it is an Italian ship or an Iranian ship before to fire an Anti-ship missile ?
 
ISAR, not SAR.  And that is how the aircrew will identify the ship, by looking at the ISAR image.
 
Though, if you're talking about fantasy scenario restrictions where they absolutely have to get a visual ID on the target, the F-35 guy will use his EOTS, the Super Bug guy will use his ATFLIR, etc. 
 
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/ELEC_ATFLIR_Imagery_lg.jpg" width="537" height="467" /> 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/23/2009 5:10:43 PM


Please , I am asking for a proof because as far as I know , it is impossible to know from BVR range which Micas have been fired at you
all flight weapons have characterstics.  they all emit or provide characteristics for sensor systems to read.  if you have the systems signature or behaviour characteristics in the dbase then you can start to know what it is.
 
Just to give you something to compare , -5s pilots here in Dijon train very often with the Swiss Hornets and they can see the Douglas fighter turning 10km away with their own eyes . Myself , I sometimes watch with my eyes (from the ground) a M2000-5 taking off from the BA 102 Airbase and in normal weather , I can still see it when its over Genlis , 8 km away . I 've got a good eyesight , pilots have better eyes than mine so imagine what an advanced and very sensitive IR seeker like Mica can "see" at 25-30km . If I remember well , the Mica 's seeker uses a dual band with a 128x128 pixel resolution (or is it 256x256 ? I go to check) .

go back and read exactly what I said about confidence in detailing a track at various ranges.  10km is wvr and is what I've clearly stated in my response.
 
the missile by itself can only see a blob at 30km, unless its assisted by other systems thats all it will see at that range.
 
Yes the target is genuine AND validated by the pilot own eyes because he 's watching it on TV (OSF) .

guess what cued the TV?
 
gf , this is the very reason why the Rafale shined at the last European TigerMeet , the fighter could kill air and ground targets (even ships) well before anyone else because the rules of the DACT were to get a confirmed ID before to shoot .

and it was cued by what?  see above.
 

Do you want me to post the report ?

No need, refer to previous.
 
Tell me just one thing , if a F-35 detects on radar (look-down and SAR mode) a far away ship sailing in the Ormuz straight (let 's say 50km) , how the fighter can possibly know (on its own) that it is an Italian ship or an Iranian ship before to fire an Anti-ship missile ?

SAR is what helicopters do on the rear port side of a carrier when launch and recovery is underway, or from the life saving club.  ISAR is the correct terminology
 
The Rafale knows it right away ~it is Iranian~ and fire an Excocet Blk II .

because it is using a combination of sensor systems to ident and validate. - its not using "just" the IRST. 




 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       12/23/2009 5:32:47 PM
155E :
""And the TV is cued by radar .""

Not only , it can also be cued by Spectra (and by Mica IR at 25-30km) .
Nevertheless , I cannot see any problem using a Pesa or an Aesa radar to cue a long range TV at BVR range . 
If you 're talking about jamming a LPI radar ~which is possible if you are good~  you could indeed blind the RBE2 but Spectra would provide the needed coordinates to target the opposite jamming platform (precise ECCMs) and cue the TV .
This is ~as you know~ about various means of detecting and IDing various targets under hostile ECM cover .
The Rafale is very good at it , because it is not a pure stealth fighter .
 
""ISAR, not SAR.""
 
Whatever , here we call it SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) :
h*tp://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/238/73249926-0475-4efa-a174-1ebbb1a4cc0f.pdf?LangType=2057 
 
You said :
""And that is how the aircrew will identify the ship, by looking at the ISAR image.""
 
The Rafale can do that as well but what happen if the radar is jammed ?
Both Rafales and F-35s will use their other means to get a picture of the target : OSF + LRF + SPECTRA for the Rafale ,  EOTS + LRF + AN/ASQ-239 for the F-35 .
I do not know any other aircraft who can do that . But out of the 2 , only the Rafale is operational and as such helds the lead for the foreseeable futur . This is what the French posters here are trying to say and rightly .
This is not about stumping our chests , it is about making sure that the people here on SP knows enough about the Rafale , so they can stop bashing for no reasons . 
I ask you a very simple and honest question now :
Which potential enemy aircraft could challenge the Rafale in AtoA , AtoG , SEADS , Interdiction , Deep strike , Naval strike (from Carrier or not) and ELINT ?
I do not know any Russian or Chinese or (fill the dots) fighter who can come close .  France and Dassault had it right .
Did we built the Rafale to attack the USA ??! We 're not that stupid .
 
Cheers .   

 
 
Quote    Reply

jackjack       12/23/2009 5:34:13 PM

If I remember well , the Mica 's seeker uses a dual band with a 128x128 pixel resolution (or is it 256x256 ? I go to check) .
 Yes, absolutely, please go check.  Also, if you find a source on-line, please post the link to it.  Hopefully the source will be describing the missiles actually in the FAF inventory and currently in use, and not some seeker under development for potential, possible future acquisition.
this is just another example of why BW is an idiot.
after such a claim, i think he will be too embarrassed to post the seeker specs of the mica
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/23/2009 5:46:50 PM

""ISAR, not SAR.""
 

Whatever , here we call it SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) :

h*tp://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/238/73249926-0475-4efa-a174-1ebbb1a4cc0f.pdf?LangType=2057 

 

and you're abusing the terminology.  SAR is NOT ISAR.  thats like saying that the Citroen 2CV and a 407 are both "just" cars
 
(well maybe it is if the Rafale has taken on the capabilities of something like the Remus 100, or if you're not using it for recovery watch like the poor bastard aft/port during launch/recovery)
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       12/23/2009 6:19:51 PM
""ISAR, not SAR.""
 
Whatever , here we call it SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) :
h*tp://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/238/73249926-0475-4efa-a174-1ebbb1a4cc0f.pdf?LangType=2057 
 
Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar is not the same as Synthetic Aperture Radar.  Different processing, different purpose.
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       12/23/2009 6:21:42 PM



If I remember well , the Mica 's seeker uses a dual band with a 128x128 pixel resolution (or is it 256x256 ? I go to check) .

 Yes, absolutely, please go check.  Also, if you find a source on-line, please post the link to it.  Hopefully the source will be describing the missiles actually in the FAF inventory and currently in use, and not some seeker under development for potential, possible future acquisition.


this is just another example of why BW is an idiot.

after such a claim, i think he will be too embarrassed to post the seeker specs of the mica



 
Thank you, jackjack.  He appears to be suffering from another bout of that "ascribe to French equipment the superior characteristics of foreign equipment" disease that Le Idiots exhibit so often.  Hopefully, he'll stop confusing the AIM-9X seeker with the much earlier and less advanced MICA IR seeker.  Of course, as I've said for many years here on SP, even the early IIR technology of the MICA IR seeker is a huge improvement over the IR seekers in missiles like AIM-9M and AA-11, and makes the MICA IR a much more deadly missile than those of earlier generations.  Still, maybe they recently started putting a more advanced version of the IIR seeker in their MICA IRs, and now they have some in their inventory that are better than the original version from the 1990s.  I hope I am pleasantly surprised by whatever BW can dig up about it.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics