Why is it that a purposefully misspelled handle, most commonly with k in place of c or z in place of s always means a moron with nothing to contribute?  Maybe it's because that's the way teenagers spell to make themselves look cool.  Why don't you post the meat of your CV?  I'd be fascinated to see where you got your PhD in aerospace engineering and how you're applying it.  You do know that there are real people from the industry on the site and that they regularly contribute great material?

since nobody gave me the name and date for this article, I am assuming it's fake...I got accsess to these magazine at work and I could copy in the full article, everybody would appreciate that....but then again....without a valid source...don't believe everything you read ...LOL

the article and source was quoted and referenced days before you posted this - and I have submitted the original scanned text some days ago as well.

I'm beginning to think that you're trolling - not engaging in meaningful dialogue.

 

 

its significant because its french sourced.

 

the content is still thin on detail and as such the ability to draw conclusions is still governed by the publicly released info.

 

its a "giggle test" issue as well

true....probably not...thats not really the question I asked...?

For those who has said that Spectra is not able to geolocation in Air air

La pertinence de l?information a été présentée par l?intermédiaire d?un film démontrant la place de SPECTRA dans le SNA du Rafale et l?effi cacité de la fusion de données fournissant une situation tactique claire à l?équipage (air-sol, mais aussi air-air). Si les avions antérieurs au Rafale présentaient des informations, le Rafale présente une situation, a précisé le colonel Moussez qui ajoute que l?excellence des résultats a été confirmée au Tiger Meet d?Albacete (Espagne) en 2006.

 

     Contribution of SPECTRA in the acquisition of the tactical situation of the Rafale? ? Conference with Colonel François Moussey, Officer of Record of the Rafale in the Air force. The Guerrelec audience received the operational point of view of the Rafale at the time of the Conference during November 26 in CHEAR, Military Academy. Colonel Olivier Foam, officer of the Rafale program, accompanied by commanders Jerome Puech, pilot, and Claude Perraudin, engineer officer, presented the system, the functions and the place of SPECTRA (System of Self-protection and Avoidance of the Conditions of the Squall's destriuction) on the fighter, in its proper context. SPECTRA is a different sensor by its very thorough integration, its capacity to evaluate the danger, its recommendations for protection measures (32 lures; EM + IR), its multi-threat capacity and its capacity of recording ?databases? (recovery of the data in flight), the menaces present programmed into a threat library. For that, it is necessary to add the actions which contribute to the enrichment of the library, 360 degree detection, the fusion of EM/IR/EO sensors, which makes better known the nature of the threat, the display of same, the co-operative signal deception/jamming, sometimes with automatic options, jamming on 360 degrees, and finally the programming of the libraries. The relevance of this information was presented to those present via a film showing the place of SPECTRA in SNA of the Rafale and the efficacy of the data providing a clear single tactical situation to the crew (air-to-ground, but also air-to-air). Unlike the way previous past (French) aircraft to the Rafale presented information, the Rafale presents that situation, unified, specified Colonel Moussez who adds that the excellence of the results was confirmed in Tiger Meet d' Albacete (Spain) in 2006.

 

 

Nothing about RANGE at all. A LOT though about shortcomings, coverage gaps, and system obsolescence.(refer to underlined.) though.  

 

Never supply others with the exact evidence that you don't know what you discuss, FS. What you claimed was NOT said.

 

Air to ground and air to air threats, presented as a composite threat display. bearing only no range in real time with coverage gaps where the threat library had no data and NO SIGNAL SIFT CAPACITY, was what Colonel Foam's team actually said. 

 

But being an EW expert, you wouldn't try to quote a small snippet of passage (in French and out of context) that you hoped would  sneak by out of context with a misrepresented meaning as to what was truly said, would you?  That would be the actions of a dishonest man, and you are not dishonest are you?

 

And GF wonders why I regard Thales the way I do.

 

H.

"Never supply others with the exact evidence that you don't know what you discuss, FS."

 

If he actually did this he would never post.   Just look at the thread where he claims, again, the the Super Hornet lacks an internal jammer.  What kind of an idiot can't even run a google search before making such an obviously false claim?

 

And this is a guy that claims he is paid 3500 Euros a day as a defense consultant...

 

 

extension of the types of detectable threats

Yes, LPI signals are an area of weakness for Spectra.  It is fine against its likely threat aircraft but all this talk of Spectra versus AESAs is just silly.  Spectra was not designed to have any capability against those types of advanced waveforms.

 

Well to be fair this article about Spectra dates back to 2007. With the slew of upgrades on the Rafale fleet since I wouldn't be surprised if Spectra was upgraded as well. But it'd be speculation anyway.  Let's not have another 10+ pages of Spectra/active cancellation/interferothingamajig technobabble again...