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
jackjack       7/3/2010 9:46:01 AM
Yes I got link, and references to modern litterature backing up every statement/claims I've provided.

is this the f-16 that rafale http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emunlove.gif" alt="" /> lost http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emunlove.gif" alt="" /> the competition with
and bullschit, uae doesnt have mica on their f-16's, why would they ?
they wouldnt even want the rafale now if usa would give them a cruise missile 
black shaheen seems their only choice and like the mica, isnt fitted to the f-16
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive    BW/FS   7/3/2010 10:59:16 AM
I'm not a US fanboy, I'm a technology fanboy... And I also come from a nation that is wasting billions on these contracts with suppliers whose products are inferior to the latest US kit, that also cost more and are less compatible with the weapons systems that our forces use.
 
I elect to use PCs over MACs for the same reason, compatability, performance, customisation and price.
 
The MICA is not comparable to AMRAAM, even a poster who earlier defended it suggested that it couldn't be compared. If you have sources, post them, demonstrate your point? It's a CHILDISH excuse, and you know it.
 
H has posted a lot more credible design critique of mica/aster than anyone posting in its favour.
 
Argue in favour of Meteor by all means, but don't compare MICA with AMRAAM unless you understand the differences in performance and why those exist.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    More lies?   7/3/2010 12:18:55 PM




I'm not a US fanboy, I'm a technology fanboy... And I also come from a nation that is wasting billions on these contracts with suppliers whose products are inferior to the latest US kit, that also cost more and are less compatible with the weapons systems that our forces use.






 



I elect to use PCs over MACs for the same reason, compatability, performance, customisation and price.



 



The MICA is not comparable to AMRAAM, even a poster who earlier defended it suggested that it couldn't be compared. If you have sources, post them, demonstrate your point? It's a CHILDISH excuse, and you know it.






 



H has posted a lot more credible design critique of mica/aster than anyone posting in its favour.






 



Argue in favour of Meteor by all means, but don't compare MICA with AMRAAM unless you understand the differences in performance and why those exist.





No, you are a US fanboy. It's quite clear the way you follow Hamilcar just because you like his lies, especially considering Hamilcar has provided any valid links, ever (yes he is a TROLL).

 

Mica and Amraam are in the same category, which are, according nato the medium-aam category. Since most performance and spec data is impossible to find on the internet, so no members of this forum know really what the mica or amraam truly are capable of. Therefor it is extremly hard, impossible to have any debate regarding the missiles. What we know from pictures and general aerodynamic knowledge is that the amraam is somewhat outdated, using a 30 year-old design.



That is the third time you've made the claim.  What I know is here and mathematically checkable. What you know is based on pictures?
 
My god, you are a nothing, just like I thought.
 
WOT.
 
H.

 
 
Quote    Reply

earlm    Advice for H   7/3/2010 12:44:42 PM
Stop feeding the trolls
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       7/3/2010 2:06:36 PM
No, you are a US fanboy. It's quite clear the way you follow Hamilcar just because you like his lies, especially considering Hamilcar has provided any valid links, ever (yes he is a TROLL).

I try to remain objective which is what I have tried to be when discussing Boeing/Airbus for example, what H has demonstrated over and over is a far better understanding of the principles involved than you have, this is what frustrates you, whether or not you like to admit it. There's several examples I can think of to hand of European systems that I believe work better than their US counterparts, but the truth of the matter is that the US spends double on average on its military than the EU nations do combined... they have also demonstrated a system of systems approach (also based on warfighting experience) that is peerless in application. These economies of scale also benefit 3rd party customers, and in the UK's case, we have a very high level of technology transfer (Trident, for example) which means that the "strings attached" problems aren't an issue. I'd rather see more collaborative EU/US projects, I just think trying to replicate all of the US tech domestically for a fraction of the budget ends up with high unit costs and technology that isn't really mature (ASTER). We learned from experience to trust Sidewinder/Amraam because they work, we developed ASRAAM using British tech combined with a seeker we couldn't manufacture ourselves for the same price per unit, compromise, win.
 
 

Mica and Amraam are in the same category, which are, according nato the medium-aam category. Since most performance and spec data is impossible to find on the internet, so no members of this forum know really what the mica or amraam truly are capable of. Therefor it is extremly hard, impossible to have any debate regarding the missiles. What we know from pictures and general aerodynamic knowledge is that the amraam is somewhat outdated, using a 30 year-old design.
 
"what we know from pictures and general aerodynamic knowledge"...
 
Ah you now have an understanding of CFD I see.. The problem you've had both with the MICA and Rafale is in failing to understand that modern missiles are sensory platforms before they are "aerodynamic" platforms. The idea is to efficiently use all of your boost to get to the point where your active/passive seekers take over, it's the seeker quality and datalink that determine performance to a FAR greater degree than being able to pull off extremely high G maneuvers. It's about getting from A to B whilst retaining as much kinetic energy as possible. Velocity and sensor range combined with decent chase logic is what gives you a good NEZ, not 90 degree turns. Adding larger flight surfaces always carries a drag penalty. 
 
Quote    Reply

Rufus       7/3/2010 2:21:57 PM
Countdown to the ban....
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

earlm    So BW or FS got a new computer   7/3/2010 2:26:18 PM

So they get a new IP and they can be here until this one gets banned too.  The idiot is going to point to one factor, such as strakes vs wings, in one area, high G maneuvers, and totally ignore the fact that for most of its flight the missile doesn't maneuver at high G's.  We've seen this before hundreds of times and it's only a matter of time before the troll gets banned once again.

 
Quote    Reply

earlm       7/3/2010 3:19:52 PM
Radar diameter alone gives AMRAAM a big advantage along with more fuel.  Add that to a motor grained to give a boost sustain profile vs boost only.  Then add in lofted trajectory in C5 (or is it C7) and later.  Haven't we been over this a few dozen times?
 
Quote    Reply

AThousandYoung       7/3/2010 5:07:22 PM
Mica and Amraam are in the same category, which are, according nato the medium-aam category. Since most performance and spec data is impossible to find on the internet, so no members of this forum know really what the mica or amraam truly are capable of.
 
Interesting logic.
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       7/3/2010 5:18:13 PM
BW/FS
 
You clearly know that the specific data for the RH seeker, including peak power, FOV, as well as the algorithms for terminal intercept are not common knowledge. We all know this.
 
To answer your question with data that IS available.
 
A key requirement for MICA was being under a certain weight threshold, it had to be wingtip mountable. It also has large flight surfaces, and TVC.
 
So we know it has larger drag than the AMRAAM, it has a greater diameter to length ratio, and it includes all the actuators and servos needed for TVC. We also know that the RH and IR versions are virtually identical.
 
So versus AMRAAM we have
 
a) Higher drag
b) Less Fuel
c) Optimisation towards pronav. (IR seeker can not range).

So the basic concept is to have a stable missile in flight (long chord wings), which can chase a maneuvering target down by being extremely agile.
 
Lets assume EVERYTHING that H has said is a complete fabrication, regarding the datalink, seeker weaknesses etc. What you DO know is that you have a missile that has a greater drag coefficient than an AMRAAM, that will lose velocity in a shorter range, and which relies on a more draggy set of maneuvers because it has to be able to home on non-ranging (IR) data (ergo pronav), whether the RH seeker uses a completely different (and more efficient) navigation logic to power the same missile I find extremely doubtful, in either case, the shell has been optimised to accomodate both at the expense of being efficient in the RH mode.
 
What you have with the IR version is an extremely long range western IR missile, this might make sense if Meteor performs as hoped, but as I said all along, I couldn't care less about MICA except that it is the backbone of Aster, which as a result is a similarly draggy two stage affair that's (like MICA) completely untested against supersonic threats.
 
Just don't compare it to AMRAAM, that's all I'm objecting to.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics