Seriously??? Sorry But I have to throw one 🙂

He actually said the EF can Supercruise at 40k feet and only burn 2x idle fuel rate…

Yeahhh, I never buy what frontline pilots say who fly the thing for a living as well, only I know what it can really do in my head.

fool.

Is Rafale rcs from top 0.1sqm as Su-35 is likely to find down below it. 400km plus range is for export. Rafale has limited fuel capacity and slow speed. it has very little chance against Mach 6+ missile and especially if launch from higher speed aircraft. Actually Rafale has zero advantage. its weak engine does not allow it to become an electronic attack aircraft and weak engines does not give the energy to BVR shot. Rafale is simply not a fighter but more compromised design for carrier operations.

rafale rcs is 1×10^(-20). su-35 will never see it. RbE2 1000000km range export. rafale will shoot su-35 first, su-35 only has 400km. su-35 too big to be agile, will break apart at high speed. su-35 carry too much fuel for manoeuvre. su-35 therefore has -10 advantage. su-35 no supercruise because outdated aerodynamics and nose to big, rafale can with load. rafale has higher t/w, with more powerfull engines. su-35 is big useless lump. rafale>su-35, france>russia.

Paraley do you have any info about the RCS reduction method for the air inlet on the SU35?

Because I have that:
“_ Treatment of the air inlets with a RAM layer with a thickness between 0.7 and 1.4 mm.
_ Treatment of the face of the engine with RAM material”

http://sukhoitributeenglish.blogspot.fr/

SU30 inlet:

Do you really think that putting RAM everywhere will make a good stealth aircraft? Especially those with an Concorde-like engine ? :rolleyes:
I’m not talking about the IR signature that matches the Space shuttle at take off. 😀

I think arguing su-35 possess lowers rcs values in operational configs vs rafale in operational configs is a moot point. Only common sense is needed.

Assuming a pure perpendicular viewpoint of the side planform of the su-35, the sheer size of the stabilisers and intake/engine housings are vast. Rafales vertical stabiliser is made of EM transparent composites and is smaller and there is only 1.

The twin intake ducts stretching along the underneath are a rcs nightmare. No s ducts, just huge fan faces, albeit treated with ram, as the rafale.

The su-35 has a much larger circular nose enhancing creeping wave return from the side. The canopy shape remains unchanged from early production models though treated with RAM as rafale.

The Brazilian evaluation showed lower rcs values for rafale than the SH and gripen NG. If the su-35 is below these I will be impressed.

The su-35 contains many more access and skin panels than the rafale with all the associated fasteners. The panel gaps are still typically Russian; huge comparatively.

I thought the rafale was also developing active cancellation through spectra reducing EM spikes of “known” loads reducing.

Also development of a technique that involves robbing the radar’s receiver of its sensitivity while it is looking in the direction of the aircraft being protected. If you can reduce the receiver gain to 1/100 of normal while the radar is illuminating the target, you have the same effect that reducing the aircraft’s RCS to 1/100 would have achieved. You have in effect obtained the signature of a real LO aircraft.

There is alot on rafales LO techniques, both physical and electronic, if you dig deep enough.

Scooter your continual strawman set ups and far future hoped for projections are really boring and plain pointless.

All the trash you throw at anything not F35 or not US can equally (and is) thrown the opposite way.

What are you contributing to the “debate???”

The F35 may one day be a decent piece of kit, pretty much everybody acknowledges that.
Today it is far from being a decent, useful piece of kit, anybody with an objective viewpoint acknowledges that.
Today it also costs one heck of a lot and there is reasonable doubt that that cost is ever going to decrease to a level that matches the capability provided once it works, again anybody with an objective viewpoint will acknowledge that.

All i read from you is “F35 Ho Rah US is great” followed by a load of what i believe is termed “trash talk” vis a vis other platforms.
You don’t provide anything beyond bland lm marketing to support your “opinion.”
Again the question is; what is it that you are contributing to the debate?

Yes I have silently been reading these forums for a while now and I agree. I am not sure however why members respond to the chap; it is pointless. I do not think he has the intellectual capacity nor the ability to listen in order to have a “real”, debate.

With the difference that the JDAMs used by the F-22 right now can’t be updated in flight and lack another sensor to hit moving targets. And ehy not comparing the JDAM to adequate ASMs like the Harpoon, RBS-15 or Exocet, not to speak about russian made ASMs which have a considerably longer range.

Also would JDAM’s not be a far easier target to engage from the ships perspective? Certainly compared to the sea skimming family of missiles…

A few will be used by QinetiQ; http://www.qinetiq.com/home/newsroom/news_releases_homepage/2007/2nd_quarter/bvraam.html

Not sure its been posted before :p

No. 🙂

Thankyou!