redreidy@ redreidy
I just happen to have read the last “Combat Aircraft”, and at the end, there’s an article about the Growler involvment in Lybia. When you read it, it states that the US had massively struck the SA-5 sites to soften Lybian defences so that the growler can go in and do its job, as it would be too dangerous for 4th gen fighters to go in without that..
a little befors, the article about the Rafale states that it went in on its own, first (before “softening” of the SAM sites), so, one may conclude that it has quite interesting caracteristics RCS and EW-wise, no?
Of course, nobody can post real RCS values for it as they are classified anyway, but between being able to engage other fighters at distances where they don’t see it even if they feature a more powerful radar, or being able to penetrate defences without being harmed in any way obviously means that it does have something for it, don’t you think?
Yes! sorry i’m a little confused you are proving my point or arguing it? the rafale is not a stealth aircraft! so you are proving my point that the european countries are not spending the billions of pounds on R&D and production of full stealth and yet are still able to Produce potent platforms.
on the other hand if you are trying to suggest that the rafale is a stealth aircraft and not a aircraft with radar reduction features like the eurofighter and the gripen then i suppose we disagree.
redreidyapart from the fact there still no proof that the rafale has a lower RCS. also i thin it is true to say the european countries have been aware of stealth for a long time for example the BAE replica was a full stealth concept created in the 90’s. I have even heard people talk of the Vulcan having radar reduction features but most people stat that it was accidental.
http://www.aerosocietychannel.com/aerospace-insight/files/2011/01/BAE-Replica.jpg
also the new generation of UCAVS coming out of BAE and Dassault all appear to be fully stealthy to me! i think that if major european nations had the need or desire to build a full stealth design they could have done it. but is it worth it? possibly for first day strikes and air superiority (thee things can still be achieved without full stealth) other than that no!
redreidyWell it does trump MKI with ease as seen on the chart. To match the Typhoon, it needs to have no more than 48% more drag.
am i understading this right are you saying that even with up to 47% more drag a Su-27SM out accelerates a typhoon??
redreidyWell… 8 AESA antena seems to me like an overkill for a RWR. But let’s admit it’s a big RWR, that just meen that this debat on the ‘big nose story’ is naïve because if we discuss the receiving capability, we must include much more parameters.
Those discussion are interesting for the shake of the debat but let’s admit that only the Indian evaluators have the whole picture.
I tend to agree with Eagle. The noze size debat toward the Rafale is just a bone given to the EF fans because they have few to brag about.Even the press print according to the alegence to those who make advertizings in their little shop and provide few to discuss about.
In your opinion. A lot of the rafale fans are making claims about the rafale having better this and that but are not providing any objective sources (i.e. anything not printed in France which appear to my eyes to be very bias.) and i dont think you would except a equal artical from air force monthly that is very pro typhoon as fact.
Having read this thread for a while the general theme seems to be that the typhoon fans concede that the rafale has attributes where it is superior to the typhoon and try to argue that the typhoon has strong points of its own.
The (well supported) rafale fans on the other hand only consede that the typhoon has a better thrust to weight ratio but in all other aspects the rafale is far superior to the typhoon.
this is causing otherwise neutral posters to come to the defence of the typhoon which is being underestimated vastly by the rafale poster, I think we could all benefit from more balanced view.
redreidywell the Typhoon’s intake HAS to curve up to make room for the wheel bay.. doesn’t mean its got stealthy intakes.
the F-16’s intake also curves up for the same reason
S ducts are a wellknown way to reduce RCS why do you assume that it was done by accident on the typhoon? I suppose the far superior French engineers knew exactly what they were doing :rolleyes:
redreidyYou can see parts of the compressor as on the Rafale, but a great portion of it is covered by the s-duct.
granted! but the accusation was that the intakes were in a straite line with the engines i just wanted show that it was not the case 😀
redreidyThe Typhoons intakes have much larger surface area. They are rectangular in shape slight outer slanting notwithstanding.Compared to that Rafale’s intakes are much more rounded and assymetric and smaller shape.Also the Typhoons intakes are in staraightline with the fan blades more or less.Plus the edges of the typhoons intakes appear to be a bit thicker compared to the Rafale where it is much sharper.The upper edge of the typhoon intake is extended anteriorly and ends in a straight border of quite some length which is another radar reflecting surface.
rectangular like those!? seems too me that the typhoons intakes are closer to these true stealth designs than the rounded small intakes of the rafale. also its a pretty obvious by the shape of the eurofighter that it has s ducts, so no i doubt you can see the fan through the intakes. and here is the proof.
redreidyhaha i doubt it!! i dont think it would get off the ground!
redreidyScorpion:
EADS said that the Typhoon ‘s RCS is 1/8 of the Tornado ‘s , who has a rather big RCS , around 5 to 10 square meter depending on its wings position .
Dassault said that the Rafale ‘ s RCS was 10 to 20 times smaller than the M2000 , depending on the position of the aircraft . The M2000 ‘s RCS is said to be around 2 square meters .
Do the math (granted with numbers that may or may not be correct).I Believe that an AtoA Rafale detect an AtoA Typhoon first and every time (with a 40km margin , so it seems from my own math) .
Anyway , this discussion is getting silly and off topic . I am probably the one to blame , I appologize if I have polluted the thread but Iam convinced that the RCS of Rafale is lower , without making the difference a big game changer . None of the two aircraft are VLO anyway and will be detected by good radars sooner than fighters like the F-22 or the J-20 .
Well , you agreed with many of my points . So , I agreed to disagree on the other points . 🙂
********************
Back on topic ,
What India told us is this :1) India refused the US “strings” and also discarded the US fighters as not good enough .
2) The Mig was clearly the weakest link .
3) The Gripen is a paper plane .They kept the two best stuff at hand (1st point) and told the USA they don ‘ want to see their fleet grounded or weaponless because one man pushed a button in Washington (2nd point) .
Presently , on capabilities , cost and tech transfer ,i think the Rafale is ahead and combat proven in various scenarios (but not all them yet like AtoA , naval and nuclear (!) strike) .Why would India buy the Typhoon ?
Do they truely believe that it is going to be the superior aircraft with time ? I don ‘t think so, But they know The full story and have all the facts and figures ,i dont. .
Do they want the UK to be a stronger partner , knowing that the UK will never be let down by the USA , so good political repercussions and ties will be maintained ?Hard to say …
On the other hand , France seems very kind to make some deals with Brazil and India , which are both going to be “Veto” Nations at the UN Concil sooner rather than later . Sarkozy has been working hard to spread the idea that the World should now see Brazil and India lke equals .
It might help 🙂Cheers .
corrected your post four you :diablo:
redreidybluewings i dont wish to offend you but do have some infomation everybody else does not, to make statements as those above as fact.
redreidyNo. He meant what he said.
We’re not on a 25% difference. The gap is actually *much* larger but nobody would believe it, so discussing this matter is just a waste of time.BTW the semi-recessed carriage of the AMRAAM is peanuts as far as the overall RCS is concerned.
Yes but the Rafale would also be carrying missiles in scenario that was brought up so recessed missiles my give a slight advantage to the typhoon here who knows.
I think the general consensus here is that the Rafale has slightly better radar cross section but not by such a great margin as to be considered a game change. After all neither aircraft is full stealth both have a large vertical, Canards both are roughly the same shape so the difference is likely to be marginal. And for proof of this point you only have to read articles, both pro Rafale and pro typhoon articles but both aircraft RCS in the range 0.25 – 1 m2.
I find claims that the typhoon is twice as easy to spot or that if can be detected 40-50 miles earlier hard to believe if I’m honest. No doubt that the Rafale is an excellent aircraft but the engineers at EAD’s or BAE are not idiots either. Both aircraft are excellent and both will have advantages over the other.
redreidyNo it just proves that typhoon pilots do brag when they kick some ass. Some here would call them unprofessional.
Nic
yes i would
redreidyBluewings! +1 now that is a well considerd post!
redreidyPossibly i was thinking about this too simplistic but in an effort to be a logical person i would of assumed that and expeditionary wing from an airbase in a foreign country would be expensive, but i assumed if you started sailing this airbase around far from supply lines it would become more expensive.
but your arguments have been very persuasive and far more informed than mine so I’m willing to accept your points of view although something still doesn’t sit quite right about it but i don’t have any information to really argue with u so am forced to admit you must be correct 😀
redreidyA lot of people seem to have misunderstood the point of my post. my point being that if a British pilot said the same thing that these French pilots have said they would deem the articles with as much scepticism as the Eurofighter fans (for lack of a better name).
Several people had quoted these French articles as absolute truth, my main point was to pose the question would you take it as absolute truth if the boot was put on the other foot?
With regards to pilots talking to the media bragging about the performance of their planes in certain exercises, i do thing that is unprofessional, i would think it’s unprofessional if it was done by a British, American, French or any other air force pilot. If the exercise was meant be made public then is should be the MOD of respective country that does this not a pilot in a press conference, if it make you feel better TMor I think your quote about a British pilot stating that the Eurofighter was better is unprofessional and him making him making his opinion public disrespectful to the French.
weather you judge me as prejudice or not is your call after all i am British and to some my post have come across as pro typhoon, but as i have previously posted i don’t care which is the better aircraft, i have said before i think we are capable of building better aircraft and i don’t think it is the best aircraft for the UK. But in this thread there have been a number of posts which has suggested that the Rafale is undisputedly a better aircraft in every spec and cited these articles of proof, which is what I take exception to.
The argument I’m trying to promote is that both aircraft will have their merits, and just because a pilot states something is true doesn’t make it so, equally if a British or German pilot said the opposite you would hold the contrary articles with sceptism and rightly so! Please don’t take my previous remarks somehow as anti french i have nothing against the French nation in fact i have far more against my own.
With regards to my outburst towards golden prawn I apologise that was not well considered. I would do well to consider that freedom of thought and speech is something that should be allowed to all people. But I do believe his posting is mostly inflammatory remarks (granted some may see my previous couple of post as similar and for that I apologise.) and he could benefit from a more balanced outlook, from what I have gathered from his post he is of the opinion that the Eurofighters have no good attributes and the nations that made it should be ashamed of themselves.
Sign In
