Rafale

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/mh/paris061807/index.php

Page 108

The upper limitation of roll rate for Rafale in light weight configuration: 270 degrees/sec.

SC at Mach 1.1… That’s the specifications of Gripen NG. Perhaps somebody mixed the two? 😀
L

The DA4 Development Aircraft achieved the cruise speed of around 1.1 Mach without A/B in 1998/02/20. At that time, the EJ-200 turbofan engine hadn’t been developed completely, and its thrust was around 8% less than it is today.

During 2004, a double-seated Typhoon achieved the curise speed of 1.21 Mach without A/B at one hot morning in Singapore (AFM, 2004/09).

A Italian AF pilot declared that Eurofighter had achieved the cruise speed of 1.2-1.3 Mach class without A/B in Italy (Combat Aircraft, 2006/06).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1550056/Typhoon-delivers-the-fright-stuff.html

Typhoon delivers the fright stuff

By Adam Lusher

As good as vertical, we rocket to 7,000ft. Then Gp Capt Mackay levels off, by rolling. I am seconds into my flight, and upside down. Things do not improve. As we “supercruise” at Mach 1.2 (Mach 1 is the speed of sound), Gp Capt Mackay decides to spar with a Hawk trainer jet. I see something blue. It might be the sea. I am upside down again…….

An unconfirmed data from other website post, the best supercurising speed that Typhoon in different configurations had achieved according to a RAF pilot’s private statement:

a. 1.5 Mach with 50% internal fuel and no external load.

b. 1.4 Mach with four AIM-120 and two AIM-132.

c. 1.2-1.3 Mach with four AIM-120, two AIM-132, and one 1,000 liter external fuel tank.

1. French AF’s Rafale fighters have fought against the later F-16C/Ds (Block50/52/52+) from Hellenic AF and USAF during the several DACT exercises in the past few years.

2. Although F-16C Block25 has the poorest thrust performance in the F-16C/D family, it is also the lightest F-16C which should have the lowest wing loading in the F-16C/D family…….

a rafale vs F16 ( 1 vs 1 WVR gun dogfight) in the united state TV report :

http://videos.tf1.fr/video/news/0,,3931177,00-contre-rafale-vrai-faux-combat-.html

the result : 6 f16 shot down for 2 rafale during the first day.

I’m sorry that I don’t know French language, so I have to ask two silly questions:

1. You mean the Rafale kill six F-16C without any loss, or with the price of two loss during the dogfight in Day One??

2. What did the USA pilot say at the end of TV report ??

But then… What if the enemy tactics somehow forced the F-22 into a Dog-fight?

A: And what kind of tactics they shall be?? You can’t forced it to do anything or use any tactic to against it if you don’t know its accurate location or even its existence at first.

So…if eventually your opponent will find away technology/tactics/whatever to force the F-22 into WVR,……:confused: And into a situation where it is out numbered? :confused:

A:

1. Then it should be the time for developing / producing 6th generation fighter, isn’t it??

2. As for the situation of being outnumbered, during the past DACT exercises, F-22A had faced the red force with fighters of F-15C, late F-16C, and F/A-18E/F class (in the hands of well experienced and trained USAF/USN pilots) that are five to eight times more than F-22A, and F-22A killed them all successfuly with extremely little, or in most of time, zero loss….. and just what potential enemy airforce on earth will be able to provide more serious threat than this to USAF in the foreseeable future ??

On points 1 & 3, I think HMS and off boresight missiles could be considered relevant.

Well, it seems that Eurofighter won’t equip HMD formally until post-2012, or even until post-2015.

I am really interested in whether EF-2000 with AIM-132 or IRIS-T only is capable enough to handle the dogfight with the Russian TVC fighters (such as Su-35BM, Su-30MKI, MIG-35 and so on) that equip Russian HMS and off boresight missiles (R-73/R-74).

This article has used many datas and estimations from other articles and sources, even the wrong one without any correction, for example:

This article said that the APG-77 radar can get the target with the RCS of 11 square feet / 3.3 m2 class at the range more than 125 miles away.

However, 11 square feets is not equal to 3.3 m2, but roughly equal to 1 m2.

1 m = 3.3025 feets –> 1 m2 = 1 m x 1 m = 3.3025 feets x 3.3025 feets = 10.91 square feets.

I’ve seen the same wrong information for APG-77 in a previous old article of AFM before, and this article repeated the error once again ~ This makes me have some questions for the accuracy of the data / information from this article.

I would not mind too much Norway buying Gripen, since it will be significantly cheaper than F-35 and may open the possibility of buying UCAVs from 2020-2025 or so. The future UCAVs would have less overlap with Gripen than with F-35… and should be well suited for attack scenarios you mention above.

I am worried that the F-35 price will be much higher than currently anticipated. World economy does not look great and countries that do not face a high-threat scenario will cut costs on defence and buy less F-35. Even Canada has decided to reduce the number of F-35s. In addition, I suspect that the F-35 will face stiff competition from a combination of “old” 4/4.5 gen fighters and UCAVs, since it may be a cheaper solution in some cases, although I may be wrong… I have not yet heard countries like France or Germany signalling any interest in manned 5.gen aircrafts, so what other option than 4.5gen + UCAV do they have? Or perhaps they have simply decided to wait with their F-35 orders until they have sold some Rafale/Typhoons…?

A:

According to the experience from USA, a stealthy long range UCAV that is capable enough won’t be much cheaper than the NG manned fighter such as F-35 (although it shall has much less costs for mission and maintenance), while UCAV still has to rely on manned fighter’s help in many aspects, it has caused many questions whether UCAV is really valuable enough or not ~ Actually, USN is considering to cancel its UCAV project right now.

And since Eurofighter and Rafale themselves are not cheaper than F-35, it is very unlikely that the combination of EF-2K/Rafale + UCAV can be cheaper than F-35……….

It is true that many European countries (UK, France, German, Italy, Sweden, and so on) now are developing the techonology for UCAV, however, except RAF (who wants to get a capable and long range stealthy UCAV at the age of around 2020s), it seems that no any other European airforce now has such a formal requirement to get a stealthy UCAV until the age of around 2030s.

It seems both German and France won’t buy any other new manned fighter except their own EF-2K/Rafale in the foreseeable future. Their defense budgets are too limited to buy and maintain one more totally different foreign fighter.