arthuro-The RBE2 comparable to the APG79 comes from Thales engineers which are certainly more aware of the situation than you, You are mixing up number of modules and AESA technology. The F16 block 60 may have more modules but that doesn’t mean its AESA technology is more advanced.
-Gripen radar will suffer from the same size constraint and will have to cope with less electricity production. You are ignoring the result of the FAB evaluation which was much more telling and the Indian criticism which may not be a coincidence. (Un)Surprisingly the RBE2 AESA was not criticized. Its tests by the swiss was also a success. Just that you are brainwashed to bash anything french. Which is your only hobby on this forum. You are not even a true supporter of an aircraft.
-Radar modes is a matter of operational requirements. GMTT/GMTI is something quite specific that not all airforces are asking for. This is a matter of software development and has nothing to do with the technology and the performance of the radar.
From what I understand the current RBE2 AESA is marginally shorter in range than the APG80 but with a smaller radar. So you cannot conclude anything on the technology which is even more advanced according to Thales as it compares it to the APG79.
A big difference with you is that I am able to change my opinion according to new sources because I am genuinely interested in what approaches the most to reality. You are just here to bash the rafale and french.
arthuroYes it does seem that the current RBE2 AESA has a shorter range than the Apg-80 although marginally given the 10% of range increase. However you must balance it with lower RCS, spectra etc. Besides this is only about range but tells nothing about its performance within its operating range. Remember that despite the lower range of the RBE2 PESA rafales fared pretty well during ATLC.
That piece of information is also valuable for the Gripen as with a similar size antenna and less electricity production it is very likely that it will also limited with its range.
Hopefully the UAE is ready to invest the money necessary to get the AESA they want and the AdA and other customer will benefit from it. It should be even ready for India if the deal materialize.
Also we should note what is going on well instead of pointing negative things : spectra is giving full satisfaction to the AdA and further upgrades sound promising. The 9t M88 should be pretty awesome on the rafale.
arthuroIntervaled AtG and AtA is already availabale on the PESA, GMTT and GMTI is a matter of functionalities to be developped.
Sure Europe is behind US for AESA although if we believe Thales there is some catching up. What can be said is that elecrticity is also a matter of concern. Being a twin engine aircraft is not a luxury to feed the AESA and get a good range. That’s probably an interesting point to put in parallel with the criticism on the Selex AESA radar performance in Brazilian tech eval and in India.
Good for Thales to have started the AESA route several years ago considering US advance. At least it is in a better position than Selex that will only field its first preproduction radar in 2011 with an operational radar in 2014for the gripen and 2015+ for the Typhoon. That is probably the reason Thales wants to propose its AESA radar/technology for the Gripen&Typhoon in place of Selex radar.
With a clear Roadmap toward GaN technology and conformal arrays it will be among the radar maker to count in the future.
What I really like with this interview is that for once that was realistic talking. Not the kind of Hyperbole marketing speech you can hear from some manufacturers. For once we have a source which sounds realistic. Something very rare when you only have powerpoints manufacturer presentations or press releases. I think this is a point which makes rafale very credible. On top of realistic pieces of informations its performance was actually tested : ATLC, Corsica, Tiger meet, Afghanistan, red flag…
On the range of the standard RBE2 vs APG80 it is unclear if the range is lower equal or superior. Given that the UAE are very requiring in terms of performance it could be that they want a significant egdge with the new radar not just a marginal one.
arthuroEngine news :
More efficient engines for the Rafale
Air&Cosmos 2228, july 23
By the year 2012, the Rafale should have engines with increased availability and reduced maintenance costs. Snecma is currently flight testing the M88-4E.
This new standard, previously called TCO Pack (for total cost of ownership ), has been tested in flight for the first time March 22 at Istres, on the CEV’s (Flight Test Center) Rafale MO2 (development aircraft).
Since then, more than 30 flights were performed on the 70 necessary for the qualification of this new standard. The goal of the standard-4E is to reduce the cost of ownership of the M88 jet engine and to have longer intervals between the inpectiuons of the main modules by increasing the lifetime of the hot and rotating parts. Snecma does not want to specify exactly how much the cost of ownership will be reduced, but it indicates that for some elements of the hot parts, it is possible to remove up to 3 inspections in their lifetime.Hot Parts
With this new evolution of the M88 , 20% of the engine is modified with improvements in the stator and rotor modules of the high pressure (HP) parts.
The six-floor HP compressor which had already undergone substantial modernization with the step 4 (M88-2 E4), adopts new rectifier, a new rear crankcase and a new improved material for his fifth disc.
The HP turbine receives new redesigned blades with increased cooling . Finally, the M88-4E has the same mass than the M88-2. “One of the requirements of this new standard is to be transparent from the perspective of the aircraft compared to the M88-2 standard”, explains Michel Caunes, Director of M88 Operations.
The first 25 flight tests allowed to test a first engine configuration, a mix between -2E and -4E standard. The second configuration, entirely 4E, was installed on the aircraft and is being tested for ten days. “The goal is to demonstrate that the engine installation is identical for the aircraft.” These tests validate the equivalence of all the parameters of the flight envelope.
Meanwhile a endurance campaign runs at the Saclay CEPr where the engine is pushed at its maximum. “One can thus calculate the maximum length of life” says Jerome Bonini, chief engineer of the M88 at Snecma.
Snecma expects a qualification of the M88-4E and the first shipments to Dassault for late 2011,. to enter service in 2012 in the French forces
The first equipped aircrafts will be the latest of the French tranche 3. Moreover, at the end of 2011, the M88-4E will be the only Snecma standard production, both for France and for export customers. It is expected that all the M88 in service will be put to this standard through the gradual introduction of -4E modules during maintenance operations.
“The modularity of the M88 allows this mix of standards,” said Michel Cannes.ECO
The first test bed of the M88-4E began in September 2009 and continued with a first campaign in a simulated altitude chamber at Saclay in last February.
The TCO pack program is based on a research, development and production contract notified in 2008 by the DGA. It consists in introducing a number of technological developments, studied and validated during the PEA (upstream study plan) ECO.Towards 9t thrust
The PEA ECO – which validated the developments of the TCO pack – had also helped to demonstrate the feasibility of an M88 with an increased thrust, from 7.5 to 9 t.
This more powerful M88, named M88-9 (formerly M88-X, cf. A&C No. 2181), is among the UAE specification as part of a possible purchase of the french fighter. Reportedly, the M88 should integrate a more powerful new LP compressor with a larger diameter in order to increase the flow of the engine from 65 kg/ to 72 kg/s.
The 3 floors of this module will be DAM (vaned monobloc disks). The compression ratio will be also increased in the proportions shown by the ECO program (including a compression ratio of 27).
arthuroThe A.Week article courtesy of Olybrius :
arthuroDSI : Interview with Admiral Alain Silvy on the state of UAE negotiations :
http://www.dsi-presse.com/?p=2010
>Plenty of insider UAE rafale news in the latest DSI edition. It is is a long interview with Admiral Alain Silvy which participates directly in the negotiations.
-First point the negotiations are going well and are very close to end. The admiral says it is a pleasure to negotiate with the UAE who are true experts about fighter aircrafts and are aware of all the constraints. However he said it would be good to see the deal being concluded now or in a short time frame. He believs it is possible to conclude the deal before the end of the year.
The main current point of negotiation and talking is about till what point The UAE want to push the performance gain. This point will make the negotiation last for longer or end them quicker depending on their arbitrage.
They have indeed two requirements : to have a “super über rafale” and to be as interoperable as possible with french F3+ rafales. The risk is that if they ask too much they will end up with another aircraft just like the mirage 2000-9 compared to the mirage 2000-5.
About upgrades the Admiral is clear : they want to push performances in every area to the extreme just like they usually do with all their purchases (F16 block 60, mirage 2000-9). A baseline for them is that the UAE rafale should be a quantum leap in every area compared to the F16 block60. Not just a little bit better. So it is not the type of negotiation where the price is the main factor. The main criteria is max performance.
>>The required improvements are really eye watering :
Of course there is the 9t M88 engine called the M88X but also an even more powerful RBE2 AESA that will have a 10% range increase compared to the french one, GMTT/GMTI functionalities and improved interlacing modes.
They also ask for a super Spectra, efficient on even wider band (GaN?), new functionalities and greater sensibility. There will be an HMS of course.
Some of the related issues with the super RBE2 AESA is electricity production. An in-depth review of the electricity production could be required. The UAE negotiators are aware of these types of constraints and they will have to choose between commonality with french Rafale F3+ aircrafts or more performances. The admiral told that for each additional miles of range you need to increase the power and at a point you need to change the electricity production.
Another issue is EM compatibilities. By increasing the power of the RBE2 AESA there are some issues with Spectra. It can be solved but it needs time, resources and money.
According to the Admiral Alain Silvy it will take 4 years to develop, but the UAE want to send pilot very quickly in france once the deal signed to become more familiar with rafale’s tactics. It is even possible that the entire rafale transforming squadron could go to the UAE !
****************************************************
>>For the french side it will cost several hundreds of millions of developments on top of the amount funded by the UAE.
There is a probability that the AdA end up with the 9t AESA engine even if there is no operational need because it is unclear that it would be economically viable to produce two M88 versions. They wait an honest answer from SAFRAN about that.
Admiral Alain Silvy said despite there is no requirements for the 9t version it is very probable that the AdA will eventually like this new engine but he is concerned about maturing issues. You need 150000 engine flight hours to get to the “mature” point so with the M88X they will have to start again.
For other upgrades (Spectra, RBE2) he says that on the french side they are not in hurry as there is no urgent operational needs but would be happy to get it. For Spectra he said that the new GaN version in 2020 would be a revolution in terms of capability.
Finally about the mirage 2000-9 the french government will take them back and resell them on the export market. Asked about the possibility to see the mirage 2000-9 in the AdA the admiral answered that although it offers some extraordinary capabilities the cost of making them NATO compatible would be too high.
arthuroSo Thales AESA technology could equip the Gripen (a revival if the rafale secure enough export orders) and the Typhoon according to Châtiel ?! 😮 😀 Apparently the green light would be after rafale export and probably for selling campaigns that would not hamper rafale exports….Châtiel noted that it took 8 years to get to the RBE2 AESA…
We learn that there were 7 AESA prototypes and 3 preproduction radars. Thales also waited that the cloud architecture concept was mature enough to go ahead with AESA.
Current RBE2 AESA has built in ECM capability but needs to be developed if a client requires it.
The aim of new development for future rafale AESA (2020) is ambitious : GaN and full conformal arrays distributed on the fuselage with shared common aperture. It will require 10 to 12 years of development and a further 1Billion Euros according to Chatiel. 25% of which would be of industry responsibility. UAE along with France would share a part of the cost. This is expected to be intoduced for the F4 standard in 2020 or for the MLU upgrade in 2025-30.
Intermediate solution available in 5-7 years would feature a centralized architecture with shared receivers but separate apertures.
They say that the next step of upgrades they will be close to the Americans in terms of introduction. (meaning that there was quite a lot of catch up).
The Cloud architecture will allow direct introduction of GaN without all the re-qualification work.
>>And the radar is free from US content.
arthuroPosted on the MRCA thread but appropriate here as well : AESA from Thales p 32-33
http://www.textbooks.zinio.com/reader.jsp?issue=416132257&o=int&prev=si
arthuroI think he was upset that you were dismissing him on the previous thread before he came in. That’s a normal and classic human reaction which led to this direct style. If you can go beyond it you can find valuable informations. It is more about you than SAAB even if he has the right to have an opinion.
If instead of attacking him and calling into question his credibility you would have seek a constructive discussion the tone would be more courteous. Just my two cents.
arthuroLet him explain, be it the wings or a part of the frame it doesn’t change the substance of the message. Its easy to make a mistake when you are answering directly. It can happen to anyone. What I find sad is that instead of making a constructive debate with him and correcting the points where he could be wrong there is this reflex to dismiss him. It is an opportunity to have him on this forum. This attitude toward him is more telling about those who are fearing the truth.
If you are confident there is no need to try to dismiss him but an opportunity to start a constructive exchange.
Sure SAAB and its partners are good on ToT. They won the FAB evaluation on this point which was the most important criterium. But that was not sufficient.
arthuroHe is like Rezende. The only difference is what Hammer brought was his opinion like a Brazilian observator when Rezende had some hard datas and facts to provide from the FAB evaluation. Look at the previous thread, Hammer and Rezende know each other and there was respect between them.
But some will stick to the only part of the story that fit their wishes.
arthuroWhat Pepe said :
According the press releases, Akaer was supposed to do the Gripen wing project.
So I don’t see how you can debunk him on that basis. Check what is his occupation and you will understand who is more credible.
Some guys are so stressed by the truth that they are ready to hang on anything to keep living in denial.
arthuroRecently there was a report about a regain of interest from Khadafi. It even said that the deal could be signed before Ramadan (11th August). Nothing happened. So this deal would be a bonus I guess if happen.
arthuroseems that the reality check acts like a cold shower for some:D
Press release with vested interest vs the FAB evaluation.
arthuroMost if not all SH improvements are proposed by the competition (for some) as further upgrades if not already operational. (Increased thrust, CFT, IRST, IRMW, LWR, increased stealth, GaN).
This upgrade set will make the SH more competitive in performance but also more expensive. Given the L1 choice in terms of price I wonder in which extent it will be a benefit in the frame of the evaluation. If they are going that way there must be a reason.
Sign In
