arthuroa new article :
http://www.defense-update.com/features/2008/november/rbe2aesa_rafale_081108.html#more
Thales celebrated last week the launching of the first production model of the RBE2 AESA radar, and the validation of the new software functions, which will further enhance the capabilities of the new radar.
The announcement follows the French government approval to cleared its aerospace and defence companies to go ahead to undertake complete transfer of technology (TOT) of strategic systems for the $10 billion Indian contract for acquisition of 126 multi-role combat aircraft. Key technologies that can be transferred include AESA radars, stealth composites and advanced missiles network enabled technologies. Such a move will better position France ahead of US companies, since US manufacturers are unlikely to be granted such a sweeping approval, given the traditional tough position on technology transfer, taken by the US Congress.
Production of the RBE2 fighter radar marks an an important step toward maturation of the French Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, designed to upgrade the Rafale multi-role fighter. The radar is also an important element in the French fighter offering in key export markets, particularly India and Brazil. According to a French defence procurement agency 2006 decision on the Rafaele Roadmap, the delivery of Air Force and French Navy Rafale fighter aircraft with a new generation of sensors including the RBE2 radar will commence by 2012.
Flight testing of the new AESA radar began in 2003 and completed earlier in 2008, validating the radar’s performance in an operational configuration. The radar’s concepts were validated in 2005 followed by industrialisation phase in 2006, culminated in the beginning of production of the hardware model. Final validation of software functions is expected to end in the 1st quarter of 2010 with the delivery of AESA radars to Dassault. Full integration of the AESA RBE2 positions the Rafale as the only combat aircraft of its category equipped with active arrays for both its radar and electronic warfare suite. This outstanding system that allows a 360-degree smart antenna array coverage, is a real technological breakthrough on-board the aircraft.
Thales has been developing its own European advanced AESA radar technology since the 1990s. With its long experience in radar technology for combat aircraft and in Passive Antenna Electronic Scanning functions qualified for the Rafale’ RBE2 radar, Thales has been testing development models of the RBE2 AESA radar since 2003.
arthuroa very interesting document which features rafale cokpit details like the main screen for battle management.
you can find it also here : http://www.air-defense.net/Forum_AD/index.php?topic=2759.6225
arthuroThere is more than enough of this joke ! 😡 Lordassap / globalPress is ruining this thread….His longevity is quite exeptional here…. What are doing the mods ???
arthuroyes but the ECO has the same diameter than the M88-2. The M88-3 is dead for the moment.
arthuroBig news for dassault !
Défense : Dassault Aviation aux commandes chez Thales
Le groupe français de télécommunications Alcatel Lucent va revendre à Dassault Aviation sa participation de 20,8 % dans le capital du groupe d’électonique de défense Thales. Les deux groupes ont annoncé, mardi 18 novembre, être entrés en “négociation exclusive jusqu’au 15 décembre”. Montant de cette opération : 1,57 milliard d’euros.
Le fabricant du Rafale et des Falcon va ainsi devenir l’actionnaire de référence de Thales. Il détiendra au total près de 26 % du capital groupe d’électronique et de défense. Dassault Aviation va en effet également racheter les 5,18 % détenus dans Thales par la holding familiale Groupe Industriel Marcel Dassault (GIMD) – ce qui portera le coût de cette opération à 1,96 milliard d’euros.
L’ELYSÉE A TRANCHÉ POUR DASSAULTL’Etat reste toutefois le premier actionnaire de Thales, avec 27,29 % du capital. C’est lui qui a préconisé cette opération dès l’été. En l’occurence, c’est l’Elysée qui a tranché en faveur de l’avionneur français au détriment du groupe franco-allemand d’aéronautique et de défense EADS. L’affaire aurait même été traitée directement entre Nicolas Sarkozy et Serge Dassault.
Il ne reste plus qu’à régler les modalités de ce rachat, dont deux principales et non des moindres : le prix et les règles de gouvernance. Les dirigeants de Dassault veulent éviter de lancer une OPA sur l’ensemble du capital. Ils vont déposer “une demande de non-lieu à l’offre publique obligatoire”. Il leur faut pour cela prouver qu’ils n’agissent pas de concert avec l’Etat notamment en ne signant pas de pacte comme l’avait fait Alcatel.
Defense: Dassault Aviation in command at Thales
The French telecommunications group Alcatel Lucent will resell Dassault Aviation with its participation from 20.8% in the capital group Thales Investment E-defense. The two groups announced Tuesday Nov. 18, have entered into “exclusive negotiations until 15 December. Value of the deal: 1.57 billion euros.
The manufacturer of the Rafale and Falcon will become the reference shareholder of Thales. It will own almost 26% of the capital group of electronics and defense. Dassault Aviation will also take effect in the 5.18% stake in Thales by the family holding company Groupe Industriel Marcel Dassault (GIMD) – bringing the cost of this operation at 1.96 billion euros.
The Elysee in installment to DASSAULT
The state remains the largest shareholder of Thales, with 27.29% of the capital. He called upon this summer. In this case, the Elysee which decided in favor of the French manufacturer at the expense of Franco-German aerospace and defense EADS. The case had been handled directly between Nicolas Sarkozy and Serge Dassault.
We just have to adjust the terms of the acquisition, two major and not least the price and rules of governance. Dassault leaders want to avoid launching a takeover bid for the entire capital. They will file “an application does not proceed to the mandatory tender offer.” They need to prove that they are not acting in concert with the State in particular do not sign a pact as did Alcatel.
arthuroI think that M88-3 datas are bogus since the eco core will have the same diameter than current M88-2 or am I mistaken ?
arthuroThe M88 is a modular design, so current M88 can be retrofited to ECO standard during its operational life (during maintenance phases) according to air & cosmos. It also answers typhoon1 concerns of commonality.
arthuroThe main improvements tested by the technology demonstrator M88 ECO are: increased speed and compression ratio of the compressor while BP DAM (Aubagé Single Disc), a new heating system lighter through a nozzle (CMC Ceramic Matrix Composites) and a new architecture which turbine blade cooling to allow increased spacing of no inspection. In total, approximately 60% of the parts of the M88 are affected.
you should traduce your documents in english.
arthuroIt’s written in French.
The M88 ECO is a more ECONOMICAL engine and more reliable.Thanks to the change on the core M88, a 9t is feasable, not ready.
I agree but it could be ready in a limited time frame and with alimited cost if ever a need materializes. Knowing the time frame between an order and a delivery, this time frame should be negligeable.
arthurotyphoon1,
I have no doubt about the feasibility of increasing the EJ2000 power. And a typhoon with so much trust would be awsome. The question is : will the four nations commit to such a power increase ? Knowing the slow developement process of the typhoon I think the chances are that this upgrade has unfortunately a strong probability to remain a “potential developement”. They are many things to fund before this engine upgrade… The ECO is available or nearly available and is funded by the french authorities which make the difference for the moment. The next rafale batch should have the M88 eco as well as the AESA and other hardware improvements.
More seriously aircrafts such as the typhoon or the rafale are already powerfull enough for what they have been design for…lower MCO is smarter I think. But for aviation enthusiasts like we are a power increase would be more “demonstrative”.
arthuroRoyalist: The decision to rejoin NATO is not taken primarily for budgetary savings?
We are told that we will make savings through Europe: I do not think that a second. Let us remember the European combat aircraft. The French did not want to join because we did not want to lose our expertise in the field of engines. We made Rafale, which is very expensive, it’s true. But the English, Spaniards, Germans and Italians have partnered to build the Eurofighter: this plane are much more expensive (+ 1.5) as many as rafale and is not as good! European cooperation is useful, but it is not always the solution
http://secretdefense.blogs.liberation.fr/defense/2008/11/les-royalistes.html
I posted this extract of a famous french defense journalist from a long interview about defense in general. His words are biased and should certainly be balanced and this is not an attempt to start another flame war. But this piece is information is interesting because it is quite representative of how the typhoon and rafale programme are percieved by the french governement (remember the 2009 defense budget debate in the french parliament) and by the french media. In fact there is a kind of a consensus about the rafale programme. And this is something which is quite unique when you see the fiecre criticisms about the A400M, NH90 or many other programmes (media have a tendancy of reporting what is not working). If you read between the lines you can understand that the rafale will probably have a good support during the life of the programme.
arthuroNope, the 9t has seen “feasability studies” and would required some devellopement before being available on the market.
But I’m not worried about that.
Posters on forums would LOVE to see 9t M88 while most AF would love to have a 7,5t M88 with a very low MCO
yes I know that, in my discussion with JPL during the latest paris air show he said that the AdA thinks that the current M88 are powerfull enough and that the AdA bosses prefer lower ownership costs rather than seeing its pilots having more fun !
But the idea of a rafale with 2*9t of thrust is quite thrilling and more appealing from a forumer standpoint. At least it can be an option for export for a minimum added cost vs the gain of performance, especially in markets where air superiority is the first requirement. It will boost its performance in that field against the typhoon which is regarded as mostly an air superiority fighter.
But I agree that the reduction of ownership costs is a more sensible idea.
arthurogoogle traduction:
M88
In April 2008, Snecma has delivered the 200th engine M88 French armed forces (Navy and Army Air). More than 73 000 flight hours were accumulated for the Rafale aircraft in service.
The General Delegation for Armaments notified Snecma said the market “Pack CGP” (Global Cost Possession) of M88-2 engine, fitted the multirole combat aircraft Rafale. The market aims to development and industrialization of changes to engine parts M88-2, the order of 16 engines and spare parts long manufacturing cycle, and the realization of benefits associated support. The planned modifications will focus on the compressor high pressure and high pressure turbine. These are derived from technology improvements and tested on the development exploratory ECO.
M88 ECO The ECO technology program was completed in late 2007 and aimed to demonstrate the cost operating gains and operational engine that could be induced by new technological innovations. It has fulfilled all its original goals, whether for the increase lifetimes parts of the engine, a gain cost of ownership, increased performance (4 000 cycles (TAC – Total Accumulated Cycles)) and lower operating costs.
ECO has also test and validate the feasibility of increasing engine thrust M88 to 9 tons. It will ensure the competitiveness of future versions of the Rafale, both incrising maximum weight and performance in the flight area.
Now the M88 ECO is ready for sale (9t or increased life span) on export markets as well as the rbe2 AESA. I think that the rafale is becoming even more competitive. A rafale fitted with two 9t engine should have a huge trust to weight ratio. I don’t know the exact numbers of competitors aircrafts, but this T/W should be one of the best if not the best available on the market.
arthuroSteveOJH
The problem with comparing the Typhoon to the Rafale is that you are comparing an aircraft with over 700 orders, with ~150 aircraft delivered to an aircraft with a possible order of 294 (but only ~120 contracted so far) and ~60 delivered.
Its also comparing an aircraft that will be in service with at least 7 countries to an aircraft that as of yet has only been ordered for one airforce. The Typhoon is therefore most likely to receive the most comprehensive upgrades as the costs would be funded across multiple countries and over a much larger number of airframes.
If it was my choice, i’d probably take the Typhoon over the Rafale simply for that reason alone.
there are good and bad points of being a four nations programme. The biggest asset is that you have a bigger political clout when dealing with other states.
A weak point is the difficulty of managing such a programme. As you said the typhoon should be the cheapest and have more upgrades with so much aicrafts to be produced, but surprinsingly it is quite the opposite !
Being a one nation programme means that you are much more reactive when you decide to fund new improvements…And that is exactly what is happening! In terms of weapons integration, hardware and new functionnalities developement, the Rafale is several years ahead and the programme is still gaining momentum with the commitment for the next batch (around 60 airframes).
About price the gain of being a four nation programme is not that obvious. You have to make people work together with different business cultures, different languages and with work shares which are often spread according to political reasons rather than cost effective choices. (2 final assembly line for instance).
Thus, economies of scale are anihilated.
Dassault on the other hand is a SME comparing to other big european players. They have small very experienced design teams which have the habit of working together on various civilian or military projects (Dassault has an extremely low turnover). So in terms of human ressources management, costs controls, programme management etc… it is way more efficient. I have personnaly worked as an intern in “team projects task forces” in an industrial firm and these factors are very important to gain a competitive edge. You can achieve the same result with less. Besides Dassault can count on a long experience of designing military aircrafts which is quite unique in europe. People who started working on the rafale have often designed several generations of fighter jets (thanx to a very low turn over, they are famous for that in france).
Never forget that behind any projects you have teams composed of human beings to manage.
arthuroa few other nice pics :
Sign In
