thank you HK !

the dacalco datalink will be fully integrated to the rafale system whereas the scarabe datalink was an interim solution developped by the AdA and not by the industry.

The Decalco is a fully integrated “scarabé” datalink with HOTAS controls. Datas, pictures and videos can be displayed in the rafale usual cockpit screens and not in an aditional screen above the virtual HUD of the rafale B like the scarabé.

Scarabé was a kind of temporary patchwork solution for CAS in afgahnistan which worked in parallel of rafale weapon’s system.

It is also said that the rafale B301 is fitted with an AESA antenna according to a french forumer which work at istres.

LordAssap (should I say Fonck /thunder / sampaix) you are becoming extremely annoying. 😡
You are highjacking this thread !

You are supposed to be banned no ?

I don’t claim that Typhoon is superior to Rafale in every area, (quite the reverse) but recognise superiority where it exists. And when it comes to MMI, superiority is considerable.

This is were I disagree. To be “considerably” superior would mean that the rafale MMI would be very bad. And this is just untrue. Your claim is very suspect and that the reason for I don’t believe you. Just as an example “If you can change a mode in one push” on the rafale what would be considerably superior ? telepathy ???

This should hardly be surprising. Dassault spent thousands of hours on Rafale’s carrier compatability, and as a result the aircraft is inherently superior as a carrier aircraft than Typhoon. Dassault concentrated more time, energy and resources on providing precision stand off weapons capability, and as a result the aircraft is currently a better A-G platform. But much as the Rafale fanboys hate to acknowledge it, there are areas where Typhoon enjoys similarly big advantages. And the EF partners spent an inordinate amount of time on the aircraft’s MMI, using a cockpit design committee whose members had direct operating experience of virtually every modern fighter, and who thrashed out the best compromise. Dassault did not undertake anything like the same process, and instead concentrated on improving the very solid single seat MMI developed for advanced versions of the Miraqe 2000. Result? EF has a better MMI.

Sorry but this is two different things with different kind of skills and enginering. To work on the navalization of an aircraft you need to calculate airframe resistance etc…These engineers are not the same who are working on MMI. You have people from The AdA, thales and Onera and not only dassault. So this argument is lame.

I read an article on A&C some times ago which talked about the rafale’s MMI. Basically it was said that a lot of effort was made in this area because the future multirole variants required to have a long term view of the MMI. Indeed at that time not everything was decided about future developments except that the rafale would need to perform a wide range of tasks. So the MMI and cockpit layout had to be ready for future functionalities.
That is why rafale’s MMI was very important. If it wasn’t well concieved at the beginning it could have been very problemetic later in its development.

The typhoon was manly focus on AtA at that time and the need of “sophisticated” MMI was to some extent less important.

I would not insult your intelligence by quoting a BAE employee or an RAF officer closely associated with EF GmbH to prove a point. In just the same way, Francois Moussez is not an unbiased source, and in claiming that Rafale has “systematically won against the F-15 and the Eurofighter Typhoon” he is not being truthful or accurate.

Why not quoting an official ??? (provided the name is given in a newspaper you can trust). Moussez has his credibility at stake. As an insider he is perfectly entitled to claim that ! If another official disagree I would be glad to here it. You can’t dismiss him only because he represents the AdA. As an officer and official person I really don’t see him lying. But again if you can quote other officials there is no problem for me if I can check it in a serious newspaper.
A Journalist is perfectly in its right to quote an official ! And they do that very often…! You are not insulting my intelligence. Note that the Herald tribune is hardly a pro french newspaper. And it is the Herald tribune not the Sun !

We disagree on the dutch evaluation.

I need to answer to several of your points Jackoniko.

First if I admit I can be enthusiastic about the rafale, I never pretend that it was better than everything else. None of my posts say so.
I can be critical about the rafale and I always admitted that the typhoon enjoy some edge in the AtA role like kinetics, Supersonic agility or radar range).
But when you pretend that you are unbiased it is a bit hard to accept it. You are probably the biggest Typhoon fan boy on this board. So I find annoying when you accuse everyone who doesn’t think like you.

About the MMI I am sorry but I don’t believe rafale MMI or typhoon MMI can be vastly superior to each other. Both are of the same generation and have the same philosophy in mind and: to give the pilot exceptional situation awareness and reducing the workload in the cockpit. One can only be marginally superior but we can’t know it exactly. The facts that a rafale or a typhoon pilot can understand a tactical situation in one look and can easily use its weapon system are enough.

All the report we have from AdA pilots and foreigner Pilot praise rafale’s MMI.

NB: Please don’t misunderstand what I say. In no way my aim is to tell that the rafale is better than everything else. My point here is just to say that rafale’s MMI are fine, works very well and there is no issue about it. Just to make an example I doubt that when you can change a mode with a “simple push” you can provide “a vastly superior option”. Perhaps it can be “marginally” superior but certainly not “vastly”. And this is valuable both way for the typhoon and the rafale.
You want me to look like as if I were a kind of extreme rafale fan boy whereas I am more moderate in my assertion than you are.

Speaking with pilots or top executive of one side maybe bias I admit but what they told fly in the face of your assertions. And I don’t believe they would have lie. In fact these guys were very respectful about the typhoon.

Here are some examples of foreign pilots commenting about rafale’s MMI

From: Chris Yeo former BAe AirOps director:

One’s immediate impression when approaching the Rafale is that it is considerably larger than previous Dassault fighters. Although the naval variant has a built-in ladder, access to the cockpit in the two-seat Air Force version is made thanks to an external ladder. The rear cockpit is very roomy and extremely well laid, with every control within easy reach.

The engineers who designed the cockpit of the Rafale concentrated on reducing the workload for the aircrew, and introduced 21st Century technology to improve situational awareness. The instrument panels of rear and front Rafale cockpits are almost identical and are both night vision goggles-compatible.

The Rafale has been designed with ease of operation in mind, and engine starting is a model of elegant simplicity: you just have to push two small auxiliary throttles from cut-off to idle, and then turn a rotary control left and right, or right and left according to which engine you want to start first (there is no preferential order).

When clearing the firing area, Philippe Rebourg engaged the terrain following mode which uses a database to elaborate a safe trajectory. The hilly terrain provided an excellent environment to test this totally passive system. Thanks to an innovative symbology displayed on the HUD, the pilot always knows what to expect when deviating left or right from the planned route, when, for example, manoeuvring to avoid a sudden threat: the height of the surrounding terrain appears on the sight in an explicit way.

After completing the cruise-missile delivery, the swing-role Rafale was reconfigured for the air-to-air role by pressing a single button. During air-to-air combat the radar searches above and below the horizon, and automatically selects high, medium or low pulse repetition frequencies to optimise detection range. Targets are IFF interrogated automatically, and a dogfight mode is available for close combat. For air-to-air interceptions, the RBE2 long detection ranges and multitarget capabilities enable the pilot to track up to 40 targets in the track-while-scan mode, irrespective of their aspects and flying altitudes. Interception data are calculated for the eight priority targets, allowing firing of MICA missiles in quick succession in their full range envelopes. The weapon system automatically selects the nearest or most threatening target, and the pilot only has to accept the proposal and shoot (or instantly switch to another target if thetactical situation or orders received dictate another choice).
On an operational aircraft equipped with a fully functioning datalink, radar, FSO, and self-defence suite, all tactical data is fused in the head-level display. For interception, the head-level display is divided into vertical and horizontal tactical images, offering a perfectly clear view of the evolving combat situation to the crew. The FSO image can be inserted into the main image to further improve situational awareness. Alternatively, for raid assessment,

Philippe Rebourg offered to ‘attack’ the Transall with our MICA missiles. Using a controller on the throttle, he just had to accept the system’s proposal, and was ready to ‘fire’: quick and simple. On the head-level screen, two lines representing the MICA maximum range and its no-escape zone clearly showed when to shoot. Thanks to this display, aircrews can choose the most adequate tactic to achieve immediate superiority. To demonstrate the multitarget capability, the test pilot engaged another target – in this case an airliner – in less than two seconds. In the HUD, the remaining missile/fighter link (LAM) time was shown graphically, whereas the remaining missile flight-time was displayed numerically.

Flying such a modern aircraft is always an honour, and this 1 h 30 min flight was an excellent opportunity to discover all the impressive capabilities of the outstanding French fighter. Its RBE2 electronic scanning adar, its Front Sector Optronics, and its innovative man-machine interface place the Rafale in a class of its own among combat aircraft, making it a leading contender on the fighter market.

*********************************************************

and From FLUG REVUE 07/2003

The purpose of the sortie from Dassault Flight Test Centre in Istres, in the south-east of France, was to demonstrate the Rafale’s performance and combat efficiency. The demonstration started in the simulator where both air-to-air and air-to-ground engagements were shown, helping me familiarise with the cockpit environment, the display formats, and the HOTAS switch logy.

The engineers who designed the cockpit of the Rafale concentrated on reducing the workload for the aircrew, and introduced 21st Century technology to improve situational awareness.

As we fly towards the north I familiarise myself with the cockpit. The impression I had gained from the simulator is confirmed: excellent view on all sides, switches well-positioned and, above all, excellent displays make the aircraft easy to fly.

After checking on the head-level display that the Tarsall is safely within the range of the missile, Philippe Rebourg launches (simulated) Mica. The remaining flight time of the missile is displayed on the HUD. While the first Mica is en route, Rebourg targets an airliner coming into the area. It is possible to change targets in only two seconds.

There is one thing sure: we can’t draw final conclusion based on a few pilots. You would need to benchmark both MMI. The experience of the pilots we have spoken to, won’t change anything. A feeling is not enough to make any conclusions. If I did so I would have conclude that the Rafale have the best MMI but you would need to assess the MMI comprehensively in operational situations to make any valid conclusions. And to do so you would need a methodology. You can’t rely on preferences it is too unreliable.

I won’t re-ignite endless debate about Korean and the Singapore evaluation as I see that it is impossible to convince each other and I think we can live with that. But at least I can provide a direct source from the herald tribune against claims from yourself (and my self by the way) we need to believe without proofs.

Moussez said that in dogfight exercises, the Rafale had out flown F-15, F-16 and F-18 opponents, and in technical and performance evaluations “we have systematically won against the F-15 and the Eurofighter Typhoon.”

But you are wrong to say that the Dutch evaluation was only about financial matters. :

http://www.dedefensa.org/article.php?art_id=84

“

A surprising and important detail had been made public: the technological and operational evaluation by the RNAF of the three candidates. According to the RNAF criteria, the JSF had been graded 6.97; the Rafale, 6.95; and the Eurofighter Typhoon, 5.85. This grading is surprising because it compares aircraft which seem only marginally comparable….”

Plus I had a direct talk with JPL last year about this evaluation which confirms this. There were more than 600 criteria in this evaluation according to him.

regards.

a nice new rafale M promo video :

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/k1S74VhqLCr3UOO2bi