Jackoniko,

You are losing all your credibility when you say that typhoon MMI is superior. This issue is really a case in point of your lack of professionalism/seriousness.

If you had ever done a research work in your life you would know that to assess something which is hardly measurable, you would have to determine hypothesis, choose a benchmark and confirm/infirm your hypothesis on a sample of representative pilots with quantitative and qualitative tests. Then you would need to analyse the results by doing a variance analysis for instance. In this work you would have to ask yourself how to isolate the effect of habits.

You cannot draw final conclusion based on one testimony because one my side I have also people praising rafale’s MMI including top managers or operators from the AdA which did red flag or TLP. (Two pilots I met in Paris last week-see rafale thread). These two pilots could compare rafale’s performance against the SU-30mki or the F15K and one of the rafale’s assets was its MMI with its higher degree of sensor fusion. I also remember J.P.L. saying that the RAF air chief which had flown on the rafale was impressed by rafale’s MMI and he wanted that some of rafale’s MMI functionalities to be developed for the Typhoon. I can add that all the report in the press put rafale MMI as being one of its assets.

All these guys were truly sincere in their assertion. Does this allow me to say that rafale MMI is the best on earth? Of course no, but if I were a bit more chauvinistic like you, I would let my imagination work and claim that rafale’s MMI are the best because I had the opportunity to talked with someone in the know!

Radar performance is another case in point of your bias arguments: of course you forgot to mention other types of performances like LPI, scan agility, the ability to work efficiently when interlacing modes or the number of targets which can be engaged simultaneously…
The captor and the RBE2 are two radars with different philosophy to answer different type of priorities… There is no radar better than the other It all depend the operator requirements.

You can see in this post that I don’t intend to pretend that the rafale is better than everything else but I am just underlying how bias and unserious your arguments are.

I could have made a pastiche of your post: The rafale is the best 4th generation aircraft due to superior MMI, better sensor fusion and greater multirole capability…. But this would drive immediately to a flame war.
That is the reason for I believe you are a bit (if not a lot!) hypocrite and perfidious in your assertions (which you make often) of being neutral. You are nothing but neutral in your comments. I can be enthusiastic myself about the rafale but I won’t be adamant and say rafale is the best in that particular area…I prefer to let people build their own opinion about it by reporting what is said about it.

About the technical evaluations all the info I had in the press or discussions confirm the fact that the Typhoon lost in Korea, Singapore and in the Dutch evaluation. I think you can’t hide behind a slow development process. The rafale was not fully developed and operational and had a much smaller number aircrafts to be build being a one nation programme which could mean a lack of development in its operational life. Until recently (the post F3 contract and until the order of the next batch) this was also a strong drawback for the rafale programme.

typhoon1,

I call into question the singapore article. This article has been written by a journalist (quite presumably john lake) which is know on several other boards to have a strong bias about the typhoon at a point a some people are wondering if is not paid by the EF consortium ! We would call it in french

“un journaliste d’influence”

(a journalist of influence). A kind of special PR guy… This is just my speculation but I really don’t trust him as you can really feel the typhoon bias in this or other articles.

If you except this source from an unsigned article with an obvious typhoon bias, you will see that various sources confirm the ability of the rafale to SC.

I remember perfectly that in a special rafale issue from the monthly air fan (that most if not all the french forumer bought I presume…:D) , A french navy pilot (so the heaviest rafale variant) was directly quote and said that he was able to sustain SC with 1*1250 l drop tank and 4 AAM.

In another Air fan issue,a mirage 2000 test pilot which job was to be help the rafale to trim its radar during the reception flights said he had to light the AB to follow the rafale at SC speed whereas the rafale could remain on max dry power.

I asked J.P.L. (dassault’ international support manager) about rafale SC ability. He said that it was able to SC with 2 supersonic drop tank and 4 AAM. (he was refering to a rafale on the static display. He said that if you remove the Exocet this one can SC.)

Dassault also confirms this ability in its fox three magazines.

To be fair I don’t know exactly at what speed and in which conditions this was achieved but the various sources we have can allow us to say safely that the rafale can SC in a combat representative config.

Rover For French Navy

Quote:
French Navy Super Etendards and Rafales operating over Afghanistan will be able to operate with the L-3 Rover targeting system under a current upgrade program. The service is also acquiring the Raytheon GBU-49 GPS/laser-guided bomb, mated to the 500 lb Mk 82 warhead.

The changes reflect lessons learned in operations, according to Maj Jean-Marc Brenot – a French army officer assigned to the Navy’s air group and responsible for close air support (CAS) doctrine and training. He told the IQPC Defense CAS conference in London last week that the French Navy had studied early CAS operations – many of them in support of British regular and special forces in southern Afghanistan – and recognized shortfalls in equipment and doctrine, compounded by language problems.

“The British infantryman is not going to speak slowly when he’s running with the Taliban 500 meters behind him,” Brenot pointed out. “There’s no time to say ‘how do you say that?'”

The Thales Damocles targeting and designation pod – operational on the Etendard and soon to be ready for Rafale – will be modified with a Rover-compatible datalink, according to Brenot, and should be operational for the next French Navy deployment, in 2009. It has not yet been decided whether the jets will operate from Kandahar or the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs…2-af6e8bdbb7d3

Over time, this board seems to have become more and more full of witless nationalistic drivel, and the quality of discussion and debate has plummeted.

Airshows can only ever show subsonic agility – and then only those manoeuvres that can be safely and predictably carried out at airshow altitude and usually at the lower end of the speed envelope.

They show what aircraft can do at airshow weight – usually clean or close to clean. Look at the difference between what a ‘Flanker’ can do with its internal auxiliary tank empty, and what it can do when fully fuelled, for example.

Many crowd-pleasing airshow manoeuvres have little or no tactical applicability. Tail slides, cobras, and hooks all represent last ditch moves of very little wide aplicability – though they do indicate the level of confidence that the pilots have in the handling of their aircraft, and they do dramatically illustrate the achievements of the FCS designers in being able to have soft limits. (But they also leave the pilot hugely vulnerable – ‘a sitting duck’ – until they can regain energy). They also give a stark illustration of the fundamental stability of the aircraft – you couldn’t override the FCS limits in a Typhoon or a Rafale because the aircraft are so unstable that if you did, you’d lose control and break up. But the upside of that level of instability is MUCH higher pitch rates, especially supersonically.

But too many enthusiasts have never flown an aircraft of any sort, let alone a military aircraft, and have never flown an energetic tailchase, let alone undertaking any ACM. They therefore look at an air display from an ‘ignorant’ perspective, and are dazzled by the spectacular and unimpressed by the significant but less obvious. Pugachev’s Cobra was universally admired, for example, while Keith Hartley’s HAVV roll in the Typhoon went unnoticed.

Airshows can be useful guides to some aspects of performance – if you know what you’re looking at. No-one needs to apologise for Typhoon in this arena, except perhaps for the lack of cloud-pleasing but irrelevant circus-stunt spectacle in its display.

But look at the take off roll, and look how rapidly it transitions into a near vertical climb. Look at the HAVV roll. Look at the roll rate without unloading to zero g. Look at the performance even when carrying 6 1,000-lb bombs.

But you do have to know what you’re looking at.

Spotters and schoolboys will always be blown away by the Russian displays. The professionals usually appreciate what they are seeing when they watch Rafale and Typhoon.

+1

TVC can become a huge liability if a fighter fail its manoeuvre and looses all its energy. HOBS all aspects missiles are the way to go.

Sign,

I won’t add much things to what scorpion 82 has said as I couldn’t say it better.

Indeed there is a lot of guessing in what you say. As for the lack of power of the gripen confronted to the rafale F2 during high altitude dogfights I remember it was the sweedish pilots which were quoted in the monthly “air fan” and not the french ones. But again on the positive points for the gripen, french pilots praised the deployability of the gripen.

EW is highly classified and it is typicaly a field where you have a lot of “guessing”. But all the info (from the press and from discussion with pilots and top executives from dassault) told that this is an aera where french excel at. (unlike engines for instance, where british or americans seem to have a small edge in term of power/weight).

In my articles database I found this one about the korean competition where the rafale finished first of the technical evaluation.

“Dassault’s combat aircraft Rafale was rated as “excellent” in all five categories, while its strongest rival, Boeing’s F-15 fighter, reached the standard in only two categories.

The Boeing fighter received “excellent” in reliability and supportive combat capability, while Eurofighter, produced by a European consortium, won the top grades in the general function and reliability categories.

In the categories of weapons and electronic warfare capability, only Rafale earned the “excellent” grade, according to the officials.

Russia’s Su-35 took fourth place with “ordinary” rates in all five categories.

So my personal guess would give an edge in That field. But again I admit it is just guessing.

I also repeat that you should take into account the rafale F3+ or F4 standard in your comparisons.

A rafale with 6 AASM fired at stand off ranges and at independents targets with off boresight capabilities will provide an unmatched fire power. The punch the rafale bring to the fight is probably one of its biggest asset with datafusion/situation awarness and its survivability. (through discretion of the sensors and the airframe coupled with SPECTRA). Note that the AASM can be coupled with SPECTRA to supress ground to air defenses which dramatically increase its survivability.

Conclusion : in terms of punch per hour I have to disagree.

A possible config we could see on the rafale according to colonel moussez : 3*GBU12 (250 kg) + 3*AASM (250kg)+ 1 GBU24 (1000kg) 2*2000L drp tanks 4 micas and two unguided rocket pods and a damocles laser designator. This is something absolutely amazing performance for a 9,5 t class fighter. Again gripen’s performance is honorable but it comes nowhere close to that !

again the outcome will depend on what level of expenses the brasilian governement is willing to pay and for which performance. (I put aside political issues here…)
If they want a modern and performant aircraft with a limited price the gripen is the right choice.
If they want to pay for extra performance to match the SU from venezuela then the rafale or the SH are the right choices.

Sign,

Rafale has never been extravagant in the electronic department(my opinion),
allthou it has made up for some in F3, it is on par generally with C/D version of the gripen, exept:
Gripens EWS suit is the best europeen to date!
Gripens the datalink is the best in the world(TIDLS)! and i will be even better(satcom). Maybe 2 F-22 has a better link between each other, but not much said.
Rafales use of spectra in F3(passive guidence is real nice and is on top of C/D gripens today)
RBE2 is maybe better than PS05-ms19(todays C/D version) or maybe not, the real data is classified.
Allthou the Gripen NG AESA will be out of this world, and WILL kill anything to date, i will tell you that..(everything else is not for disussion forums.. )

On Gripen NG/future C/D will add 360 degree MWS/LWS to the EWS-39 for missile launch and even better threat detection(both passive).
EWS-39 would give threat detection at a likely greater range and not as subject to bursts of light or other heat interruptions.
So with that clear, that leaves the 360 synthetic IR image of the DAS, and well with IRST/LDP/HMD the visual IR coverage should generally speaking be good in forward/up/down/side aspects but blind to the rear.

Normaly when people compare fighters, they dont care about the versions and upgrades, which is a real big problem.
A/B gripens which the most common to find specs about is kind of old these days. Upgrades are made monthly, so those specs isnt fair.

In this case, Gripen NG will be first to kill over Rafale F3, of the basis of sensors, EW, and datalinks.
Ordinance wise, they are on par, thou Rafale has 14 hardpoints vs 12.

In a dogfight or a fatigue effort it maybe different story, but who are we kidding..no one can tell you that, without the big clash, or a special debated scenario and support(tankers, tactics, AWACS ,airfields, numbers etc.).

Thou LM seems to know it all!

It seems that you are not up date about rafale’s EWS which is often regarded as one of the most advanced EWS integrated on a tactical fighter. SPECTRA come from France’s biggest black programme and have already proven itself during international exercises providing a unique situation awareness allowing long range passive detection and identification. Rafale’s EWS has been rated with the highest grade during the korean evaluation against the SU35, typhoon an F15K. SECTRA account for several millions in the rafale’s price tag and some rumors report the use of active cancelation.

The first element of discretion is that Spectra’s receiver system and the FSO help detect and track targets without using radar. Spectra incorporates a radio-frequency (RF) detection system, a missile-approach warning sensor, and a laser-warning system and provides full 360-degrees coverage. The RF detection subsystem uses prominent square-section antennas, mounted on the lower corners of the engine inlets and in the rear of the fin-top pod, covering 120 degrees each. The receiver antennas use interferometric techniques to measure a signal’s angle of arrival within less than 1 degree and are designed so that they do not have a large radar-cross-section (RCS) contribution.

The Rafale is also designed to use terrain masking, particularly at night or in bad, weather when visually cued short-range surface-to-air weapons are less effective. With its maneuverability and a high degree of cockpit automation, the fighter is designed to fly a terrain-avoidance/threat- avoidance profile at 5.5 g and 100 feet in altitude. The RBE2 and a terrain-referenced navigation system, using stored terrain data, are used to provide redundant flight guidance.

Rafale makes extensive use of radar-absorbent material (RAM) in the form of paints and other materials, Dassault engineers have said. RAM forms a saw-toothed pattern on the wing and canard trailing edges, for instance. The aircraft is designed to so that its untreated radar signature is concentrated in a few strong “spikes,” which are then suppressed by the selective use of RAM.

Spectra’s active jamming subsystem uses phased-array antennas located at the roots of the canards. Dassault has stated that the EW transmit antennas can produce a pencil beam compatible with the accuracy of the receiver system, concentrating power on the threat while minimizing the chances of detection.

But there is more to Spectra than conventional jamming. Pierre-Yves Chaltiel, a Thales engineer on the Spectra program, remarked in a 1997 interview that Spectra uses “stealthy jamming modes that not only have a saturating effect, but make the aircraft invisible… There are some very specific techniques to obtain the signature of a real LO [low-observable] aircraft.” When asked if he was talking about active cancellation, Chaltiel declined to answer.

Earlier this year, Thales and European missile-builder MBDA disclosed that they were working on active-cancellation technology for cruise missiles and had already tested it on a small unmanned aerial vehicle, using a combination of active and passive techniques to manage radar signature. This revelation makes it considerably more likely that active cancellation is already being developed for Rafale.

Active cancellation is a LO technique in which the aircraft, when painted by a radar, transmits a signal which mimics the echo that the radar will receive – but one half-wavelength out of phase, so that the radar sees no return at all. The advantage of this technique is that it uses very low power, compared with conventional EW, and provides no clues to the aircraft’s presence; the challenge is that it requires very fast processing and that poorly executed active cancellation could make the target more rather than less visible.

The complexity of active cancellation could account for Spectra’s high price tag, estimated in 1997 as “several billion francs” (equivalent to the high hundreds of millions of US dollars) for research and development. One of four Rafale prototypes was dedicated to Spectra tests, along with a Falcon 20 flying testbed. Four new large anechoic chambers were built to support the Spectra project, including one which is large and well equipped enough to operate the complete system in a fully detailed electromagnetic environment.

from:

Bill Sweetman, “Killer Angels”, Journal of Electronic Defense, November 2002

another article speaking about datafusion and SPECTRA :

Deployed solely in the “Blue Air” forces, the Rafale participated in all major missions. Crews were designated as “mission commander” several times. The French detachment participated in at least one day strike and one night strike daily, for a period of ten days, confirming the aircraft’s complete range of capabilities and its multirole design. Operating in a dense, hostile environment, the aircraft’s systems provided pilots with a clear, precise view of the tactical situation. The multi-sensor data fusion system (RBE2 radar, Front Sector Optronic (FSO), Spectra self defense suite, Link 16 datalink) worked perfectly. Thanks to this system, the Rafale amply proved its self-defense capabilities. It experienced no losses due to air defense systems, and was often able to eliminate these threats.

Operational scenarios provided for the simultaneous use of MBDA Mica EM and IR air-to-air missiles, Sagem Défense Sécurité AASM guided weapons and MBDA Scalp cruise missiles. American observers were impressed by the accuracy of the AASM weapons. Each aircraft can simultaneously engage six targets over an extended area, with each bomb having its own ballistics and target coordinates.

The Rafale fighters used the Link-16 datalink network for allied aircraft. This technology ensures Rafale’s interoperability with other weapon systems, in particular for a balanced allocation of firing plans between the different aircraft. Since all possible scenarios are recorded on the ground, if one Rafale does not hit its target another one can take over to complete the mission.

another extract :

Indeed, if the various participants were not particularly struck by the capacity “swing role” of the Rafale – Known-30MKI, the F-15E Strike Eagle and F-15K Slam Eagle have it already – it is unquestionably the precision of the sensors of the Rafale and its air-to-ground armament “stand-off” which impressed the gallery. ” On the Rafale the fusion of the sensors is an extraordinary concept which is very successful. It forever have divergences of tracks between the various sensors ” added the commander of the 1/7 there. The Rafale was present in all the missions of principal interest in particular at least two missions like “mission of ordering”. During missions of “coil escort” or “organic escort”, Rafale/F2+ made it possible to introduce the complete panel of the air capacities of the new plane.

The last confrontation between the rafale F2 and the gripen in france (Reims) showed that the rafale weapon system was more advanced in several areas notably data fusion and thus situation awareness.
As an aircraft, sweedish pilots acknowledged in the monthly Air fan that the gripen lacked some power during high altitude dogfights against the rafale. French pilots praised gripen quick turn around possibilities but compared gripen weapon system to the mirage 2000-5mk2 and told that there was a generation gap with the rafale.

You are talking about upgrades but what about those of rafale’s ? The post F3 standard is funded AND ordered by the French air force unlike the gripen NG. Post rafale F3 standard will encompass AESA RBE2 (which is already flying on rafale B301 by the way) a next gen Frontal Sector Optronics, improved SPECTRA, improved engines, and a new missile warning receiver.

And It seems you don’t that Gripen NG AESA antenna is from Thales the same French manufacturer which is responsible for rafale’s radar. So the rafale’s AESA radar will “kill everything as well!”

Ordinance wise, the rafale is in another league! This is THE big forte of the rafale airframe which can carry an exceptional payload. 3*2000 liters drop tanks + 2 *SCALP (1,2t each) plus 4 to 6 AtA missile and 2*1300 liters CFT if needed by the customer. Gripen NG comes nowhere near this performance. A rafale can carry as much as a SH but with 5 t less of airframe !
As a consequence the rafale will offer much more punch than a gripen.

I think the gripen NG will be a great aircraft, but you have some fundmantals features you can’t change. The gripen will always be limited by its size, but that beeing said it offers great capacities for the money. The rafale is more expensive to buy and operate but you have what you pay for…

I think the gripen NG offer sufficient performances for many air forces around the world and in terms of capabilities/money it is probably one of the best (if not the best) aircraft available. As a consequence the gripen NG as good chances in brazil if the FAB wants to get a modern fighter with a limited price.

I’ve just spent two hours around the rafale in paris (under the rain and braving the cold temperatures !)

I discussed with two employees from dassault but I didn’t manage to get first hand interesting infos:( . I was indeed not the onnly one who wanted to talked to them….
The only confirmation I had was about the two outer wings hard points which are wired and ready but not cleared for use because the AdA doesn’t need it for the moment.

Many tourists were quite amazed to see the rafale (B01), neuron and mirage 3place de la concorde near the champs élysés.

I took some pictures with my cellphone but something didn’t work so I have none for the moment but I hope to see it again so I can bring back some fresh pics! the rafale is in paris till the 12th october.

regards.