MildaveOne somewhat interesting precision made in this TV report by rafale test pilot about rafale AESA radar is that it offers the best radar range, even against the big Captor M. Well perhaps nothing extraordinary but it tells that rafale AESA range is already quite good as I never heard anyone complaining about Captor M poor radar range.
At 0:30 he is saying something like, AESA radar, the only one in Europe (so far), and its range is far superior to it competitors…
Well it might be good to hear for Rafale’s fan, but I recommand a little bit of salt. Everyone in the video are saying their aircraft is the best.
What we do know for sure is that the RBE2-AA will have sufficient range to operate the Meteor, which will also be the case for the captor E and the Gripen.
In the end, the quality and the versatility will make the difference (how many modes, modes superposition, LPI, detection and tracking of multiple targets in heavy counter measure and EW environment, jaming and EW attack, sensors fusion, discrimination…).
Thales completed its first active phased array, comprising 1,000 gallium-arsenide Transmit/Receive modules, in 2006. In late April this year, the company said the RBE2 AA had successfully completed a new series of tests on Rafale, carried out jointly with the French DGA defense procurement agency, at the Cazaux flight-test center.
http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/issue/cover/Serious-Squall_32315.html
There is no doubt in my mind that the captor E might be one of the best radar when it’s fully developed. But as often with the Typhoon, the problem isn’t the capabilities of the industry but the will of the politicians to commit. And so far, the four European partner nations still have not collectively committed funds.
I have no idea where the gripen is at on the front of AESA radar…
One interesting thing though is that while the captor M is often praise for its long range capabilities (against what exactly I still don’t know), fact is it can track 20 targets, while the RBE2 can track 40… so both have their strenght and weaknesses
MildaveArmies, as Van Creveld points out, are still needed to conquer and pacify enemy territory, and navies remain the best means of carrying heavy loads across long distances and projecting power abroad.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/i…/1/161765.html
And in order to do that effectively they need appropriate air power…
I really don’t understand those you confuse weapon system effectiveness and political or ethical considerations. Guerrillas are usually based on ideology and you cannot use a gun against an idea or a way of life (unless you try to kill every leaving soul) unless you propose an alternative way of life instead.
The ministry of defence has already agreed to raise the budget in accordance with the price of the Rafale and Typhoon. So only the cheaper of the two should win.
MildavePlus the side with the biggest number of aircraft (and the most recent) is at a loss since they cannot use it to influence the conflict as they have more to loose.
Mildavethe IAF will get aircraft that were designed a decade ago to be put fully into service from half a decade to a decade from now and to last 20 years thereafter at-least.
So was the F 22 and it’s still considered one of the best.
Well, the MMRCA is a good example. As India will spend Billions purchasing a 4.5 Generation Fighter. That will be shortly outclassed by 5th Generation Types. That in the end maybe cheaper along with more capable. Hardly a winning strategy and clearly not in the interests of the Indian People.
Apart from having a lower RCS on paper, and unless they are using lasers and are thought controlled, I need to be explained what would make them cheaper and more capable.
Because the F 35’s delay and cost overrun, it might not be introduced with all capabilities at the ready. As such it would take years, money, and patience for it to reach full expectation. India would have no ToT and in prime the risk of having their equipment bugged.
On the other hands, they can choose a aircraft that is already performing every mission they need, and that can be delivered as soon as the politicians are ready to put the money where their mouths are, with up to date technologies, their own production line, ToT… And most importantly offering the Indian people their full sovereignty…
Russia is already offereing high end 5th gen fighter, and the US had their fair chance to show what they were capable of. They lost.
MildaveThe JSF is a tri-service fighter and experience from LM (F-22 & F-16), Northrop Grumman (YF-23, F-14 & A-6), and BAE (AV-8) allowed it to produce a better fighter that served all three roles (the primary role being a F-16 replacement).
As to European AESA: I did not say that their first version would only be as good as the APG-63(v)2, only that it will not measure up to the APG-77/81, especially in the area of LPI.
If there is an area where the Europeans might be behind in AESA radars for fighter aircraft, would be jamming, counter-measures and other attack modes.
Newer mechanical radars already have some measures of LPI only limited by the nature of the technology used. The rest is determined by maths which Europeans are good at, software and of course money.
Mildavedjcross posted this in the News thread.
Do you think either of the two MRCA contenders can penetrate HQ-9 SAM network ?
No airplane can penetrate a modern air defence with any guarantees of success, which is the raison why stand-off weapons are becoming so widely used, even small military forces are getting cruise missiles, stand-off missiles etc…
Any aircraft can however with the proper support, surprise and confuse an enemy air defence long enough to launch an attack. How successful that attack might be will depend on the quality of the aircraft, the pilots in addition with the political will to take risk to damage your enemy.
The Rafale was certainly designed from the start for such a mission while the Typhoon can profits from the experience gained with the Tornados (maybe even switch ECM pods…) in order to perform such a mission with stand-off weapons of course.
The F 35 is subject to the same rules. It might gain a few more minutes, but eventually and unless it turns away, it would die. In fact not been able to outrun many interceptors today in operation, not been able to carry as many weapons, it would even die quicker. It might however be able to sneak and attack keys command centers, so I would say right now its value is more one of deterrence than actual performance (after all it has never flown an actual combat mission…).
The HQ-9 SAM network probably based on the Russian S-300PM/PMU is likely to be as good. Capable to destroy tactical ballistic missile, I would advise any aircraft to stay clear or fly way above no matter what.
MildaveHow long would it take HAL to set up a line and start assembling frames 19 onwards? With the experience gained through Tejas, would it take long?
Would we see 18 frames being delivered from Europe then a pause until the first HAL-built aircraft emerged from their line?
MildaveLow level strike penetration is part of anyone doctrine who cannot afford expensive all spectrums stealth bombers. The altitude at which the weapons will be released is another matter. They are likely indeed to go to medium altitude to release their weapons for greater range and then go back to low altitude to escape the zone.
MildaveYou’ll find French screws on the Typhoon, and British, German, Italian screws on the Rafale. I provided 3 sources, including a pretty thorough study of the economic and industrial package offered by the Typhoon which shows US involvement in a few sensitive systems.
So far it doesn’t really matter as long as the US considers Europe as a key partner. But that may change if European continues reducing their military spending as the US have already warned.
Thales AESA radar was delayed a few years when the US decided to restrict the French government from using sensitive US made item.
What many people appear to be ignorant or unaware of is the very fact that many national companies have been swallowed by larger foreign companies over the years! That doesn’t make their products foreign IP.
Any technology developed with the money and intellectual property of a country remains the property of the country. But there is a reason why every state is trying to keep a key role in its defence industry by keeping a majority of share. We shall discuss about it further when Raytheon becomes China Ltd.
In the end, while the announcement from the UAE is politically and economically pretty damaging, the French offer is part of a large collaboration including industrial development (satellites, partnership on the Rafale programs…), strategic partnership etc. So I would like to see what happen once they are done with their calculators. It will be even more damaging for the Typhoon than for the Rafale if they loose.
MildaveI hate to repeat myself but I bet my money on Rafale in India because of three reasons:
1- Rafale will offer the better price as always without any doubt
2- Indian pilots have experience with M2K so that a smooth transition to Rafale is guaranteed.
3- The fact that everytime these two fighters competed in the past ,the Rafale came always ahead of Typhoon..Why should this be different now?
The Eurofighter might have offered a more attractive industrial cooperation which we don’t know yet BUT, M2K and Rafale have the same suppliers which means saving money and time in logistics,spare parts,negotiations ect which is an important factor that can’t be omitted from consideration.
1- The Rafale “should” offer the better price
2- The M2k might help but will not be as important as one might think. I think the important presence of Thales and other french companies in India will be more of a factor. Thales, MBDA, Safran, DCNS already have strong ties with India defence sector and are working on many cooperation. That’s the strongest factor in favor of Dassault if they know how to use it.
However the fact that part of the M2k will be upgraded in India with ToT might be a very interesting development since it would be easy for Dassault, Thales, Secma… to use it as a base to help train HAL in order to build the Rafale.
3- The Typhoon been offered is very different than the Typhoon then. It’s like comparing the Rafale F1 capabilities and the F3. So far only time will tell if the Typhoon T3 can be deliver on time and with the capabilities advertised.
MildaveApparently some here have difficulties with subtleties.
I have great respect for the British aerospace and defence industry. After all BAE managed this year to become the number 1 in terms of sale, in given how competitive and protectionist the US market is, that’s no small feat.
What I am pointing out is how the philosophical choices made by the politics have undermined the British defence industry and army, and in fine, it’s very sovereignty.
I am also pointing out that the Eurofighter Typhoon which is presented to all as a product 100% European is a lie since very few to none of the European countries developing it have total sovereignty and autonomy in their defence industries. And as far as I am concerned the only problem is the Eurofighter consortium trying to say otherwise.
Unfortunately I know that no matter how many sources, links and documents as proofs I may present here, many will still manage some intellectual dishonesty and claim the contrary without even caring for presenting their evidence but for the benefice of the debate –and so that I may not be guilty of empty claims, I am going to try anyway.
So to be clear what I am writing here is my personal opinion based on facts available for the general public (and so probably wrong), and general wisdom.
My opinion is that the Eurofighter Typhoon is a powerful air superiority fighter built during the Cold War in order to assure the European control over their sky and compete with existing air superiority fighters (i.e. F 15), and with air superiority fighters yet to come (i.e. F 22).
For years its constructors have tried to compare it with the F 22 superiority fighter until it became clear that the F 22 wasn’t as magical and useful as once thought. It was a time were comparing the Typhoon with the versatility of the Rafale was considered an insult (after all such an aircraft could not possibly exist, and be a good thing).
Then came the war on terror, the F 35 and the realisation that one plane could really be used for air superiority and air to ground roles.
As such the Typhoon lacks vision, not skill.
As far as the Eurofighter Typhoon been an independent built European fighters here are some elements to think about. I have found some direct US involvement in subsystems such as: Materials / Coatings / Composites. Components / Active Electronic Components / Electrical Components / Mechanical Components / Passive Electronic Components. Airframe Systems / Airframe Assemblies / Fluid Power / Weapons Systems. Avionics / Avionic Components / Communications (Airborne) / Flight and Data Management / Navigation Aids (Airborne). Power Systems / Fuel Systems. Production / Computer Integrated Manufacturing… (There is more but it’s starting to get boring).
Some of the leading companies found include : AkzoNobel Aerospace Coatings, Hexcel Composites, General Dynamics, Raytheon Company Missile Systems, Northrop Grumman, BMT Aerospace USA, Delcam Plc…
http://www.airframer.com/aircraft_detail.html?model=Eurofighter_Typhoon#Coatings
http://prod.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2005/05/bae-systems-names-supplier-for-eurofighter-typhoon.html
http://www.eurofighter.com/fileadmin/web_data/downloads/extpub/03_Typhoon_Updated_Report_Feb_2008.pdf
Mildaveyark…
MildaveI think “capable” should be replaced with “opting”,
-the rest of the world are opting/capable of free trade, to have each place specialize in parts, to get cost down.
That is the point of trade, and in a broader sense also industrialization,
or you end up with “unworkable” price tag
Except that some skills are lost, and more money is needed to recover them and become autonomous.
Really? Which communication systems are the Norwegians supplying? It has been rumoured that the UK helped with the PS05/A, but I would yet like to see a confirmation for that. They are supplying the AESA antenna only. Italians aren’t involved at all. I think you underestimate the Swedish content on the Gripen or overestimate the foreign one. No doubt that your basic argument remains unchanged, however.
It’s not like British, Italians or even Germans couldn’t do it themselves on the base of knowledge and technical capability, the will to go it alone is missing however and I’m yet interested to see whether France will built another fighter all alone in the future, I have my doubts… Btw there is no HEAVY US reliance on the Typhoon, only minor and quickly replaceable components come from the US. Wrt GPS licences and LINK16 IP the US is in charge, but that’s also true for the Rafale! The only US weapons in use on the Typhoon are AMRAAMs and PW II. Rafale uses PW II/III from the US. Not such a big deal. I don’t know why everyone makes such a big deal out of it.
Wheather France is going to develop another fighter alone is irrelevant.
Weapons in use or planned for the Typhoon from US:
AtA:
-AIM-9 Sidewinder
-AIM-120 AMRAAM
AtG:
-AGM-65 Maverick
-AGM-88 HARM
-Paveway™ IV
-II/III/Enhanced Paveway
-JDAM
MildaveOr maybe not: New cracks stop vertical landings on some F-35Bs
MildaveThe problem is that most of the AtG capabilities of the Typhoon’s development are rushed (or even considered) because of potential exports to India or other countries.
If the Typhoon does win India then fine, but if it doesn’t I am not so sure that Spain, Italy and Germany will be very motivated to make much monetary effort to carry on early integration. The UK will be left alone to push for AESA, AtG etc…
Sign In
