Nick_76Why not ? 😉
Nick76 : lol 😀
Standard fighter sized… 5sqm ? We never know…
But if 172km is the detection range, 140 km may be the tracking range. My point was to tell you that it’s still a good A-A radar. The RDY on M2000-5F already gives full satisfaction.
Thanks – thats interesting, any idea whether this is the RDY 2MK2 or just RDY2?
RDY2 Mk2 had 15% over RDY2 right?
Also any idea whats the average power of the RDY2Mk2 or RDY2 TWT, and the antenna dia, gain etc?
Nick_76Can I please participate in the debate?:D :rolleyes: 😀
You sir, are a masochist. 😀
Nick_76TMor
As a point of comparison:
Zhuk ME- ~150 km detect against a 5 Sq Mtr target, (1.5 KW average power), 10 target TWS, 2 target engage with R-77
Zhuk MSE- 50% better performance than above, so 225 Km detect, 980mm antenna, rest of specs same.
Above ranges are all approaching, head on, lookup. Reduce ranges by ~20% for look down. And ~60% of original for receding.
Captor-M can lock on to 5 Sq Mtr targets at 185 Km and beyond.
So what are the ranges of the RDY-2 against what RCS.
And RBE-2?
If I am correct, RBE-2 can detect a 1 Sq Mtr target at 100 km. So thats 150 km against a 5 Sq Mtr target.
RBE-2 can detect 40 targets, track 8 and engage 4 with MICA-EM/IR. Lot of confusion over this, thanks to Thales usage of the term “tactical situation build up” over the 40 target detection and occasional use of the term tracking.
Correct me wherever I am wrong.
Nick_76It’s funny how you depict France… I have the feeling that people ask questions so as to get answers to fuel their impressions about the country. 😀
Not France. Not France at all. But French armament firms and other consortiums. France- I like (Borat voice)!
1) We’re only average citizen. We don’t know why everything 😉 .
You will know far more than me about French weaponry and systems. 😉 😀
2) RDY detect at up to 150km (80N.m), and RDY-2 see 15% farther : 172km.
It’s already a good detection range. What’s the problem ? :rolleyes:
8 target tracked, but at least 20 detected (my source gives 36 detected).
source : “Le monde de l’aviation” n°8, january 1999, by Jean-Marc Tangy)
Aha see!! Now we are getting somewhere. My problem is that the Thales radar should be as good as or better than the CAPTOR-M. 😀
That way my AF could buy them. :p
On a serious note, what is the above against, in terms of RCS?
Then, why do people avoid talking about the 45,61% MAC instability ?:confused:
Because we are waiting for Jack to come and tell y’all that y’all are totally wrong and bought into Dassault propoganda etc and the debate will begin again. 😀 :rolleyes: 😎 🙂
Nick_76All in all, Sweden and Bae sold 56 Gripen to 3 countries (not 5)
In the meantime Dassault sold twice more mirage 2000-5 (119) which was the actual french competitor of the gripen.Don’t forget that the USA also had some interests in the gripen through the engine and the AA missiles
AFAIK, the rafale was never proposed to the 3 gripen customers :rolleyes:
Now that I am on a cribfest against Dassault 😀 , let me add some more cribs against Dassault and the Mirage 2000. Why the heck was Dassault so blase about an AESA or RDY-2 upgrades? Look at Phazatron for example, barely is their Kopyo and Zhuk-ME in production, but they already have a functional prototype of a Zhuk-AE in service. The Mirage 2000-5 otoh, is still stuck with a MSA RDY-2 with a ~140km range against a 5 Sq Mtr target, and a 8 target TWS ability. Hardly earth shattering in the A2A arena. I think Thales requires a big kick up their backside in terms of airborne FCR to make them less complacent and help land more Mirage 2000 and Rafale deals. 😎
Nick_76I do agree that Dassault didn’t advertise and promote well its plane , and i honestly do not know why we didn’t sell more platform and struck more deal with India .
Indias bureaucracy is also partly to blame of course. Much of the problems stem from there. But I still think France could have done more.
One thing that strikes me is that several of Frances conglomerates are state owned. That could be an issue when it comes to negotiating since the French bureaucracy would be involved. And thats two layers of hassle.
But , to be frank , i do not think that France scorned in any way India and highly doubt that it is related to self-complacency reasons or something alike , but about rational and cautiously pondered decisions that the average citizen cannot know .
It is those “rational” decisions that are making the Indians more aware that there is no free lunch. For instance, the bid for the Marlin post Scorpene was a huge wake up call for India.
It is definetely in the interest of France and its industry to work and cooperate with India , Israel offer a very advanced level of technology in electronics , missiles and drones so it is not icomprehensible that they managed to sign plenty of contracts with them , i don’t know about the fiscality in Israel , but if they managed to offer better prices , then it is a good lesson for us and we will have to take example on it in the future .
I agree, and frankly, French/European technology is superior to Israeli items many a time. It is just that these firms are watching the opportunity of opportunities pass by. India as a launch customer for the Rafale would be a huge win for Dassault, but it doesnt seem to be overly bothered.
Nick_76What you say is basically correct , but the form you employ is unkind and i will try to tell why i have this impression 😉 .
I do agree I was unkind.
Indeed , Israel was willing for more transfer technology to India , and if France was cautious about it , it is not really a question of “arrogance” but for a couple of other reasons that are specific to each case and type of equipment . People making these decisions aren’t really arrogant , but look at the best interest of the country just like everybody does .
The problem is that the customer gets tired of such arm twisting. What you define as “best interest” is interpreted by the customer as arrogant, especially when the supplier doesnt give you what you want but says (in effect), this is all you will get. This attitude is what is under question. Unfortunately, some of THALES, Dassaults higher ups have conveyed that impression. Its not that France is collectively responsible. As I have said, these are global consortiums, hence can afford to overlook certain deals and will not compromise on what they regard as IP or price, which is ok after all. But when they constantly price gouge elsewhere it becomes an issue.
For the high prices , i think you can figure out easily , that apart from huge military-industrial complexes like USA or Russia , only a very few European countries sell every kinds of military equipment , France with a smaller industry and Far less sales and benefits in export has to price higher , not for greed , but for simple economical and fiscal reasons . to pick an example , if you buy some meat in the supermarket who makes huge profits , it will always be cheaper than at the butcher , doesn’t mean your meat will be better , it could in some case , in other cases it could be equivalent or just different
I dont quite buy this. Israel often provides equivalent items at almost .5 to 3/4ths the cost. Its a question of price gouging and these consortiums knew that the customer doesnt have too many options. After all, for many many years, India couldnt afford American or get it (politics), Russia was lacking, Israel was off limits, and France asked top France + some!
You do know that France arms across the world many armies in every kind of things , from missiles , to tanks , helicopters , ships , vessels or radars etc.. , so when you say just a subsystem provider , it’s not entirely correct .
Please read what I wrote- I meant India in particular. In recent years, bar the Scorpene contract, how many platforms has France sold to India?
And what did it do after landing the Scorpene? Promptly started negotiating with the Pakistanis for the Marlin/ Scorpene derivative!
This behaviour gives India a wake up call to find an alternative supplier, or indeed refund its own industries and source systems from Israel/ Europe.
Rafale export life is about to begin , with F3 standard , Marroco is strongly interested and other countries could follow in the future .
The point is that a MRCA contract in India is right there. If Dassault were to play its hand well- offer full Tech transfer and negotiate for zero Offset etc, then it could very well land the deal.
But I am sure Dassault wont. It would rather play hard to get and lose the deal. Note how subpar the Dassault marketing for the Rafale has been in India vs the professionalism and elan displayed by the Gripen team who have constantly harped on technology transfer and local production, despite being weaker in that area (since a lot of components are non Swedish) than the French.
Look at JVs- how many projects is India colloborating with France with as compared to Israel and Russia? Do you think the latter countries are so ahead of France that its left behind? Hardly, its a combination of “we dont need them so why bother”.
This is what I defined as arrogant or short sighted, call it what you will. They are perfectly willing to only offer or be satisfied with subsystems but are ignoring platforms. The problem is that the window of opportunity is fast closing. India is finally spending decent amounts on defence R&D (hence JVs), which basically means that in another decade and a halfs time, it will stop looking outside for large scale platforms.
Nick_76The French inability to get sales is a combination of geopolitics, arrogance (in demanding the highest price for their products even over and above what rivals are willing to live with) and finally, competition. Then there is complacency, since these consortiums – THALES, EADS etc are so huge that they tend to take customers for granted.
For eg: India, which could have been a cent per cent French market w/ Russia is now more Israeli and Russian. Because the Israelis were far more flexible and offered worldclass products and technologies at reasonable prices and were willing to work with India to complete the remaining 20% of its indigenous projects. The French otoh, wouldnt compromise on any aspect, and also supplied Pakistan. It does tend to make the customer look for options. So France is more and more getting to be a subsystem provider, rather than a full platform provider.
Nick_76India in all probability. This is probably the new Barak project, or perhaps another one which has not been revealed.
To address the threat from Palestinian Qassam rockets, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and then-defense minister Amir Peretz approved the development of an alternative missile-defense system which is based on intercepting rockets rather then laser beams. The missile interceptor, named Iron Dome (“Kipat Barzel” in Hebrew), was to be developed by Rafael, the national authority for the development of weapons and military technology, and completed within three years.
Nick_76The Russians – as Otaku said above- lagged in Microprocessing during the Cold War. There was one more lag, in production methods and equipment.
And high accuracy CNC equipment in the numbers and types they required. That imho, led to a greater focus on high precision manufacture only as and when necessary and designs with greater ranges of production tolerance so they could be produced asap by a complement of highly skilled manpower backed up by much greater numbers of lesser skilled manpower.
What must be remembered is that it was the Soviet Union vs the entire “free world” as NATO/US styled themselves. The freemarket policies allowed for rapid economic development and the industrial ecosystem of the latter dwarfed that of the SU which was in essence, pulling along the Warsaw Pact in terms of technology. In contrast NATO had far greater resources spread amongst its member states and each was by itself a technology power in many respects.
Today, both electronics and production machinery of high standards, if not the absolute bleeding edge, are available off the world market, COTS processors and ASICs as well as high accuracy machinery from Japan, Europe, niche manufacturers the world over. The increasing focus on highly precise tolerance for manufacturability for stealth, also plays a part. The PAK-FA is likely to be the “smooth” Russian fighter ever, in terms of fit and finish. No old style riveting everywhere.
Nick_76http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/mh/paris061807/index.php
Article about european AESA on page 78.
(AdA to receive first AESA Rafale in 2008 ??? :confused: )
I like Reuben Johnsons articles. But hes not the most accurate author and is more of a generalist than anything.
Nick_76This is the kind of courtesy you were referring to on another thread, Nick?
The occasional touch of acerbity is brought out by your courtesy Jack, as always. To wit, in this very thread:
F-22 did exceptionally well. Typhoon did well. F-15 did better than you’d have expected. The reason that I get annoyed with the half wits is that it’s actually very simple. The performance of most aircraft was over-stated where there was any doubt, in order to make things realistically tough for Typhoon.
This is courtesy?
Nick_76Radar performance isn’t all about output power.
CAPTOR / Typhoon has some major advantages over Bars / Su-30 in the avionics.
Think ECCM, think sensor fusion, think signal processing power.
The presumption here is that these are insurmountable advantages or the kind that translate into something similar to what the Raptor brings against its opponents, and that the MKI has stood still and improvements havent continued. And that everything about the MKI/Bars etc has been revealed as is. Both are wrong.
Yes, the EF has some advantages in avionics, the kind that are very useful on paper and could be debated back and forth, this processor vs that, that vs this and some advantages which are tangible- eg, the Towed decoy, the integrated DASS vs the federated EW units on the MKI…etc. But do these translate into across the board war winning advantages vs the MKI? I think not. Nor are they eternal. As we speak, further modifications are being made to the MKIs. A towed decoy may also be incorporated and so on and so forth.
It may not be elegant, but a MKI can burn fuel to engage the EF if it wishes, it may bleed energy more than the EF at supersonic speeds but alternatively, it will also dump that energy use TVC , engage reheat and get the heck out of dodge ..pros and cons, pros and cons..the Bars may be many times heavier than the Captor but it can easily sustain the longest armament of the MKI at the ranges it deserves..
None of the above translates into a F-22 vs the others scenario. Which is what I was getting at.
1) It’s not going to happen, except facing the F-22.
You can believe that if you wish, but its nowhere near the truth I am afraid. The EF isnt a silver bullet despite your obvious national pride in it, and desire to show it in the best possible light. Its a very impressive aircraft by itself however, and doesnt need such constant trumpeting as the be-all and end-all of airwarfare or second to the F-22 or whatever PR comes across.
Re: the bit about JOUST- suffice to say the other thread has already poked huge holes about the technical assumptions made- take the radar for instance. A high powered ICG array and its equal to Captor-M, oh please! And if I or the others here were to insist on the exact details of the “developed Su-27 package” let alone the missions flown and how they were structured (in detail, not 1-2 liners)- I would wager that you wouldnt have the details either and would point out it was classified and occurred long back.
As a point of interest, it may be worthwhile stating that the Russians do have a Captor-M equivalent in terms of the 980mm dia Zhuk-MSE, in terms of performance, even if its quite larger and utilizes a larger aperture antenna (which should justifiably point out the excellent achievements of European industry in developing a ~700mm dia radar with equivalent performance).
Ray,
Thank you for the kind words (and I surely dont deserve them), but I think I am done here. In Jacks POV, the EF is light years ahead of everything else. And its your national pride that isnt allowing you to see the light…sure, and its been you (& I & everyone else) who have been engaging in this ridiculous mine is better than yours craziness vs the Rafale and EF all the while!
Its quite clear who has the emotive dog in this fight (and the interest!) in proving that his pit-bull (or terrier) is a better breed than all the other yard dogs around- and dont think it is you mate!
I quite agree- all other dawgs are mongrels and the British bulldog takes the day. I do think that if the Internet had been around in WWII we would have a debate on how the latest Spitfire was so much better than the P-51 and P-47 and FW-190 and etc etc.
Lets all agree that the EF rocks, everything else sucks – doesnt stand a chance against it, tactics etc dont matter when the disparity is SOOOO great, and lets move on.
Nick_76no matter indian dont need same product twice.:cool:
The Rustom is an ADE/NAL/HAL project to develop a MALE UAV (Medium Altitude Long Endurance). The Heron is the currently used MALE UAV by India.
It is named Rustom in honor of the late Dr Rustom Damania, of NAL who did a lot of work in terms of setting up research and facilities for light aircraft projects.
Word from BRF @ AeroIndia is that the Rustom airframe will be similar to the Rutan Long EZ.
Nick_76While i dont have a reason to question that an EF armed with similar weapons could be an equaliser to raptor in WVR (just like most other agile fighters),
Right now, when both fighters are without HMS, a TVC equipped Raptor has an edge over the EF imo. Which is why I wouldnt take this “fly against Raptors they came on top in WVR, due to there sheer agility,” too seriously. It would be a pretty tough call.
tracking a raptor from 80 miles is somewhat questionable; either Raptor must have a larger RCS than previously claimed or EF might have an extraordinarlity powerful radar.
Its more of an internet legend really, in that any X band radar could track a clean Raptor at 80 nm. One version states that it was because the Raptor had external fuel tanks, even that appears to have holes in it..
Sign In
