Yes and that that would be for the B not the C.
Before you get your nose rubed into gouvernement figures (official) take the arrogance away from your posts expecialy when you got it all wrong.
The Rafale C is officialy quoted at 9.5 tons.:dev2:
Above this it is either the M or the two seater, looks like YOU are the fanboy here mate…
And Rafale is WAY better than Typhoon by DESIGN.:cool:
Caractéristiques du F1 (Rafale M).
Envergure : 10,90 mètres
Surface alaire : 46 m²
Longueur : 15,27 mètres
Hauteur : 5,34 mètres
Masses :à vide : 10 196 kg
maximale : 24 000 kg
Vitesse maximale : Mach 2 (1 290 noeuds)
Vitesse d’approche : 120 noeuds
Temps de patrouille : supérieure à 3 heures
Plafond : 50 000 pieds
Distance franchissable : 1 000 nautiques
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/decouverte/equipements/aeronefs/rafale_mRafale (Air).
Envergure : 10,90 m (avec missiles)
Longueur : 15,30 m
Hauteur : 5,34 m
Poids à vide : inférieure à 10 tonnes
Poids maxi au décollage : 24,5 tonnesMotorisation : 2 SNECMA M88-2 de 7,5 tonnes de poussée chacun avec PC 5 tonnes en sec.
Domaine de vol : de 0 à 750 noeuds ou Mach 1,8Carburant interne : 6 000 litres
Charges externes : supérieur à 8 tonnes
Points d’emport : 14 (13 sur la version navale) dont 5 points humides pour les réservoirs ou charges lourdes 2000 Kg.Facteurs de charge :
– + 9G/-3,6G en configuration supersoniques avec réservoirs de 1 250 litres vides
– air-air (missiles ou réservoirs supersoniques de 1250 litres vides)
– + 5,5G/-3G avec charges lourdes (bombes, Apache ou réservoirs de 2 000 litres).This PDF indicates an average NOT a specific Empty weight by type.
Also for those who knows what this means, the configuration is given in A2A in this Swiss PDF, so are the figures.
Now you tell US how a Rafale C weights on the same than a M please…
Thanks for cuting the BS.
It looks like you dont comprehend the words, Max Structural Load of 1.4 vs Industry standards 1.5 and Rafale 1.9.
😉
:D:D
FACTS ABOUT fighters
Norway to buy up to 48 combat aircraft to replace the current F-16 fleet.
Thursday manufacturers have competed for the contract: Swedish JAS Gripen and U.S. F-35 Lightning II (JSF) produced by Lockheed Martin.
The government is committed to select the F-35.
The price for the purchase will be 18 billion (nkr).
According to the government’s F-35 clearly cheaper, both in procurement and in terms of costs over the expected life of 30 years.
According to the government was the only F-35 that meet all the operational and technical requirements that the government has set.
Norway is a paying partner in the development of the F-35 (JSF).
after netherland, korea, singapore, brazil, its norway, bad news for the greatest ever “whobeat the raptor” european fighter…
let’s bribe the arabians, they are used too, lol
:diablo:
Seems so, however there is something I find strange in the weights they give on that pdf:
Empty weight 10220 kg
Max weight without external stores 14900 kg
Max internal fuel 4680 kgIt seems the difference between max weight without external stores and empty weight is just the fuel. Where are the other things counted (lubricant, pilot, gun ammunition etc etc)? Are those already counted in the empty weight?
Nic
could be the bi place, landing take off distance aren’t right, even the climbing rate isn’t right,
http://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/defense/rafale/aircraft-characteristics.html?L=1
The former BAE SYSTEMS Test Pilot Craig Penrice declared that Eurofighter could reach the altitude of 40,000 fts (12,200 m) in one minute after taking-off.
Adding the time for taking-off, then theoretically, Eurofighter should be able to reach the altitude of 40,000 fts in 70 seconds after braking-off.
i’ve seen someone on another forum, can’t remember his name said that he saw a british pilot telling that the london tube could reach 500kms/h on straight line!
adding time to start the turbine, the tube could be able to reach 490km/h in 1 minute…
i’m not sure!:eek:
Lord, it seems that somes would spin forever that most of the ferrari sold are yellow!
thinks for the accurate sources about it!
don’t waste your time anyway, teens always like spining about anything!
when i think that somes are looking at credibility in telling such BS as “Snecma is a dead compagny, they doesn’t improve their product” i’m smiling, as if Snecma was a banana republic assembling spares from others as most british defence compagnies does!
puffffffff:diablo:
thx bro for your knowledges..
I guess that someone has cloned our Star:D
the star you will never reach by your cleverness?
yes
The M88-3 was the first concept to equip the export clients, but technologies improved enough to enhence the actual M88-2 rather than build almost a new engines the m88-3!
Snecma stopped the M88-3 dev after the korean bid, the technologies devloped for this engine gave the M88-2 2E4 and while improving components on others engines Snecma did adapt this technologies to the M-88-2 with the program ECO, that ended in 2007!
engines 2 years long to output parts for this new engine are starting production, this mean that in 2011 engines for the rafale will be over 90kN ,
there’s nothing new in that, Dassault publish it for years now!
My dear Funky, I think you just post enough BS about French aircraft über alles in your previous post to convince everyone that you definitively can’t prevent to mix real informations to mistakes/pure lies/phantasm (pick one) which turn any of your post into waste of time.
So, the M88 ECO is an evolution of the M88-2 that we know, and an evolution to a 9t version is possible.
YEs, it’s what I wrote since the beginning.You quote “même encombrement” => “same size”.
But the important word is “PRATIQUEMENT” => “close”.so, an M88-3 was supposed to be just a big bigger.
Again, it’s what I wrote since the beginning.
no, all this mean they done it, to know about if its “possible” they know it from the start, the M88 was developped to increase his power basis!
as the m88-3 never was a peper engine, they tested it alot!
dear Glitter, you knowledges about all aeronautics stuffs look so minced at time, and spining around or trying to make look the realities as “waste of time”
is just ridiculous, you still take time to answer me lika punk!
9t engine is asked by the navy for ten years now, Snecma will deliver it in 2011, this articles claims that the new pack eco is avarded and in production!
cheers
As I wrote before, these datas were written when SNECMA had the M88-3 only on paper.
on the paper?
June 2006,
M88 ECO
Le M88 ECO est un démonstrateur technologique
en cours d’essai. Il doit permettre
d’optimiser le coût de possession du
M88-2 et d’augmenter sa poussée jusqu’à
9 tonnes. Il assurera la compétitivité des
futures versions du Rafale, tant en masse
d’emport au décollage qu’en performance
dans le domaine de vol.
http://www.snecma.com/IMG/pdf/Brochure_Snecma_Gamme_Militaire_FR_OK.pdf
the ECO programe is over since 2007, industralisation is on the run..
Le M88 est conçu pour générer une famille très large de dérivés pour avion de combat : avec le même corps HP, il peut conduire à des dérivés à 9 T pratiquement dans le même encombrement et jusqu’à 12 T avec un système BP plus conséquent.
Des composants de technologies avancées sont d’ores et déjà en essai pour préparer ces futures versions, dont l’une est proposée pour remotoriser le Gripen suédois en concurrence avec l’EJ 200 et le F414.
http://www.stratisc.org/Moteurs_10.htm 2005 le directeur de la branche militaire de Snecma!
regards
@LordAssap/GlobalPress/Whatever
You constitute an insult to this forum, thus, I have chosen not to answer to your posts.
Thank you for your understanding.
well, the insult in my mind is first to compare me to Lord “who need noone to defend his views” and that you brings more BS than anyone over here, keep on spining you “UK general said typhoon beat the F22” like on the whinnies topics, but here, as Gitter pls don’t try to speak about things you aren’t able to understand!
Cheersss
I think that M88-3 datas are bogus since the eco core will have the same diameter than current M88-2 or am I mistaken ?
mode troll on:
put on glasses,
http://www.domain-b.com/defence/def_prod/20081110_kaveri_jet.html
you can remove it
mode troll pff:
you should traduce your documents in english.
yes i can beleive that snecma in their worst ever design could be wrong on 20% parts of an engine, but 60% of an engine only to increase a lil the life, wow… :rolleyes:
😀
It’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.
so you should open your eyes!
Les principales améliorations testées par le démonstrateur technologique M88 ECO sont : une augmentation du débit et du taux de compression du compresseur BP tout DAM (Disque Aubagé Monobloc) ; un nouveau système de réchauffe plus léger grâce une tuyère en CMC (Composites à Matrice Céramique) et une nouvelle architecture de turbine HP dont l’aube à refroidissement augmenté permet un espacement du pas d’inspection. Au total, environ 60 % des pièces du M88 sont concernées.
you can close it now.
To my understanding so far, an increment in M88’s thrust, will come by increasing the engine’s (compressor’s only??) diameter.
If this is the case, how easy will it be to incorporate it, to the rafale?
:D:D
Yes, I don’t this.
The paragraph was clear, some studies for the 9t M88, nothing more.
2/ Bilan du programme technologique M88 ECO
Le programme technologique ECO s’est achevé fin 2007 et avait pour but de démontrer les gains en coût d’exploitation et en disponibilité opérationnelle du moteur qui pourraient être induits par de nouvelles innovations technologiques. Il visait également à étudier la faisabilité d’un développement en poussée du moteur tout en conservant un haut niveau de performance (consommation, masse).
Depuis l’automne 2004, Snecma a poursuivi les essais d’un démonstrateur technologique destiné à optimiser les coûts de possession du moteur M88 et à préparer ses évolutions futures.
Les principales améliorations testées par le démonstrateur technologique M88 ECO sont : une augmentation du débit et du taux de compression du compresseur BP tout DAM (Disque Aubagé Monobloc) ; un nouveau système de réchauffe plus léger grâce une tuyère en CMC (Composites à Matrice Céramique) et une nouvelle architecture de turbine HP dont l’aube à refroidissement augmenté permet un espacement du pas d’inspection. Au total, environ 60 % des pièces du M88 sont concernées.
Deux moteurs ont été consacrés à ce programme : un moteur pour les essais de performance et un autre moteur pour les essais d’endurance.
Le programme M88 ECO a rempli l’ensemble de ses objectifs initiaux, que ce soit pour l’augmentation des durées de vie des pièces du moteur, un gain en coût de possession, des performances accrues (4 000 cycles (TAC – Total Accumulated Cycles)) et une baisse du coût d’exploitation. Il a accumulé plus de 150 heures pour les essais d’altitude et l’équivalent de 1800 heures de vol du Rafale en mission, ECO a permis également de tester et de valider la faisabilité de l’augmentation de poussée du moteur M88 à 9 tonnes.
ECO assurera la compétitivité des futures versions du Rafale, tant en masse d’emports au décollage qu’en performances dans le domaine de vol.
some studies?
http://www.snecma.com/IMG/pdf/Note_d_informations_Snecma__M88_pack_CGP_VF_OK.pdf
oh well, ok!
M88 that would be produced in 2011 will be only more endurant?
nice new for the adla and customers!
Hazard a guess at the TWR it may achieve? But then Eurojet could just boost the EJ200 if the Rafale starts to show superior characteristics, I have seen figures quoted as high as 26,000lb’s for EJ200’s!
I think it will be likely over the years the engine power will be increased more for export customers, increasing competitors etc….as what happened with the F-16/15/Tornado/Migs/sukhois etc…
Or at least a special number of Rafale M/C/B’s making them slightly better AtA performer, but undermining the claim the French Airforce wants them all at the same standard.
ej200 is a enough fuel eater and IR radiant, its enough for his developement without changing all the engine, when it comes to Scnema hight core pressure part, think GE, they works together for decenies now…
its enough clear that snecma output products who will fit the rafale in 2011
http://www.snecma.com/spip.php?article720&var_recherche=qualification
will no more be 7.5t engines..