TeerGrandclaudon admitted as much that the 7-1 scoreline was not the only engagement, nor was it representative of an overall trend, that other engagements had the reverse.
Yet all subsequent grandstanding comes from that 7-1 engagement. It is not lying, but it is an oversimplification of a situation that the French are making large amounts of hay out of.
So really, when the French are enthusing about superior MMI and lower RCS, why did this not help in situations where Typhoon has come out on top, in well documented cases?
Official RAF policy is against pilots speaking out, thus that side of the story will remain frustratingly off the record and will struggle to gain traction on the french side due to their hatred of Jon Lake as a source.
Can you point out which other Typhoon-Rafale engagements occurred in UAE where the latter fared badly?
Also, any other engagements bar the ones in UAE?
Would sure like to read about them.
I dont necessarily write off what you say, in other words and would like to know more.
Lastly, coming to Jon Lake – I daresay not only the French would be skeptical about some of his claims. IMO, his love for the Typhoon makes him put blinkers on when he writes on any other 4G+ aircraft which he considers to be a rival. His writing comes across as evangelism and not to mention a tad one sided and its not too hard to make out which side he is pitching for. In short, a good source of info on the EF itself but not necessarily well informed or objective when it comes to comparisons..
TeerGood find Teer,
The answer from the french side is clear about it, would be interesting to have more precision from the other side :GrandClaudon (squadron commander) :
Captain Romain
Thanks Arthuro, sounds pretty similar “on the top” to a report on the AIS of the Typhoon I found on the net:
Sensor Fusion
The Typhoon pilot has a powerful radar, with long range, able to simultaneously track and engage a large number of targets, and also has an infrared search and track system, advanced ESM capabilities, and can also receive information from ‘offboard’ sensors (his wingman’s radar and IRST, AWACS, etc). These different sensors will have different degrees of accuracy and reliability in range, azimuth, and certainty of identity, but to allow a manageable workload, these different sensor inputs are merged into a single, correlated overall picture, with single tracks for each target. Physically, the Typhoon’s sensors are integrated and ‘fused’ within the Attack and Identification System (AIS), using STANAG 3910 1,000-Mbit/second optical data bus.
Using a series of processes and algorithms collectively known as ‘Sensor Fusion’, the target track information available from the individual sensors is given an appropriate ‘weighting’ based upon such factors as what the source sensor was (angular information from the IRST is particularly accurate, for example), before a ‘weighted’ position is displayed.
On the cockpit display the pilot will see a single correlated track, but with minimal further interrogation he is able to see the sources providing this information. Sensor fusion in Typhoon is so useful that many describe it as the aircraft’s most important sensor.
With the target detection and sensor management/sensor fusion processes generating solid information as to target and threat priorities, and able to ascertain the most efficient intercept geometry, it is possible for the Flight Control System, Auto-pilot and Auto-throttle to carry out the intercept (and to deal with energy management) automatically, leaving the pilot to monitor the ‘big picture’ and maintain his situational awareness. The Auto-pilot and Auto-throttle can also alleviate pilot workload during the navigation and approach-to-landing phases of a mission.
But surely there would be differences..would really like more details to see where they differ..but clearly the Rafale MMI is no slouch either.
TeerIt did make waves but the other airforces as well as EADS who did put forward a press release were far more dignified about it.
If you want to believe a heavily embelished from a very biased source that your funeral.
There is no dignity in such things – either its wrong or its right. Given two serving French officers have gone on record and not been called on it and there has been no formal apology from the French AF or detailed rebuttal, even if unofficial from the other side , its fairly obvious these guys were not lying or if they were, theres simply nothing there to say they did
TeerCan anyone tackle the MMI Qn? That’d be interesting.
TeerGrandclaudon exaggerated simple as that the 7-1 figure is BS as is the F-22 one and the SEAD stuff was a clear lie.
As I said why bring it up again? its boring.
Also still don’t see any Rafale expot sales:diablo:
If the French had lied, it would have made all the waves by now, yet there is no rebuttal…
TeerMy point was unless the IAF plans to strike deep into China using aircraft, which IMO, with multiple S-300 is very risky, the drop tanks factor may not come so much into play. So it may be that the IAF did not dwell on this too much or the RFP had easier specs
BTW this shows the formats on the EF:
http://www.mil.no/multimedia/archive/00089/2_Eurofighter_capabi_89302a.pdf
Page 23-24 et al speak of sensor fusion. HUD has basic info plus ECM aided escape cues, some cues will show up on HMCS. Plus there is an IRST attack format, and a radar format. Plus one MFD should have engine, aircraft indicators etc. Can anyone compare this versus the Rafale layout to show up the points of difference? Is it that the Rafale has lesser “Formats” but fused to begin with with all 3 fused on one screen (radar/eo/esm) to make it simpler for the pilot and the other 2 MFD/HUD/HMS act as adjunct which the pilot refers to but relies only on the main screen?
TeerArthuro,
One additional comment though – the results of the Rafale and Typhoon did show up the propoganda attempts by certain folks that the Rafale was a slouch at A2A and did come as a vindication to those who noted it would be a good performer. Also, some claimed that the Rafale MMI was “poor” – glad to see French pilots rubbish that as well. The Rafale got its due. 🙂
TeerA query to Scorpion82 or anyone similarly well informed about the EF – do we know the current avionics state of the EF have all planned capabilities been achieved? And what were the EF that took part in UAE at?
Many thanks.
TeerTeer,
To be precise the restriction were on rafale side but it still won. That is why this exercise was taken seriously. Moreover the pilots made comments about what they thought that make a difference. ie : sensor fusion, MMI, RCS, maneuverability.
My point is that all these quotes are from the French side, in that they are noting that their sensor fusion and MMI made the difference. What this tells me is that the Rafales sensor fusion and MMI is excellent, but i cannot be sure that the Typhoons is so bad either given prior data that the EF too has sensor fusion and DVI.
It could also be that, the T2 Typhoons they faced may not be upto the definitive standard or the pilots were inexperienced and made tactical errors.
They can however, roughly determine the RCS and maneuverability, given these are visible externally to the Rafale pilots using their own radar & via dogfighting/maneuvering.
For instance if we see: And the french pilot to recognize, with great sportsmanship, that the Typhoon pilots who had been opposed to the Rafale the week preceding the ATLC were young and relatively inexperienced, as the French already benefits from lessons learned from 3 operational detachments in Afghanistan (one year of presence in all) and 4 of its pilots had participated in Red Flag 2008.
and ….On paper, the Typhoon has some undeniable advantages: more powerful than M88, its two reactors give it a better weight/thrust than the Rafale. According to the Eurofighter pilots, this additional power would be particularly appreciable during simulated combat below 20,000 ft, where the density of air allows the engines to be fully expressed. In the battle beyond visual range (BVR), the Typhoon also has an greater “extension” than the Rafale. This is because of the the physical characteristics of the radar, which antenna “sees” futher than the RBE2-PESA, but also because of the dynamic performance of the American missile AIM-120 AMRAAM . Designed exclusively for medium-range interception, it certainly does not have the versatility of the Mica, but it is superior in terms of range.
and the article goes on to say:
Facing a Rafale, these theoretical advantages, however, must be nuanced.
..which is exactly my point as the Rafale has good MMI/SF making up for its shorter radar, and the FBW may be better to some extent offsetting the Typhoons power advantage, whereas the lower RCS offsets the larger range of the Captor. Each has its pros and cons.
In other words, both aircraft have their pros and cons.
As for AtG just compare the amount of external fuel carried by both platform in similar config
But what happens to the aircraft performance then, in such a heavy loadout config. because of which it may not end up being used. Somehow, I dont think the IAF rated this aspect too highly otherwise the Typhoon would not be in the top 2 at all.
TeerTo have simulated a SARH missile and guided it all the way to its target, I think that the Rafale’s small RCS, coupled with the OSF and MICA IR combo would’ve come into play. During such a simulated DACT, the Typhoon pilots would’ve had no way of knowing that the MICA IR was simulated to be launched at them since those launches were basically simulated after the Rafale pilots identified the targets using their OSF. In reality, a missile launch plume would’ve likely been picked up by the DASS and warned the pilot. DASS is also to include wideband RWR and ESM systems with 360 deg coverage and had the Rafale been illuminating the Typhoon with its RBE2 PESA, the threat would’ve been picked up..
However, Tranche 2 Typhoons only feature a limited or basic DASS system so it is possible that they went into the DACT without adequate self-protection and warning systems on board. Nevertheless, that only illustrates that EXISTING maturity of the Rafale vs the Typhoon. No doubt though that the Typhoon will get there eventually, but with partner nations looking to cut orders and save budgets, it might take more time than anticipated.
Exactly, simulations can disguise a fair bit as there is no actual missile in the air for MAWS to pick up.
Also, if the RBE-2 like the RDY2 does not change waveforms on locking on for high grade tracking for missile shots, the opposite guys RWR will keep the same tone as if its TWS. The end result is tactical surprise in the sense that the opponent does not know that a missile has been launched.
About overall capabilities, I think bar the AESA & TVC, pretty much everything on Typhoon has been funded for in terms of operational capabilities to be deployed?
Funny how things change. A couple of years back, everyone was tomtomming how the EF had a viable upgrade path on account of larger orders and the Rafale was a dead beat, now the shoe is on the other foot with budget cuts and what not.
In all likelihood, we are likely to put Israeli and Indian LGBs on these aircraft, buy a limited stock of Meteors and otherwise rely on Astra (hopefully) and Popeyes/ Exocets and what not – so the munitions should not cost us such an arm and a leg as they otherwise would have.
TeerThen why was this advantage not on show.
Thats where exercise restrictions, and airspace constraints come into play.
Let me give you an example, at Cope India, F-15s were knocked out by Bisons. Would you rate the Bison as an overall more capable platform than the F-15? No – but it did show when well employed the Bison is a threat. The F-15s lost 9:1 versus threats with worse overall capabilities or avionics including Mirage 2000-Hs.
The reason was that the US side overestimated their capabilities and did not do adequate planning, and nor were their tactics flexible enough. Being overconfident, they agreed to use SARH whereas the Bisons and Mirages simulated ARH. Even so, the results were very lopsided.
The Rafale performance was very credible, especially as they simulated SARH and still won but as the above example shows, it does not necessarily mean overwhelming superiority, as a lot depends on how the platform is used.
Furthermore, do note that per reports the follow on definitive IRST for the Rafale is not in production, whereas PIRATE is. One cant just claim that A is better than B in passive attack either.
We have had more than one source claiming the supriority of the Rafale. Wasn’t there a Flight article where a retired RAF (or was it RN) pilot flew the Rafale and said its a more capable platform.
He was very impressed with the FBW and overall ease of operations for the most part, something where the Rafale may indeed have an advantage.
And then there was the UAE exercise where for all the rhetoric the Typhoon supporters could not come up with anything that disproved the Rafales claims of superiority.
At best Typhoon is Rafale’s equal in A2A while it is vastly inferior in A2G. It also has significantly lower range.
You are jumping to far too many conclusions without any definitive data on hand. At what altitudes is the Typhoon compared with the Rafale and at what altitudes did the UAE exercise take place? What were the capabilities on the exercise Typhoons and the pilot skill (experienced, average, rookie)?
How is the Typhoon vastly inferior in A2G for the kind of missions the IAF plans to undertake, with payloads they envisage?
What are the range profiles for different missions?
Its one thing to state A can carry X tanks with Y bombs, what if the user never employs this config, as it makes the aircraft vulnerable and sluggish, and prefers a lighter balanced loadout?
Very little of this data is available publically for one to one comparisons in the exact sense. What we do know however, is that both platforms are very credible 4G+ fighters.
As for hot and high if the Times NOW report is true the Rafale must have done well during the trials.
Sure, but what happens with more payload and when operating in an independent manner w/o AEW&C support? The Typhoons larger radar aperture and stated excess thrust should give it some advantages.
It is also going to get uprated engines in the near future.
Not certain, as the UAE deal is under negotiation, and there is no mention afaik, of the IAF getting Rafales with uprated engines?
TeerWe had countless threads in which the superiority of Spectra and the radar have been laid out.
What my impression was that each side had pros and cons. All I could garner was:
Spectra is very advanced and has had a lot of money spent on it but then again so is Praetorian.
Radar – the RBE-2 is more discrete but suffers from limited scan angles and range versus the MSA Captor. Again, differing approaches.
In addition there are also the clear reports from the UAE which show how Rafale slaughtered the Tiffies.
Yes, but that is the one exercise and do we know at what altitude, conditions, the exercise took place?
TeerThe results spoke volumes and exchange ratio of 7:1 is simply too much. May be it is because the PIRATE is not operational but still even the Rafale matching the Typhoon in A2A is amazing as it is clearly the better A2G platform.
The thing is that the 7:1 happened in one exercise – if there were a couple against other operators using the latest Typhoon, then we can unequivocally claim the Rafale is superior across the board.
Right now, all it says is that well handled, the Rafale is good at A2A and not a slouch. That itself is a myth buster.
But a lot more needs to be known about the capabilities of the Typhoons that went into the exercise. And besides, India will be getting T3s with AESAs and otherwise mature avionics by 2012 onwards, not exactly the same aircraft that were employed vs the Rafale.
What do you say about Rafales superior range and Payload and survivability in a high threat environment as compared to the Typhoon ?
I really cant say it has better survivability, because if loaded down, all aircraft become significantly vulnerable and rely a lot on situational awareness and electronic measures to avoid getting shot down
Rafale guys would claim their aircraft is more discrete and has SPECTRA, EF guys would claim the EF has excess power to escape from fast threats and Praetorian is no slouch.
Both aircraft are very evenly matched for IAF requirements.
However, the EF does have an advantage in A2A thanks to its A2A optimized design which should give advantages in BVR, whereas in A2G, the Rafale has a more mature capability, and as the prior comparisons show, may have a payload advantage in specific configurations.
I have long maintained that both of these aircraft (and the advanced Flankers and now Eagles) are fairly matched in terms of pros and cons, and when handled well, can come up with good results.
For the IAF, do they go for a fighter which can have a decisive sensor advantage vs the PLAAFs Flankers plus airframe advantage, and can also do strike OR do they go for a fighter which can hold its own versus the PLAAF Flankers, dominate the other threat, have a reasonable airframe performance and do strike in a comprehensive manner..but again, the EF may have an advantage in hot and high.
Its a tough call. I do hope however that one of these two wins rather than the other four
TeerLiger,
If we do not plan to go to war, if Russia does not plan to go to war, if Pakistan, India and everyone see no clashes at all ahead… then why the hell Russia and all the others keep building more and more arms, more and more technologically advanced?
If your answer is “China and India (and let’s add even Russia) need weapons to prove their might on the international stage and impress each other and the US and Europe” my conclusion is: the Cold War CHANGED, but did not end. And we did not understand it.
Liger, why keep bringing India into the discussion, when you should be looking at what the UKs requirements are. Sounds to me more like a someone, somewhere is arming so should we!
India is arming because it has Pakistan & China to deal with, nothing less & nothing more, and even so, its restricting its expenditure as a % of GDP to a stated level and not increasing it. Despite many calls to raise it by a percent point, the increase in overall expenditure follows the overall growth of the Indian economy. That apart, the chances of the UK & India having a conflict are remote, and even if that were the case, the UK would have to arm itself to the teeth to wage a successful campaign in entirety, and to what end, and what strategic objective?
Better off, posing some hard questions over the kind of conflicts the UK expects to engage in, and prepare for those rather than posit such far off crystal ball gazing. Otherwise, there is no end to capabilities required, and expenditure.
IMO, if the UK concentrates on getting its economy on track, expenditure will recover. After the events of the past two years, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, some belt tightening was inevitable and I do doubt it will be as drastic as your papers make it out to be.
TeerDo you have a source for that?
What I have read was that the F-35 radar was, according to the Norwegian evaluation committee, considered superior to the Gripen NG radar. Which is not at all surprising given that the F-35 radar has a larger number of TR modules, a larger diameter, and is also the latest generation of US American AESA radar technology.
I am sure the F-35 radar will be superior also to the Rafale AESA. This does not say anything about how the Gripen NG and the Rafale AESAs will compare.
The link was a Norwegian news report quoted on this forum and the net, which was translated. Perhaps some member may have archived it.
I have summary points in my email which I am quoting:
Reports says that the SAAB claims were optimistic and not necessarily accurate given the radar was yet to be developed, whereas the US had significant experience in AESAs.
Also, another report mentioned that the Gripen NG w/Meteor had a marginal advantage in win ratios against the Su-35, which quite frankly, was underwhelming given the performance of the Meteor besides which even this was a simulation.
Also, when the Norwegians considered PAKFA into the equation, they thought only the JSF would do.
Overall, IMO, given the factors, the Gripen NG and the MiG-35 were the weakest contenders in the MMRCA contest given a variety of factors, including development risk, unproven tech, and comparison vis a vis peers and capabilities being developed locally.
Sign In
