Scorpion82The idea was that radar range was required to be able to fire your weapons at their max range and nothing more. I supposed they decided that scanning huge volumes of sky with a very powerful radar was counterproductive and would make you a target more often than not, while the opponents wouldn’t even have to light on their radars!
Add in the support of awacs, and data fusion from link 16, OSF, SPECTRA and other theater assets, and you get an idea why the radar won’t be needed as often. The PESA also had inherently better LPI characteristics than a MSA, which means yet less chances to be detected while locking your target.
The question is what if you don’t have that AWACS support? An advanced RWR like the Spectra’s is certainly going to pick up a radar signal from longer range than the opposing radar might be able to detect the Rafale, but does it give you enough data to take pre-emptive actions? While bearing might be accurate (albeit it depends on the radars characteristics and is also reduced with range) the rangefinding is quite difficult to achieve against an aerial target. So you know that enemy XY is out there somewhere in this or that direction, but you might have no idea about its distance. You what are you going to do? How will you react as a pilot especially if you don’t know if the enemy has actually detected you on the radar or not? If the enemy in fact detects the Rafale early enough he might take pre-emptive actions on his own as he might have more data at hand. Then we have to factor in the jamming which is another unknown variable. When the OSF is finally cued and a MICA can be launched the enemy might have launched a missile on his own prior that, maybe doing a HOJ approach or overcoming the jamming while being better aware of the enemies (in this case Rafale’s) position (heading, speed, height, closure rate, range…).
Another question regarding the RBE2 PESA is how effective are its LPI characteristics on practical terms? Agile beam sweeping is fine, but it’s just one of many factors and doesn’t make your radar automatically discret.
Scorpion82I totally agree with you…That is why as a rafale enthousiast I am a bit angry with JL article. Honestly that must had been a very easy task to ask dassault about this directly at Dubai…Just a few meters to walk…Plenty of pilots and officials eager to communicate… I don’t think he was lazy but its goals were obviously elswhere : to support BAE and the Typhoon. And that is not a crime by any means but he should just admit he is not neutral…
Well all of us have a certain bias to a more or lesser extend and wouldn’t it be boring if you just get reports from one side? Regarding Peter Collins I have to agree with that article, another pilot with more “relevant” experience would have been a better choice. That doesn’t mean that the pilot is discredited or that the article itself is wrong or something like that. It’s more about putting things into a broader perspective.
Of course : But then you should ask what is more relevant nowadays considering current and future potential threats…The delay of the meteor integration is a clue…
I mean most of people argue “my aicraft can kill yours” in a cold war mindset to assess performance when AtG is 100% of the job now. Of course you should brace for every possibilities (thus being AtA capable) but I think (in my personnal opinion) the rafale is a far better/relevant mix of capabilities than the typhoon to cope with todays air operations.
For me SC is far over rated…Carrying capabilities, range, a wide range of weapons, SA etc are more important in a post Cold war environement.
Agreed, but it doesn’t change the fact that both aircraft are of the same vintage or if you want to call it cold war designs. They were just designed with some different requirements and priorities in mind and that has to be viewed with regards to the original customer, albeit an export customer couldn’t care less. If Eurofighter manages to develope the aircraft at least halfway to the plan (and that depends on the customers) it will be a pretty decent AG platform as well, certainly not the best or most optimised, but that’s the price you have to pay. The future couldn’t have been forseen, as it can’t be forseen right now so it’s also a question of luck to a certain extend. The french had more luck with regards to the current situation.
Scorpion82This isn’t a delta wing at all. It’s cranked arrow wing.
Did it ever went to prototype phase, or remained just on blueprints?
True. Was a bit carried away by its uglyness.
Scorpion82[QUOTE=arthuro;1492913]
And of course my own meeting with people at dassault…But to be relevant you should confront both views…But I am not the “journalist” here !:rolleyes:
EDIT : Typhoon AtG capabilities speek for themselves…!
Well all fine and I could dig up a couple of comments from pilots who are/were very impressed with the Typhoon’s MMI as well. In the end much depends on the pilots view, which is often subjective and depends on a number of factors, such as backgrounds, personal feeling etc. Some pilots may find it easier to get used to MMI X, while other pilots might find MMI Y more intuitive. I pretty much agree that you have to see both sides and I’m no journalist either. But it doesn’t matter if you are a journalist or not as long as you claim things in the face of others.
What does the Typhoon’s AG capabilities speak about? Me aircraft was designed with a stronger emphasis on AA? Certainly yes.
Scorpion82Thank you Sintra. I have to follow USS ugly as hell statement. It looks really ugly, probabley the ugly delta canard I have ever seen.
Scorpion82He is mistaken on one point : rafale enjoys superior MMI to that of the Typhoon.
And your version of the story is verified in which way?
And he conveniently forgot that the Typhoon is a cold war air superiority fighter with limited multirole capabilities which is much more relevant to the childish “my aircraft can kill yours”
Ah and I thought the Rafale was designed at the same time. But let me guess as a non french guy I have no idea about this aircraft, but you of course know every detail about the Typhoon to do an adequate comparison…:rolleyes:
Scorpion82I didn’t read any reference to Spectra, so I don’t know what you mean.
It was stated in the “D-Day for Rafale” article.
and Rafale’s Systeme de Protection et d’Evitement des Conduites de Tir du RAfale (SPECTRA) DAS remains some way short of its originally planned capabilities.
Scorpion82The problem is that for many Frenchman, anything that isn’t a complete ass-kissing for Rafale is viewed as a hatchet job.
Well I think one of the greatest problems is that for all the “critical” claims there are never names mentioned. Those articles just point into a direction from where it comes (RAF pilots in this case f.e.), but why not mentioning any names? And where does the “Spectra doesn’t work as intended” claim comes from? JL would do him self a favour if he actually starts mentioning some names for these kind of claims, but what we see is “unspecific person XY claims this or that”. Not really convincing in the first place.
Scorpion82AFAIK, the “IRST” is a simple laser designator. Will it be fully fused with the radar and EWS system and how much is that software development going to cost? (AFAIK, OSF and Pirate didn’t come cheap)
As for RCS, there are no shortcuts:
– Has SAAB been putting full-scale mock-ups of the Gripen through RCS testing like the French have?
– Has SAAB trialed saw-tooth edges?
– Where’s the additional RCS reduction in Gripen NG?
– How will Gripen have a lower RCS than Rafale/Typhoon without recessed AAMs and with an external IRST hanging from the fuselage, and with an airframe whose original design pre-dates stealth calculations?
IRST = Infrared Search and Track and it would be installed on top of the nose.
Scorpion82You´ve never seen the original Version IV of the Hornet 2000? It was a delta canard version of the Hornet offered to the Eurofighter partners in the begining of the nineties.
Cheers
I have never seen it either, are there any pics available?
Scorpion82Yes and F14 is a carrier-borne swing/wing aircraft. Can’t remember exactly but I think each F14’s pivoting mechanism was about 1500 kg (or lb) heavy.
F15 is 5t lighter then Su27. How’s that for comparison?
The original F-15 weights 12.5t the Su-27 16t that’s a difference of 3.5t and the Su-27 is still a fair bit larger, similar to the difference in size between the F-14 and the Su-27. May I add that the Su-27 is also rough field capable.
Scorpion82Su-27 empty weight is almost in F14’s class which has VG mechanisms.
While the F-14 is a twin seater and has VG wings, it’s also ~3 m shorter, 1 m lower etc. and still weights ~2t more than the Su-27 baseline model.
Scorpion82Tell me Scorpion82, how on earth can you fit a Flanker wing on an SH without reducing the size??:confused:
Wing area:
SH: 500 ft² (46.45 m²)
Flanker: 667 ft² (62.0 m²)
I didn’t understood your claim the way you present it now. Anyway why adopting a Flanker wing at all, you just need to rework the F/A-18s wing. Who says a down scaled Flanker wing would work on a Super Hornet at all?
Scorpion82200th Eurofighter delivered
The 200th Eurofighter was delivered to date to one of the cumstomer nations. The aircraft is GS036 (30+51) delivered to the Luftwaffe’s JG 73 “S”.
Scorpion82Double post. Deleted
Sign In
