Scorpion , could you give again the link to the DASS pdf , thank you .

This pdf was once up on Eurofighter’s official website among others but has disappeared since the website underwent changes a few years ago. I of course have it on HD though.

Anyway , we all know that emission control with a mechanical radar is rather basic since we can ‘t ask the radar to perform selective output power in sector “X” while scanning with a different output power in sector “Y” and/or “Z” and certainly not simultaneously . Then , ask the Captor to modify (adjust) by itself its output power in real time to “just” light-up the target with the minimal power needed to do so as the target is closing in . Then , you can ‘t ask the Captor to “beam” its radar cone in just a very small portion of the sky (like a laser pen vs a light-torch)

As I said , the EMCON concept is not possible with a mechanical array . It is just not flexible enough .
I only hope that DASS has been built with the Captor-E in mind .

.

Emission control isn’t about the radar only and there are situations when you want to reduce emissions to a minimum or even cut them all together. In contrast to what you believe/claim the Typhoon is perfectly capable of conducting silent interceptions using DASS, PIRATE and MIDS, not unlike Rafale with SPECTRA, OSF and MIDS. PIRATE alone can actually gather a lot of information including angular position, range, speed, acceleration rates and whether a target is approaching or receding. It generates target images for visual ID on selected threats and work goes on to include a multitargeting mode with imaging capability and EADS works on an automatic target recognition software since years which is used to identify targets on base of the signature with PIRATE and Captor. The ATR software is part of the precision targeting system which is mainly aimed at AG missions, but the software could be adopted to AA use as well. Captor is right now capable to ID AA-targets using the non-cooperative identification feature, something the RBE2 will just introduce with its AESA antenna and even with the AESA antenna RBE2 won’t exceed the resolution of the current Captor-D!
MIDS is the same as on the Rafale and DASS provides very similar passive detection capabilities to Spectra.

Now , regarding the sensor fusion , we should understand the difference in between getting and gathering the infos and managing them .
While the Typhoon is perfectly capable to detect possible threats in a 360deg bubble and display them in one of the side display , it can ‘t provide possible courses of actions to the pilot , like the possibility to ask the autopilot to set-up a new flight plan from the RF findings (and avoiding them) because there is no AI running the show in the background.

It also displays threats on the PA as aforementioned! Dunno about DASS providing cues to avoid RF emitters as others mentioned here, but the system provides all information you need to avoid them including the engagement envelopes of ground based air defences. The autopilot of the Typhoon can automatically fly attack profiles and interception manoeuvres or as a pilot puts it:
“Typhoon is probably a manned-unmanned fighter”

Scorpion , just look at the “sensor fusion” graph you ‘ve posted .
It shows that track No1 (top) is followed by radar and MIDS , track No2 is followed by radar , MIDS , FLIR and ESM . Track No3 is followed by etc …
Ok , fine , the Typhoon can track with multiple sensors .
But , look at the picture you posted showing the supposed “God eye view” (DASS) , what are doing the targets ? Are they tracking me ? What with ? and which one ? Are they all tracking me ??? :confused:
I don ‘t know ! 😮

In this case neither of the displayed contacts is directly threatening the aircraft, there are no DASS cues included in this graphic! Btw why don’t you come up with graphics which demonstrate your claims for the Rafale, preferably in the Rafale thread. I would really be interested to see those!

In this scenario (5 different targets) , it is already difficult to engage an active jamming if the targets are the same aircraft (ie: 5 F-16s = same radars to jam) but if they are different aircraft with different radars , the only thing DASS can do is to try to blanket the most obvious frequencies with noise (not very efficient) , hope for the best and use the towed decoys as last defenses.

So the all so great beam agility you praise wrt the RBE2 is worthless for EW? DASS can simultaneously jam mutiple threats, you certainly need short interruptions to reposition the beam and tailor the frequencies and yes AESA can do this better if you have enough TRMs at your disposal with enough output power to deal with multiple threats. Your mighty SPECTRA won’t necessarily be able to jam all threats in your threat environment either.

OTOH , SPECTRA can “blanket” but also can try to take each adverse radar separately ~thanks to its AESA antennas and beam forming capability~ and find a tailored jamming for each of them .
(we had a confirmation by Eagle1) :

Just again a quote from Eurofighter about the DASS
“…The EuroDASS ESM-ECM and MW are programmed via Mission Data, which loads emitter libraries and associated ECM techniques…”

As I said many times , the Typhoon hasn ‘t been designed as a “discrete” fighter capable to make its way unarmed (or unnoticed) to Moscow.

The ASMP-A has a range of 500 km! Just because an aircraft performs nuclear strike missions doesn’t mean it is particularly special! The Tornado IDS was designed with that mission in mind as well…:rolleyes:

The Typhoon ~as an interceptor~ is a souped-up M2000 and will also end up as a good bomber but it is certainly not a benchmark in any of the actual or planned missions .
It is an excellent aircraft , better than any F-teens in AtoA , maybe on the par with a SU-35 in combat but inferior to the Rafale in every missions you can think of . Sorry to say (again) .

That’s your opinion and that’s it. Repeating it over and over again won’t convince anyone.;)

Cheers .[/QUOTE]

@TMor
As aforementioned the idea about using an array with lower population itself isn’t a problem. The question is why do you want to use an array with fewer modules if you have one with more at your disposal. Thales states that they had an array with 1000 TRMs back in late 2006, so why wasn’t it fitted? THAT’S the question. As aforementioned there might be multiple reasons for this, the lack of power and or cooling to squeeze out the max performance for example.

Yes if. Hmm let me guess that this “someone” starts with a J and ends with a K and that twice.;)

So far the partner countries just signalled their willingness to fund the Captor-E at some point in the future and encourage the industry to continue investing and developing with the “promise” that it will pay off.

@RobL,
if India orders the Typhoon the situation for Warton won’t change at all as those first 18 aircraft would be assembled by Cassidian in Germany and the rest will be assembled in India. BAES will continue production of major part for the aircraft but without additional orders the Typhoon assembly line at Warton will shut down after the Saudi and UK orders are fulfilled.

You are speculating yourself! The article only states that Thales has built a 1000 TRM array in late 2006. They don’t even specify whether it was a general test array or a specific one for the RBE2AA. Do they say the current radar has a 1000 TRM array? Where?

Thales certainly knows more about there products than obligatroll.

This article is more than 4 years old now and there were at least three images released between late 2008 and now, all showing a module count of ~840. There is obviously some free space on the antenna, so maybe Thales has tested a 1000 TRM array but settled with a 840 one for whatever reasons? Ever thought about that?

Found this document and wonder how seriously we can take it at all.
http://siae.netdirect.fr/2011/sites/actu/docs/3-vol/fiches2011/Rafale_F.pdf

It states M 1.4 supercruise with 6 MICAs, which is the single most interesting part.

But they claim >100 aircraft delivered when just 98 have been delivered. They state two Rafale B prototypes when there was just one. It’s claimed that the combat radius is 3700 km which is actually twice what’s being stated by all other sources. It states 2 clients when there is just one right now (or has the UAE finally singed a contract?)…

TOW is given with 19500 kg:confused: Or does it relate to NTOW in strike configuration?