Name the pros and cons of each then 😎
Pros RBE2:
The nature of an electronically scanned array offers some design inherent advantages. Such radars can almost instantaneously reposition their beam and are subsequently able to scan their entire field of view in azimuth and elevation within fractions of a second. This allows such a radar to scan its entire FoV multiple times a second. A mechanically scanned array needs several seconds to do so once. The result is that the ESA monitors a much large portion of the sky within the gimbals and range constraints. The probability that such a radar will miss a target is subsequently lower and the detection performance against small RCS targets might be better as well, albeit the latter is dependent on other factors as well. electronic beam steering is also more compatible with LPI techniques and modes, though PESAs won’t offer the flexibility and potential of an AESA. That means that the RBE2 is likely to enjoy an edge here over the current Captor, but neither of them is stealthy enough to hide its emissions from a halfway decent RWR/ESM. ESA radars can update target data more frequently as well improving track quality and ECM resistance, albeit the latter isn’t solely dependent on scanning speed only. Available data additionally suggest that the RBE2 is able to track about twice the number of aerial targets at the same time in comparison to the Captor-C/D (40 vs 20). Another advantage of the ESA enabled agile beam steering is the ability to interleave modes, such as mapping and A2A tracking or track here while scan there.
Captor-C/D pros:
The greater aperture and likely higher power output of the Captor translates into a superior detection and tracking range performance against the same RCS target, which is confirmed by the data published so far. The advantage appears to be notable. The radar additionally offers a 20° larger azimuth coverage and an advantage offered over fixed ESAs is the fact that its performance is not degraded at higher scan angles. ESAs will become less accurate at higher gimbals and suffer from performance degradation.
The Captor additionally offers an advanced NCTR capability, advanced because it recognises the shape of an aircraft rather than counting compressor blades only. Such a capability is not present on the current RBE2, but will be added with the new RBE2AA. NCTR is a useful aid for BVR identification in addition to other means such as IFF, ESM, FLIR and offboard ID handoff. The Captor-D of T2 examples additionally offers a 0.3 m resolution in SAR mode, a performance which will just be matched, but not even exceeded by the newer RBE2AA AESA derivative. In contrast to the RBE2 the original Captor is already designed to fully support the Meteor missile and offers sufficient range performance to do so. It may not even require any updates at all whereas the RBE2 PESA may never be updated to support that missile at all, though there appear to be no plans to retrofit the batch 1 to 3 Rafales with the AESA variant.
——————————————————————————————-
In the future things will change, the RBE2AA soon to be introduced on batch 4 Rafales will eliminate the most stringent weaknesses of the current RBE2 in comparison to the Captor-C/D. It will offer the same azimuth coverage and equal if not superior range performance, NCTR and identical SAR resolution. It will retain the other advantages the RBE2 already enjoys over the Captor and will even improve on them, with superior LPI characteristics, better ECCM and probably even greater mode interleaving in the mid term. The only disadvantage retained is the performance drop at higher gimbals owed to the fixed array.
Once Captor-E becomes available the RBE2/RBE2AA will hold no distinctive advantages at all, though it’s fair to say that the software plays an important role and the French will likely have gained some experience and might continue to be ahead in some areas for some time. Captor-E will most likely shift the radar range performance advantage back to the Eurofighter as well as the scan angles and radar performance at the gimbals. Anything else being the same the Captor-E would without doubt be a superior radar, but as not anything else is the same it’s not possible to make such a clear cut and it’s to early to draw conclusions now on either side.
just my 2ct and everything is based on what I gathered about each respective system and my understanding of the technology itself.
Sign In
