Sens;1351045]:D Not a single data about the allowed AoA of the present Rafale, but a lot of noise like a boy caught his **** down.

You mean that YOU want to aknowledge?

For the benefit of the others sofar. 😉

YOU benefit no one by posting innacurate stuff you can’t even comprehend sun!😀

SEE Below:

1. (Air to surface configuration, with 600 Gal tanks * 3 + SCALP-EG * 2 + MICA *4)
Upper limit for G-loading: 5.5G; Upper limit for rotating rate: 190 deg/sec; Upper limit of speed: Mach 1.04!!!; Upper limit for AoA: 25 degrees!!!.

Within the FCS Soft LIMIT.

2. (Air to air configuration)
Upper limit for G-loading: 9.0 ~ 11.0 G+; Upper limit for rotating rate!!!: 290 deg/sec; Upper limit of speed: Mach 2.1!!!; Upper limit for AoA: 32 degrees.

Within the FCS Soft LIMIT.

3. G-loading: -3.2 to + 9.0 G ~ 11.0 G+

Within the FCS Soft LIMIT.

[QUOTE]4. AoA: 32 degrees, normal upper limit by FBWs; more than 100 degrees without the restriction from FBWs.[/QUOTE]

Within the FCS Soft LIMIT.

5. Maximum rate of turning:
?30 deg/sec Instaneous
24 deg/sec Persist

SENS please go back to your local flying school and borrow the begginers books… 24 deg/sec Persist???

Seriously how can YOU post this stuff???

6. With a clean Rafale, using afterburner, you can enter a turn at 500 kt. and 10,000 ft., pull the maximum 9g and still accelerate. Cornering speed for the Rafale is 360 kt.

SO, the SAME pilots give YOU some VALID datas on Rafale corner speed but they will of course tell stories about its demonstrated Max AoA (from the SAME article)?

Talk about what you don’t know appart for double standards and copy/pasting…😎

7.Blah-di-Blah…

Within the FCS Soft LIMIT.

Aerobatics
Thanks to her FBW the Rafale is extremely manoeuvrable. Depending on the configuration there are 2 flight domains : air-to-ground with heavy loads (5.5G max and 160°/s roll) or air combat (9G max and 280°/s roll rate) In emergency case the max load factor can reach 11G.
During test flights for opening the flight envelope at very low speed the aircraft flew at an incidence of more than 100° and at negative speeds of ’40 knots without loss of control.<
‘We consider that firing after a brutal nose-up like a Cobra are risked during combat because weapon separation problems can arise and pilot can be in a very dangerous situation if he fails to destroy his opponent(s). We prefer to use a very agile weapon, like the MICA and a helmet mounted sight’ says Jean Camus, test pilot and ex-manager of the EPNER 5french test pilot school) and former M2000 test pilot.

Oh well, much like Jon Beesleys comments on the F-35 we can take that with a massive pinch of salt, afterall he has to say it otherwise he will get the sack. :diablo:

Masive pinch of salt involves NO given figures, 100* AoA and 40 kt NEGATIVE speed IS already BEYHOND the Cobra figure (90* AoA).

Basicaly you got no argument here.:diablo:

Sens;1351014]Your claim about the movies does give it away. You do have problems to distinguish between some test flights and real operational life to stay polite.

BOY you still can’t understand that i know this little more than you do about it.

First of all mate the AoA/Gs limits of Rafale are SOFT if you comprehend the difference and apparently you cant, we KNOW about the 11Gs we DONT know how much AoA CAN be achieved through the limiter.

The claim of the USN pilots is free of any data and just a claim by eye-sight, when you make it up your way “When one knows …”

We also know that Rafale is WAY less limited aerodynamicaly then a Typhoon for example.

It is a FACT and reconised among the entire industry, only someone who doesn’t KNOW about it can come up with stuff like that you write.:mad:

For the benefit of the others, that claims are neatpick tp bolster the own claim, 😉

For the benefit of other you’re going to ELABORATE as to WHY it is so.:D

when the same pilots said, that they still preferred their SH over the Rafale.

You OBVIOULSY PREFER NOT TO MENTION WHY…

So much about a friendship visit to bolster multi-national cooperation and show the new toy to the other side. In certain flight conditions a fighter can go behind 30 AoA,

More of the usual “talk-about-what-i-dont-know” thing to which we are by now, well acoustumed infortunatly.

but do face limitations from that, because it has to be lowered to restore a stable airflow otherwise we do speak of a vertical flight for a limited period. 😀

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D Which doesn’t mean much by every begginer’s book.

MORT de RIRE if you want i’ll translate for you boy!:D

So 40 kt NEGATIVE speed on the VERTICAL plan…

But you still free to show us the allowed AoA of the Rafale from a manual of cockpit. 😎

Yea sure, we show guys like you that of a Mirage IIIE only tyo be lectured on how much lower than 50.000 ft its operational ceiling is despite a difference of 25.000 ft to its Maximum ceilling, talk about trying hard to be educational.

NOW please put your money where your mough IS and tell US why all of this isn’t possible, i’m willing to listen.:diablo:

BTW Before they tried anything stoopid, they actualy asked ONERA to simulate the maneure…

http://www.onera.fr/images-science/simulation-numerique/avion-militaire-simulation-trajectoire.php

Rafale A in a Cobra and Herbst maneuvre simulated by ONERA for the benefit of Dassault-aviation; so when a test pilot and ex-manager of the EPNER (french test pilot school) and former M2000 test pilot says they did it, i trust him with my life, on the other hand considering how you comprehend the basics i wouldn’t land you my genuine Chinese kit for a flight-test… Sorry.

Robert Hilton;1350982]Very interesting post, there is alot of useful information,

I’m please you like it.:D

Note the mention to the increased sweep to 42* which is that of the F-22 reduced from the YF-22 48* (value for Rafale).

but you still haven’t explained why gas temperature rise increases thrust.

Same as internal combustion engine no?

Increased volume with increased temperature, this BTW is the A from the MTO ABC no?