jackjackI agree only with the second sentence.
I know that SPECTRA is an AESA jammer, but you have to know that AESA radars becouse of their frequency agility (and other factors) are very hard to jam – even using another AESA radar. I agree that SPECTRA AESA jammer might be a great tool for jamming non-AESA, less agile radars. Even jamming APG-77 with APG-77 might be very difficult task, but jamming and significantly degrading performance of APG-77 with small SPECTRA is almost impossible IMO. Of course, you can degrade its performance, but not much.
this confusion on ability is probably one of the reasons why thales doesnt use the term “aesa” to describe its jammer transmitters, another is aesa has both transmit and receive modules
http://www.thalesgroup.com/Portfolio/Defence/Aerospace_Product_SPECTRA/?pid=1152
active phased-array transmitters
http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-57541.aspx
the MMICs in the Rafale’s self protection jammer can’t slide their bandwidth window fast enough to cover threats operating in multiple regions of the X band simultaneously
sort of time sharing rather than transmitters that can simultaneously operate across the entire threat spectrum
France does not currently have the resources or certain key technologies to contemplate designing or building a system that would approach the power and flexibility of something like the F-35s (F-22) EW system with its unparalleled stealthy low power jamming modes.(and the ability to create incredibly powerful long range jamming modes if its AESA is used as a transmitter.)
I don’t know if the Spectra can detect Raptors radar, but even if it can, it’s probably much more difficult than detecting a normal MSA radar. It think it would be very hard to detect such whispering radar as the APG-77 at very long ranges.
it depends on its ability to see the aesa transmission as a radar signal and not just background hash, which seems to be the usa/aesa design goal
@Grey Area
check
jackjacki dont know how the f-16 got in the list, its less than the eurocanards that are about 30 deg aoa
the f-16 doesnt have a high aoa, its about 25 deg, with a conventional tail and not the twin tail stabilisers st andrews cross like /, fa-18 f-22,35 which have a high aoa 45+ deg with the f-22 at about 60 deg aoa
some submarines have the (full) st andrews cross X, where i suppose the planes have a half because the of the horizontal stabilisers as it would be hard to land with a full one
jackjackfrom what i gather the wing had to carry a fixed bring back load and wing drop was found in flight test of the prototype, but wasnt called prototype as sh was sold to congress as an upgrade, with the help of nasa a solution was arrived at and at the same time the lerx was also redesigned and this is where the lerx computer design came in with the work nasa were doing with vortex and such at the time
the tail planes are a type st andrews cross arrangement, like some of the submarines are doing, its suppose to give better maneuverability
they seem to be the ones with a good aoa and yes i know i have opened up a box of worms with this, as everyone knows delta and canards are better
so to appease them, i’ll say, if you are going to have a tail, you are better off with a st andrews cross tail, but this has upset all the russians except for the pak fans, so i really cant win
jackjackThe Rafale and Eurofighter are still 4th generation fighters and do not posses the edge over the MiG-29 or F-16 and once they are upgraded are basicly competitive in all aspects. that is the reason they lose even in Europe in markets like Poland or in Asia in Korea
The F-18E with all its gadgets continues a good aircraft in terms of weaponry and avionics
The Su-27 shows a very well designed LERX; the F-18E a design that was hastled by economic considerations resulting in a aircraft with the adverse features of LERXes
i also think its the difference in the avionics and systems they operate in, as 4.5 platforms are similar enough to be worked in the chosen system effectively with the appropriate avionics etc
one point, the sh lerx had the benefit of decent computer modeling available for its design of vortex management and i would argue that if not the best is as good as the best, i havent seen sources or claims of better than it for 4.5 gen
we seem to be happy about the 24 sh we ordered, 12 being wired as growlers
jackjackFrance conducted a significant amount of work on the radar reflectivity of the front face of the M88 engine, but I don’t know if this led to any form of RF blocker being added to the Rafale intakes.
thanks for that,
i guess unless otherwise stated, we are looking at a fuzzy image of a fan and not a blocker, as i cant make out what it is
jackjackthanks for the link
there is saw on the trailing edges of canard and wing, i think this was said to be ram based by someone here [2 jobs in one absorb and scatter], but i dont know as ram is normally on the leading edge
jackjackAn S-duct is not a post-production “add-on” (if that’s what you are getting at). The RCS of the retractable probe is quite minimal (according to either Arthuro or TMor IIRC). The sawtooth arrangement you see is actually RAM coating I think. For the record though, it is my opinion that Dassault never intended the Rafale to be anywhere near the same level of LO as an aircraft like the Raptor (or F-35 or T-50).
no, intakes were original, like positioning them under the overhanging fuselage for radar protection from above on their low alt runs
rcs probe : someone that does signature management for the military said there would be a significant return signal from it, take it for what its worth
i agree, when the rafale was first designed rcs wasnt such a big issue as it is now
saw isnt ram, it has to do with traveling radar waves along the frame and when they meet a join etc or something like that, i would have to google the terms and refresh my egg-timer memory
basically the rafale is a good plane which will be even better with the proposed upgrades, i should put all the good things i’ve said about the rafale in my signature, as its just the wild claims that get me going
jackjackYou know what’s funny ? Everyone’s debating F-22 vs Rafale… and the Typhoon’s utterly forgotten. I take it as proof that everyone agrees with the notion that Rafale vs Typhoon is a foregone conclusion. 😎
more knowledgeable fanboys perhaps ?
phoon and gripen fanboys dont make such wild and nonsensical claims as the rafale fanboys do
jackjackRead the ******* link for ****’s sake! It’s FROM THALES and it states word for word that:
“Using sophisticated techniques, such as interferometry for high precision DOA and passive ranging, digital frequency memory for signal coherency and active phased-array transmitters for maximum effectiveness and covertness,”
Do you have an issue with the words PASSIVE RANGING?
Another claim? Other than a statement from the manufacturer?
Damnit it’s not possible to be so thick!
no i have no issue with the term passive ranging at all
if fact several aircraft use it including our 25 yr old hornets
the problem is what the fanboys think it can do, please post detailed info from dassault or thales on the abilities you want to claim, other than what i have agreed with and i will happily say i was wrong
jackjackIt’s speculation, but spectra is just a self-defence jammer. Jammers degrade radars performance, but to degrade it by 50% signal has to be quite strong. Another thing is that AESA radars are hard very hard to jam.
a very valid point that is overlooked in the hype, they are primary short range jammers for missile defense, they would have function for jamming radar on planes through range gating etc the french use the term discrete jamming
jackjackagreed they have done some rcs reduction in design and post production
the amount of post production rcs reduction tells the level in the original design and they still cant get a retracting probe
lets face it, if the inlet and small part of fan exposure worked, they wouldnt have spotwelded on that sawtooth arrangement which some question its value as opposed to doing it right in the first place
jackjackIt doesn’t work when you are not logged in unfortunately. And you still read the offending posts when they are quoted by someone else. Which is why it is useless for me to ignore you and jeessmo.
Anyway its in user CP, top left of the screen and then in edit&options.
Oh and one last link (from the manufacturer no less) so you will have to cut your BS about spectra not being capable of ranging a threat:
http://www.thalesgroup.com/Portfolio/Defence/Aerospace_Product_SPECTRA/?pid=1152
stationary ground threat for a weapon with self targeting on final, or another sensor to give precise location, eg radar mapping for gps coords
and flat trajectory launch of a2a missile on a bearing, but please show me any other claim for its ability
jackjackquote
And even if you could circle around and get on it’s back the Mica can be fired in the plan’s 180° anyway.
not from onboard sensors it cant and you still haven shown how it knew the f-22 was there
quote
How long can the Rafale maintain M1.2 though? How far away can the Mica engage a target that’s on the Rafale’s 6 o’clock HIGH ?
i just made it a more realistic senereo
jackjackthe longest test flight is 67k?
with that and the manufacture saying 60k, can you email them about their mistake, it was probably a typo, but please post the return email saying the range if its different than 60k
didnt i offer to show you where the ignore function is, or you could just post correct info
jackjackPure speculation as you hardly have any data to support your claim. But anyway, Meteor range is 100+ km, which was precisely my point. Especially if you paint the Rafale with your radar, as you would need to go towards it.
And what is your point? You jam when a radar is painting you already, so it means you are already detected or going to be detected.
That said, the Rafale uses AESA antennas to jam directly towards the emitter. Minimising the chances of detection by other platforms.
Wrightwing brought the 120D so it’s fair game to bring in the Meteor. Anyway the Mica has a range of 80km, which is quite close to the 80/90km range you have been quoting.
Twice as fast? Rafale can supercruise around M1.2 with AA load. Yes there is still a difference but not as big as one would be able to “circle” around the Rafale. And even if you could circle around and get on it’s back the Mica can be fired in the plan’s 180° anyway.
Besides why do you think the Rafale couldn’t light up AB?
Nic
again i refer you to page 3 post #80
http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Avionics/AN-APG-77-multimode-radar-United-States.html
Designed from the outset for operation in dense RF environments, the APG-77 is reported as having a maximum range in excess of 180 nmile against a fighter-sized target
In addition to the normal Search, Track-While Scan (TWS), Multiple Target Track and Dogfight modes,
the radar incorporates an ultra-high resolution target recognition mode, offering centimetric resolution at the extremes of its range envelope. Returns generated by the ultra-high resolution mode are matched to an onboard library to facilitate Non-Co-operative…
“non-cooperative target recognition (NCTR)”
other than BW who else said the mica has a 80k range
TMor doesnt think so, nor does the manufacture
i think he was being conservative, several sources give the 120d well over 100+k upto 180k
Sign In
