dark light

TMor

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,171 through 1,185 (of 1,365 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Rafale news #2533863
    TMor
    Participant

    Jack, do you think that the M2000 is better in BVR than Rafale (because the RDY has not the limitations of RBE-2) ?

    in reply to: Rafale news #2533885
    TMor
    Participant

    I really thought that the purpose of Joust was to show that Typhoon need a long range BVR missile (S-225, Meteor…).
    All of this is still unclear.

    in reply to: Rafale news #2533907
    TMor
    Participant

    Rafale scored worse in Joust then than it would today, because it’s WVR armament did not include IR Mica, but the difference was not huge.

    Hmmm…. Joust was a BVR simulation.
    Mica IR as the EM is as well for WVR as for BVR…

    Joust was used by the JSF programme (quite a credit to it), and its results were borne out by the more recent SILVE simulations – and SILVE was validated by Dassault and Matra. Silve gave Typhoon an exchange ratio of 7:1 (4 vs 7 Su-35 escort & 8 MiG-29 bombers), F-15E got 2.6:1 in the same scenario, and Rafale 2.2:1.

    Matra ? How old is it ? 😀
    Do you know something more about this sim ?:cool:

    in reply to: Rafale news #2535197
    TMor
    Participant

    Why not just accept the truth – the Rafale and Typhoon are both on a par.

    Because it’s inaccurate.;)

    The Rafale probably has a slight edge in air to ground, but the Typhoon probably has a slight edge in air to air.

    Maybe. Who’s trying to prove otherwise in this thread ? The problem is what Jackonicko saies, i think it is somewhat arguable, and i’ve already clearly said why.

    The MMI in the Typhoon seems to be a little better,

    Ah ha ? Did you test it ? (and both) 😎

    but frankly the Rafale is no slouch either.

    Yes, but at least your point of view MAY be wrong. And I don’t understand why.:(

    Put the two fighters up against each other, and it will be the better pilot (and the luckier one!) who wins.

    Probably, and it’s exactly what I expect.
    But we still don’t have leaks from the confrontation between Italian air force Typhoons and french marine Rafale…

    in reply to: Rafale news #2535416
    TMor
    Participant

    General Jumper was also quite polite when he tested Typhoon.

    Nonetheless, some here often remind us how much he praised Typhoon.

    So, all this story just to show that this ACM seems to have enjoyed its flight.;) I draw no conclusion about comparison.

    in reply to: Rafale news #2535583
    TMor
    Participant

    I really HAD too put it there :
    RAF Air Chief Marshal flies the Rafale

    Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy visited the French Air Force base at St Dizier this week and had the opportunity to fly in a Rafale F2 with the Officer Commanding from 17 Squadron. 17 Squadron is the first French Air Force Squadron to incorporate an Operational Evaluation Unit (OEU) and a Operational Conversion Unit (OCU)

    The sortie; a medium level close air support mission which included Terrain Following Radar (TFR), consisted of 2 x Rafale F2; which has a full air-to-ground attack capability, against 2 x Mirage 2000 RDI multirole fighter aircraft. Air chief Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy was impressed with the Rafale F2 performance and the intuitive cockpit layout, and greatly impressed with the sensor fusion. The Rafale F2 aircraft at present are deployed in Afghanistan by the French Air Force and French Navy.The Chief of the Air Staff signing

    The visit proved to be very successful and has opened the way for closer liaisons between the Typhoon OEU/OCU and 17 Squadron French Air Force in the future.

    http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafiles/32619DD2_1143_EC82_2EFF6481D53FED3B.jpg

    in reply to: French SEAD? #2540106
    TMor
    Participant

    Superbe Etendoire Modernisée

    Is this a joke ? 😀 It would be “Modernisé
    SEM = Super Etendard Modernisé
    aka Modernized Super Standard

    For SEAD, France will use the AASM (Spectra and/or L16 help locating threats). As this weapon is based on the Mk82, it has the capability not only to suppress, but also to destroy the AD (=>DEAD).

    The Scalp would be used against EWR site, far behind front line, maybe.

    in reply to: Rafale news #2540960
    TMor
    Participant

    I don’t think they are to blame, but this zealot of a “journalist”. After all it was his comment, not part of the quote.

    I wasn’t blaming them. And I can ensure you that the “zealot of a journalist” didn’t wrote this comment on his own. Every time papers talk about Tiger Meet, it’s the same… I find it funny, and I don’t blame for this one.

    By the way, could somebody please answer my question regarding the specific fuel consumption of the M88 engines that have seen service yet?

    The M88-2 had these figures :
    AB : 1,7 kg/daN.h
    Dry : 0.8 kg/daN.h

    The currently used M88-2 E4 (“Etape 4″=Step 4) has an overall consumption 2 to 4% lower…

    in reply to: Better looking aircraft = better performance? #2540964
    TMor
    Participant

    “If it looks right, it flies right” Kelly Johnson :rolleyes:

    Oh… It really sounds like the Marcel Dassault’s “A beautiful airplane is a good airplane…” (in French “Un bel avion est un bon avion…”)… 🙂

    in reply to: Rafale news #2541196
    TMor
    Participant

    It is a level above the Eurofighter which, it should be added, also shone at the exercise. But only by its absence…

    😀
    Dassault and French AdA remains on their over-provocative positions.:rolleyes:

    in reply to: Rafale news #2542599
    TMor
    Participant

    The 1994 aircraft are the 13 F1s.
    B301 and B302, C101, and M1-M10

    The 1999 aircraft are the 48 F2s.

    Except that it no longer adds up to 48.

    6 Cs (102-107), 25 Bs (303-327) and 15 Ms (11-25) = 46 aircraft

    Speaking of the F3s, is it still 13 Ms? And how many will be Bs and how many will be Cs?

    Can anyone refresh my memory as to the original planned number of Cs versus Bs, and the number planned now?

    I still have a problem with those figures…
    The C101 was a F2.:D Actually, even the B302 was nearly a F2…:cool:
    So, we have at least 7 Cs F2. And I don’t know what the last have become…
    The “before 1997” order was of 13 aircraft… I don’t know what is the thirteenth. It may simply never have existed after all… That’s really a mess. Maybe it was the canceled Rafale N (twin seater for the MN). No, really, I don’t know.
    It is clear that many Cs have been turned into Bs…

    But the Cs/Bs ratio isn’t decided, it is often said that it will depend on the needs.
    According to AdA, the 59 F3 order was :
    -36 C
    -11 B
    -12 M

    in reply to: What makes the Typhoon so special? #2548925
    TMor
    Participant

    Where exactly IS Eurofighterland? Couldn’t find it on a map is all.

    😀

    First all, I posted it because the video seem nice. Nice shots of the the EF, plus the pilot interview. Second, its a Discovery Channel Program!! No where did I say its the the absolute truth or 1000% accurate or anything like that. Plus, they have shown plenty programs which included the Flanker family, especially the Su-37!!.

    I don’t think Kovy wanted to blame you. He just commented the video. No need to react this way 😉

    in reply to: Rafale news #2550201
    TMor
    Participant

    Good point! And for what I know, some Rafale-Ms have been used as “buddy-buddy” tankers for the Super-Etendards operating over Afghanistan…

    Yes, they are already capable, but a refueling pod is to be designed.

    in reply to: What makes the Typhoon so special? #2550204
    TMor
    Participant

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-YHFTHbY0c

    Wow ! I want a Typhoon for next Christmass ! 🙂
    And I want it painted black.

    in reply to: M-88 engine questions. #2550531
    TMor
    Participant

    Mr. Paranoid is back:diablo:

    And it’s truly incredible… 🙁

Viewing 15 posts - 1,171 through 1,185 (of 1,365 total)