The point of Rafale is sensor fusion, nobody ever argued that the ESM would replace radar. Even if SPECTRA alone can’t give you a decent fix (which I doubt, but let’s imagine for a second), your other sensors will know where to look and you will need minimal radar emissions to track the target & get a fix, or you can slave your IR channel to it, or you can ask for another asset to look overthere & give you a better fix.

True, with sensor fusion, one sensor can be used to cue another to have better tracking of target
The problem i have is that, some people seem to think that passive sensors are much better than radar, in fact every sensor have their limitation :
IRST : doesnt really work in bad weather or if enemies fly in cloud, Very narrow FoV for long range, most IRST have quite limited engagement range due to LRF
RWR : doesnt work if enemy turn off radar, air to air passive ranging can be negated by simple tactics, not quite accurate either
Radar : Sending out energy, can be detected by enemy’s RWR, can be jammed

1. fly silently using AWACS/ground/see assets to do the radiating and use your ESM to detect enemy emissions (yes including DAS, since if you want to fly silently in your beloved EF you have to turn DAS off :highly_amused:), & then slave your radar a couple seconds to get a fix & a shot off if other assets can’t provide it.

Fly silently and have support from assets with powerful radar like an AWACs, ground radar or destroyer is always the best obviously, however there are many situations when you don’t have support from these assets For example when you are deep inside enemy’s territory , thus you will have to rely on the sensor on your aircraf.
Btw, DAS is on F-35 not EF-2000 and it is an IIR sensor, if you mean DASS then it can be used in receiving only mode, also, why turn on jamming if enemy doesn’t turn their radar on

2. patrol the skies with your radar on scanning everywhere, letting anyone with a decent ESM system know your whereabouts but detecting what gets in your radar’s FOV.

As explained before, modern radar have advantage in gain compared to RWR so RWR doesn’t always detect radar first. Also, modern AESA radar use many method to achieving LPI such as random scanning pattern, extremely high scan rate, changing frequency thousand time/sec, compress their pulse.. etc thus, it not easy for RWR to distinguish between AESA radar signal and background noise. And since modern AESA scanning very fast, they can scan air and ground near simultaneously, the radar wave that hit ground will also be reflected to enemy’s direction, now enemy’s RWR will have to decide whether the signal coming to it is from a ground radar or not . So just because you turn your radar on mean you will be detected instantly
And way, when there is no support from asset like Ground radar , AWACs i think the best tactics is to turn radar on and off in cycle ( turn on for 2 seconds after every 10 seconds or something like that) thus negated enemy RWR ability to passive ranging, also create confusion since they wouldn’t know how many radar are there with their RWR because you move and turn radar on/off constantly

. The more discrete you are the easier you can surprise your opponent, & in air combat surprise is 90% of a kill.

Nic

not just in air combat, in combat in general, the elements of surprise is very important

[QUOTE=Urban;2223285

Lets do some numbers here. Everyone likes numbers.
f-16s engine : dry thrust 17,155 lbf (76.3 kN) Wet thrust: 28,600 lbf (127 kN)
Gripen C engine : dry thrust 12,100 lbf (54 kN) Wet thrust: 18,100 lbf (80,5)
Gripen c’s engine is in dry thrust 30% worse and in wet 37% worse. That is bad isn it !?

BUT YET it has the same speeds as f-16 dry thrust or wet, and it has better turnrates both instant and sustained, that is enhanced Aerodynamics.

The best turnrate page i found is this, but i even have swaf pilot the other day twittering about that they never ever have been out turned not by f-15 f-16 f-18. Looking at the fact book of construction it follows the “line”
https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2015/03/01/missile-and-aircraft-turn-performance/
[/QUOTE]

Urban, if you link to Picard blog, no one would take you serious, Picard is basically like Carlo Kopp, the only thing different is he support Rafale

Right I’ve read all the docs (again in many cases), watched the marketing videos and read the text.

Nowhere does any of it make the claims you guys are making.

The text is largely the same things repeated on different pages.

You chaps are projecting massively from a few titillating hints to come to your desired conclusion.

No
You just repeat the same crap over and over again without any support evidence
By contrast, i have posted many books, interviews links, producer’s test video, producer’s advertising video and they have shown iam right
So by now it clear for everyone that you are just a troll, not a single person want to defend you now since it will make them look retarded

Best you tell Northrup Grumman that they need to start printing the truth as you see it.

it funny that you say that while they clearly mentioned APG-81 jamming and DAS tracking/targeting capability in their advertising video

Proof? Not the intercontinental missile please.
Neither of these pages give any:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/AAQ-37
http://www.northropgrumman.com/capabilities/anaaq37f35/pages/default.aspx

In fact the second one has this to say:
“Designated the AN/AAQ-37 and comprising six electro-optical sensors, the full EO DAS will enhance the F-35’s survivability and operational effectiveness by warning the pilot of incoming aircraft and missile threats, providing day/night vision and supporting the navigation function of the F-35 Lightning II’s forward-looking infrared sensor. “

The closest to your claim is this: “The DAS surrounds the aircraft with a protective sphere of situational awareness. It warns the pilot of incoming aircraft and missile threats as well as providing day/night vision, fire control capability and precision tracking of wingmen/friendly aircraft for tactical maneuvering.”

I also note you state the DAS coupled with every other sensor, yes not quite what you said but near enough, so not quite the claim made that the DAS does it all on its own.

I know I’m not dead and I’m fairly comfortable that I’m not wrong to any significant level either given the paucity of data that supports the F-35 lovers claims.

https://youtu.be/fHZO0T5mDYU
https://youtu.be/qF29GBSpRF4
and read the video description as well

No. Stop creating strawmen.
If your counter argument has sunk to this level you should give up as you clearly don’t have an argument.

oh really ?
i don’t have an argument? when you are the one repeatedly claim F-35 without any proper explanation or and source to support your claim

blah blah blah… The photo was NOT taken during the shot. you would have seen the missiles but nvm no use talking to deaf.

well the photo probably taken before the shot in lock on phase, unless you can prove otherwise

Leaving aside the powerpoint acronyms and definition of operational; anything equipped with Storm Shadow can offer a VLO strike capability.

Firstly, long range cruise missiles like Storm Shadow are used to attack stationery target, that have been known before mission
you cannot use Storm Shadow to attack moving target or target of opportunities like SAM, tanks, AAgun, Vehicle, ship.. etc
Not every target is fixed and known before take off, also many target have very smal signature and required you to get close to be able to detect and attack them so no missiles like Stom Shadow doesn’t give you VLO strike capability like a Stealth platform

Secondly, How many Storm Shadow can a rafale carried ? , how many target can it destroy with them?, How many SPEAR/SDB can F-35 carried? how many target can be destroyed ?

Anything that purports to be modern and built within the last 15 years has RWR, MAWS and most have IRST and FLIR.

Still no fighter have IRST system that allow it to detect, track target 360 degree around like the F-35 does
MAWS may alert pilot went a missile come close, but it will do nothing if enemy’s aircraft creep up from behind, MAWS wont allows pilot 360 degree vision either

Electronic attack using the AESA radar is relatively new on the scene; I had read somewhere that the AdlA were intending to use the RBE2 for electronic attack. Can’t find it now though.

APG-81’s electronic attack have been tested before while there isn’t even a plan in near future to equip RBE2 with similar capability
also talking about study, there is a study to equipped F-35 with laser DEW as well, should i start claim f-35 have laser weapons yet? :p

The first time i said way over 10 nm. After checking data could be disseminated on the net i say 20nm

halloweene the picture clearly show the shot is at 7.8 nm

I rather think this is the problem of folk like you.

You have this need to think in terms of “better” “worse” “lover” “hater.” There is seemingly no ability to think in anything other than with us or against us terms. The reality is that most positions are neither 1 nor 0, not black or white but the myriad shades of grey in between.

you are obviously a hater, stop denied that
yes there are people with neutral position but you are not one of them
I can only see a few people actually in neutral position : for example : Andraxuss, CastleBravo, Hotshot

Incremental and planned upgrades and enhancements, spoken about on these pages, for the Rafale have been implemented and used in operational missions; this contrasts somewhat with the F-35 where a never ending stream of (future) capabilities are constantly quoted by the usual suspects as “evidence” of the superiority of the platform over everything else for all missions ever.
The reality today is that the F-35 is going to go to IOC with a limited ability to do anything, using a software load that was not intended to be operational. Indeed IOC is going to be declared without any testing of deploying live weapons from the deck. This couldn’t be the Marines desperately trying to justify their requirements which have compromised the aircraft to such a degree could it…? No of course not…

Oh an aircraft that was design, introduced earlier go to service first, what an achievement
if you want to talk about services history then fine Rafale are used in combat earlier than F-35
but then using the same philosophy then Rafale is pathetic compared to F-15, F-16 both aircraft have been used in service for far longer time, shotdown hundreds enemy’s aircraft, bombing hundreds target, destroy hundreds tank, SAM.. etc