Since the F-35 is a LO aircraft , talking about stealth in general is interesting .

Here is a paper from Thalès about ” Image Processing for Anti Air Counter Countermeasures (CCM) applications /

When I read that , I sat back and meditated on it . Soon , I came to the idea that every EM spike on the aircraft was known and recorded , on various frequencies , at various angles and with different loads . From there and after applying RAM , it was possible to build a 3D picture of the aircraft residuel ‘s EM spikes .
Could a clever AESA ECM system use those 3D EM images to build a clever response when jamming a known radar ?
Are we talking about “active cancellation” here ? Just asking .
Some DRFM techniques are already known to lower the RCS echo .

Cheers .

This kind of RCS measurement been done to all kind of fighter , it not something very special

Moon_light :

No it hasn ‘t .

come on :confused: do you even read ????http://wiki.scramble.nl/index.php/Terma_PIDS
http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Radar-and-Electronic-Warfare-Systems/Pylon-Integrated-Dispenser-Station-PIDS-Denmark.html

look at the pylon
or this http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/news97468.html

Newer generation aircraft , when compared to F-teens , also have a different airframe made of newer materials . The F-16 airframe is built with about 80% aviation-grade aluminum alloys, 8% steel, 3% composites, and 1.5% titanium .
“3% composites” .
Aircraft like Eurofighter and Rafale are mostly made of composites (80-85%) :

Same with the F-35 .
Composites are radar transparent , not steel and aluminium . Often , we read that Typhoon and Rafale have a rather big vertical tail (which is true) so it must show as a big spike . Not at all , it is mostly made of radar transparent material and RAM is used here and there on the aircraft (advantage to Rafale here) .

we all know the rafale do have lower RCS than F-16 but it doesn’t solve the problem of carrying weapon external like i have explain , and radar transparent is not really the good way to achieve LO because the radar wave may end up reflected by the inner structure of the wing , antenna , wire ..etc

and while rafale have smaller RCS than F-16 , carring weapon external will close this gap , you may argue that F-16 also have bigger rcs as it carry missiles external too but the thing is RCS decrease by 10 times only decrease detection range by 44 % , so aircraft with smaller RCS will suffer more form carry weapon external
for example : if total RCS all the missiles and pylon = 1 m2 then when loaded the RCS of RAFALE = 1.1 m2 ( rcs increased by 11 times ), while the loaded RCS of F-16 increased to 2.2 m2 ( rcs increase by 2 times ) ..etc

To start with , better active antennas . The direction finding is also better since the UAE said that the ICMS MkIII onboard the M2000-9 do a better job than the Falcon Edge at finding target with precision . Spectra is at least equal to ICMS MkIII .

do you have any source for this

Then , I wander how the threat library is and how it is managed . Do you think that the Falcon Edge suite comes with any library to start with ? Maybe , maybe not .

what do you mean ??? , even normal RWR have thread library

Falcon Edge is a comprehensive ECM suite , one of the best the US ever made but its job in the ELINT/SIGINT field is secondary where this is Spectra ‘s main mission . The “self-defense” part in Spectra (like close-in jamming , chaffs/flares) happens only if the LO concept failed . The primary purpose of Spectra is to manage the entire battlefield at hand in RF bands , in the visible and in the IR spectrums . From there , it compares its findings with the uploaded flight plan and update the picture in real time , filtering what is useful for the pilot and what is not (also depending on the various filters used by the pilot) and can propose options to evade the detected threat(s) . To archive this , the system has various means at hand and a very important one is the the long range TV . Because of it , the pilot knows very quickly if it is friend or foe 😎 . Falcon Edge can ‘t do that .

honestly sound nonsense , just because falcon edge can jam enemy radar doesn’t mean it not good in ELINT/SIGINT field http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-3538.html and talk about long range TV and IR then F-16 can carry sniper-XR or ATFLIR as well , it can even carry the AAS-42 if necessary http://www.lockheedmartin.co.uk/us/products/InfraredSearchTrack.html

During debrief , the data downloaded from Spectra are put to good use and they often call for a different planning or for a new mission .
I ‘m not too sure if falcon Edge can do that and if it does , how is the interaction with the other systems .

if you are not sure , there no reason to make conclusion that Spectra is better than Falcon edge IEWS
yes i do agree that rafale do have advantage against F-16 ( more agile , internal IRST ) but their gap is not that far like you imagine , if you think rafale is better than F-35 because it cheaper and stealth be useless in the future due to super strong radar then why dont just buy F-16 ? quite agile too , cheap , and JHMCS + aim-9x can give any pilot a run for their money , not to mention they have good kill record ..etc

I agree with that.

Concerning what you posted above, I disagree. I answered a specific subject which was concerning the role of processing power in radar technology, and its effect on current stealth technologies, and I will put technologies with a S, since electronic’s stealth is in theory possible as well as plasma stealth and a number of other techniques.

If you know of any Romulan cloaking devices existing today please share with us :).

what i mean is , the time which aircraft radar can get 100 times stronger is not in near future , even at the moment agile become less important compared to SA and stealth due to JHMCS and dogfight missiles , so the time in the future when radar get so strong that stealth become useless then maneuver may be also irrelevant as all aircraft have laser , emp weapon ..etc , or may be in the future missiles can have 2 stage , new fuel .. that alow them to travel much further
(and in theory it also possible for the F-35 to have laser weapon http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2585-fighter-planes-laser-may-blind-civilians.html http://www.gizmag.com/northrop-grumman-laser/22472/ but at the moment they dont have it so no one talk about it as advantage of F-35 compared to rafale or EF-2000 ,for the same reason talking about future theoretical super radar , plasma stealth , electronic stealth of Rafale , EF-2000 to prove that they are better fighter than F-35 is nonsense )

One word digitalization… as you said radars have reach the limit of physical improvement which is why digitalization and processing power is becoming so important. Things analogue couldn’t do, digital can. The only limit is imagination really.

Now let say that most aicraft get a mature DIRCM technology as well as effective AESA jamming of EM seekers, the “first look, first kill” of the US’s 5th Gen fighter would be reduced to almost 0 meaning only close in engagement will decise the battle. In addition previous wars have showed that systems too complex and expansive to build are very bad for a country when you start taking casualties and you need to replace your losses.

So because something is technologically “amazing” doesn’t mean it’s survivable on the battlefield. And yes the increase of computing power will allow a F4 with a modern ESM suite, to fight of AMRAAM guided by a Raptor, while AESA technology linked to processing power will allow radars to become even more deadly.

If you doubt that then ask yourself how is the US defend itself against the numerous stealth aircraft being developped around the world?

even at the moment fighter already using super agile missiles in close in battle along with JHMCS alow fring missiles against enemy from any direction , none fighter can sustain 60-70 G like a AIM-9x ( or python-5 , aim-132 ..etc ) , maneuver become much less important , a little bit more agile of rafale or EF-2000 will not going to change that
your argument based on the future therotical nonexistent improvement on electric device that allow fighter radar to be 100 times more powerful without getting bigger or having any heating problem ..etc , you also assume that EW and DIRCM in the future will defeat missiles 100 % percent of the time … 😉 alright you say that will all be possible in the future and F-35 and F-22 become useless , so how about this http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2585-fighter-planes-laser-may-blind-civilians.html http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/futureoftech/boeings-new-missile-takes-down-electronics-without-touching-them-1C6663618
what if in the future F-35 will have laser weapon , or super powerful AESA radar that can form EMP beam that destroy any electric equipment within 400 km will that balance anything ?
oh talk about future may be we should add photon weapon , Romulan cloaking devices ,plasma shield , blink.. etc should we ?

I have just checked some thrust-to-weight ratio for 2 multirole fighters , the F-35 and the Rafale .

F-35 with full internal fuel : from 0.75 to 0.90 , depending on the version .
Rafale with full internal fuel and 4 Micas : 1.10 .

Now , add the aerodynamics into the equation and the gap is yet increasing in favor of the Rafale .
(When Rafale did beat Luke ‘s F-16 Blk25 6-2 , the Rafale had to be careful not to overshoot the Viper in dogfight , in full Mil power , it could turn inside the Viper in AB)
The Rafale is also an Interceptor (must replace the M2000-5) while the F-35 is not . The Typhoon is also a formidable Interceptor , it climbs like a home sick angel and fly real high real fast .

As a striker , a clean F-35 is short legged and its punch power is relative because of small internal carriage . It is going to be extremely expensive to fly and to hit numerous targets , one will need many trips . If you use it with external stores , I wish you good luck becaue you ‘re not gonna stay alive long . You can ‘t dictate the combat , you can ‘t accelerate , you can ‘t turn , you can ‘t flee unless to jettison everything and then , your dash speed is not going to save you … Ouch .

So , what ‘s the point of buying such an aircraft at an horrible price ?!
I don ‘t get it .

Cheers .

it stealth , very simple , using rafale or EF-2000 to fight the F-35 is like using an AK-47 to fight a guy using Barrett M82 , at close range the ak-47 is better , but at long range the snipe have advantage
moreover F-35 carry much more fuel compared to rafale ( double i think ) to reach to same distance as F-35 with internal fuel , rafale need 3 bag which mess up not only RCS but also kinematic performance, and even the advantage in kinematic will not mean much against modern missiles like Meteor or aim-132