Not big surprises, really

1-the missile load is not enough for such big aircraft like the 22
2-Heavy ECM enviorement leads to close combat
3-There are not “magic” pk 0.99 Amraams, or R-77’s, most of them will fail and badly.. the “close combat is dead since the 80’s” was brought by western trolls, please check why the USAF did not chose the “stealthier” plane in the ATF contest..

About the 22’s turn rate at which speed is done?..at lower speeds with lower aerodynamic g’s you can actually turn better than at the max g corner speed, with TVC that would not be a surprise

Still is funny how you guys defend your f-22/su-27/f-15 toys ..

ohh yeah and the typical “you are a fanboy” bash, and the “you are an -hated member by western cheerleaders- clone”…come one, grow up..

One last thing, God guys, pilots are not the kind of guys you are thinking, the guy in the briefing is a pilot, not an engineer

Spectra is a conventional EW system with a lot of marketing and nice myths (active cancelation of EM waves…good luck with that)

You guys are getting overoptimists about EW in the rafale, is hard to tell how good is

Is very funny how some terms are being coined so easely to promote some planes, since the 90’s the marketing campaigns are getting really annoying, with these dumb phrases like “unfair advantage”, and ppl just repeat the same stuff without any objetive argument

I still have my suspects that the Rafale was/is a “teenized” concept of the traditional french fighter..with their weak points

In fact what I understood was that it was better investing money on an EW suite rather than going in an endless competition of bigger weapons, bigger radars

If you are investing on EW, you are going on the defensive side, and you depend on the accions of your foes for your tactics, losing initiative.

over-G

the only purpose of saw tooth is stealth. I had the confirmation from two rafale pilots three weeks ago in paris. The rafale B301 was displayed at “place de la concorde” for the celebration of one century of french aeronautics as well as many other aircrafts. I posted a personal picture of this event on this thread.

Is ok, but seriously, i would not ask these questions to pilots, they fly the thing..they did not design it..

Still have my doubts about that stealthy feature..but is not a great issue or polemic

I just cant see any significant LO feature on that plane, being worried of the leading edge RCS when you have such rounded airframe….is just not logical, neither the placement of it, if you can see in the ventral rear fuselage there is also these weir sawtooths..why always are placed on the rear side of the thing? , but is ok, i wont open a debate about that

You should think again, the leading egde from wing and canard are highly sweeped!

The f-4 wing also is “highly sweeped”….are you kidding right?

Go ask the F-117/F-22/etc designers…:D

😉

I doubt these have something to do with any kind of RCS reduction…since the f-117 was unveiled some guys are willing to see things that do not exist…same goes with the EF

The AESA news are a surprise, good for the Rafale team…lets see how it does in the Indian contest

Star, seriously that whole semicondutors, economics, industry , X vs Y, and “if they would get more money” debate has nothing to do with the thread, go to the general discussion for that….

Now, can someone tell me what is the real size of the PAKFA?, will be heavier than the 22? or will have the “20 tons normal take off weight”?

I dont understand…which is the real weight of the pakfa? heavier than the f-22 (as some rumors claimed) or lighter than the su-27 (as claimed by the chief design)?

Most ppl claim that the huge quantity of money spent on R&D is a sign of the F-22’s superiority….but that is realy a sign of how bad was managed the program, how bad was rushed the design, how the things were changed in the last moment, etc…goin from 14 tons to almost 20 tons of weight, decreasing the % of comositive components, finding problems on subsonic regime (changing the wing design), seriously they did restarted all over again..just compare it with the f-15/16 program…, of course for the public everything is shown as “the 8th wonder on the world has it cost”…

If the russians would have chose, and began the PAKFA airframe in the 2002-2004, is probable they would had the same “R&D superiority”…..with the consequent programs end

My point is that you are -as almost every stealth cheerleader- confusing the reasons of the poor quantity of “stealthy” planes with the end of the cold war and a suppossely extremely complicated alien tech of the f-22/35…