Lula still vacillates. There is good reason for this.

1-If he declares RAFALE as the winner he will have to forget the UN Security Councel .
2-He will also have to forget the multi billion dolar Embrear deal for the US Airforce. so he is in a bad fix.

It’s a trade off between the tucano deal or the KC390.

Nic

Anyone who suggests using active cancellation as a remedy does not understand how difficult it is to cancel a single unknown, continuously changing waveform. The threat radar does not see one massive return, but a set of returns from the engine inlets, cockpit, wing leading edge, wingtips, radar antenna, underwing weapons/pylons (with many stores configurations to be considered), empennage, engine exhausts, wing/tail trailing edges and panel/door edges. The returns change in strength as the target’s azimuth and elevation with respect to the emitter changes. (Note: Knowing this set of returns is one of the methods used for NCTR using SAR mode, so threat radars are assumed to be interested in/looking for that set of returns). Then add overlapping radar coverage from 3-6 radars from different directions and the task of active cancellation becomes overwhelming.

I agree with you.

I think that the progress with Spectra are going to be focused on detecting and locating LPI radars, effectively rendering its use dangerous. A radar is always going to be detectable further than it can detect, provided it is even looking in the right direction. The goal is to be able to detect and locate it before you are detected by it. Then you can either move away from the radar beam, or even attack the plane that emits.

If it proves too dangerous to turn your radar on, then there is no need to actively cancel it.

AC could still prove nice to fool missiles though.

Nic

How do you decide which AC could use active cancellation and which couldn’t?

That would be on the F22 then.

Is there a way to know the TR/AOA ratio if the most common fighters…

Say 9G@10AOA&300kts

Then you can get part of the AOA induced drag and you can tell which aircraft is more efficient? The more AOA you need to achieve the 9G at a certain speed would mean more induced drag. Then we could see which wing layout would be more efficient.

Nic

The Mirage 2000 is a very good example of simplicity but very well designed, so good it can beat a Viggen and is as good as the Gripen and F-16, from my point of view the Mirage 2000 even without having canards like the Gripen or LERXes like the F-16 is an excellent fighter however the Mirage 2000 has a large wing bigger than the F-16`s wing and Gripen`s wing.

But the Rafale can do all this and much more. Not only has it got a load more power than the Mirage 2000 for better STR and what not, but also it has much more controlability at very slow speed which means it can operate from an aircraft carrier.

Canards allow you to keep a very competitive aircraft without compromising the performance to get carrier ops capability. It would be impossible to achieve that wih a regular wing layout, or a delta without canards.

Nic

Was there ever any interest in getting some of the FA2 sea harriers and upgrading the rest of the indian fleet to that standard?

I could see how the purchase of the AIM120 could be an issue, but derby or some other BVR weapon could surely be integrated if the US decided not to sell AMRAAM. Mica could even replace the Magic II at the same time.

Nic