Nicolas10It should definately not be that hard to integrate to the typhoon when you consider the fact that this capability was added to the Rafale onboard the CdG during the first Rafale deployment. However, that’s where the Rafale’s 2000l tanks come in handy. To refuel another aircraft, you have to carry fuel as well as your buddy/buddy kit 😀
Nic
Nicolas10And while better on the carrier, Rafale and Super Hornet are inferior in the air.
Objection your honor: hearsay.
Nicolas10But going with the Rafale would introduce much more overhead and not increase commonality.
Not more so than with the F35, which is after all a new type too just like the Rafale.
Rafale: New training, new support gear, different spares, foreign production, no offsets
EF: Largely common training, common gear, common spares, own production, native offsets
French MN pilots are trained in the US, and there is every reason to believe the RN pilots would be too for a CTOL Typhoon variant, as only in the US exists the infrastructure to do arrested landing and so on.
Nic
Nicolas10@TOAN
Some feedback from the greek forum on the EF.
– It does have air refuelling (RAF).
– It does have a HMD (RAF).
Hyperion, what Toad was refering to is the ability of the Rafale to refuel another Rafale with a buddy refueling pod. Pretty useful for countries with limited air refueling assets, or maybe for carrier aircraft when there isn’t air refueling assets on the theater.
Nic
Nicolas10I know it’s not hard to strengthen the Typhoon’s structure and gear, and add an arrestor hook. But would it’s wing/canard layout enable it to come in at low enough speed to land on a carrier, especially when you are considering bringing a decent load back?
I think a Rafale M/N vs more work in the PA2 deal would be a win/win… it would also greatly benefit dassault if the AMRAAM/ASRAAM, Brimstone… get integrated on the Rafale for future export customers.
For the RAF, the cancellation of the F35 would increase the need for a AtoG version of the typhoon, giving the program a huge shot in the arm. Could a purchase of the Rafale by the RN pave the way for the integration of the AASM on the typhoon?
Nicolas10The questions remain:
Has any of those HMD been fully integrated with the Rafale?
Would you have to start the whole work again to integrate another HMD, or could you just replace the chosen helmet?
Was the AdlA dissatisfied with the HMDs themselves or with their integration in the Rafale?
Nic
Nicolas10Is it absolutely sure that a HMD would have to be integrated? There was work on several HMDs in the past. The topsight I think, or the Gerfaut which was supposedly selected by the AdlA once upon a time.
I also think I remember there was a proposition for an israeli HMD to be offered for export Rafales?
Surely integration of at least one of those has been made.
Nic
Nicolas10Ok we finally managed to get Hyperion. Who’s next? 😀
Nicolas10AASM is certainly a huge advantage for Rafale, and will remain so until Typhoon has a stand off PGM (the new Brimstone, perhaps).
In anything but an Afghan/Iraqi scenario (where Litening and EPW is fortuitously quite a useful A-G fit) Rafale enjoys real advantages over Typhoon in the A-G role, as you’d expect.
I disagree. At the very beginning of this thread I translated the news report of the first use in anger of the AASM, and it said it was used because the Mirage 2000 with a LDP was unable to assist the ground troops because of bad weather. Thankfully the canadian forward air controller sent the coordinates to the Rafales for the AASM strike. In such a scenario your litening is going to be as much useful as the Mirage 2000 with GBU 12. What use would be the EF if it couldn’t work in bad weather?
But for a customer (like Greece) wanting a better A-A aircraft, I’d say that Typhoon has a useful edge.
I’d rather have ASRAAM, PIRATE and a helmet than IR Mica, and I’d certainly rather have Captor than RBE-2
If you rather have them, then I suppose it means they are better huh?
– Let me think ASRAAM over Mica IR? Why exactly?
– PIRATE over OSF v2? Same question. Is the Pirate so much better than the OSF? I think they use similar technologies and hence they can’t have so much different characteristics.
– Helmet ? Well the Rafale can be equipped with a helmet. The fact that the AdlA didn’t get one due to financial reasons doesn’t mean a Rafale customer can’t get one. So what kind of silly argument is that?
– CAPTOR? Heck if you prefer a technology of the past with “some” LPI capabilities, just because it’s got a better range and better azimuth, then I suppose you live in the AtoA arena of the past. An ESA will provide much better LPI characteristics, but the radar isn’t the primary AtoA sensor anymore. The range has to be good enough to lock and guide your primary weapons, but any serious player will now rely on other more effective (and quieter) means to detect adversaries (awacs, SPECTRA, OSF). The radar isn’t your main sensor to detect your foes anymore, but more a fire control tool. You want it to be able to guide your weapons, and not to reveal your position when you use it.
The RBE2 seems to be much more adapted to the modern (networked) battlefield than the captor. And besides the range issue is going to be moot soon as the RBE2 gets an active antenna, which should come in time for the service entry of the Meteor.
Nic
Nicolas10Thank you. It’s what i wanted to hear. I wasn’t sure if the Rafale “lock” with the IR missile can be used in such way in cooperation with the AWACS.
I ask, because HAF has just accepted officially the first Erieye and strangely, to verify the link16 capabilities, a french Rafale was sent to Greece.
You wouldn’t also happen to know the answer to the same question in the absence of AWACS (let’s say it got shot down)?
Well I don’t know at what range the lock could be provided by the OSF, but I suspect it would always be greater than the range you can identify the target?
Anyway during tests, a rafale even fired a Mica to shoot a target that was behind her (yes at 180°). The designation was provided by another Rafale. Add this to the LOAL feature and I think you have a very potent missile system.
I think the Mica IR and the AASM are two major advantages of the Rafale compared to the EF. I sure hope they will make an IR version of the Meteor.
Nic
Nicolas10My question is exactly about MICA IR. Is there any reliable info, from french sources, on what can be the range that a Rafale can shoot a MICA IR, using the OSF? I mean, without relying on radar and assuming that doesn’t need to wait for positive identification because an AWACS will provide that info.
Can the Rafale shoot a MICA IR to a target visible in the IRST, even if it’s still a very “small” target, if it knows that it’s the enemy? To put it more simply, a Rafale detects on the OSF a “hot dot”, which still is too far away to identify positively, but an AWACS or ground radar gives that info to the Rafale. Can the Rafale “slave” (lock) the MICA IR to that “dot” and shoot? If yes, is there any info about the approximate range?
I don’t understand your question. If the target info is provided by awacs, then the Mica can be locked by the awacs directly through link 16, so you don’t need to lock it with the OSF. Besides it can be locked after launch by your awacs or any other plane in the location (if the plane can provide target identification, then surely it can get a lock too?).
Nic
Nicolas10😮
So great logical deduction.Next step :
‘American observers were impressed by the accuracy of the AASM weapons’ mean that Mica was unable to hit target.. (:rolleyes: in simulation !!)
Dude, keep in mind that the article was published by dassault originally. If there had been no Rafale loss at all, they would have made sure to say so in the article. You don’t have to be a genius to figure out that they would jump at the oppotunity to say that there had been no AtoA loss as well.
Nic
Nicolas10In my opinion: no Rafales lost to air defence means that there were losses to other causes. So there must have been A to A losses, but it would be nice to know the ratio.
Nic
Nicolas10MiG-23 shot down F-15, in case you forgot.
And with that statement, your whole argument just went up in flames. When has a MiG-23 ever shot down an F-15? Hasn’t happened.
Not saying it’s not possible, but it hasn’t happened.
I think zare makes reasonably good points otherwise. It’d be nice to see you debate them rather than just jump on the one thing that’s not supposedly not correct in his post.
I’m not telling that to diss you, but as you are usually one poster here who makes a lot of sense (when it isn’t about the Phantom anyway :diablo:), I think it’d be nice to hear you take on zare’s points.
Nic
Nicolas10I’d use a spad XIII, and when the ETs start laughing and run circles around it, I send a salvo of SM3 to catch them offguard :diablo:
Sign In
