Nicolas10I only wish more countries and businesses would closely study the Swedish air-defence procurement system – it is head, shoulders, torso, thighs and knees the best in the world.
Sure if you want to go with mostly foreign content (and the political restrictions that go with it) in your fighter.
Nic
Nicolas10RIP … may be a curse of being honest 🙁
Past a certain level in politics, being honest isn’t very healthy to say the least.
Nic
Nicolas10[ATTACH=CONFIG]221510[/ATTACH]
Awesome.
Even though at a time I googled anything sundowneresque, I’d never seen that one, thanks.
Nic
Nicolas10What’s your favorite Modern Day Nose Art from the 1970’s – Present. (please keep it clean)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]221506[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]221507[/ATTACH]
A little off-topic, but I think the sundowners’ F4 & F14s are some of the sexiest schemes that ever graced the skies.
Oh and real men fly in high-viz markings.
Nic
Nicolas10Delaying orders means no Rafales.
In my opinion in a few years we are going to be even more broke than we are now.
Nic
Nicolas10Mirage III: like F-104 with poorer thrust and less acceleration. French engine sucks. With a J79, could’ve been like a half size F-106 or a F-104 thats more balanced
…
Kfir: Mirage III with J79 but got too heavy and sucks
Ahem
Nicolas10I don’t think you can really compare both planes. The Pak-FA fills a role that isn’t comparable to any other aircraft. It is just supposed to be low observable enough to get within firing range of high value targets such as AWACs or tankers. Even moderate RCS reduction will give that considering there won’t be any external weapons or fuel, & it’s probably going to light on it’s radar a few hundred kilometers away to fire its long range missiles so why bother with such levels of stealth like the F22 or F35 if your radar is going to give you away anyway?
Nic
Nicolas10This thread has reached 30 pages, let’s close it & get pack on topic on the new one…
Nic
Nicolas10Israel’s main tool of spanking Arab aircraft was with Mirages, that was until 1967 when CdG placed an embargo on them, forcing them to make Neshers, Kfirs, and into the arms of Uncle Sam’s succulent breasts.
but what if he never placed the embargo (or if Pompidou lifted it after CdG left)..
how would the IAF be different during the wars after 1967.. how would international relations be different?
Pompidou is one of the worst traitors in french history.
Nic
Nicolas10What if the opposition has a very sophisticated ECM/EW and SATCOM denial capability? Can the Neuron or X-47 pick targets and discriminate on their own? The USAF/USN does not think so. Perhaps France has better capability, but from what i see the US has a different threat level from the french for which they must prepare. Manned assets give you capability to operate on their own..A pair of LGB’s using EOTS and DAS can take out targets…If SATCOM is jammed and/or manipulated and if your Link-16 is degraded you dont have any option…LOS data links do not work as well when you have a manned asset close by, might as well use it. In a high intensity conflict against a peer adversary you have to look at these things. In the US there is OPEN research and development and then there is a Huge black budget (Bigger than most nation’s defense budgets)..The LRS_B is a product of both and as a B-2 replacement it is probably going to be one of the most sophisticated project in the world..From what we know its going to be OPTIONALLY manned ( at best, most likely – Fully manned) that too post 2030 or so…They do not have confidence to make it totally unmanned..Forget replacing a full tactical strike fighter with that….UCAV’s will increasingly become important but they would not replace tactical strike figthers and this coming from an AF/USN setup that spends the most amount of money (and has the most combat experience) on Unmanned aviation and UCAV’s…For most nations that do not have sophisticated capability the strike ability of X-47/Neuron is no better than that of the Avenger or Predator which are less survivable but available NOW…
Well at some point there will be direct line of sight comms. Laser or AESA or whatever. Good luck intercepting that.
I wouldn’t like to be a pilot in a F35 that’s relying only on its own sensors to make a picture of the tactical environment. If the sophistication level of the opponent is such that it manages do deny communication between a SH & a UCAV a few dozens miles away, you might as well forget about overflying them at medium altitude in your F35 that won’t be able to receive/transmit data from any other platform.
Nic
Nicolas10The F35’s pilot eyeballs aren’t the sensors that they will use to look for targets as you guys like to put it. Its sensors are. So it makes no difference if the operator is inside the F35 or in remote F18F or whatever AWACS or a Rafale B with SATCOM. In France’s case, several Neurons could be controlled by a Rafale B pair that could double as air cover (with Meteor) & offboard sensors with SPECTRA, especially once the TRAGEDAC upgrade comes online with several SPECTRA working together to map the area.
The Rafale B’s WSO could process the Neuron’s sensors data, forward it to deciders & the Rafale’s pilots would remain focused on their escort duties and air to air coverage.
Nic
Nicolas10There is a point where your tactical strike fighter begins to stretch itself.. beyond a certain distance combat radius is quite a unproductive configuration if you ask me…I think when you start to get into 800-900 to 1000nm combat ranges you are getting into the X-47, neuron type territory where delivering a couple of Bombs at ranges is going to be far better performed by these crafts…
Most of the added capabilities of the F35 due to stealth are redudant with X-47/Neuron. Which is why I think it is not worth spending all that money in a plane that will only occasionally need all the bells & whistles but that you have to pay for through the whole life of the plane, incl in peacetime. By removing a few of the missions of the F35 and giving them to the X47 & other UAVs, you could have ended with a MUCH less compromised design at an affordable cost.
Nic
Nicolas10I did not raise the question. Someone else made a claim which had already been settled. On internal Fuel the F-35 gets you more combat radius. With external fuel the Rafale beats the F-35 because of EFT’s which are not yet cleared on the F-35. The Rafale has a excellent Combat radius with 3 large EFT’s of 800+ nm in a mixed profile (Submitted by toan on this forum)…The F-35 cannot go much above 700 with the smaller tanks that have already been developed and would be integrated in the short-mid term. For added range the operators are funding their industry to develop larger 600 gallon tanks for the F-35 and even CFT’s. These will take longer to come online and should offer more range given that they are around 40% larger than the smaller tanks. In a pure bomb truck load currently the F-35 cannot do the range of the Rafale mainly on account of being a far less-mature program (not even operational let alone years of in service maturity for the rafale)…In the future the F-35 should not have trouble to get you near that 800nm mark with larger EFT’s for those that need it (So far only the IDF)…Those looking to integrate the F-35 into an existing F-16 fleet would probably not need the 600 gallon tanks (most Viper users do not use 600 gallon tanks regularly either) because of the range provided by the F-35 on internal fuel and with smaller tanks…The F-35 due to its stealth will also fly a different profile compared to HOW THINGS WERE DONE by F-16’s…More Mid altitude flight and operations because of stealth and greater SA (So you can better manage threats)..
A few points:
– As you have said the 800 NM flight profile of the Rafale is mixed. F35 is probably not mixed since it’s supposed to stay at medium altitude, so there’s no reason to give the range for mixed flight profile. In case of low intensity conflict the Rafale can then probably get even more range if it doesn’t have to fly low.
– If you factor in the hypothetical CFTs & ETs of the F35, then you may also want to factor in the CFTs of the Rafale which have been designed & tested (although some testing may still be required), and for which every Rafale is already plumbed.
– 40% extra external fuel won’t increase the F35 range dramatically. Say you add 40% to the extra range provided by the existing ETs & I’m not even sure you reach a 800NM range, and that’s with a LOT of fuel!
– Comparing to how things were done by F16s is irrelevant as we are comparing with a Rafale on a mixed Hi-Lo profile anyway! So back to the first point.
The nice (& only, IMO) advantage of concurrency is that once it’s clear that the F35 is a lemon, hundreds will already have been manufactured, & cancellation of the program is going to be impossible.
Nic
Nicolas10Are you asking this question only to make the Rafale look bad compared to the F35 or is there any other reason why the Rafale couldn’t carry at least one fuel tank? Because there’s plenty of room to do so. And you could even use CFTs if you are allergic to external tanks.
Nic
Nicolas10Lets begin all over again…Whats the combat radius of a Rafale with a decent weapons load on internal fuel?
It’s a silly question. What’s the point? What is interesting is how many weapons you can carry to what distance. (And also interesting wrt life cycle cost is how much fuel do you burn to reach that point).
Nic
Sign In
