TooCool_12fwhat i’m saying is that it obviously has a low RCS and that is visible fropm at least two points:
1- when facing fighters like the eurofighters it managed to get the lock abnd shoot without them being able to lock and fire back, despite the fact that the eurofighter features a more powerful radar (if its “more powerful radar repeadly can’t lock until too late, then the only explanation would be a lower RCS)
2- it could go over lybia on firsdt strikes before massive cruise missiles strikes destroyed most long range SAMs, which, according to CA, rendered the place quite dangerous for any 4th gen fighter…. it was even considered unhealthy for dedicated aircraft like the growler (still according to CA) so, again, it has something that enables it to do so, which is either:
– very low RCS
– very powerful ECM suite
– both of the above (probably the right answer)
I simply gave these two examples which lead to think that it does have a very low RCS indeed, while you stated that there’s no evidence of it
TooCool_12f@ redreidy
I just happen to have read the last “Combat Aircraft”, and at the end, there’s an article about the Growler involvment in Lybia. When you read it, it states that the US had massively struck the SA-5 sites to soften Lybian defences so that the growler can go in and do its job, as it would be too dangerous for 4th gen fighters to go in without that..
a little befors, the article about the Rafale states that it went in on its own, first (before “softening” of the SAM sites), so, one may conclude that it has quite interesting caracteristics RCS and EW-wise, no?
Of course, nobody can post real RCS values for it as they are classified anyway, but between being able to engage other fighters at distances where they don’t see it even if they feature a more powerful radar, or being able to penetrate defences without being harmed in any way obviously means that it does have something for it, don’t you think?
TooCool_12fall rafales are built structurally as “navy types” i.e. the M version, and there’s little difference in adding a second cockpit, be it for the B or the N version.
one should not forget that at first the euro was made to have a sort of parity with the dollar US. now, with the euro worth around $1.50 you obviously have high rafale prices when compared to other aircraft from out of the eurozone.
bring the euro to the dollar level and suddenly the rafale will become waaaay cheaper for everyone outside the continental europe
TooCool_12fone question to those who believe canted intakes are a must have for stealth
you guys claim that intakes at 90° with aircraft axis would reflet echos straight forward… I invitet you to make a small experiment: take your girlfriend/wife/mother/your(?) small make-up mirror, put it straight on a wall, and walk to the other side of the room. then try to see yourself in it
you’ll notice that, unless you’re perfectly in front of it, you see the wall behind you
the same goes for “vertical intakes, radar antenae etc..” they will reflect the echos straight back to the emitter in one and only case: if the nose of the aircraft on which they are is pointing straight at that emitter. if the nose points just one degree out of line, most if not all echos will pass besides the emitter (only a few marginal ones, like “noise” may get back to it
same for curves on the surface. after the F-117 was presented to the public, anybody seeing a pic of the F-22 would say “no it can’t be stealthy, there are no facetted surfaces on it”… yet, it’s supposed to be stealthier than the F-117.
while the rafale doesn’t aim at a fully stealth classification of its airframe, it obviously (lots of details showing it) was made with low rcs in mind
TooCool_12fRadar, ECM, ESM, EOTS/EODAS, MADL, etc….and the fusing of on/offboard information, into a coherent picture, for superior situational awareness. The competitors have yet to match the Super Hornet’s MMI, much less approach the level, that F-35 will be operating at.
you mean it will do what rafale has already been doing for some time? fusing all receivers information and display it in one clear picture to the pilot?
TooCool_12fjust one remark:
more than once in this very thread, as well as in others, people talk about that “big reflector” that a vertical tail is..
it’s been pointed out in this very thread (that’s why I’d like to remind it) that the vertical fin or the rafale is made of EM-transparent materials.. which mans, as far as I understand “transparent”, that radar waves don’t bounce on it but simply go through…
TooCool_12fwrightwing:
1/ high AoA is usable only at low speeds.. at higher speeds you simply can’t pull any really high AoA unless you want to pull lots of G’s..
2/ SH as made to fly in a certain way, the F-22 in another.. their aerodynamics are very different and you can hardly make conclusions on one based on the other
3/ Mr. Beesley worked for LM. whatever he said publically was obviously PR. be it right or not, it was PR.. therefore anything he might say should be taken with a grain of salt, to say the least
TooCool_12fit’ Beesley talking. as he’s being paid by LM, how much of that is PR?
answer: every single bit
it doesn’t mean it’s all wrong, but to take it at face value is naive, to say the least
TooCool_12fYou have to feed first the missile with the location of the target!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Exocet will active its own radar when it is supposed to be close enough to the boat!
No radar data before alaunching, no possibility
of hitting!!!!!
:diablo::diablo::diablo::diablo::diablo::diablo:
tazz, argentinian superetendards fired their exocets against royal navy while flying at wavetop level from about 60 km away. with the curvature of the earth, the navy ships had no way to see them coming, but the attackers couldn’t “aim” either. they simply shot and turned away, the missile going straight ahead until it found something to hit on its own. you don’t need a radar for the exocet… you only need something to launch it from and point it in the general direction of your target. The missile is fully autonomous after leaving the rail
TooCool_12fI passed in front of Wittering RAF base this week with my truck and there was a “brand new” harrier staying at the entrance, replacing the older one that was there before. took a pic with my phone but while driving, it’s not very easy to do it right… 😉
it’s in fully grey camo, carrying two big droptanks and two really big GBUs under the wings. while it looks nice, sadly, that’d be one harrier very recently retired…
TooCool_12f@ swerve
ask yourself why pilots still train in ACM, why missiles like the AIM-9X and such are developed, and so on…
you use your missiles at higher range and from safe position as much as possible, but a dogfight is something you can’t dismiss altogether.. depending on conditions, it still can occur, and if one finds himself in such a position, he better has the equipment for that.
TooCool_12fwhat he pointed out is that the ideal position for IR missiles is on wingtips, where the seeker has the most unobstructed view, especially interesting for most modern seeekers that search at pretty wide angles
the second thing he pointed out was the integration of missiles into specra, allowing missiles to be targeted with other spectra components. I’d add from what I’ve read, the missiles’ seekers are also potantially usable to augment overall specra detection capabilities as the integration is made “two ways” so to speak, so the missile sensors can be used to increase the systems sensitivity
TooCool_12fthey’ve chosen kevlar probably because it’s extremely resistant material (not many known materials have better resistance to traction, torsion, or impacts) , while perfectly transparent to radar, which can be useful in order to get maximum performance out of your own radar (no interference with echos, even the weakest ones)
TooCool_12fnobody claims “truly invisible” aircraft, but what has been pointed out are some delacations and some facts that may be “counter-counter-intuitive”…
for example:
– EF has a more powerful radar, which all here agree upon
– Rafales in DACT had to act as fighters having only semi-active missiles on board
– EF was supposed to do its howeork and kill the “bad guys” (rafales in this example)
what happened?
rafales locked onto the Typhoons, fired (virtually of course) and scored, apparently, the Typhoons never (or almost, since they scored one kill) managed to lock onto the Rafales who had to have their noses pointed towards them (meaning, closing in) for the whole duration of the missile flight (semi-active missiles needing continuous lock from the shooter)
Something doesn’t go well in this example with the Typhoon: it is supposed to be able to detect being locked, and if they’re locked, one may expect them to turn their radar on in the direction of the threat at full power to get the picture of what’s after them and fight back.
They obviously had trouble in doing so, regardless of their superior radar, something prevented them from detecting the atatckers and firing back, while the attackers were closing in (at the speeds they fly, you can easily consider they got some 10-20km closer, if not more, between the first lock and the “kill”. If they couldn’t get a lock despite the higher power of their radar and diminishing range, then obviously the rafales have something to keep their RCS low, be it SPECTRA or their “passive discreet features” or (most certainly) a combination of both
TooCool_12fweak argument seahawk… if the internal probe was so important, my bet is that dassault guys would have found the way to put it internally… otherwise, why waste time to put ram coatings into inlets, trailing edges etc…
Sign In
