@Scorpion
You quoted this :

The pod is indifferently fitted to aircraft armed with the GBU-12 or the AASM and is used for target identification at long distances, for the guidance of GBU-12s or to determine the precise coordinates of a target before engaging it with an AASM.

Nothing is as accurate as a laser , not even a suite like Spectra . As a pilot , I would trust a targeting pod over an ELINT suite .
Spectra was used to slew the Damoclès pod (or/and the OSF/radar) .
What you quote is not saying anything about Spectra , it is about the pod Scorpion .

With all our sensors – the radar high-resolution mode, the Spectra suite and the Damoclès and Front Sector Optronics systems – we were,
however, fully capable of detecting, localising and engaging enemy surface-to-air missile sites and we destroyed SA-3 and SA-6 SAM systems with our AASMs, including some mobile, time sensitive systems.

There , you are given some clues but you don ‘t seem to take them onboard , do you ?

The AASM is user-friendly and targets coordinates can be fed into the weapons in three different ways: manually, from the Damoclès targeting pod, or from data sent from the AWACS via datalink.

They talk about three ways but they name only two : the pod and a third part (AWACS) . What do you think is the third mean ? 😉

Such is the quality of the Spectra electronic warfare suite that the
Rafale literally disappeared from the radar screens of the Libyan Air Force while performing ‘soft kills’ on the enemy radar systems.

You responded with :
“”Did the French apparently sit in the radar operating centers to make such a claim?“”
The answer to your question is within the quote itself :

while performing ‘soft kills’ on the enemy radar systems

Think about what it means and the way to archive it , please …

Vnomad :

In Libya, it (DASS) was apparently able to target SAM sites for destruction by tracing their emissions. That’s enough for it to be declared capable of performing ELINT operations.

That ‘s a negative , it doesn ‘t make it an ELINT system . Getting a bearing on a ground target within one degree of accuracy (or less) does NOT make a RWR an ELINT system , far from it in fact . Getting a visual and tone warning inside the cockpit as well as a bearing on the threat is the usual RWR ‘s job . To do ELINT , you need something a little bit better than a RWR , you need a whole system capable to do a proper EM mapping and you want the system to tell the other aircraft ‘s systems what ‘s going on and to tell them to act accordingly . This is called EMCON (EMission CONtrol) and is only used so far (AFAIK) by the F-22 and the Rafale . It is a part of the low obvservable concept by the way .
DASS does NOT do that .
I said that Spectra had twice the range of DASS (the numbers are from both official sites and should be well known by now) but Spectra also cover twice the bandwidth range of DASS (80MHz-40GHz for Spectra , 100MHz-18GHz for DASS) . If one wants to go into technical “details” (!) like instantaneous measurements of multiple frequencies simultaneously , one will learn that Spectra is also way ahead by around 40% .

Now , if we start talking about jamming techniques and how those are generated to evade , fool or hide from the adverse emiter(s) , Spectra could teach a couple of nice things to DASS 😀 Of course , the later would need some upgrades before to archive the same results .

I say again , DASS is very good self-defense system designed to warn the fighter as a safe distance from the threat(s) and to protect it at close range , the towed decoys being the “incarnation” of DASS as the last EM active line of defense (shaffs being the last passive defense) .
While DASS also has some capabilities in basic ELINT because of its own qualities , it is NOT an ELINT system .

Cheers .

Yep .

Cheers .

For the sake of Truth , the Damoclès pod is not rated very highly by the pilots but it ‘s OK for the job .
They still say that the American pods are better …

Cheers .

EE :

Bluewings, regarding your last post on here, #133. Still spouting off the same heap of sh*te as normal I notice.

I am sorry if you don ‘t fully get the ins and outs of what I am talking about EE , but it ‘s not my fault 😎
You seem to understand few things wrong , from my post you beleive that I am saying :
– the people behind Spectra is better than the people behind DASS
– the components used by Thalès are better than the components used by the others
– —> the rafale is the better aircraft

This is NOT what I am saying EE , not what I am saying . Ok ? 😉
It is about what solution a group of enginerers can find for the task at hand , with a clear goal part of the original design , a good deal of money and intelligence to spare . It is not a secret that Spectra cost an harm , a leg and an eye and at the time of Rafale F1 , the price of the system was already a good few percent of the aircraft . Now and from the top of my head , Spectra is for more than 10% of the aircraft ‘s price .
Thalès didn ‘t made it because they are more clever than others (maybe they are) but because they had to , so they had to dig deep into new grounds to build a system where the absolute priority was twofold , long range detection with pinpoint accuracy for :
– EM mapping of the zone on the fly (to know what ‘s going on)
– EM recognition of the adverse systems (for instant or futur use)
The secondary goal was also twofold :
– medium range stand-off jamming (to hide within the EM fog of war)
– short range self defense

Comparing DASS and Spectra is like comparing apples and oranges .
Overall , Spectra is a better system but I am not thumping my chest because I know that the design (the desired goal) was higher with Spectra .
DASS is a system designed primarely with two things in mind :
– to warn the crew of a possible threat from far away
– short self defense (Xeye+towed decoys)

I did my homework on DASS a long time ago and I still do because I have a great interest in electronic means to get an edge against an adverse system . DASS is a very clever piece of work and against today ‘s RF missiles , it should do the job with panache , better than what the USA actualy have in the front line bare the F-22 . I can ‘t rate the Russian or Chinese fighters as I do not speak , read , Russian or Chinese and it doesn ‘t help :o:mad:

Jacko , let ‘s say that we are in mid summer , july the 12th 2015 .
What is the Typhoon ? What can it do ? What ‘s the radar , the ammo ?

If I want to buy one , what do I get in front of my door ?

Cheers .

I was going to respond to a couple of points until I read Blue Apple ‘s last post (#236) . Good piece of writing .

There is very little I could add , only personal details here and there . For our Brithis friends , I think the most important part to remember is this one :

Which is why DASS performance is perfectly fine for the missions where the Typhoon excels, and PIRATE performance gives it an edge to intercept stealth platforms. For missions where EM listening performance is really needed like deep strike, recon, SEAD… the UK will have the F-35 (which, incedently has interferometric arrays and will surely be able to do passive targeting, the F-22 already can).

I sometimes get the stick from some when I remind people that the Typhoon is first and foremost an Interceptor and as such , its EW suite is tailored for the interception role with a emphasis on generic awareness and close self-defense , thus DASS and Pirate . Being able to survive alone way behind enemy lines by analysing the EM fog of war to make its way accross , using evasion and precise discret jamming is NOT part of its mission .

Because of this , the Typhoon ‘s people did NOT need a system like Spectra which played a major part in what Rafale was going to be . The airframe itself was build with Spectra in mind and Spectra was build with such an airframe in mind , and from day one .
Of course Spectra had to be more advanced because of its very purpose : protect the aircraft (and the crew) under the most harsh conditions for the most difficult mission there is in air warfare : penetrating an unarmed enemy air defense .
This is not the role of an Interceptor upgraded to a multi-role aircraft .
In the Typhoon , everything is screaming “I ‘m an Interceptor !” , the airframe , the angle of the delta , the canards , the engines , the big radar dish , the external wet stores , the fuel management , etc …
So are the DASS and the Pirate systems .

Cheers .

I also heard that some F-16s were using the towed ALE-50 …

Cheers .

Jacko :

There has been speculation that the apparently high proportion of GAINS guided attacks by Tornado/Typhoon actually camouflaged the use of friendly ground-based designation, is there a French perspective on that?

French Operatives were indeed on the ground to provide variious kind of Intels as well as laser designation on some of the bombing , as usual I should say . These personals are not seen as “boots on the ground” in the way that they are not “fighting” but merely doing what is requested from them . They are AdlA SpecOps , understand CPA-10 and also few RPIMAs from the MN . Most Nations use SpecOps outside the UN mandat simply because it is needed in this kind of situation , nothing new under the sun .

Obviously , there are no official reports on this and its is perfectly normal . I know because I was one of them in the 80s (GIA Squadron in Lebanon and Syria which was to become the CPA-10 years later) .
Having “eyeballs” on the ground is still the best way to avoid collateral dammages (as much as possible) .

Cheers .