Nicolas , you completely misunderstood what I said .
Let ‘s try again together , shall we ? 🙂 Good .

I said :

AFAIK , the M2000-5 ‘s autopilot does it too and since , well …
What I am talking about is not setting up a “safe” interception route but setting up an evading course at the edge of the enemy detection range , which is vastly more difficult .

You responded by :

What he was describing was just that

when HE said :

The autopilot of the Typhoon can automatically fly attack profiles and interception manoeuvres

I am sorry Nic , but Scorpion NEVER talked about evading one or many threats .
He talked about , I quote AGAIN :

automatically fly attack profiles and interception manoeuvres

Do you get it ou je te fais un dessin ? Bordel , c ‘est pourtant pas compliqué ! 😎

Scorpion :

Really? You just recently stated the Typhoon isn’t what it should have been a “silent” interceptor and repeatedly came up with Rafale’s passive targeting capabilities insisting that the Typhoon can’t…

I have never said that the Typhoon can ‘t do silent interception . What I said is that the Rafale is better at it and that ‘s a fact . Silent interception with SPECTRA , OSF and IR Mica (that you don ‘t have) has been one Rafale ‘s wanted capability from day one . Check the first FoxThree publications , you ‘ll see .
Now , you keep thinking that DASS can do SPECTRA ‘s job which is far from the truth . But hey , it ‘s your opinion as we like to say .
I already posted more stuff than I should regarding SPECTRA ins and outs , including some technical papers on Superheterodynes , Bragg cells , GaAs MMICs (here DASS is “folding”) and subtilities behind and within the software running the show .
Have we ever heard of a possible “Active Cancellation” capability for the Typhoon ? Ever ?
As we say in France , there is no smoke without a fire .

ATR? Source please!

Do you mean “Automatic Target Recognition” ? If so , what with ? The RBE2 or the OSF ? Because the RBE2 will make the difference in between a F-15 , a F-16 or a Fulcrum (example) by counting the engine blades and the RBE2-AA will prvide iSAR . The OSF provides a video of the aircraft so …

NCTR is just yet introduced with the RBE2AA whereas Captor offers that capability since years!

Correct and I respect this capability .

if the resolution isn’t good enough you might not be able to match the returns adequately against your db.

Correct again and clever thinking . Do I really have to say that I trust Thalès 😀

Fine that your AESA scans faster (albeit 200000 times? Source please for the scanning speed thanks!)

A mechanical radar like the Captor needs around 2 whole seconds to go from 9 O ‘clock to 3 O ‘clock , then the scan rate during the plate rotation is way slower than a simple Pesa radar since the beam is not electronically steered . I am not even talking about the time needed to scan the vertical plane as the radar is rotating , but I should 😉

As an example , the fixed RBE2-AA scans the entire field of view in about 100 nanoseconds . You can multiply this by 50 for the Pesa RBE2 (one beam) . Now , do the math 😉

Yes it’s mine opinion and that you don’t share it isn’t surprising as everything which states Rafale not superior is out of consideration for you!

Talk to me about the F-22 , the SU-27/35 , the F-35 and you ‘ll see that I consider the superiority in some capabilities . But here , we ‘re talking about the Typhoon . 😮
Really , if Dassault wanted to make a souped-up M2000 , they would have built the Typhoon , but better :diablo:
Sooner rather than later (when the AtoG weapon integration will be completed) , the Typhoon users will learn the hard way when they ‘ll fly at 450Knt @100ft with a full load in terrain following mode . Ouch ! 😮
Ouch for the range , ouch for the hard ride . Not even talking about DASS here 😀

Yes we can discuss the Typhoon as it is a fighter who shouldn ‘t be underestimated but don ‘t compare it too much with the Rafale .

Cheers .

redreidy :

Bluewings i have a mission for u that the typhoon is better.
Time critical interception of a high alt bombing force… rafales slower, shorter range missiles and radar.

Aaah … Yes , you ‘re correct . Nice catch 🙂

Scorpion :

In contrast to what you believe/claim the Typhoon is perfectly capable of conducting silent interceptions using DASS, PIRATE and MIDS, not unlike Rafale with SPECTRA, OSF and MIDS.

I never said otherwise , I perfectly know that the Typhoon can do passive shooting , thank you .

PIRATE alone can actually gather a lot of information including angular position, range, speed, acceleration rates and whether a target is approaching or receding. It generates target images for visual ID on selected threats and work goes on to include a multitargeting mode with imaging capability and EADS works on an automatic target recognition software since years which is used to identify targets on base of the signature with PIRATE and Captor.

Yes , similar than OSF and RBE2 .

Captor is right now capable to ID AA-targets using the non-cooperative identification feature, something the RBE2 will just introduce with its AESA antenna

This is software related and has nothing to do with radar performance .

even with the AESA antenna RBE2 won’t exceed the resolution of the current Captor-D !

You know what Scorpion , you don ‘t know what you ‘re talking about and furthermore , you forgot to say that while the Captor-D is doing SAR , it can ‘t do anything else meaningfull . :diablo: It is mechanical !
RBE2 is scanning the entire field of view 200.000 times faster than the Captor-D , my friend .

Wrt resolution :

It ‘s rather good .

DASS provides very similar passive detection capabilities to Spectra.

This is your opinion and I don ‘t share it .

The autopilot of the Typhoon can automatically fly attack profiles and interception manoeuvres

AFAIK , the M2000-5 ‘s autopilot does it too and since , well …
What I am talking about is not setting up a “safe” interception route but setting up an evading course at the edge of the enemy detection range , which is vastly more difficult .

Cheers .

Scorpion , could you give again the link to the DASS pdf , thank you .

I quote :

“The DASS also has full control of the RF transmitters and receivers allowing optimisation of emission control and crossaircraft sensor management, including a stealth mode for controlling RF transmitters in covert operations.”

I wasn ‘t aware of this , so I stand corrected . Thanks .
Anyway , we all know that emission control with a mechanical radar is rather basic since we can ‘t ask the radar to perform selective output power in sector “X” while scanning with a different output power in sector “Y” and/or “Z” and certainly not simultaneously . Then , ask the Captor to modify (adjust) by itself its output power in real time to “just” light-up the target with the minimal power needed to do so as the target is closing in . Then , you can ‘t ask the Captor to “beam” its radar cone in just a very small portion of the sky (like a laser pen vs a light-torch) .

As I said , the EMCON concept is not possible with a mechanical array . It is just not flexible enough .
I only hope that DASS has been built with the Captor-E in mind .

Now , regarding the sensor fusion , we should understand the difference in between getting and gathering the infos and managing them .
While the Typhoon is perfectly capable to detect possible threats in a 360deg bubble and display them in one of the side display , it can ‘t provide possible courses of actions to the pilot , like the possibility to ask the autopilot to set-up a new flight plan from the RF findings (and avoiding them) because there is no AI running the show in the background .
DASS (and the Logic behind Praetorian) is not made and tailored to run the entire weapon system ~the aircraft .
It is why I said that Rafale without SPECTRA is not even thinkable .

Scorpion , just look at the “sensor fusion” graph you ‘ve posted .
It shows that track No1 (top) is followed by radar and MIDS , track No2 is followed by radar , MIDS , FLIR and ESM . Track No3 is followed by etc …
Ok , fine , the Typhoon can track with multiple sensors .
But , look at the picture you posted showing the supposed “God eye view” (DASS) , what are doing the targets ? Are they tracking me ? What with ? and which one ? Are they all tracking me ??? :confused:
I don ‘t know ! 😮

SPECTRA will tell the pilot the answer to most of these questions and even propose a possible course of action .
In this scenario (5 different targets) , it is already difficult to engage an active jamming if the targets are the same aircraft (ie: 5 F-16s = same radars to jam) but if they are different aircraft with different radars , the only thing DASS can do is to try to blanket the most obvious frequencies with noise (not very efficient) , hope for the best and use the towed decoys as last defenses .
OTOH , SPECTRA can “blanket” but also can try to take each adverse radar separately ~thanks to its AESA antennas and beam forming capability~ and find a tailored jamming for each of them .
(we had a confirmation by Eagle1) :

the best case is to have performed ELINT to allow tailor-made jamming mode against a given asset. He said SPECTRA was very good at spying the transmission and comes up with adapted jamming modes in a short time.

I am not sure that it would work that good versus 5 adverse radars but it would surely work better than DASS anyway .
As I said many times , the Typhoon hasn ‘t been designed as a “discrete” fighter capable to make its way unarmed (or unnoticed) to Moscow .
The Typhoon ~as an interceptor~ is a souped-up M2000 and will also end up as a good bomber but it is certainly not a benchmark in any of the actual or planned missions .
It is an excellent aircraft , better than any F-teens in AtoA , maybe on the par with a SU-35 in combat but inferior to the Rafale in every missions you can think of . Sorry to say (again) .

Cheers .

To be honest , I don ‘t think we ‘ll know the exact TRMs counts on the RBE2-AA until its real deployment .

I am sure that the RBE2-AA prototype had ~at one moment in time~ 1,001 modules . It might not be the case anymore , mind .
Since , Thalès and UMS could have updated the plate with newer TRMs providing more output power per Watt/consumption . In this case , reducing the total amount of TRMs would help the cooling while gaining in range , as well as keeping the power consumption acceptable .

Anyway , we already have some clues and if we add one to two , we might get some more clues 🙂
We know that the actual RBE2-AA has an output power of 9.6 kW . If it has 840 TRMs , we know that each module is at least capable of emiting 11,42w . Then , Thalès and Dassault just said that by fitting a new cooling pump , the total output power reach 14kW which means than the same modules are capable of emiting 16,66w .

When one do a quick research at UMS , one learn that their best MMICs can reach somewhere around 24w .
http://www.ums-gaas.com/telechargement.php?id_page=0-42-19&file=24_26GHz_UMS_MMIC_solutions_for_Industrial_Radar_Sensors_2.pdf
http://www.admiral-microwaves.co.uk/pdf/ums/UMS-news-letter.pdf
If the RBE2-AA is indeed equipped with some of these modules , a total output power of around 20kW is theoretically possible .
So , as Scorpion rightly said :

Is the available power output the limiting factor?

Indeed it is . I said so for a very long time ! 😎
What I really would like to know is the total output power needed by SPECTRA when in full use , including during active jamming with its GaAs AESA antennas .

Anyway , the numbers provided by Dassault , Thalès and UMS wrt the RBE2-AA are an “eye-opener” . I mean , if Dassault was to find a way to boost Rafale ‘s electrical system , the Radar could have a 250km range (!) vs a F-16 size target . This is better than the SH ‘s AN/APG-79 .

I don ‘t expect this kind of performance anytime soon but since Dassault talked not long ago to do a full review of Rafale ‘s electrical system , I find it relevant to look into a possible futur .
Then , knowing than GaNs MMICs are planned (SPECTRA then RBE2) , such very high performances could be archived with a total output power of only 18kW , which is perfectly feasible and with a … small nose :D.

Cheers .

Scorpion :

If the 50% more range with an AESA turns out to be true you will look at 3-4 times the figure you stated.

Are you saying that the Captor-E will detect a 5sqm target at 250km ?
Well , it seems a bit exagerated and I can’t see how that would be possible with the output power at hand . If it is indeed possible , that would mean that many people including myself (modestly) were wrong .
AFAIK , we don ‘t know the output power of the Captor-M , we don’ t know the output power of the actual AESA Captor prototype and we don ‘t know the output power of the futur Captor-E .
I know that some papers are quoting the Captor-M to have one of the best radar range there is for a radar of its kind and I believe them .
But it would be very hard for us to rate the futur Captor-E without pulling rabbits out of a hat .
AESA modules count and dish size are 2 very important things , I admit , but it doesn ‘t tell the whole story .
Personaly , I think that Thalès has a good 3 years lead wrt integration , back-end and software compare to the Captor-E . Then , the technology at hand might not be the same . GaAs modules MAY be the same but the way to use them could be different . Bets are on … 😎

You have no clue about the Typhoon that’s your problem, add your utter bias towards the Rafale and it becomes clear that there is not the slightest interest in figuring out the truth about the Typhoon’s capabilities.

I have been following the Eurofighter 2000 since , well … from the begining .
I am truely disapointed to find out that you discard my posting so easily , Scorpion .
I understand , saying that the Typhoon is a “souped-up” M2000 is not easy to swallow but there is not much difference in between the two . The Typhoon is a Sprinter , better acceleration at all regimes than the M2000 but same max speed , same altitude ceiling but with a bigger radar and a wonderfull IRST . The ECMs are probably on the par with the ICMS MkIII (M2000-9) .
As a dogfighter , I would say that a Typhoon ‘s driver put up against a M2000 driver is going to sweat a lot .
When I think that more than 15 years after the blueprint , they discovered that Apexs were usefull , I have a sarcastic smile on my face . Don ‘t ask me why 😉 They made the Typhoon with a 30 years old Dassault technology (80s) .

The F-22 uses three different sensor formats on separate screens as well.

You forgot that the F-22 ‘s mains screen (and the Rafale ‘s) is a fusion is between all the available sensors with an EMCON concept , as well as showing a God eye view , which is not the case with the Typhoon .

the DASS format provides a clear picture of threat environment if required

This is exactly what I ‘m saying to you , IF REQUIRED . Yes the DASS has its own display (if the pilot ask for it , left side display) but it can ‘t be fusionned (if I may say) in the main display and with all the filtering needed to only show what what the pilot should take care of , while the rest is managed and recorded for immediat or futur use , as I said earlier on . Here Scorpion , I ‘m not talking aboput MMI but about sensor fusion . MMI will come later :diablo:

while the PA format provides the overall picture with AA, AG targets, navigation information etc. All onboard and offboard sensor data are fed into the AIS which fuses these data, correlating sensor information, assigning joint tracks and priorities.

Rgr that loud and clear but it is what every 4th gen aircraft do , more or less . Some do better than others …

Nonsense! DASS requires not any input at all if not required, the IRST-attack format is only of relevance if the radar is on standby or off

Really , are you sure !? 😮
First : “DASS requires not any input at all if not required” is a nonsense . Read again what you said , english language is cristal clear but you ‘re not . Then , if PIRATE is only used when the radar is off or on stand-by , you know jack about the Typhoon .

it doesn’t need the DASS display format unless you want to get a clearer and more detailed picture of the threat situation beyond the standard indications.

Unless I want ??? 😮 I want EVERYTHING and NOW !
If I have to go through buttons and switches ~if the system is capable of doing so~ to understand what is tracking me , where , how far , I prefer to eject right away , come back to base and ask to fly a Rafale for my next mission ! 😡

DASS actually manages the active emissions of the aircraft

Wrong . Sources , please . :diablo:
Then , to perform such tasks , DASS would need to be in charge of the Captor to manage a true EMCON concept , which is not the case and a mechanical radar is not the best to manage multitasking (ie : SAM tracking at 11km , adverse fighter tracking at 85km , terrain following) which suppose excellent output power flexibility and fast beam stearing .
In fact , the EMCON concept with a mechanical radar is of little use .
In this regard , the Rafale is well ahead and the RBE2-AA will benefit for free of what is already implemented .

Some should ask themselves why Dassault decided to use a PESA radar from the begining instead of a more powerfull mechanical radar , like a RDY-MKII .

Dassault folllowed a different route and it shows . Wrt sensor fusion and pilot ‘s ease (is that making sense ?) , the Rafale is probably superior to the F-22 while being inferior in BVR due to RCS .

Twinblade :

and the odds on your beloved fighter ?

Versus a SU-35 , Rafale is on 50/50 . Maybe 65/35 for Rafale if SPECTRA can hold the Flanker until 60km to target .

Cheers .

What an ugly bird … 😮
Then without its big engine , it is a brick .

Luckily , it has some top of the line avionics .

Cheers .

Scorpion , I only responded to your questions . 😉

Anyway further discussions wrt the Rafale and its equipment should be allocated where it belongs to (the Rafale thread)

I agree .

Cheers .

Scorpion :

Really “all kind of modes”? So what about GMTI/T, EA, interleaving of GMTI/T & SAR, simultaneous tracking of AA, AG and naval targets etc.? Sure “all modes”.

Why do you ask ? You know the answer as well as I do .
GMTI/T is currently implemented on the actual RBE2 , simultaneous tracking of AA , AG and Naval targets are already implemented , since the standard F3 .
Interleaving GMTI/T & SAR is also a feature of the RBE2-AA , obviously .
AFAIK , the RBE2-AA is about at the same stage than the actual PESA RBE2 wrt modes .

Cheers .