Mercurius :

If you consult any aerospace dictionary or technical dictionary, you will see the terms ‘primary radar’ and ‘secondary radar’ defined in terms similar to those I used.

Ok , I give you that .
But I am still sure that the HA-100 is capable of detecting and traking flying objects , even stealthy ones as reported by Thalès .

Unless Vympel has gone into the disinformation business we will not be seeing a ramjet-powered R-77 in the next five years.

And to judge from a recent report in Jane’s Defence Weekly on the recent Zhuhai air show in China, most Chinese work on ramjet-powered air-to-air missiles has been theoretical. So we are unlikely to be seeing a ramjet-powered AIM from China in the near future.

Well , since you seem to be in the business , I decided to trust you 🙂
Thanks for the input and for the fair debate . It was a pleasure .

Cheers .

PPP :

Keep on copy pasting from TMOR and Wingman. At least I can stand on my own two feet without needing to copy from members of other forums

I ‘m 47 , ex Air Force . I don ‘t need to copy/paste anyone , Sir 😎

Wrt Spectra , I know probably far more than you will ever know and it is why I asked you to do a bit of homework before to post nonsense . If you were a bit more aware of the NATO pilots reports , you would know that the French are highly regarded when it comes to ECMs .
Towed decoys are good but somehow counter-productive for few reasons :
– they take up space and pylons
– you use them once and there are gone after ejection
– they cost much to end up dropped
– they are omnidirectional noise jammers (non-stealthy)

Cheers .

Mercurius :

The Rafale A was a technology demonstrator , so it had to explore the proposed performance envelope.

True .
It has to be noted that even the LM X-35 NEVER reached Mach 1.6+ but a mere Mach 1.3 . So , even the technology demonstrator was slow .

Wrightwing :

I don’t think we can agree on why LM hasn’t flown the aircraft to M1.6

Because it probably can ‘t .

There’s too much riding on the success of the program, considering the amounts invested, to needlessly risk losing airplanes/pilots.

lol !:D Are you serious ?

Mercurius :

So I don’t think it was valid to compare the pace of the programme with that of the F-35, which would have involved a greater integration task.

I beg to disagree . The differences between the Raf A (demonstrator) and the Raf C are huge .
When Dassault mounted the M-88 engines to replace the F404s , the Rafale C was a ton lighter , 1m shorter , winspan was 1.15m shorter , wing surface was 2 square meters smaller . The wing itself was different , the tail was different , the air intakes were also changed , etc …
But the C and its new airframe reached its top speed in no time .

There is something wrong with the F-35 airframe and aerodynamics . 😡
LM has it all wrong which is surprising knowing their knowledge … :confused:

The problem with lower-frequency sensors is that for a given size of antenna they have a much lower angular resolution than microwave radars. They can tell you that there seems to be something out there, and give an idea of its speed and course, but you then need to use either a conventional radar or a long-range EO sensor to locate the intruder.

Again , this is false wrt the HA-100 radar . You more or less say that a HA-100 type radar cannot pinpoint a target , but it can . If it couldn ‘t , why the Germans (as an exemple) tried the radar at the Frankfurt main airport as the main radar ? Over a civilian airport , the air controlers need to know which aircraft they’ re tracking and with great accuracy and furthermore , amongst many other targets . You don ‘t mess around with civilian lives .

There is/was a project called R-77M, but I’m not aware of an R-77M1.

A product-improvement of the R-77 Adder is in the works, codenamed the R-77M1, and will feature a ramjet propulsion device. It weights 226kg and its range is 160km .

Cheers .

Wrightwing :

You may want to recheck your facts on how well JASSM performs.

Sorry WW , but it ‘s you who should re-check the performance of JASSM and Storm-Shadow (SCALP-EG) .
Bare the better range , the JASSM is no match .
MBDA ‘s cruise missile is waaay better , it is stealthier , it has a better guidance systems , better warhead , better end game .
Then , the French Naval Scalp (MDCN) also has a better range than JASSM , over 1000km .

Cheers .

Wrightwing :

Let’s put it this way- they know the thrust, weight, drag, etc…. so I doubt the estimates are going to vary significantly.

I agree but the F-35 program already had tons (yes , tons) of problems and I and others predict some more to come , crystal ball not needed . 😀
Check the milestones , it ‘s an eye opener .
First maiden flight : 15 December 2006 .
13 November 2008 , Mach 1.05 at 30,000 ft . It took 2 years .
4 years and 12 days after its maiden flight , its max speed is still unknown :confused::eek:

Now , a different example :
Rafale A maiden flight : 4 July 1986 .
8 months later (4 March 1987) , the same aircraft fly at Mach 2.02 . Its dash speed is said to be Mach 2.15 .

You also said :

Ground based low band radars don’t have the resolution needed to prosecute an attack

False . Have you heard of radars like the Thalès HA-100 , it can detect and track stealth object easily :
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/aw/dti1007/index.php?startpage=32

It has to be noted that the refresh rate is one second , which is equivalent to a fast military rotor driven radar .
As it is said , the radar and its software build a “very pure” picture of anything flying bigger than 1 meter and at up to 100km .
Thales says that the HA-100 has the biggest signal processing capacity of any other Thales radar .
Such system coupled with IR SAMs or IR missile equipped Fighters can shotdown a stealth target (Aircraft , Cruise missile , etc).
It can be set up by a 2 men team in less than 20 minutes .

The first point is a huge assumption with regards to detection(or the AMRAAM’s range for that matter). Assuming the LPI signal was detected, the rate at which the AESA scans(and how briefly the target is illuminated), you’re not going to have a firing solution(especially if the emitter isn’t the shooter).

Rafale ‘s Spectra and F-22 ‘s ALQ-94 have no problem to detect and track LPI signals (Rafale tracking another Rafale ‘s RBE2 or Typhoon ‘s Captor and F-22 tracking Rafale ‘s RBE2) . It is a fact .
Then , if the opponent stays silent (EMCON) it can still be detected at long range by good IRSTs or long range TV Cam .

All of this to say that passive stealth , while useful and desired , is defeated by numerous means . Add IR BVR missiles and you ‘ve got the kill chain completed . 😉

In which Fiscal Year do you expect the Chinese Air Force to have more 5th Gen fighters than the US?

No idea . 2025 ? :confused:

Cheers .

Wrightwing :

Probably because the later model AMRAAMS(and follow on weapons), combined with the low RCS were deemed to be perfectly suitable, due to threat capability assessments.

Maybe but this is not the point .

Which fighter is going to detect the F-35 at ranges, where a ramjet powered BVR missile would be handy?

Any fighter directed by a 3rd party like AWACs or ground low band radar .

It won’t need the Meteor to even up the fight. It can avoid incoming fighters, or engage them at ranges beyond their ability to detect it(the F-35).

Says who ?
Then , a good RWR will warn the opponent way before to be in F-35 ‘s Amraam ‘s range and could even provide enough infos for a BVR shot . MAWS will also warn the opponent that a missile has been fired .
It works both way Wrightwing .

In a VLO vs VLO fight, then having extremely long ranges AAMs becomes even less important, as the ranges at which they’ll detect each other will be much closer, than legacy aircraft.

Radars are not the only mean to detect an aircraft at long range .

It will be a stealthy pod, so that it doesn’t stick out like a sore thumb.

Says who ? Source ?

The speed/altitude advantages are a negligible, as neither plane would be flying around at their max altitude, and at supersonic speeds for prolonged periods.

Funny that the US aircraft are always flying higher and faster than others but when it ‘s the others who are flying higher and faster , the advantage is negligible 😀

What missile and number advantage? Which air forces are you comparing here?

Chinese AF .

None of this seems to coincide with how pilots have commented on the F-35’s performance.

Which pilots ??:confused: F-35 performance ? What performance ?? :confused::D
As it stands , the F-35 is only capable to fly . :diablo:

The F-35 is able to fire weapons at M1.6

False . We ‘re not even sure that it can fly well in supersonic and it never fired a weapon yet . Stop making things up . Marketing and propaganda is one thing , demonstrate it is another story .

As for agility, it’ll exceed the F-16/F-18 capabilities in turning, high AoA, acceleration, range, combined with VLO, and higher SA than opponents.

Same again . Proof ? Source ? :diablo:
Today , the F-35s are prototypes only .

Cheers .

A second exercise with the HAF took place in 2007 , the Rafales were this time F2s :

4 Rafale F2 B, 1 Rafale F2 C.

The recent excercise wasn’t the first occasion for a HAF squadron to counter the Rafale. In 2006 the Rafale M from CdG partecipated in excercises with F16block52+ and F4E AUP. But the Rafale M of the time, were F1, a version centered in air-to-air role with somewhat limited capabilities. In the Aegean Gust partecipated Rafale F2, with improved air to air capabilities, including the data link between aircrafts of a formation, combined with FSO and data fusion…

… Both greek and french pilots flew as backseaters in each other planes. As for the engagements:

4 sorties occured in the morning and 3 in the evening of Tuesday in 2 vs 2 scenarios, in BVR. The greek aircrafts were B52+. On Wednesday 8 sorties with Rafale B in 2 waves (morning, evening), with the partecipation of 1 french pilot and 4 greek backseaters. This time it was 4 vs 4. The greek aircrafts were B52+, B50D, B30.
Something that appeared strange to the greek pilots, was that while according to the HAF policy the pilots were doing the last pre-takeoff check of their planes (Leak check), the French pilots were taking position on the runway without doing so.

The impressions of the greek pilots were variable, as is natural , and their observations quite interesting. The whole of the greek F16 pilots, found the cockpit particularly functional, although a bit small, as is used in all french aircrafts. Also, the best impressions left the glass cockpit advanced disposition. It is known that the high operational output of the Rafale is result of high performance, excellent behaviour and friendly MMI that adopts to the high workload in multirole missions. The existance of so many displays and the characteristical absense of analog instruments, was natural to make a big impression to the greek pilots, who apart the Falcon’s MFDs, are used to analog instruments. Some in fact, told us that they would feel more comfortable, if some analog instruments have been kept as backups in cases of malfunction or failiure of the electric system. Of course it is certain that safety valves has been thought, while evolution indicates that full glass cockpit will dominate in the future, as will happen in the case of F35 too.

It is also natural to be impressed by the high situation awareness provided by the Rafale thanks to data fusion. The Rafale, as the greek pilots had the chance to see, can receive tracking data from RBE2, Spectra, OSF, IFF, MICA IR sensors and accompanying aircrafts, ground command and control facilities and AWACS, elaborate them and produce system tracking data (system tracks). These are superior to quality compared to the single data of the individual sensors. This data is then used for fire control and is shown in the central tactical display and can be transmitted to fellow aircrafts. So, at a glance at the tactical display, the pilots can see the position of targets that may be inside the radar cone or outside and even in the rear hemisphere, no matter if the radar is on or off!

Also, it was verified that OSF provides advantage in air combat. As the greek pilots observed, once the target is locked from the radar, its image is then displayed in the central display which facilitates very much the target identification even in great distances.A similar function is provided in the F16 by the Lantirn Pod in air to air mode, with the difference that the backseater can make a search independent of the radar. On the contrary on the Rafale, the OSF is primarily slaved on the radar.

The best of impressions left to the greek pilots the performace of the Rafale’s self protection suite, confirming the french reputation in the sector since the time that HAF operated the ICMS2000 in the Mirage2000.

Small reprimands were made to some small but important details, like the fact of the abscense of a countdown timer in the HUD when a BVR missile is flying towards its target. The greek F16 pilots are used to such an indicator on the lower left of the HUD, indicating the “Time On Target” of the Amraam and the time remaining until the Amraam’s autonomous seeker is activated. If the missile fails tracking, then the indication “Loose” appears over the locked target on the HUD and the pilot is aware that the shot has failed. Something like this wasn’t found on the Rafale, leading to a difficulty in the interpretation of the BVR shots during the engagements. And this, because the French were regarding that after a certain range , a MICA shot was always successful. As a result, the arrival to safe conclusions, was problematic.

Beyond that, it was also commented positively the agility of the Rafale. Of course the greek pilots still think of the F16 as a particularly capable aircraft in dogfight.
In the air, the Rafale is very agile, but for the greek pilots the sense of flying was very different from that of the F16. It was commented as perfectly stable, with very good response in all speeds and manouvers. Very good impressions were also left by the automatic pilot as well as the ability of maintaining very low speed during approach, prior to landing.

… The Rafale certainly proved that it is a very capable aircraft in the hands of the excellently trainned french pilots who have battle experience. The encounter with F16s, gave the greek pilots the opportunity to measure the F16 capabilities against a 4th gen aircraft, while it showed yet another time that the level of HAF pilots is one of the best in NATO airforces.

Cheers .

In the article, he claims that the F/A-18E/F is “.. a better ground-attack aircraft than Tornado or Harrier; a better air-defence aircraft than (and less than a third of the price of) Typhoon.”

I agree .
Typhoon as it is now and as an interceptor , is overestimated . This is my opinion .
The SH is a hell of a fighter .

Cheers .