[USER=”41059″]halloweene[/USER]

How do you know it is not an effective design? From what I have been told, a CSG can move freakin’ fast, actually much more than publicised… for a ship. That is, essentially motionless compared to a 10 or 15 M ballistic missile. Nevertheless, what is your point, that the RV will not find its target or something? How much distance can a CSG cover in 15 minutes? How do you hide a 300 m vessel and escort in the middle of the sea??

i understand your point, but on the other hand what will be the exact range of DF-21 impact?

DF-21 is more a political tool than a really efficient design. Do you know how fast a carrier group can move ?

No timescale mentioned there, just says that it’s very ambitious. For GaN transmitter, demonstrator was 2014 (assuming it was on time), and in-service date is 2023. Full MFA demonstrator is currently non-existent, so based on that I’d say sometime after 2030, which is also the opinion shared a French journalist who wrote an article in Combat Aircraft, July 2015, Page 23. The conformal, multiband, multirole antennae development will begin in 2025 for qualification around 2030+. They will get GaN on the existing system first and then begin work on the rest. From a testing perspective it doesn’t even make sense to have the latter interfering with the integration of the former.

That is probably why there will be *Rafale 4.1 (2023) and 4.2 (2025) (first real fork in Rafale program), with funcions available as soon as 2022. Spectra antennas are already AESA. but in fact, they realized that tile architecture of modules was cheaper and already greatly improved signal treatment (co location).GaN modules were expected on F3R standard but will be available finally on Spectra 04T (on fourth tranche Rafale, F4.1). At least that is what i could deduceafter extensive talks with Thales people (not very talkative).

There will be a much larger model of it at PAS19.however, ppl in DA are keeping secret size and scale.

now im curious if German have its own vision on what’s look alike. Or maybe it’s the one in Airbus Video. The engine would probably “hybrid” between whatever German learns with EJ-2000 and French M-88.

Given the vision of this aircraft. This might entail very sophisticated high bandwidth communication system. The front end would be the AESA radar with suitable waveform for the task. Air datalinking can occupy up to 33% duty cycle at the heaviest point, this might deny the radar to conduct search tho. So more realistic value should be bit lower maybe 10%. The required power would be small, only as high as needed to counter weather. It will have range to at least 200-250 km against typical fighter like Russian one to allow employment of Meteor at very long range if needed. For controlling UAV tho i would expect 3 faced arrays like Russian approach with Su-57. Should there only 1 nose array however that might constrain the employment of high bandwidth datalink but shuldnt be a problem given the UAV will likely always be at front.

We have some more information now. First 2*9T engines (power generation). conformal tile based GaN arrays. (multiple functions). All in all, a communication ser ve “à la ” F-35, but within an open system (not “à la f-35) including satellites, AWCQ/tankers, UCAV, expandable intelligent “carriers” , intelligent swarms etc. The idea is to build a system FROM a core and not link platforms after they are built. hey scorpion (armée de terre) is integrated, aswell asMN. Next step is RAfale, probably EFT etc.

Their are sometimes comical sentences here and there (not so on this forum). Like Europe tech lags 15 years behind US when F-35 was designed on a french software, Airbus and Boeing using Dassault Systems 3DS colaborative platform and time to time NASA asking for aerodynamic expertise of DA… Show them a slide of a Thales congress conference (not a PR stunt) and they get mad because well… Because it would be more advanced than F-35? and 5 years later F-35 will have another trick to get more advanced etc.?
Life cycles.

Just a slight correction: The USAF is not “looking at the F-15X”, it is being forced on them by forces outside the USAF.

Yes, everybody says that on F-16 so it is Gospel truth. Israeli were also forced?

Was tested at around 2300/2400K at DGA propulseurs 2 years ago. New PEA (Turenne 2) signed today.

Well that was my biggest issue, so thanks for agreeing on that.:very_drunk: I don’t doubt that GaN could be available for 2025, or most of the other relatively simple upgrades, but a completely redesigned dozen panel SPECTRA layout seems unfeasible given the timescale. And honestly, it has so many potential issues that time alone might not be the problem.

Did you take time to read the latest pdf from Thales posted here?