ErkokiteHMD is offered to potential Rafale customers who want it. AdA hasn’t ordered it.
ErkokiteAh… thanks for the explanation.
ErkokiteI swear I read that the Rafale uses sawtooth shaped RAM. Meh. I’ll look it up at some point. Guess we have conflicting info on the probe. We’ll see what info the future brings.
Anyways, here is a good resource on RCS physics:
http://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedia/absorbingradar2.cfm
I think the sawtooth essentially “breaks up” traveling waves, causing them to scatter from many points as opposed to larger echoes from a single point. I know that is what R-cards do, and the idea for a change in boundary conditions seems to be the same for both sawtooths and r-cards. This is somewhat conjecture on my part.
ErkokiteAn S-duct is not a post-production “add-on” (if that’s what you are getting at). The RCS of the retractable probe is quite minimal (according to either Arthuro or TMor IIRC). The sawtooth arrangement you see is actually RAM coating I think. For the record though, it is my opinion that Dassault never intended the Rafale to be anywhere near the same level of LO as an aircraft like the Raptor (or F-35 or T-50).
Erkokitei dont know if it would have met the same fate, but boeing had spiral hardware upgrades as opposed to LM’s fixed blocks and we know how that turned out
my guess is there would be a lot more than there is now, thankfully the f-35 has gone with spiralagain, i’ll give the example of the PAK-FA prototype that has visible fans now, but wont when in production
i dont know why this is so hard, other than you want to hang onto it like a dog with a bone to minimise rafales basic mistake if they had truly considered low rcs a priority in the production design or the fact that it wasnt a primary motive
i’m going with the latter as there are many other examples of non priority
Clearly, there is an s-duct on the Rafale. They wouldn’t have put it there unless they were thinking about LO.
ErkokiteProduction F-23s would have had redesigned intakes:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/YF-23%204%20View.gif
Not sure if that would have been enough to completely hide the engine face, or if that was even the target.
You are correct. This was to replace the boundary layer suction device (that mesh thing in front of the intakes visible on the prototypes) with a DSI bump, in order to keep boundary layer air out of the intake. This would have helped greatly with maintenance and weight. It probably would have helped with stealth too (and that likely came into consideration), but as you say, we cannot tell if the fan blades are still slightly visible from some angles. Too bad this didn’t enter production. It would have been a gorgeous aircraft. 🙂
The way I see it is- NG clearly went through the trouble of designing a complex inlet boundary layer suction device. They wouldn’t have done this if they only intended it to be used on a prototype. So at the time of the design of the prototype this would have been close to what they planned for a final design. However, when NASA and the USAF started doing research on DSI’s they probably realized this would be a simpler, cheaper, lighter, and more easily maintainable solution while still providing good performance.
Erkokite@ Tmor
I’d just hit the ignore button if I were you. Jessmo doesn’t quite seem to grasp the concept of passive vs. active sensors or that DACT doesn’t use real missiles. And he is intent on proving the (already known and widely agreed upon) superiority of the F-22 over the Rafale and gloating about it.
Note to Jessmo:
The F-22 a fighter aircraft. You clearly don’t fly it and you clearly didn’t invent it. Why are you gloating?
You keep saying that the Rafale lost its chance to prove it was superior to the F-22. The Rafale didn’t have to prove anything. It’s a training exercise intended so that pilots can get a feel for flying against dissimilar or asymmetric threats, as well as cooperation between aircraft of different types. They don’t just fly against each other with all of their classified systems engaged, firing live missiles, and see who has the “best” aircraft. Half the time they are actually simulating other aircraft (like MiG-29’s) anyway.
Undoubtedly the French were overjoyed when the Rafale did prove that it could handle the F-22 to some degree in a WVR fight- great, whatever.
ErkokiteVersus a 4th generation fighter its effective. Against the Raptor it is dead weight. I thought you said before that it was in training mode and it was operating? Any way I would even go as far as saying that even if the Raptor was activly emmiting, or not stealthy in any way, it would still beat the Rafale and make spectra a non issue. Do you understand why I am saying this?
In the WVR combat against the Raptor, it was not activated at all (that is known, and neither was the APG-77). Outside of that exercise, I don’t know if it was used or not, but it certainly wouldn’t have been used in anywhere near its full capabilities. Remember multiple exercises took place, of which the DACT with the Raptor was only one.
No, I do not I understand why you are saying this at all. Unless you have the classified data on SPECTRA’s full set of capabilities and are an RF/signal processing engineer, I don’t think you are qualified to determine whether or not it can detect a Raptor.
ErkokiteSPECTRA is most certainly not dead weight. It wasn’t even used against the F-22. I’m sure that Thales, Dassault and the French government wouldn’t have spend billions of Euros developing it if it was “dead weight.” Not that they are experts like that internet phenomenon, Jessmo, but still.
Erkokitein vietnam war, they bombed the trucks under the tree canopy by detecting and locating the rf of the spark plug system and that was 30 years ago
just because the radar isnt on, it doesnt mean you’re not emitting rf
Good point, but I think emissions control is a lot tighter on modern fighter aircraft than soviet or chinese manufactured trucks during the Vietnam war. The same thing could be said about jamming though- if certain jamming modes are used then the ALR-94 can pick them up as well, though SPECTRA can form a pencil-beam jamming signal, thus decreasing the chance of ALR-94 detecting it. More likely though was that the Rafale was actually emitting via RBE-2 or maybe even SPECTRA in a training or degraded mode, and there happened to be an F-22 in the nearby area, which may or may not have been participating in the exercise either on the same side or against the Rafale.
Erkokite1.The report said that there was 1 BVR engagement. The Raptors fired using passing tracking ( or LPI AESA who knows) but it wasn’t fair because the Rafale didn’t know the Raptor would use this.
2. GEE when I back you into a corner and make you admit that the Rafale has no way to acquire a firing solution from BVR at all on a RAPTOR, suddenly my argument is strange?
1) It wasn’t fair because they weren’t officially engaged in any DACT. There was no pre-arranged or official BVR DACT between the Rafale and the Raptor.
2) It could detect if it is emitting. It is not emitting with the ALR-94. The Rafale likely was emitting via its RBE-2 when the Raptor achieved the unofficial “lock”.
Erkokiteis it me or did they clean up the undercarriage a lot?
A few weeks ago it looked like the starwars death star under there.
The landing gear is up. 😀
Erkokitelike i said, if i post a pic of the pak-fa that shows the blades, does that prove there wont be SM in the production plane
bills article on russia claim, does this go with the plasma too
come on at least try to support your claim with a creditable link
My point was that the rcs of the YF-23 was considered lower than the YF-22. That is widely known. If you’re looking for exact numbers, you won’t be able to find them. If you post a picture of the PAK-FA with fan blades, I might be inclined to think that they are using a blocker or RAM coated blades, as the inlet duct is almost straight. With the Rafale and YF-23, it is not- the ducts are highly curved and thus conceal the blades from most angles. And I pointed out earlier that almost no reflected or diffracted waves are likely to emerge from such a system.
As for more info regarding RAM coated fan blades, some digging based on the Sweetman Article and flateric’s postings at f-16.net yielded this:
http://defense-archive.teldan.com/Article/Russian-Stealth-Research-Revealed.aspx?sID=371641
So find the paper:
“Stealth Technology: Fundamental and Applied Problems” presented at the International Quality and Productivity Center’s conference in October of 03 and you may find your answer.
ErkokiteAlright this is getting ridiculous. Every time somebody posts something that contradicts your opinion, you simply state that it doesn’t count (for whatever reason). I’m not gonna keep googling for sources for you because you insist that the ones I post “don’t count.” We already posted YF-23 pictures, which you insisted didn’t count because it was a prototype (which is laughable). I posted a link stating that it was possible to coat fan blades with RAM- something I have seen in multiple places, but that doesn’t count because you don’t like Bill Sweetman. Go find your own sources if mine aren’t good enough. I’m tired of playing games.
ErkokiteAlso, fan blades can be RAM coated as well
i suppose you dont have a link for this either
well at the end of this page, i guess i will have to google myself to get an answer about the rafale ef gripen intakes and see what info is on the yf-23, not that i really care about a it
Rather than placing an absorber-treated blocker in front of the engine, as on the Super Hornet, ITAE developed a radar absorbent material (RAM) that could be applied to the first-stage compressor blades.
Now what was it about me not including links?
Sign In
