copy paste from last post
i have answered and asked what is needed to prove your point
should i just copy paste it to your posts ?
prototypes dont cut it, the fans of the pak-fa are visible now but wont be, post what was planned
then we can look at the f-22 and f-35 if you wish

again, all you need to do is show that the looser in the comp was going to have the fan showing in production
if i put up the prototype for the pak-fa showing the fan, that will prove the production one wont have blockers

come on, just one link please

Well, jeez let me just dig out a picture of a production F-23 just for jackjack. The YF-23 (the prototype) was indeed considered very stealthy. That’s what everyone is getting at. Northrop knows very well what they are doing when it comes to stealth. If a slightly exposed fan surface was such a huge deal then they wouldn’t have designed the aircraft like that.

Radar waves are not going to bounce back off the fan blade directly in the same direction in the same direction that they came. You will have some scattering due to edge diffraction back in the direction out of the inlet, and maybe some due to specular reflection (judging by the geometry of the blades, this will be almost nothing), but the majority of the waves will be bounced around elsewhere (like the walls of the presumably RAM coated inlets). Also, fan blades can be RAM coated as well.

Gah… why did you resurrect this thread?

2. They likely could use the 94 in BVR. It’s a purely passive system- they could use it all they liked and nobody would ever know (that is if exercise data is not being relayed back). I don’t know if the ALR-94 was engaged in the official WVR DACT- if they barred SPECTRA and APG-77 then they probably didn’t use ALR-94 either. But this kill was in BVR, outside of official DACT or any RoE’s, so using ALR-94 would have been fair game as it is possible no data would be relayed back to commanders outside of official DACT.
I assume you are referring to the BVR combat. WVR would have been guns or using a missile’s IR seeker (pretty simple).

3. Because it was probably using the ALR-94, which doesn’t emit. Or maybe they used APG-77 and SPECTRA was not engaged, but I doubt that the USA would risk exposing their radar in such an exercise when the 94 could do the task as well with far less intelligence risk.

4. Some fbw aircraft can perform post-stall maneuvers using what little lift is left after stall. Also, over-use of TVC will cause an a/c to lose speed very quickly. This loss of energy eventually does manifest itself in an inability to turn without losing a lot of altitude eventually. It’s actually not that outlandish. From what I understand, Typhoon pilots (and the opposing Su-30 pilots) were able to give a decent account for their aircraft after DACT with TVC equipped Su-30MKI’s.

5. My guess is that it refers to pulling out of WVR missile or gun range.

You guys are way off……

Norway’s secret weapon is this:
powered by this:

…China’s screwed!!

I thought it was this:

😀

jessmo :

Maybe , but I couldn ‘t care less as I am NOW a civilian . :D;)
***************
Erkokite , as far as I know , there is no “blocker” inside Rafale ‘s intakes .
But I could be wrong …

Cheers .

Ah… I stand corrected then. Maybe it was the EF that had a blocker. Someone on this forum brought that up a while ago, but I haven’t heard anything otherwise.

yes, the rafale nay be more agile but so would those redbull air race planes
the sh has better radar, better weapons and has better sa in the system battlespace
heck even our old 25 yr hornets will give the rafale a run for its money

the rafale has poor radar and a2a missiles in comparison, come back and tell me in 2014 when the rafale has been updated and then you may have some points

I believe the Rafale actually did quite well in AtoA DACT against the Super Hornets. I don’t want to say that it beat them handily, because that’s not what DACT is about, but that was basically my impression. And a Rafale against the original Hornet is a bit of a mis-match- really I can’t see a classic Hornet standing much of a chance in most combat against a Rafale.

If the Typhoon use RAM , where it is placed on the airframe ?
Is the material used is indeed RAM or radar absorbent paint ?

Likely the leading edges of wings, and interior of intake. See here:
http://typhoon.starstreak.net/Eurofighter/structure.html
Look under materials.

It’s a 1/13 scale rc model. Not a real aircraft. The first 30 seconds of the video are cgi showing a full scale model.

Ok, so what we know so far is…..

You should probably compare figures with the Rafale featuring the uprated engine. In any event, the thrust/weight of the F-35 is pretty poor in comparison to other current fighters, at least as far as SL wet thrust/loaded weight (under 1.0 for the A model). Even with 50% fuel the t/w is unimpressive (1.04). As is the wing loading (446 kg/m^2). Even the RAND Corporation was scathing in its criticism of the F-35’s performance. However, these things don’t simply boil down to comparing a few numbers- numbers at altitude and various fuel states and weapon states would need to be compared.

I’ve heard that, in the subsonic region, the aircraft accelerates similarly to a clean F-16 Block 60 and feels like an F-22 (they share the same FCS). The goal of the program was to match performance of the F-16 Block 60. However, the Rafale is generally considered more maneuverable than the F-16 Block 60 and possessing both greater instantaneous and sustained turn rates.

The numbers you have given don’t tell the whole story. We don’t know altitudes for the Rafale, nor what its weapon load was, nor do they account for an uprated engine. The AoA you have given for the Rafale is software limited (likely to keep maintenance down and airframe life up), not airframe limited. This limit is actually disabled for airshows.

I know you are a huge fan of the F-35 and very strongly dislike the Rafale, but making a bunch of assertions and stating that they are known facts is absurd. Pretty much everything you stated is quite open for debate and most certainly are not known, established facts.

At this point in time you can find very positive and very negative viewpoints on the F-35, both with numerical data to back it up. When we see an F-35 and a Rafale go head to head in DACT in both BVR and WVR and have comments from the pilots, as well as some knowledge of the RoE’s, and kill-counts, we can talk. But such info is probably 5-10 years away.

EDIT:
Why are we discussing the Rafale on an F-35 thread anyway?:confused: