Rafale v Typhoon v F22 and the rest...Was there ever a conclusion?

[TMor]

Air & Cosmos have come back on their previous statements.

They only challenge AdA on the BVR part of the F-22 vs Rafale story (there were no BVR according to our AdA, officially). I've not read the article, but according to them, after the dogfights, US pilots were surprised by the ability of the Rafale to resist the Raptor, though the Rafale has no TVC.

[arthuro]

Air et cosmos n°2205 p36 :

The AdA officialy recated to the last week air&cosmos article.

I've just read it : the AdA denied BVR fights with the F22 and reiterate the 5 draws and one loss in dogfight against the F22. Air&Cosmos inquired and it seems that it could be 2 loss for the rafale and 4 draws (according to their own sources)...It appears that one victory of the F22 is contested and claimed to be a draw. According to A&C The BVR story would be that F22 made virtual kills against rafale while rafale pilots were not aware that F22 pilots whould try to simulate this kind of engagements. (They were busy performing their own missions but not expecting that F22 would try to score a kill)

F22 pilots according to air&cosmos were "extremely surprised by the resistance of the rafale ".

The 7-1 victory against the typhoon is put forward again by The AdA and that was with "one hand tight in the back."

The quality of the spectra was again put forward. The AdA claims to have been able to detect threats that the F16J couldn't.

Omnirole capability and long range positive visual ID was also praised by the proponents of ATLC according to the same article.

[uss novice]

The quality of the spectra was again put forward.

Ahem, hate to make too fine a point of it, but did I not say that this little EW kit might have made a LOT of difference? Go Rafale - now to sign a deal for the MRCA! :diablo:

USS.

[TMor]

Capitaine Romain (Rafale pilot) gives his point of view about the events against the F-22 :

According to him, because BVR doesn't rely on pure airframe performance, US pilots refused the BVR engagements and prefered the dogfights (it seems to confirm that the US pilots were unwilling to show their radar).

At this game, the heavy F-22 demonstrated superb capabilities, but at the cost of a high fuel consumption due to low speeds.

None of the two aircraft demonstrated a superiority over the other. No details were given because pilots know that dogfights depends on a lot of factors.

So, the Grandclaudon's story about dogfight isn't really challenged. The only remaining problem is about the BVR part.
France denied it happened.
I thought USA too.
A&C say it happened.

[arthuro]

Sorry should have posted it here :

Rafale vs F-22 : the balance of the match

The Air & Cosmos magazine publishes the results of the meeting between the French Rafale and the F-22 in the skies of the United Arab Emirates in December 2009, as it has been confirmed by the Air Force. Six engagements have taken place during the exercice we already reported on this blog.
Of those six games, "the F-22 conducted one shot gun, five other ending with a draw" -a scenario called "mutual neutralization " .Slightly dominated by the U.S. plane, a pure stealth fighter and very maneuverable the Rafale has therefore proved to be a tough opponent. This information confirms what we wrote in mid-December.

It should be noted that the Americans had wanted to limit these meetings in within visual range engagements , that is to say dogfights one against one. Du "dogfight" dans le style de la bataille d'Angleterre revue et corrigée avec la technologie du XXI ème siècle. "dogfight" in the style of the Battle of Britain, revised with the technology of XXI century.

This is little in the way combat aircrafts act today because the long-range interceptor (Beyond Visual Range) is preferred.

Through its system of passive detection AN/ALR-94 the F-22 Raptor "fighter would have detected the French long-distance" which allowed him to shoot the (fictional) of air-air missile "standoff" says the Weekly Air and Cosmos.

http://secretdefense.blogs.liberatio...du-match-.html

[Loke]

I am confused -- what role does spectra play in a dogfight, which I thought would be the "end-stage" of a WVR?

And in any case I stand by what I have said before: Unless everything is known, it's very hard to draw any conclusions from such trainings...

Still: It could be that in a dogfight the Rafale would be able to closely match the F-22. Is that really surprising? The Rafale seems a superb dogfighter to me. I thought modern fighters were mainly limited by the pilots anyway -- There are limits to how many Gs one can pull without blacking out...

[Arka_Voltchek]

I am confused -- what role does spectra play in a dogfight

Witch role ? Almost nothing. Detection and situation awareness if the other have their radar on, but it's almost all it can do in this situation. Spectra is a good piece of technology, but it can't do a dogfight alone (it's a shame, doesn't it ?).

@+, Arka

[arthuro]

I am confused -- what role does spectra play in a dogfight, which I thought would be the "end-stage" of a WVR?

In Air&Cosmos, spectra was put forward for its passive indentification performance against SAM sites. Nothing to do with the raptor dogfight.
That article didnd't speak only about rafale vs raptor altough this part was much more advertise.

[MadRat]

Arka_Voltchek, please don't correct gammar if you are going to misspell.

SPECTRA does play a role in any engagement. You're infrared seekers are slaved to fire control, which in many situations uses a radar lock to align the seeker to a target. There are few countries with the technical know-how to silently intercept without some kind of emmissions. SPECTRA gives the pilot awareness 90% of the time by that fact alone. Not all emmissions are from transmitters. The mere act of cutting air with your airframe gives off emmissions detectable out to about 10km.

[Loke]

Loke, please don't correct gammar if you are going to misspell.

SPECTRA does play a role in any engagement. You're infrared seekers are slaved to fire control, which in many situations uses a radar lock to align the seeker to a target. There are few countries with the technical know-how to silently intercept without some kind of emmissions. SPECTRA gives the pilot awareness 90% of the time by that fact alone. Not all emmissions are from transmitters. The mere act of cutting air with your airframe gives off emmissions detectable out to about 10km.

Are those emissions IR?

AFAIK WVR is normally considered to be less than 5 nm (10 km).

[MadRat]

Sorry, my mistake

Are those emissions IR? AFAIK WVR is normally considered to be less than 5 nm (10 km).

No, they are electromagnetic. You can detect wind shear by listening to the same frequency range. The biggest problem or limits to this is of finding specific direction to the source.

[Fedaykin]

Frankly without context I am highly cynical about the stories coming out of the AdA. We have heard pretty much nothing out of the other services involved except that it was a training exercise.

Maybe it was a 7-1 for Rafale vs Typhoon but without the context of the engagements it means nothing. What if the Typhoons were acting as Red force with intentionally limited tactics and systems use? The whole point of Red force is to die!

I also don't think the F22 is quite the magic bullet it is made out to be, against late generation aircraft with the gloves properly taken off (ie proper use of electronic jamming and detection equipment) I think the US might be a bit surprised.

[sferrin]

Frankly without context I am highly cynical about the stories coming out of the AdA. We have heard pretty much nothing out of the other services involved except that it was a training exercise.

Maybe it was a 7-1 for Rafale vs Typhoon but without the context of the engagements it means nothing. What if the Typhoons were acting as Red force with intentionally limited tactics and systems use? The whole point of Red force is to die!

I also don't think the F22 is quite the magic bullet it is made out to be, against late generation aircraft with the gloves properly taken off (ie proper use of electronic jamming and detection equipment) I think the US might be a bit surprised.

Yeah I'm pretty sure they've never considered jammers or detection equipment. What's that stealth stuff for anyway?

[Fedaykin]

Yeah I'm pretty sure they've never considered jammers or detection equipment. What's that stealth stuff for anyway?

Well I more then certain they do think about it BUT I feel European technology is far better then they give credit and I think the US will be surprised about how good it really is.

Notice I said PROPER use of jamming and detection equipment rather then the watered down nature of exercises.

[snafu352]

Yeah I'm pretty sure they've never considered jammers or detection equipment. What's that stealth stuff for anyway?

I'm pretty sure they did consider jammers and detection equipment; however that limp one liner of yours doesn't invalidate the comment by Fedaykin in any way.

Give some hard solid info and i'll go with it; unfortunately you and others of the "if it's US it must be best brigade" seem to think that nationalistic jingoism passes for good info.

Note: lot's of US kit is indeed the best, just not all of it and i think it is a very dangerous path to go down if you assume that "cos it's US" it must be best / incapable of being negated / defeated.

[flex297]

Yeah I'm pretty sure they've never considered jammers or detection equipment. What's that stealth stuff for anyway?

Wonder why most nations keep their air forces after F-22 came in? They must be useless, anyway...

[AlphaZulu]

Does anyone think the recent meeting's of Rafale with Raptor, typhoon etc has something to do with the recent announcement of the French AWACS getting upgraded?

I don't. Such upgades are already planified/prepared a long time before a contract/order is signed : I heard about it when visiting the french AWACS airbase in 2006 & 2008.

anyone know what the upgrade will do? Will this make the French fleet better than NATO, UK, Saudi and US fleets?

Sorry, I can't remember accurately, but public sources are available (press, websites...). They were (at last) two upgrades under way, regarding :
- mission system (radar...) (IIRC this is the one recently announced)
- vector systems (new avionics)

What if the Typhoons were acting as Red force with intentionally limited tactics and systems use? The whole point of Red force is to die!

Agreed for the point of Red Air.
But... The initial statement was : 4-0 then 3-1 with "limited weapons" for the Rafale.
Unless I'm seriously mistaking, Blue Air "plays" with its own, "real" strengh (capabilities ; except for those you don't wanna show to you allies/comrades/customers/...).
On the other hand, Red Air "plays" the role of a defined opponent, for example : "today, you're red air, and you simulate Flankers armed with Alamo A".
Then, if one side "limits" its weapons capabilities, doesn't that mean that this side plays Red Air ? And faces a "full capability" Blue Air ?
Wondering...

Cheers
Az'

[sferrin]

I'm pretty sure they did consider jammers and detection equipment; however that limp one liner of yours doesn't invalidate the comment by Fedaykin in any way.

Give some hard solid info and i'll go with it; unfortunately you and others of the "if it's US it must be best brigade" seem to think that nationalistic jingoism passes for good info.

Note: lot's of US kit is indeed the best, just not all of it and i think it is a very dangerous path to go down if you assume that "cos it's US" it must be best / incapable of being negated / defeated.

Lot of ASSumptions you're making there don't you think?

[sferrin]

Well I more then certain they do think about it BUT I feel European technology is far better then they give credit and I think the US will be surprised about how good it really is.

Notice I said PROPER use of jamming and detection equipment rather then the watered down nature of exercises.

Any half-way decent system would be tested against the toughest problems they could come up with, not "problems" designed to make the system look good.

[TooCool_12f]

Frankly without context I am highly cynical about the stories coming out of the AdA. We have heard pretty much nothing out of the other services involved except that it was a training exercise.

Maybe it was a 7-1 for Rafale vs Typhoon but without the context of the engagements it means nothing. What if the Typhoons were acting as Red force with intentionally limited tactics and systems use? The whole point of Red force is to die!

I also don't think the F22 is quite the magic bullet it is made out to be, against late generation aircraft with the gloves properly taken off (ie proper use of electronic jamming and detection equipment) I think the US might be a bit surprised.

well, let's see what's been said:

besides exercises (meaning, nobody was "acting red or blue", but only "us against them"), there were several confrontations, Rafale vs Typonn in degraded mode (MICA range artifically reduced) and WVR confrontations Rafale vs F-22.

so, in clear terms: head on confrontation, and let the best win (the day's best at least, not that one result gives a definitive and undisputable rating).

that "I want to see the context" start to look like if you watched the wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal wins against Federer, and when you tell your buddy (Federer fan), he answers:

"gee, I don't know, I want to see the context before considering that a victory"

what context? it was in daylight... on grass... plenty of people around the court watching the game... simple tennis game...

[snafu352]

Any half-way decent system would be tested against the toughest problems they could come up with, not "problems" designed to make the system look good.

What are you actually trying to say here?

A couple of insinuations but no actual info.

If you are privy to information on the testing and abilities of the systems then supply it; if you are not then you have nothing to say...other than "smart alec" insinuation.

So again, what are you trying to communicate to this community, that is not nationalistic jingoism?

[mrmalaya]

now this from the DEW line blog on FLight Global:

"Meanwhile, back in Paris, the Armee de l'Air leaks to French newsweekly Air & Cosmos, providing a few more tidbits about what happened between the Raptor and the Rafale at the Al Dhafra exercise late last year. According to Air & Cosmos' sources, the USAF requested only two training sorties between the F-22 and the Rafale of three engagements each, with one-on-one combat within visual range. [In other words, the USAF says, "If you don't turn on your Spectra system, we won't turn on our ALR-94."] "

[arthuro]

here is the full post :

By Stephen Trimble on February 17, 2010 2:47 AM |

The United Arab Emirates has dropped a bombshell on France's Dassault, according to this UPI story today. Before it agrees to buy 60 Rafale fighters, the UAE wants Dassault to integrate Boeing's standoff land attack missile-expanded response (SLAM-ER), instead of the MBDA AM-39 Exocet. Sacre bleu! And so continues the most tortuous contract negotiations since Boeing offered to lease 100 767s to the US Air Force.

Meanwhile, back in Paris, the Armee de l'Air leaks to French newsweekly Air & Cosmos, providing a few more tidbits about what happened between the Raptor and the Rafale at the Al Dhafra exercise late last year. According to Air & Cosmos' sources, the USAF requested only two training sorties between the F-22 and the Rafale of three engagements each, with one-on-one combat within visual range. [In other words, the USAF says, "If you don't turn on your Spectra system, we won't turn on our ALR-94."]

In those six engagements, the F-22 scored one gun kill, but the other five dogfights ended in a draw, Air & Cosmos says. Another sources tells the magazine the F-22 scored two gun kills, with four nulls.

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/

[Fedaykin]

Any half-way decent system would be tested against the toughest problems they could come up with, not "problems" designed to make the system look good.

Well the best systems they could come up with, doesn't mean whoever developed the ALR94 had access to the Eurofighter AIS or Rafale SPECTRA.

Considering neither of these systems come fully out to play in exercises I find hard to concieve how the developers of the ALR94 can be confident that they have everything covered.

[Fedaykin]

well, let's see what's been said:

besides exercises (meaning, nobody was "acting red or blue", but only "us against them"), there were several confrontations, Rafale vs Typonn in degraded mode (MICA range artifically reduced) and WVR confrontations Rafale vs F-22.

so, in clear terms: head on confrontation, and let the best win (the day's best at least, not that one result gives a definitive and undisputable rating).

that "I want to see the context" start to look like if you watched the wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal wins against Federer, and when you tell your buddy (Federer fan), he answers:

"gee, I don't know, I want to see the context before considering that a victory"

what context? it was in daylight... on grass... plenty of people around the court watching the game... simple tennis game...

Yes context is important, nobody has stated if Eurofighter took the gloves off properly in the exercise, I seriously doubt it.

[Fedaykin]

I don't. Such upgades are already planified/prepared a long time before a contract/order is signed : I heard about it when visiting the french AWACS airbase in 2006 & 2008.

Sorry, I can't remember accurately, but public sources are available (press, websites...). They were (at last) two upgrades under way, regarding :
- mission system (radar...) (IIRC this is the one recently announced)
- vector systems (new avionics)


Agreed for the point of Red Air.
But... The initial statement was : 4-0 then 3-1 with "limited weapons" for the Rafale.
Unless I'm seriously mistaking, Blue Air "plays" with its own, "real" strengh (capabilities ; except for those you don't wanna show to you allies/comrades/customers/...).
On the other hand, Red Air "plays" the role of a defined opponent, for example : "today, you're red air, and you simulate Flankers armed with Alamo A".
Then, if one side "limits" its weapons capabilities, doesn't that mean that this side plays Red Air ? And faces a "full capability" Blue Air ?
Wondering...

Cheers
Az'

The thing is Blue Air in multi national exercises clearly doesn't use all its capabilities hence my cynicism over the stated results.

[Erkokite]

here is the full post :

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/

Will Boeing and the US government allow SLAM-ER to be integrated on the Rafale? Or can it be done without them?

[djcross]

Will Boeing and the US government allow SLAM-ER to be integrated on the Rafale? Or can it be done without them?

Add Northrop Grumman into that mix because they own the Precision Guided Munition Planning System that allows SLAM-ER, and other :diablo: evil American PGMs, to be used in its fullest capability.

But the bottom line is the US Department of State, an appendage of the Obama administration, has the final say in the matter. Give Obama enough under-the-table campaign contributions, and he will make it happen. (That process worked when the PLA wanted ballistic missile technology from Clinton).

[Fedaykin]

Add Northrop Grumman into that mix because they own the Precision Guided Munition Planning System that allows SLAM-ER, and other :diablo: evil American PGMs, to be used in its fullest capability.

But the bottom line is the US Department of State, an appendage of the Obama administration, has the final say in the matter. Give Obama enough under-the-table campaign contributions, and he will make it happen. (That process worked when the PLA wanted ballistic missile technology from Clinton).

I think the US will sign off SLAM-ER integration on the Rafale, I don't think they regard the fighter as much of a sales threat so there isn't much harm to be had and it might even open up export potential for the US.

[TooCool_12f]

Yes context is important, nobody has stated if Eurofighter took the gloves off properly in the exercise, I seriously doubt it.

sure, the typhoon just went out to get slaughtered in front of the rare nations that can afford fighters of such a price... seems so logical.

The AdlA statement (official and all that) is that confrontations took place besides the official exercises and that the rafale was in a degraded mode. Nobody (nobody having any competence as to what happened overthere) came to contest that version, so:

Unless you have some serious source (not neighbor's kid's pal's uncle whose mother in law is a secretary in a dental office where the grand mother of a villager living within less than 50miles from an air base), such "doubt" seems to be mostly fanboyism rather than a thought through opinion