Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rafale 2018 Thread: Europe's best Eurocanard

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (1 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • OPIT
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Aug 2005
    • 901

    Originally posted by Scooter View Post

    The difference today is the giant leap in technology and capability over the previous generations.
    Except that the giant leap is in the systems, not the airframe.

    Comment

    • djcross
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jan 2000
      • 5467

      Originally posted by OPIT View Post
      Except that the giant leap is in the systems, not the airframe.
      True, until you consider VLO. With VLO airframe design there is a giant leap in capability which Gen 4 does not possess.

      Comment

      • halloweene
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Jan 2012
        • 4350

        Noone denies that VLO IS a big advantage for survivability. Simply for Raffale they assessed survivability with a diferent concept. Extremely sophisticated self defense suite and capability to fly 550Kts at 200 fts in automatic follow ground mode.

        Comment

        • TomcatViP
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Nov 2011
          • 6125

          Comment

          • halloweene
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Jan 2012
            • 4350

            Not a dual (radar plus/or numeric maps).

            Comment

            • TomcatViP
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Nov 2011
              • 6125

              Well it had two radars. The one that'd you expect and the TFR, an architecture commune to many US design of the 60/70's... Idem with the Mirage 2000N & D. Plus it could fly at Mach 1.2 on deck.

              Comment

              • St. John
                Rank 4 Registered User
                • Jan 2018
                • 568

                Originally posted by halloweene View Post
                Noone denies that VLO IS a big advantage for survivability. Simply for Raffale they assessed survivability with a diferent concept. Extremely sophisticated self defense suite and capability to fly 550Kts at 200 fts in automatic follow ground mode.
                If they were that confidence in the self-defence suite, they wouldn't fly an an altitude where it's redundant.

                Comment

                • halloweene
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Jan 2012
                  • 4350

                  If they were that confidence of the self-defence suite, they wouldn't fly an an altitude where it's redundant.
                  Redundancy is a ky for safety. I they were (F-35 engineers) so confident in stealth, would they have radar attack modes?

                  Comment

                  • St. John
                    Rank 4 Registered User
                    • Jan 2018
                    • 568

                    Originally posted by halloweene View Post

                    Redundancy is a ky for safety. I they were (F-35 engineers) so confident in stealth, would they have radar attack modes?
                    Err... to kill other planes which aren't stealthy.

                    If you're flying at 200ft it doesn't matter whether you're in a Rafale or an F-86. In fact the smaller F-86 might even be more difficult to hit.

                    Comment

                    • edi_right_round
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Nov 2005
                      • 266

                      Originally posted by TomcatViP View Post
                      Well it had two radars. The one that'd you expect and the TFR, an architecture commune to many US design of the 60/70's... Idem with the Mirage 2000N & D. Plus it could fly at Mach 1.2 on deck.
                      More like M1.5 and going on

                      Comment

                      • FBW
                        FBW
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Dec 2011
                        • 3294

                        More like M1.5 and going on
                        1000+ KCAS at sea level? No.

                        Airspeed limit at sea level is 800 knots- 1.2. (most likely same reason as F-16, flight control placard limit 800 knots),
                        600 knots using automatic terrain following.

                        Last edited by FBW; 11th February 2019, 18:44.

                        Comment

                        • edi_right_round
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Nov 2005
                          • 266

                          Originally posted by FBW View Post

                          1000+ KCAS at sea level? No.

                          Airspeed limit at sea level is 800 knots- 1.2. (most likely same reason as F-16, flight control placard limit 800 knots),
                          600 knots using automatic terrain following.
                          Well there is an interview of Jeff Guinn,at Aircrew Interview he said that they had no problems doing that.Pretty interesting if you got time

                          Comment

                          • FBW
                            FBW
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Dec 2011
                            • 3294

                            Ah your talking F-111. Was gonna say, Mirage-2000 is fbw and has flight control knot/Mach limits that can only be briefly exceeded.

                            F-111 was technically 750 knots on deck I believe, but actually time limited by heating (could greatly exceed 750 knots for short time). Yeah, Ive read stories of pilots saying Mach 1.4+ on deck. Ill have to listen to that interview when I have a few min.
                            Last edited by FBW; 11th February 2019, 22:40.

                            Comment

                            • halloweene
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Jan 2012
                              • 4350

                              Originally posted by St. John View Post
                              Err... to kill other planes which aren't stealthy.

                              If you're flying at 200ft it doesn't matter whether you're in a Rafale or an F-86. In fact the smaller F-86 might even be more difficult to hit.
                              blah blah about stealth "magic". It just means shorter time to detect and react for the opponent. Yes, it is useful. But if you ever went into a back seat looking down, even with doppler, it is difficult to differentiate a plane from clutter. Now lokk Rafale from above, pretty sleek shapes...

                              Comment

                              • edi_right_round
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Nov 2005
                                • 266

                                Originally posted by FBW View Post
                                Ah your talking F-111. Was gonna say, Mirage-2000 is fbw and has flight control knot/Mach limits that can only be briefly exceeded.

                                F-111 was technically 750 knots on deck I believe, but actually time limited by heating (could greatly exceed 750 knots for short time). Yeah, Ive read stories of pilots saying Mach 1.4+ on deck. Ill have to listen to that interview when I have a few min.
                                Yes man,the 111.That guy has like 3 interviews plus actual flight videos and q&a.Really awesome and cool guy.
                                then theres the Tornado guys in TFR in Az going as fast as they could and then an 111 comes and just disappeares in front of them

                                Comment

                                • djcross
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Jan 2000
                                  • 5467

                                  Originally posted by halloweene View Post
                                  Noone denies that VLO IS a big advantage for survivability. Simply for Raffale they assessed survivability with a diferent concept. Extremely sophisticated self defense suite and capability to fly 550Kts at 200 fts in automatic follow ground mode.
                                  I sincerely hope Rafale's radar has an LPI TF mode, because someone will use ESM to build a weapons quality track and shoot it. If it emits, it dies.

                                  Comment

                                  • Guest's Avatar
                                    Guest

                                    Originally posted by OPIT View Post
                                    Except that the giant leap is in the systems, not the airframe.
                                    Your very mistaken as the "airframes" of the 5th Generation Fighters. Allow them to carry weapons internally and large volumes of fuel. These are just as big of a benefit as Stealth and Sensor Fusion to the overall package.

                                    Comment

                                    • OPIT
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Aug 2005
                                      • 901

                                      Originally posted by Scooter View Post
                                      Your very mistaken as the "airframes" of the 5th Generation Fighters. Allow them to carry weapons internally and large volumes of fuel. These are just as big of a benefit as Stealth and Sensor Fusion to the overall package.
                                      No I'm not. You're just pretending that a by product of VLO (internal weapon bays) is yet another benefit. Ditto about the large internal fuel volume vs external fuel tanks.
                                      While I'm at it, the "5th generation fighter" label is a LM thing I just don't care about.

                                      Comment

                                      • St. John
                                        Rank 4 Registered User
                                        • Jan 2018
                                        • 568

                                        Originally posted by halloweene View Post

                                        blah blah about stealth "magic". It just means shorter time to detect and react for the opponent. Yes, it is useful. But if you ever went into a back seat looking down, even with doppler, it is difficult to differentiate a plane from clutter. Now lokk Rafale from above, pretty sleek shapes...
                                        That's the exact opposite of what Desert Storm statistics show as regards ground-based air defences. And modern aircraft can look-down and shoot-down with ease.

                                        Comment

                                        • stealthflanker
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • Sep 2015
                                          • 1027

                                          Originally posted by djcross View Post
                                          I sincerely hope Rafale's radar has an LPI TF mode, because someone will use ESM to build a weapons quality track and shoot it. If it emits, it dies.
                                          Terrain following is easily LPI as it basically needs only few to tens of Watts. and Phased arrays can support it no problem. Remember as during TF your target which is earth is alot closer, and its wide thus quite large RCS already to work with without a hassle. Sidelobes are manageable depending on what kind of algorithm supported by the radar.

                                          The one actually need to worry for ESM sneaking around is the air to air combat modes as this entails more power requirement.

                                          Aside from radar tho, one would be worried more about datalink and communications as this is usually use wide beam omni antenna and always operate at full power. But then communications can have almost noise like waveform (DSSS) Something which radar can't use (yes there are no real "noise radar" except one wish to lose doppler filtering capability)

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X