IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Locked
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34831
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by chetak »

Karan M wrote:
Singha wrote:the familiarization flight thing appears dubious at high level 20,000ft....no need to stage a fight to get familiar...just fly around and know the north sea range or whatver in terms of ceiling floor and dimensions...in any case controllers would constantly monitor if anyone is straying out...they do at red flag also.

i could understand if it was iaf jaguars doing lo-lo-lo exercises in concert with tornadoes over rolling scottish terrain .....
Singha, these were the same no holds barred workups that the IAF had vs the RAF in the past in India and the UK. They pulled their entire bag of tricks - but it didn't work for them. They had no qualms claiming all sorts of stuff in the past, but are now very upset that they came out worse. :lol:
military Aircrew training in UK, like IN pilots, have all undergone such familiarization flights before being allowed to fly on their own. They need to understand the harsh environment ( in terms of traffic and close spacing and control procedures ) first.

There seem to be no exceptions to this rule.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

GeorgeWelch wrote:
You think I'm a secret EF fanboi?
Right on one part, "fanboi". :lol:
Last edited by Karan M on 07 Aug 2015 13:51, edited 1 time in total.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

chetak wrote:military Aircrew training in UK, like IN pilots, have all undergone such familiarization flights before being allowed to fly on their own. They need to understand the harsh environment ( in terms of traffic and close spacing and control procedures ) first.

There seem to be no exceptions to this rule.
These were not familiarization flights but 1vs1s and 2vs2s and 1vs2s post the familiarization flights.
GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1403
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by GeorgeWelch »

Karan M wrote:
GeorgeWelch wrote:
You think I'm a secret EF fanboi?
Right on one part, "fanboi". :lol:
So . . . you uncritically accept the version put forth by some Indian pilots while completely discounting the British version for no particular reason, even when the scenario described strains credulity and you're calling me a fanboi?
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

GeorgeWelch wrote: So . . . you uncritically accept the version put forth by some Indian pilots while completely discounting the British version for no particular reason, even when the scenario described strains credulity and you're calling me a fanboi?
The fact that you can't even understand the glaring holes in the British version, and think that its credible, whilst completely discounting the IAF account (which you have demonstrated in the past as well) puts you firmly in the class of a fanboi.

If the shoe fits, wear it.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34831
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by chetak »

Karan M wrote:
chetak wrote:military Aircrew training in UK, like IN pilots, have all undergone such familiarization flights before being allowed to fly on their own. They need to understand the harsh environment ( in terms of traffic and close spacing and control procedures ) first.

There seem to be no exceptions to this rule.
These were not familiarization flights but 1vs1s and 2vs2s and 1vs2s post the familiarization flights.
Wokay. :oops:
TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by TSJones »

all victories, no problems found. can't argue with success now can you?
GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1403
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by GeorgeWelch »

Karan M wrote:The fact that you can't even understand the glaring holes in the British version, and think that its credible, whilst completely discounting the IAF account (which you have demonstrated in the past as well) puts you firmly in the class of a fanboi.
Feel free to expound on the glaring holes in the British version.

I'm not completely discounting any account, but I recognize pilots tend to the shade the truth and events tend to be more complicated these sorts of breathless accounts portray.

And while we don't know exactly what happened, we do know there is no such that as an invincible WVR fighter.
fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4580
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by fanne »

The fact that on M2000 maintenance we spent thrice the amount than Mig 29 is in BR itself, sourced from CAG. Also it is public knowledge (google please), that 66 M29 costed $970 million to upgrade, 51 M2000 costed upward of $2billion. It is a myth that French planes cost less to maintain or upgrade. Where they score is availability, real time capability near to advertised spec and lower gas bill.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34831
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by chetak »

fanne wrote:The fact that on M2000 maintenance we spent thrice the amount than Mig 29 is in BR itself, sourced from CAG. Also it is public knowledge (google please), that 66 M29 costed $970 million to upgrade, 51 M2000 costed upward of $2billion. It is a myth that French planes cost less to maintain or upgrade. Where they score is availability, real time capability near to advertised spec and lower gas bill.
Personal experience. French equipment is very expensive, excellent design, usually very reliable and easy to maintain with availability also being very good.

However, dealing with the french is a real biatch onlee.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by brar_w »

Had there been a substantially larger M-2000 fleet it would have been economically viable to license production with a lot of the spares and overhauls being designed and conducted in house. It would have benefited. Unfortunately the M-2000 never really enjoyed massive economies of scale like the Mig-29 or the F-16 and the French are expensive due to many reasons. The net result was an expensive but very capable aircraft. This might happen again with the Rafale but if there is gradual indigenization of the Rafale and some level of local development of support and who knows even production then things could be lot different.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5554
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Cain Marko »

Arun Menon wrote:^All this speculation ignores one essential fact - PRICE. How much will a Make in India Gripen cost? Will it be much cheaper than Rafale? Will we be able to afford it in numbers? Or for that matter, which other foreign fighter (outside of Russian and Chinese ones) will we be able to afford in numbers? And do any of these hold a candle to LCA Mk. 1/1.5/2 in terms of value for money?

Wikipedia says Gripen costs close to 70 million per unit (which I SERIOUSLY DOUBT is the current fly away price, not to mention the price of the TOT version). Does this even compare to the 30 to 35 million dollar (at most 40) price of the LCA? Particularly when the capabilities are almost identical.

If they want something more they will have to pay MUCH MUCH more? Where is that money going to come from? Does the IAF have a dollar printing machine?

None of these presstitutes and their MOD/IAF "sources" include these considerations in their speculations, so in the end it is all just NONSENSE.
Admittedly, I too am speculating, but there is some smoke...so is a fire being lit? Here is the real issue:

By 2023 (wheen the.mk2 is supposed to be ready), the IAF will barely have 29-30 sqds. 14 mki, 6 m2k/29, 2 rafale, 2 lca, 6 jaguars....possibly a pakfa or two, this is a far cry from their current strength, let alone the bare min of 39.5 sqds, which is still further from the desired 45. At a minimum, they will be looking at 6-8 sqds by that time. Question is how to find these and then continue a smooth induction of newer birds as the fulcrums and jags start to go.

As far as mk2 is concerned, it is nowhere to be seen, perhaps a little consultancy from saab along with a flock of gripens might be just what is needed to address both issues? Esp. If a make in india tag is attached? pricewise, I don't see why 90 gripens can't be had for $12 billion based on the figure quoted.

I am not particularly keen on the idea but if I can see the dots, surely some chaps who are more influential might see such connections? Again, what was baba fadnavis doing in gripen factory?

Let us see what and if a new dpp comes in, I would hardly new be surprised if direct govt to govt deals come back in fashion and such deals are made..without all the tendering business
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5554
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Cain Marko »

Singha wrote:
ramana wrote:arthuro, Very good article on evolution of weapons for Rafale and by same token for all aircraft.

In my view stats show 80% of A2A kills since WWI are from rear third quadrant. So a rearward firing AAM is useful.
imo thats unrealistic as the backfiring aam will have to waste lot of fuel cancelling the fwd velocity of the plane, also there is no radar cover in the back to guide out the missile or provide it waypoints.

so onlee option is to get to know of the threat from 3rd parties and take action not to be ambushed.
The SU-35 has it iirc...big assed sting
Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Shreeman »

fanne wrote:The fact that on M2000 maintenance we spent thrice the amount than Mig 29 is in BR itself, sourced from CAG. Also it is public knowledge (google please), that 66 M29 costed $970 million to upgrade, 51 M2000 costed upward of $2billion. It is a myth that French planes cost less to maintain or upgrade. Where they score is availability, real time capability near to advertised spec and lower gas bill.
fanne,

What is unwritten is that local /indiagenius maintenance never learnt anything about either plane other than turning screw drivers and whining. This may be a bit harsh, but what would be routine import substitution in any other supply chain is either a massive import failure with political overtones or impressive jugaad that saves X cr of furrin exchange. People foul mouth HAL for evrything from bad boeing parts to IJT failures. But lack of the ability to maintain (aka TATA service shop stealing your 80A indic alternator fuse) is never in question. Thr availability is defined as my scorpio will eat rocks and drive stright through mud and sit in sun all day. Why? Is a shade that much pain for what you already have spent an arm and leg for?

The availability and lcc are red herrings thrown in to cover up -- we will never employ or learn how to maintain ANYTHING we buy at the OEM level. Only excel at blame game so we can buy more used C17s.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

arthuro wrote:I am not convinced by sensor fusion for the typhoon in the near future (P4E). It is not just a software patch but rethinking and redesigning the whole system. True sensor fusion that you can find on the F35 or the rafale is very different from mere sensor corelation and it takes years to achieve.
A single track fusing radar, ESM and PIRATE is exactly what will be delivered with the P4E upgrade. And yes it does consist of a software upgrade. BTW the Rafale doesn't fuse the IR feeds either (of course the new F3s omit the IRST altogether so its not even an option there). The F-35 of course is on a entirely different level, being the only one to deliver effective multi-ship fusion (absent even on the F-22) albeit at Blk 3F (2017).
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Philip »

There does appear to be a faction within the establishment disillusioned with the pace of LCA development,and spent on it,see SAAB and the Gripen as a way to to salvage the huge cost and effort already spent on the entire programme. AS I posted earlier,the LCA MK-2 may see some SAAB involvement and the Gripen acquisition in the new MMRCA tender with a spin-off in simulataneous perfection of the Mk-2. I don't think that the Rafale is going anywhere because of its huge costs. The recent IAF-RAF exercise in the UK,where our MKIs supposedly thrashed the Eurofarter by a wide margin is sure to reinforce the cost-effective factor of acquiring more MKIs instead of more expensive Rafales/Eurofarters. The DM has himself said that "2 MKIs could be bought for the price of one Rafale".
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

Viv S wrote:
arthuro wrote:I am not convinced by sensor fusion for the typhoon in the near future (P4E). It is not just a software patch but rethinking and redesigning the whole system. True sensor fusion that you can find on the F35 or the rafale is very different from mere sensor corelation and it takes years to achieve.
A single track fusing radar, ESM and PIRATE is exactly what will be delivered with the P4E upgrade. And yes it does consist of a software upgrade. BTW the Rafale doesn't fuse the IR feeds either (of course the new F3s omit the IRST altogether so its not even an option there). The F-35 of course is on a entirely different level, being the only one to deliver effective multi-ship fusion (absent even on the F-22) albeit at Blk 3F (2017).
Typhoon already corelates tracks into a single screen but this is different from true sensor fusion where almost raw sensor inputs are processed in a single processing units to build the tactical situation (the MDPU for the rafale).

To achieve true sensor fusion, a complete redesign of Typhoon system architecture is required. This is way harder than to develop an AESA radar, TVC, CFTs etc...And it takes years of debugging to be certain that your single track is realy reliable.

Just read on page 3/8 here :

http://www.dassault-aviation.com/wp-con ... e_nr_6.pdf
The powerful data fusion algorithms combine and compare the data gathered by all Rafale sensors, and accurately position and identify targets. It’s much more than simple correlation as it gives the pilot an accurate and unambiguous tactical picture. One of the key advantages of the system is its ability to identify and classified the type of target/threat, by using either the Spectra suite or the TV sensor of the FSO. When all tracks are positively identified, the system automatically creates a synthetic image with all enemy and friendly tracks shown in a clear and explicit way. Off-board sensor can also contribute data to the integrated tactical air picture, via the datalink. Wingmen or AEW aircraft can feed their data to the leader’s system, thus helping target-sorting and co-operation within the formation. Multichannel target acquisition/ tracking associated with smart sensor fusion key-enabler which will radically change the face of air warfare. This combination of multisensor technology and smart data fusion significantly increases mission success rates through enhanced crew awareness and improved aircraft survivability. With its multisensor technology, its advanced data fusion management system, and its remarkable Man-Machine Interface (MMI), the Rafale clearly stands in a category of its own and no other fighter in the world has such a wide array of systems at its disposal.

You can read this also (page 6/11)
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/sp ... ox3_14.pdf
All the Rafale’s sensors are closely integrated and all data is automatically fused to massively reduce pilot workload and significantly increase tactical effectiveness. “Our goal was to avoid saturating the pilot, explains Jean-Noël Stock, Thales Rafale Programme Director. This smart data fusion significantly increases mission success rates through enhanced crew awareness and improved aircraft survivability. This is a crucial advantage over our competitors.”

As for IR, Mica - IR sensors are fully fused into rafale system. Ans there is 48 IR channel available for the rafale fleet which are just plug and play.

read this from Brazilian test pilot:
Data Fusion

PCWRITE. This combination of "letters" appears in the lower left corner of the HLD - Head Level Display, giving a real-time and instant confirmation of which sensors are signaling at that moment. Each letter representing either the RBE2 AESA radar, the Infrared / Laser / TV Front-Sector Optronics (FSO), the internal system of electronic warfare SPECTRA EW, IFF (identification friend-or-foe), are merged into a unified and clear visual symbolism directly on the SA display (situational awareness), and that means keeping the pilot in the situational loop. Rarely (not witnessed at any time during our evaluations) would the pilot ever be unaware of the environment within the 360º “bubble” surrounding the aircraft.

The heart of this data fusion is the MDPU - Processing Unit Data Modules that com-prises 19 LRUs (flight-line replaceable units), each providing a processing capacity up to 50 times greater than the previous generation of fighters. Translation: The pilot has a reduced workload, which enables him to act like a real tactical decision maker, rather than a mere sensor operator.

The key point of this data fusion is to overcome the limitations of any one particular sensor. For example, if it relies on waveforms, frequency, or infrared imaging, and the angle, distance, altitude, weather conditions or even a malfunction pose a limita-tion; other components supplement the formation of the big picture, situationally. The MDPU collects consolidated data from different sources based on various technologies, complementing, organizing and providing information through symbolism refined, reliable and unified.
(...)
As mentioned before Rafale Data fusion can use visual information from MICA IR infrared seeker, processing and merging data, acting as an extra sensor, while aboard the aircraft rails.
http://www.defesanet.com.br/rafale/noti ... fference-/

And here is a rafale pilot input on sensor fusion vs the competition:
Cne Romain:

One must first know that France has a very high credibility worldwide in terms of jamming. So one should be particularly ill informed to think there could be a beginning of a gap in Spectra.
Spectra is a accomplished self-protection system that we are developping every day with programming, testing and with software and hardware updates: month after month ,Spectra is evolving.
In my opinion, i think we are currently using only 2/3 of Spectra capacities: We still have much work to do to optimize our jamming libraries and methods of use. Finally, just to give you an idea of what stealth is or isn't : to be 100% stealth, one should neither be seen nor to let others know they are seen ... For example, a stealth aircraft that would use its radar to fire a missile, would be suddenly no longer stealth
One of the great strength of the Rafale is here: we do not need to activate our radar to fire our missiles far beyond visual range ..

Corentin

Hello Captain,
Thank you for these clarifications! I am perhaps too curious but can you explain how the Rafale is capable of firing beyond visual range "passively", and how far?
Do other airplanes of the same generation (EF, Gripen, F-18) use, to your knowledge, equivalent techniques ?

Cne Romain:

The Rafale merges the informations coming from its sensors to give a very reliable and clear picture to the pilot. It's already a considerable advantage over previous-generation aircraft, including EF and Gripen. When the pilot decides to fire a air to air missile, the missile leaves the aircraft taking automatically into account all available informations.
When the radar is not used, the missile can use the OSF (a TV camera coupled with a laser rangefinder), the informations provided by another aircraft via the MIDS, a heat source detected by the OSF or a MICA IR, or finally a localization by SPECTRA. Faced with these sensors, stealth is useless and we know, thanks to our tests ,that our missiles are very effective in such context.
about captain romain:
http://henri.eisenbeis.free.fr/belotti/ ... romain.htm

You should also read on the previous page of this topic the comment of the journalist on this issue.
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

Philip wrote:There does appear to be a faction within the establishment disillusioned with the pace of LCA development,and spent on it,see SAAB and the Gripen as a way to to salvage the huge cost and effort already spent on the entire programme. AS I posted earlier,the LCA MK-2 may see some SAAB involvement and the Gripen acquisition in the new MMRCA tender with a spin-off in simulataneous perfection of the Mk-2. I don't think that the Rafale is going anywhere because of its huge costs. The recent IAF-RAF exercise in the UK,where our MKIs supposedly thrashed the Eurofarter by a wide margin is sure to reinforce the cost-effective factor of acquiring more MKIs instead of more expensive Rafales/Eurofarters. The DM has himself said that "2 MKIs could be bought for the price of one Rafale".
And that's why IAF has always been a strong proponent for the rafale and is still pushing for aditional ones. The IAF - RAF exercise does not prove in any way that the Mki is superior to the typhoon. Personnaly I think the Typhoon has an edge against the SU30 both in WVR and BVR in a true combat scenario:
Mach 4 near BVR ASRAM + HMS > to SU 30mki and its IR missiles. SU30 better slow speed maneuvring can't do anything about that so the 12-0 BFM is meaningless.
Typhoon flies higher than the SU30, has a lower RCS which should give it an edge in BVR.
The Mki is still a big impressive machine that should not be considred lightly but it is not particularly "advanced" and "modern", its systems design being rather old now.
member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by member_20453 »

And that's why IAF has always been a strong proponent for the rafale and is still pushing for aditional ones. The IAF - RAF exercise does not prove in any way that the Mki is superior to the typhoon. Personnaly I think the Typhoon has an edge against the SU30 both in WVR and BVR in a true combat scenario:
Mach 4 near BVR ASRAM + HMS > to SU 30mki and its IR missiles. SU30 better slow speed maneuvring can't do anything about that so the 12-0 BFM is meaningless.
Typhoon flies higher than the SU30, has a lower RCS which should give it an edge in BVR.
The Mki is still a big impressive machine that should not be considred lightly but it is not particularly "advanced" and "modern", its systems design being rather old now.[/quote]^

Hogwash in a true combat scenario, the MKI can hold its own both in BVR & WVR. While employing a mix of Long Range R-77s/ R-27s, the MKI can start the fight from a long range. The MKI also carries more ordnance and can stay longer in the air, with R-27s it doesn't even have to have a radar to starting a fight in BVR. EF with Meteor and AESA will be tough target but with Super MKI with AESA & new upcoming missiles, MKI can always counter it. As for the Rafale, MKI in BVR will consume this puppy whole and spit it out. Rafale is good dogfighter, combining good avionics and payload and range, however till Meteor arrives the Raffy is a sitting duck for the MKI. Rafale does fill the IAF's need for deep pen strike aircraft.

As for Meteor, far too expensive to be ordered in large numbers for India.
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

Hogwash in a true combat scenario, the MKI can hold its own both in BVR & WVR. While employing a mix of Long Range R-77s/ R-27s, the MKI can start the fight from a long range. The MKI also carries more ordnance and can stay longer in the air, with R-27s it doesn't even have to have a radar to starting a fight in BVR. EF with Meteor and AESA will be tough target but with Super MKI with AESA & new upcoming missiles, MKI can always counter it. As for the Rafale, MKI in BVR will consume this puppy whole and spit it out. Rafale is good dogfighter, combining good avionics and payload and range, however till Meteor arrives the Raffy is a sitting duck for the MKI. Rafale does fill the IAF's need for deep pen strike aircraft.
As for Meteor, far too expensive to be ordered in large numbers for India.
I don't dispute the SU30 mki shouldn't be taken lightly. However it has some weaknesses : its ergonomics, MMI and sensors are at least a generation behind (about 15 to 20 years old now). In a complex environment and ROEs, SU30 crews will be quickly overwhelmed by information, loosing the tactical picture.

SU30 mki's force is that even if its not cutting edge, it packs a very large and powerfull radar. With well trained IAF pilots, the SU30 is still a formaidable threat.

On the other hand the rafale enjoys superior situational awarness & MMI, considerably smaller RCS in AtA config and excellent offensive EW capabilities. This combo has already proven deadly against Typhoons in BVR albeit the latter being more impressive on paper is this domain. I don't see any reasons the same scenario wouldn't apply with the SU30 mki (I actually would expect the gap to be even bigger).

Just a hint: Swiss evaluation rated the rafale superior in AtA than the typhoon...

The Typhoon were inferiors.

Concurrently, November 16, the Rafale gave, according to the french pilot, a memorable beating to the RAF Typhoon - the most recent version - which were also deployed in the UAE for the ATLC. To put it bluntly, Lieutenant-Colonel Grandclaudon said the two air battles - battles with IR-guided missile and cannon - which opposed Rafale and Typhoon gave a score of 7 wins for the first and 0 for the second, the only Rafale considered as having been destroyed flew below the allowed flight floor ! Obviously this statement has immediately raised an outcry among British pilots, relayed by the media and the Anglo-Saxon specialized blogosphere, including claims that the Typhoon did not fly as such during the fighting, but simulated "red" attackers, MiG-29 and Su-27 in that case. So, the 1/7 Provence squadron leader made a point to recall that 2 of his Rafale were also"red chest" (MiG-29 index "Charlie") when they shot down 4 "blue" Typhoon - flying as Typhoon - while being reduced to use virtual russians AA-10C missiles to be guided by the Rafale until the impact on their target, which forbade to shoot multiple targets at once . For Fabrice Grandclaudon, the limitations of the "red" plastron role don't prevent a weapons system to show its real capabilities, because the pilots are taking advantage of the real human-machine interfaces and sensors on board, one of the Rafale has benefited from a refresh of its tactical situation by his teammate via Link-16. In other words, even if some of them simluated Su-27, the British pilots virtually shoot down were using the sensors and the avionics of their Typhoon and not those of a Su-27! And the french pilot to recognize, with great sportsmanship, that the Typhoon pilots who had been opposed to the Rafale the week preceding the ATLC were young and relatively inexperienced, as the French already benefits from lessons learned from 3 operational detachments in Afghanistan (one year of presence in all) and 4 of its pilots had participated in Red Flag 2008.

Some advantages that make the difference.

However, he heavily emphasized the performance of the french system in the field of arms data fusion, from his point of view the main reason of the superiority obtained. Instead of each sensor to display its studs (aircraft detected) on a specific screen, forcing the Typhoon pilot to operate an intellectual gymnastics , annoying in combat stress, to check if the plot of its corresponding screen of electronic warfare was or was not the one visible on the radar screen or IRST, the Rafale's systems present to the pilot a single plot on a screen, the system automatically compares the plots provided by the various sensors on board and decides if it is or not the same plane. The french pilots have also appreciated the agility of the antenna of the electronic RBE2 radar - The Typhoon has for now only a mechanical antenna - allowing to refresh the situation in the whole volume monitored. But they insist, for close combat, on the perfect controllability of their Rafale, thanks to the excellence of FBW, to the extreme limits of the flight envelope.. To point the nose toward the target and to design it to the weapons system in the absence of a viewfinder-HMD while operating at very low speed. What are not necessarily capable of the main opponents of the Rafale ...
Well obviously, one should not rejoice in excess. The extremely positive results of these meetings have been obtained in special circumstances. The pilots had been set specific roles by the commander of the COMAO device and were therefore not free to exploit in depth all the potentials of their weapons system. The results have been different perhaps in other circumstances (nevertheless, some time ago, another meeting between Typhoon and Rafale, in Corsica, was also turned into "massacre" at the expense of the first 8 losses to 0 ). But, simply put, the EC 1 / 7 pilots are particularly satisfied with their stay in UAE. Their demonstration has , aptly, made a strong buzz [noise] among the aviators of the region and troubled the Anglo-Saxons until now convinced of the utter superiority of their planes. A disturbance also compounded by the loss - virtual of course - of an F-22 gun shot by an UAE Mirage 2000-9 flown, this time, by a French experimented pilot. Really, when everything goes wrong ... P
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

arthuro wrote:Typhoon already corelates tracks into a single screen but this is different from true sensor fusion where almost raw sensor inputs are processed in a single processing units to build the tactical situation (the MDPU for the rafale).

To achieve true sensor fusion, a complete redesign of Typhoon system architecture is required. This is way harder than to develop an AESA radar, TVC, CFTs etc...And it takes years of debugging to be certain that your single track is realy reliable.

As for IR, Mica - IR sensors are fully fused into rafale system. Ans there is 48 IR channel available for the rafale fleet which are just plug and play.

You should also read on the previous page of this topic the comment of the journalist on this issue.
1. The idea here is to reduce the pilot workload. Which the EF already does by generating single track solutions.

2. The radar silent mode of operation that you previously stated was the Rafale's SOP, can't exploit sensor fusion at all (radar is off, IRST is absent).

3. The EF also provides a 360 degree awareness bubble. A good one apparently post-DASS upgrade.

4. With the initial cueing (for a small volume search) by the DASS, the Captor-E will emit far greater power as a result of antenna size.

4. The IR seeker of a missile (expendable by design) can never be a substitute for an IRST (and even IRST ranges are quite limited in real world conditions). And given that OSF feeds weren't fused in the Rafale, I'm skeptical about the MICA-IR being different.

5. As for all the Frenchmen testifying to a French product actually being a generation ahead of its fellow Eurocanards, err... well I'll let that one slide.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

arthuro wrote:I don't dispute the SU30 mki shouldn't be taken lightly. However it has some weaknesses : its ergonomics, MMI and sensors are at least a generation behind (about 15 to 20 years old now). In a complex environment and ROEs, SU30 crews will be quickly overwhelmed by information, loosing the tactical picture.

On the other hand the rafale enjoys superior situational awarness & MMI, considerably smaller RCS in AtA config and excellent offensive EW capabilities. This combo has already proven deadly against Typhoons in BVR albeit the latter being more impressive on paper is this domain. I don't see any reasons the same scenario wouldn't apply with the SU30 mki (I actually would expect the gap to be even bigger).
- Unlike the Rafale, the Su-30 always flies with two pilots. That's two minds and two sets of eyes. The WSO can be dedicated to handling long range radar in air-to-air and laser designation in air-to-ground roles.
- The sensors (and probably MMI) is due for a major upgrade, including an NIIP AESA (similar to the PAK FA's). Its jamming system is already packs plenty of brute power (SAP 14 + 2 x SAP-518)
- The Rafale's lower RCS is doubtful when its laden with EFTs (without which it can't hope to match the Su-30MKI's range).
- The EFs were scripted exercises meant for training.
Just a hint: Swiss evaluation rated the rafale superior in AtA than the typhoon...
They never assessed aircraft with P2E upgrades. Back in 2007-08, the EF didn't even have the capability of firing an AMRAAM passively (i.e. with guidance provided by a third party). On the other hand, the only thing lacking right now is the jam-resistant AESA which should be available by around 2018-2019.
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

Viv S wrote:
arthuro wrote:Typhoon already corelates tracks into a single screen but this is different from true sensor fusion where almost raw sensor inputs are processed in a single processing units to build the tactical situation (the MDPU for the rafale).

To achieve true sensor fusion, a complete redesign of Typhoon system architecture is required. This is way harder than to develop an AESA radar, TVC, CFTs etc...And it takes years of debugging to be certain that your single track is realy reliable.

As for IR, Mica - IR sensors are fully fused into rafale system. Ans there is 48 IR channel available for the rafale fleet which are just plug and play.

You should also read on the previous page of this topic the comment of the journalist on this issue.
1. The idea here is to reduce the pilot workload. Which the EF already does by generating single track solutions.

2. The radar silent mode of operation that you previously stated was the Rafale's SOP, can't exploit sensor fusion at all (radar is off, IRST is absent).

3. The EF also provides a 360 degree awareness bubble. A good one apparently post-DASS upgrade.

4. With the initial cueing (for a small volume search) by the DASS, the Captor-E will emit far greater power as a result of antenna size.

4. The IR seeker of a missile (expendable by design) can never be a substitute for an IRST (and even IRST ranges are quite limited in real world conditions). And given that OSF feeds weren't fused in the Rafale, I'm skeptical about the MICA-IR being different.

5. As for all the Frenchmen testifying to a French product actually being a generation ahead of its fellow Eurocanards, err... well I'll let that one slide.
OSF feeds are fully fused in the rafale just like the mica IR sensors. You can find this infrmation in multiple official source (Dassault, Thales, MBDA etc...). This is the first time I saw someone supporting the contrary. One example, direct quote from Dassault's website :
What makes the essential difference is the RAFALE’s “multi-sensor data fusion” process running on data provided by all the sensors of the aircraft.

In essence, the “multi-sensor data fusion” concept implemented into the RAFALE allows the pilot to act as a true “tactical decision maker”, rather than being only a sensor operator.

The core of these enhanced capabilities of the RAFALE lies in a new “Modular Data Processing Unit” (MDPU) incorporating “commercial off the shelf” (COTS) elements. It is composed of up to 19 flight “line-replaceable units” (LRUs), with 18 of them individually providing 50 times the processing power of a typical mission computer employed in previous generation fighters.

The MDPU is the cornerstone of the upgradeability of the RAFALE. It allows a seamless integration of new weapons and new capabilities to maintain the warfighting relevance of the RAFALE over the years as tactical requirements evolve, and as the computer industry keeps rolling out new generations of processors and software.

The “multi-sensor data fusion” provides a link between the battlespace surrounding the aircraft and the pilot’s brain with its unique ability to grasp the outcome of tactical situations and make sensible decisions.

It hinges on the computing power of the MDPU to process data from the RBE2-AESA radar, the “Front Sector Optronic” (FSO) system, the SPECTRA EW system, the IFF, the MICA infrared seekers, and the data link.
http://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/def ... ta-fusion/

Although there aren't official publication about it yet, the DDM NG is also fused to build the tactical situation.

Bottom line: rafale's sensor fusion is repeatedly quoted by pilots and industry as a key differentiator against competing aircrafts. Typhoon sensor fusion is a weak point. It was mentionned twice by credible independent sources : in the swiss eval and in the rusi report. There is no evidence that it will catch up in this area.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Karan M wrote:The fact that you can't even understand the glaring holes in the British version, and think that its credible, whilst completely discounting the IAF account (which you have demonstrated in the past as well) puts you firmly in the class of a fanboi.
Feel free to expound on the glaring holes in the British version.

I'm not completely discounting any account, but I recognize pilots tend to the shade the truth and events tend to be more complicated these sorts of breathless accounts portray.

And while we don't know exactly what happened, we do know there is no such that as an invincible WVR fighter.
That you need me to expound on the glaring holes shows that you lack even the basis to be spoonfed information. Your inability to even sort the wheat from the chaff and your constant attempts to downplay the credible accounts of pilots and other technically proficient personnel, thanks to your preconceived biases, whilst you lack any credibility whatsoever to counter their real world experience, also speaks volumes.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

Arthuro wrote:I don't dispute the SU30 mki shouldn't be taken lightly. However it has some weaknesses : its ergonomics, MMI and sensors are at least a generation behind (about 15 to 20 years old now). In a complex environment and ROEs, SU30 crews will be quickly overwhelmed by information, loosing the tactical picture.
In essence, the “multi-sensor data fusion” concept implemented into the RAFALE allows the pilot to act as a true “tactical decision maker”, rather than being only a sensor operator.
And here we have yet another example of arm chair marshal-giri in full flow. Wonder how much real world experience the above poster has in deploying the Su-30 in complex ROE (such as Red Flag or the various LFE exercises the IAF has been in). Answer: Zero.

This is the sort of fanboi rubbish which deliberately ignores the results of real exercises when they don't match preconceived notions of le zuper Rafale which can do no wrong, when in the real world, this is what happens.

Image

The famed fighter which matched the super-effective complex ROE the Rafale is superb in.

Image

Looks like the Rafale operator/s were pretty lousy "tactical decision makers". :rotfl:

Ah wait, its 2015 now, the Rafales are the true masters of SEAD and what not, they have everything for "complex ROE". Yet, not even a proper ARM. Only the AASM. :lol:
Last edited by Karan M on 10 Aug 2015 16:12, edited 1 time in total.
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

Viv S wrote:
arthuro wrote:I don't dispute the SU30 mki shouldn't be taken lightly. However it has some weaknesses : its ergonomics, MMI and sensors are at least a generation behind (about 15 to 20 years old now). In a complex environment and ROEs, SU30 crews will be quickly overwhelmed by information, loosing the tactical picture.

On the other hand the rafale enjoys superior situational awarness & MMI, considerably smaller RCS in AtA config and excellent offensive EW capabilities. This combo has already proven deadly against Typhoons in BVR albeit the latter being more impressive on paper is this domain. I don't see any reasons the same scenario wouldn't apply with the SU30 mki (I actually would expect the gap to be even bigger).
- Unlike the Rafale, the Su-30 always flies with two pilots. That's two minds and two sets of eyes. The WSO can be dedicated to handling long range radar in air-to-air and laser designation in air-to-ground roles.
- The sensors (and probably MMI) is due for a major upgrade, including an NIIP AESA (similar to the PAK FA's). Its jamming system is already packs plenty of brute power (SAP 14 + 2 x SAP-518)
- The Rafale's lower RCS is doubtful when its laden with EFTs (without which it can't hope to match the Su-30MKI's range).
- The EFs were scripted exercises meant for training.
Just a hint: Swiss evaluation rated the rafale superior in AtA than the typhoon...
They never assessed aircraft with P2E upgrades. Back in 2007-08, the EF didn't even have the capability of firing an AMRAAM passively (i.e. with guidance provided by a third party). On the other hand, the only thing lacking right now is the jam-resistant AESA which should be available by around 2018-2019.
-rafale can also fly with two pilots and two man in the machine is not a panacea : lots of talks and time lost when first time quality information and auto prioritization of threat is much more efficient.
-rafale RCS even with drop tanks will be much lower than Sukhoi.
-by the time the Sukhoi gets its upgrade (which remains to be seen...) the rafale will have gone to the next level : Spectra GaN (2018), conformal radars with GaN (under development - de risking stage - 2025) and radar jamming modes (option for F4 standard)

DGA launches studies on next-generation active radar antenna.

Delegate General for Armaments, Laurent Collet-Billon, officially presented today at Jean-Bernard Levy, CEO of Thales, a technology education contract for the next generation of active antenna radar.

This project aims to demonstrate the technology multifunction panels and new scalable architectures calculator. These new antennas are designed to equip forward the Rafale fighter and future projects of air combat drones.

Representing euros 89 million over several years, this investment demonstrates the effort devoted by the state to maintain the technological lead of the French defense industry, particularly in the field of military aviation. After making their first European with active antenna radar serial Rafale, France intends to maintain its leading position in the field of airborne radars.

These studies will demonstrate the maturity of components and achieve multifunction antenna (radar, electronic warfare and communications). These new antennas will also offer a significant advantage in terms of scope and discretion of the aircraft and will maintain the highest level of technology the French combat aviation industry."
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/dga/actualit ... nne-active
THALES AWARDED WITH A STUDY CONTRACT FOR THE NEXT GENERATION OF ACTIVE ARRAY RADARS

September 30, 2014

KEY POINTS

-Thales awarded a technology demonstrator contract for the next generation of active phrased array radars.
-These technologies will ultimately equip the Rafale and will be suitable for future unmanned combat air vehicles.

The French defence procurement agency (DGA) has awarded Thales a technology study contract for the next generation of active phased array radars, including modular processors and multifunction panel technologies. These new technologies will ultimately equip the Rafale combat aircraft and will be suitable for future unmanned combat air vehicles (UCAVs).

During the signing ceremony held on 29 September in the presence of Laurent Collet-Billon, Head of the DGA, Jean-Bernard Lévy, Thales’s Chairman and CEO wished to highlight the "strong support of the DGA in maintaining a French sector of excellence in the field of airborne radars. With this technology study contract, Thales will maintain its lead in the field of active radar antennas, which is essential for the future of defence aerospace. "

Under the advanced study contract, Thales will demonstrate the technological readiness of various components and design a new generation of multifunction arrays (radar, electronic warfare and communications). The new arrays will also significantly improve range capabilities and discretion.

Over the next four years approximately 100 Thales staff, will be involved in these studies alongside a number of SME’s which have already contributed to the development of the Rafale active phased array radar.
As for the swiss eval, even the typhoon anticipated in 2015 was rated inferior to the rafale in the Air to Air role (and every other role for that matter). They said sensor fusion and EW were weak points and that's exactly what I read in 2015 rusi report...hum...

For years you and other said : "it is not representative, it has been upgraded" etc etc...But finally nothing has changed significantly and we are in 2015.
Now some like you are saying "but just wait the next upgrade...I'll promise you this time..."
Last edited by arthuro on 10 Aug 2015 16:30, edited 5 times in total.
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

Karan M wrote:
Arthuro wrote:I don't dispute the SU30 mki shouldn't be taken lightly. However it has some weaknesses : its ergonomics, MMI and sensors are at least a generation behind (about 15 to 20 years old now). In a complex environment and ROEs, SU30 crews will be quickly overwhelmed by information, loosing the tactical picture.
In essence, the “multi-sensor data fusion” concept implemented into the RAFALE allows the pilot to act as a true “tactical decision maker”, rather than being only a sensor operator.
And here we have yet another example of arm chair marshal-giri in full flow. Wonder how much real world experience the above poster has in deploying the Su-30 in complex ROE (such as Red Flag or the various LFE exercises the IAF has been in). Answer: Zero.

This is the sort of fanboi rubbish which deliberately ignores the results of real exercises when they don't match preconceived notions of le zuper Rafale which can do no wrong, when in the real world, this is what happens.

The famed fighter which matched the super-effective complex ROE the Rafale is superb in.

Looks like the Rafale operator/s were pretty lousy "tactical decision makers". :rotfl:
Unless you can come with specifics on the ROE your post is worthless and puerile. The only hint was from an air maintainer on "secret defense" blog which stated the ROE was very restrictive : LOBL with the mica IR was mandatory while Phantoms had their full capability available and supported with awacs.

Bottom line is that rafale sensor fusion is repeatidely quoted as a key differentiator. And this is not me which is saying it but credible sources : several pilots, Dassault, Thales, swiss evaluation etc...
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

>>>-by the time the Sukhoi gets its upgrade (which remains to be seen...) the rafale will have gone to the next level : Spectra GaN (2018), conformal radars with GaN (under development - de risking stage - 2025) and radar jamming modes (option for F4 standard)

Even if the Rafale gets its upgrade (which remains to be seen...), the aircraft's limited nose size and EW aperture size means the GaN claimed advantages will be limited at best.

For instance:

Image

A small number of AESA modules which puts the range performance figures firmly far behind those of Su-35 & F-15, EF, F-22, F-18 and similar platforms.

It speaks volumes that the Rafale today still can't "brag" about range-performance even equivalent to the Su-35 or F-15s out there and has to dance around the issue of performance and only claims improvements on its previous gen PESA, which by several accounts was a failure.

Meanwhile, far more powerful AESAs are already flying on the T-50 FGFA with every possibility of being ported onto the Su-30 class fighters.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/254309277/Ad ... ssian-AESA
In August, 2009, Tikhomirov NIIP were permitted to publicly display the new AESA developed for the PAK-FA, and also a clear candidate for FLANKER retrofits, stating that the integration of an AESA into the FLANKER airframe would not present difficulties [15]. The large 0.9-1.1 metre diameter aperture provided by the FLANKER nose and radome design will be especially attractive to an AESA designer. This aperture size permits around twice as many AESA modules of similar size to most current Western designs, apart from the F-22A Raptor APG-77 and F-15C APG-82. The implications of this are sobering, insofar as with modules rated at half the peak power of the current state-of-the-art, such a radar could provide about the same peak power rating as current upper tier US AESAs. The power aperture would thus be higher due to the aperture area being so much larger.
Public statements made in Russia claim 1,500 TR module elements. Counting exposed radiating elements on video stills of the antenna indicates an estimated 1,524 TR channels, with a tolerance of several percent.
The best strategy available to the Russian industry for reducing AESA cost is the export of AESA upgrades to the large global community of FLANKER users over the coming decade, emulating the US approach with this technology. Tikhomirov NIIP brochures state that the existing AESA would be the basis of AESA upgrade designs for the Su-27/30/35 FLANKERS
Long story short, the BIGGEST screwup in the Rafale design was the limited nose size which cannot be changed without affecting the entire planform aero which is why its not been messed with.

Every competitor is ahead of the Rafale in this respect. The EF, and per some reports, even the Gripen may have an edge.

This reminds me of how Japan's F-2 was widely touted to have the first AESA. Never mind, its operational range was far inferior to the MSA's in Japan's F-15s. Much the same with the Rafale. A lot of PR speak about GaN in 2025 and what not, whereas in many respects its matching earlier MSAs (not even PESAs) with its AESA!
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

First, picture available on the net of the RBE2 radar are photoshoped to hide the exact number of modules. The only official things you can find is "more than 1000" on Dassault's website (fox three to be precise). DSI, a serious defense publication said 1001 modules for the rafale and 1437 for the typhoon.

Second, not everything boils down to radar size and range. Lattest confrontation against Typhoon, swiss evaluation are a testament of this. Superior SA through multi sensor fusion coupled with performant EW and appropriate tactics are exellent means to defeat aircrafts which might appear more impressive on paper.

If rafale radar size was so critical, why would it even be selected by IAF during its technical evaluation ? How could it beat bigger aircrafts with bigger radars in technical evaluation ? (Swiss, south korea, singapore, dutch, brazil...) How could the IAF justify buying more rafale than the 36 anticipated ?
Last edited by arthuro on 10 Aug 2015 16:41, edited 1 time in total.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

arthuro wrote:Unless you can come with specifics on the ROE your post is worthless and puerile. The only hint was from an air maintainer on "secret defense" blog which stated the ROE was very restrictive : LOBL with the mica IR was mandatory while Phantoms had their full capability available and supported with awacs.
ROTFL, when the Rafale loses pathetically, its the ROE at fault. When an opponent does far better in exercises. It was the ROE, melawd, the ROE.

Perhaps the German AF were so unaware of the poor ROE, that they shouldn't have pasted the picture about how they pasted the Rafale? :lol:

"The only hint was from an air maintainer on "secret defense" blog" - yes, a French blog, rabidly pro Rafale which claims the Rafale is ze best in the world, whenever Rafale gets a shellacking in exercises. Its either the aircraft or the crew. Take a pick! Oh no, the ROE, always the ROE (which the crew agreed on!)

What's worthless and puerile are your silly rants about how great Rafale is, how EF is behind, how Su-30 is behind, all on the basis of dodgy stuff.
Bottom line is that rafale sensor fusion is repeatidely quoted as a key differentiator. And this is not me which is saying it but credible sources : several pilots, Dassault, Thales, swiss evaluation etc...
It sure differentiated it from the F-4Es, which became Rafale eaters. :lol:

Meanwhile, Rafales have been shot down in exercises by F-18s, F-16s, and who knows what else.

I guess the Rafale operators were too busy taking tactical decisions while a missile went up their exhaust. :lol:
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

Ok so if the rafale is so inferior according to you why did it pass IAF technical evaluation ? Why other air force rated the rafale so high during their own technical evaluation ? How could the rafale defeat the typhoon in BVR ?
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

arthuro wrote:First, picture available on the net of the RBE2 radar are photoshoped to hide the exact number of modules. The only official things you can find is "more than 1000" on Dassault's website (fox three to be precise). DSI, a serious defense publication said 1001 modules for the rafale and 1437 for the typhoon.
Its the ROE. Its photoshop!! Yes, really - lets come up with all sorts of claims to dance around the basic admission the Rafale is space volume limited for large antenna. :lol:
In terms of radar capabilities, existing Flankers are equipped mostly with variants of N-001, comparable to early F-15 APG-63s. The Su-35 carries the N-011, closer to a late model APG-63/70, and the Su-30MKI the NIIP N-011M BARS which is a hybrid phased array closest in technology to the much smaller RBE2 in the Rafale.
PS: he's referring to aperture size:
NIIP and Phazotron are known to have been working on an AESA design, and given the aperture size of the Flanker, an AESA radar in the power-aperture rating class of the F-22's APG-77 is a distinct possibility for a post 2010 Flanker.
http://www.ausairpower.net/DT-SuperBug-vs-Flanker.html

Meanwhile anybody can use eyeball Mk1s and see the Rafales nose is smaller.
Second, not everything boils down to radar size and range.
Ah yes. Why AESA for Rafale then over PESA and repeated advertising of range. :lol:
Lattest confrontation against Typhoon, swiss evaluation are a testament of this. Superior SA through multi sensor fusion coupled with performant EW and appropriate tactics are exellent means to defeat aircrafts which might appear more impressive on paper.[/quore]

LOL, as and when it suits you, appropriate tactics can defeat "aircraft superior on paper", when all throughout your arguement is basically on paper claims!!

As paper as the claims of simultaneous mode interleaving on AESA which was only recently incorporated (if!!) whereas Bars has had it for a while.
If rafale radar size was so critical, why would it even be selected by IAF during its technical evaluation ? How could it beat bigger aircrafts with bigger radars in technical evaluation ? (Swiss, south korea, singapore, dutch, brazil...)
Has it struck you that the IAF may be ok with a small nose sized Rafale since will have bigger more powerful radar equipped Su-30s as the "eyes". :lol:
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

arthuro wrote:Ok so if the rafale is so inferior
Its not that inferior. Its ok. Its only that your completely over the top statements are ridiculous.
according to you why did it pass IAF technical evaluation ?
India wanted a second source of fighters bar Sukhoi which has had far too much dominance with both the Su-30 & the proposed FGFA.
Why other air force rated the rafale so high during their own technical evaluation ? How could the rafale defeat the typhoon in BVR ?
Earth to saturn. Most AF rated a bunch of fighters equal or superior to the Rafale depending on their evaluations. Many have ignored the Rafale entirely and moved to stealth platforms - eg F-35. The Rafale is going to be out of the export market soon once stealth platforms become more common.

As regards the Typhoon in BVR, the RAF has been claiming otherwise. Its funny to see the alacrity with which you believe the French claims in that respect but are unable to believe the Su-30 could do so. Perfect definition of ... fanboism.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by brar_w »

What you also have to account for is how a smaller aperture and radar sizes up when pitted against Low Observable Targets (these could be UAV's, cruise missiles, or Low observable fighters) that themselves have their radars designed to account for both the detection, LPI and to account for their own best-case/aspect RCS. Even if we add 200 T/R modules to the Rafale it goes into the 1000-1100 module territory..Thats in between the F-16's AN/APG-80/SABR and F-18's AN/APG-79 or closer to the F/A-18C/D's RACR. That's fairly decent if you are out there fighting fourth generation aircraft in a netted environment with AWACS cover, but if you have to switch the mission to tracking cruise missiles, jamming (Don't bring SPECTRA without getting into how much power is available to it compared to the radar) and finding 'hard to find' targets at long distance.

There is a reason each F-35 costs more because the USN stuck to its demand for larger and more sensor requirement and moved the AESA to within 25% of the AN/APG-77s size because they wont have that level since they didn't acquire any raptors.

Gallium Nitride T/R modules will improve it but then the French have not yet set any record in terms of getting the AESA radar so it is highly unlikely they'll be ahead in getting GaN onto a fighter X-Band FCR before the rest of the world especially when there are GaN foundries with higher production capacities elsewhere.

For the French it matters little since much like the F-16 and F/A-18 the Rafale will make use of NATO's net-centric abilities and the primary sensors are going to be the data links (L16 and whatever follows) and SPECTRA, but as a whole it is a reduction in overall organic capability, no two ways about it..Having a smaller radar to the Typhoon and to the LO/stealthy F-35 is a disadvantage even though the Rafale is still a highly capable multi-role fighter.
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

page 8/8
The AESA
radar array will be made up of
more than 1 ,000 trans -
mitter/receiver modules
so
that several can fail with no
significant degradation in acuity.
It will further contribute to the
Rafale’s excellent reliability.
The RBE2’s open architecture
will facilitate upgrading, and
the new AESA array is totally
‘plug and play’, switching from
the passive to the active array
configuration taking less than
two weeks.
http://www.dassault-aviation.com/wp-con ... ee_n11.pdf

And yes the photo is photoshopped.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

BrarW wrote:What you also have to account for is how a smaller aperture and radar sizes up when pitted against Low Observable Targets (these could be UAV's, cruise missiles, or Low observable fighters) that themselves have their radars designed to account for both the detection, LPI and to account for their own best-case/aspect RCS. Even if we add 200 T/R modules to the Rafale it goes into the 1000-1100 module territory..Thats in between the F-16's AN/APG-80/SABR and F-18's AN/APG-79 or closer to the F/A-18C/D's RACR. That's fairly decent if you are out there fighting fourth generation aircraft in a netted environment with AWACS cover, but if you have to switch the mission to tracking cruise missiles, jamming (Don't bring SPECTRA without getting into how much power is available to it compared to the radar) and finding 'hard to find' targets at long distance.
For the French it matters little since much like the F-16 and F/A-18 the Rafale will make use of NATO's net-centric abilities and the primary sensors are going to be the data links (L16 and whatever follows) and SPECTRA, but as a whole it is a reduction in overall organic capability, no two ways about it..Having a smaller radar to the Typhoon and to the LO/stealthy F-35 is a disadvantage even though the Rafale is still a highly capable multi-role fighter.
Bingo!!
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

arthuro wrote:page 8/8
http://www.dassault-aviation.com/wp-con ... ee_n11.pdf

And yes the photo is photoshopped.
Sigh, still missing the point by a mile!! It need not be PS'ed - it could have merely been the first set with larger modules. Thats not the issue though.

When your peers have much larger module counts, 1mtr dia F-15, Su-30 class apertures, T-50 etc, bragging about 1000 in an era wherein targets are getting smaller is not exactly an advantage.

Admit the facts. Which can accomodate a larger dia radar. EF or Rafale? F-15 or Rafale? Su-30 or Rafale?
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

Karan M wrote:
arthuro wrote:Ok so if the rafale is so inferior
Its not that inferior. Its ok. Its only that your completely over the top statements are ridiculous.
according to you why did it pass IAF technical evaluation ?
India wanted a second source of fighters bar Sukhoi which has had far too much dominance with both the Su-30 & the proposed FGFA.
Why other air force rated the rafale so high during their own technical evaluation ? How could the rafale defeat the typhoon in BVR ?
Earth to saturn. Most AF rated a bunch of fighters equal or superior to the Rafale depending on their evaluations. Many have ignored the Rafale entirely and moved to stealth platforms - eg F-35. The Rafale is going to be out of the export market soon once stealth platforms become more common.

As regards the Typhoon in BVR, the RAF has been claiming otherwise. Its funny to see the alacrity with which you believe the French claims in that respect but are unable to believe the Su-30 could do so. Perfect definition of ... fanboism.
-First, my comments are backed with sources as often as possible. I could make the same statement on your posts : talking about the F4 kills without detailing the ROEs, omitting officials source of info on rafale's modules.
-As for a second source of fighter requirement, this is just an external analysis but this has never been confirmed officialy. For the record the mig 35 took part in the technical evaluation. If this was really a criteria it should not have take part in the competition.
-As for rafale in technical evaluations it won Korea, Singapore, Brazil, Swiss and Koweite ones. It came a very close second to the F35 in the Netherlands and toped the IAF evaluation with the Typhoon among six competitors. Not bad. As for most other airforces, they have gone to direct negotiation for strategic reasons.
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

Karan M wrote:
arthuro wrote:page 8/8
http://www.dassault-aviation.com/wp-con ... ee_n11.pdf

And yes the photo is photoshopped.
Sigh, still missing the point by a mile!! It need not be PS'ed - it could have merely been the first set with larger modules. Thats not the issue though.

When your peers have much larger module counts, 1mtr dia F-15, Su-30 class apertures, T-50 etc, bragging about 1000 in an era wherein targets are getting smaller is not exactly an advantage.

Admit the facts. Which can accomodate a larger dia radar. EF or Rafale? F-15 or Rafale? Su-30 or Rafale?
Radar diameter is just one parameter among many. Rafales multi sensor fusion, SA, MMI and EW more than make up for this.

This how an aircraft with a bigger more powerfull radar loses to the rafale :

(And here you have the detailed ROEs :wink: )
The Typhoon were inferiors.

Concurrently, November 16, the Rafale gave, according to the french pilot, a memorable beating to the RAF Typhoon - the most recent version - which were also deployed in the UAE for the ATLC. To put it bluntly, Lieutenant-Colonel Grandclaudon said the two air battles - battles with IR-guided missile and cannon - which opposed Rafale and Typhoon gave a score of 7 wins for the first and 0 for the second, the only Rafale considered as having been destroyed flew below the allowed flight floor ! Obviously this statement has immediately raised an outcry among British pilots, relayed by the media and the Anglo-Saxon specialized blogosphere, including claims that the Typhoon did not fly as such during the fighting, but simulated "red" attackers, MiG-29 and Su-27 in that case. So, the 1/7 Provence squadron leader made a point to recall that 2 of his Rafale were also"red chest" (MiG-29 index "Charlie") when they shot down 4 "blue" Typhoon - flying as Typhoon - while being reduced to use virtual russians AA-10C missiles to be guided by the Rafale until the impact on their target, which forbade to shoot multiple targets at once . For Fabrice Grandclaudon, the limitations of the "red" plastron role don't prevent a weapons system to show its real capabilities, because the pilots are taking advantage of the real human-machine interfaces and sensors on board, one of the Rafale has benefited from a refresh of its tactical situation by his teammate via Link-16. In other words, even if some of them simluated Su-27, the British pilots virtually shoot down were using the sensors and the avionics of their Typhoon and not those of a Su-27! And the french pilot to recognize, with great sportsmanship, that the Typhoon pilots who had been opposed to the Rafale the week preceding the ATLC were young and relatively inexperienced, as the French already benefits from lessons learned from 3 operational detachments in Afghanistan (one year of presence in all) and 4 of its pilots had participated in Red Flag 2008.

Some advantages that make the difference.

However, he heavily emphasized the performance of the french system in the field of arms data fusion, from his point of view the main reason of the superiority obtained. Instead of each sensor to display its studs (aircraft detected) on a specific screen, forcing the Typhoon pilot to operate an intellectual gymnastics , annoying in combat stress, to check if the plot of its corresponding screen of electronic warfare was or was not the one visible on the radar screen or IRST, the Rafale's systems present to the pilot a single plot on a screen, the system automatically compares the plots provided by the various sensors on board and decides if it is or not the same plane. The french pilots have also appreciated the agility of the antenna of the electronic RBE2 radar - The Typhoon has for now only a mechanical antenna - allowing to refresh the situation in the whole volume monitored. But they insist, for close combat, on the perfect controllability of their Rafale, thanks to the excellence of FBW, to the extreme limits of the flight envelope.. To point the nose toward the target and to design it to the weapons system in the absence of a viewfinder-HMD while operating at very low speed. What are not necessarily capable of the main opponents of the Rafale ...
Well obviously, one should not rejoice in excess. The extremely positive results of these meetings have been obtained in special circumstances. The pilots had been set specific roles by the commander of the COMAO device and were therefore not free to exploit in depth all the potentials of their weapons system. The results have been different perhaps in other circumstances (nevertheless, some time ago, another meeting between Typhoon and Rafale, in Corsica, was also turned into "massacre" at the expense of the first 8 losses to 0 ). But, simply put, the EC 1 / 7 pilots are particularly satisfied with their stay in UAE. Their demonstration has , aptly, made a strong buzz [noise] among the aviators of the region and troubled the Anglo-Saxons until now convinced of the utter superiority of their planes. A disturbance also compounded by the loss - virtual of course - of an F-22 gun shot by an UAE Mirage 2000-9 flown, this time, by a French experimented pilot. Really, when everything goes wrong ... P
Last edited by arthuro on 10 Aug 2015 17:32, edited 1 time in total.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Karan M »

And this is what the Flanker class is capable of with even an upgrade to its current systems, flying today, let alone PAKFA tech
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the ... u-35-11799
“It’s a great airplane and very dangerous, especially if they make a lot of them,” said one senior U.S. military official with extensive experience on fifth-generation fighters. “I think even an AESA [active electronically scanned array-radar equipped F-15C] Eagle and [Boeing F/A-18E/F] Super Hornet would both have their hands full.”
The addition of the electronic attack (EA) capability complicates matters for Western fighters because the Su-35’s advanced digital radio frequency memory jammers can seriously degrade the performance of friendly radars. It also effectively blinds the onboard radars found onboard American-made air-to-air missiles like the AIM-120 AMRAAM.

Further, the Air Force official added that even modernized versions of older jets would be in serious trouble against the new Flanker variant. “I'd say our fourth-gen AESAs aren't a big advantage,” said the official. “They're more to get us back in the game against jamming.”

But even the addition of AESA radars does not really solve the problem. “We—the U.S. Department of Defense—haven't been pursuing appropriate methods to counter EA for years,” said another senior Air Force official with experience on the F-22 Raptor. “So, while we are stealthy, we will have a hard time working our way through the EA to target the Su-35s and our missiles will have a hard time killing them.”

The Su-35 also carries a potent infrared search and track capability that could pose a problem for Western fighters. “It also has non-EM [electro-magnetic] sensors to help it detect other aircraft, which could be useful in long-range detection,” the Super Hornet pilot said.

Another of the Su-35’s major advantages is that it carries an enormous payload of air-to-air missiles. “One thing I really like about the Su-35 is that it is a high-end truck: It can carry a ton of air-to-air ordnance into a fight,” the Navy pilot said.
And yes, the Su-35 has sensor fusion too..
Locked