Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Vishnu
BRFite
Posts: 274
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: New Delhi

Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Vishnu »

Hi Folks ... I flew the Rafale from Istres in France a few weeks ago. You can see our webpage on the sortie at:

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/thund ... ter-250710

The site also has some nice images and video of my sortie, some of which was just a 100 feet off the deck of the Mediterranean. There is also video of an 8.5 G maneuver in which, you can see me fighting to stay conscious. The link for this is lower down the page. Don't miss the videos ... they are incredible.

THUNDER AT 100 FEET: FLYING FRANCE'S RAFALE SUPERFIGHTER

- Vishnu Som -

"We will now enter the yellow potato."

"Excuse me?," I ask Sébastien Dupont de Dinechin, a Rafale test pilot, otherwise known to his fellow as 3D.

"Yes, look at the Head Level display, we enter the area which looks like a yellow potato and then we `pickle' the weapon."

"And then what ?" I ask.

"And then we go home. The target no longer exists."

I wonder - Could modern air warfare really be as simple as this ?

What 3D and I have been doing is thundering over the French countryside, at ultra-low altitude, in a state of the art Dassault Rafale, the pride of the French Air Force, deep over imagined enemy territory to a pre-selected target which we have now destroyed.

The yellow "potato" 3 D is referring to is a graphical outline located in a high resolution display which we were both looking at as we commenced our attack - 3D in the front cockpit, me in the rear. Once `inside the potato,' well before we are physically close to the target, 3D depresses the trigger on his control stick, and an imaginary 2000 pound laser guided bomb `separates' from the wing of our jet and follows pre-programmed GPS-based coordinates to strike the target with pin-point precision.

If this were a real conflict, 3D and I would be at a stage of our sortie fraught with danger: The enemy has been alerted to our presence and we need to escape, evading ground based surface to air missile batteries and airborne fighter jets.

But we have a friend. `SPECTRA' is her name.

Built into the Rafale fighter, SPECTRA is widely considered the world's most advanced fighter-based electronic warfare suite, a system which is the cornerstone of the Rafale's survivability against a host of the latest threats. SPECTRA is designed to detect threats and provides a multi-spectral threat warning capability against hostile radars, missiles and lasers. By detecting threats at long-range, SPECTRA allows the pilot to instantly select the best suited defensive measures combining radar jamming of ground and airborne radars and the deployment of infrared or radar decoying flares and chaff. In a best case scenario, SPECTRA would enable 3D and I to safely exit hostile airspace.

But not on this occasion. We have been detected. A lone enemy Mirage 2000 is trying to position itself behind us to get off a shot with an air to air missile.

Except we have the advantage.

The Rafale's RBE-2 Active Electronically Scanned Phased Array Radar (ASEA), the heart of the Rafale's weapons system, is at the cutting edge of aviation technology. It detects targets at greater ranges and with far more accuracy than anything the Mirage has to offer. Capable of simultaneously targeting multiple enemies in the air, the RBE-2 AESA has a fixed plate in the nose of the Rafale filled with T/R (transmit-receive) modules which fire electronically steered radar waves across a huge expanse of the sky ahead, above and below us.

But the Mirage pilot is no rookie. His own electronic warfare suite would have told him he is up against a formidable threat and right now, he's maneuvering to get outside the Rafale's kill zone. We maneuver as well but this isn't quite your Battle of Britain seat-of-your-pants flying experience. In fact, we can't even see the enemy with our eyes but he's there alright, his location clearly outlined on our heads-up-display which is now providing 3D a firing solution for his Mica beyond-visual-range air to air missile.

In just a few moments, 3D gets a SHOOT indicator on his head-up-display. There is no time to waste. A trigger press later, an imaginary Mica air to air missile blasts off one of the Rafale's wing pylons and begins tracking the enemy Mirage.

But wait. There's a problem. The Mirage has disappeared off our radar !

Will our 2 Million Euro Mica air to air missile miss its mark ?

Hang on ! There he is, back on our display once again !

"Are we launching another missile ?" I ask.

"No" says 3D quickly providing the missile revised targeting data through a high-speed data link which points the Mica missile in the right direction so it can intercept the enemy Mirage. In moments, the Mica missile's own radar seeker goes `active' by detecting the enemy jet.

The Mirage 2000 jinxes around the sky in a last ditch effort to evade the Mica missile. But the writing is on the wall.

Notch that up as another kill for the Rafale.

We decide thats enough work for one day. Its time to head home without any further detection.

Now over the sea, the Automatic Flight Control System is activated to Terrain Following Mode and we drop to a sea-skimming altitude of 100 feet.

3D feels the need for speed and lights the afterburner, accelerating from a speed of 250 knots (463 kilometres per hour) to 600 knots (more than 1111 kilometres) in less than 20 seconds.

Its all incredibly impressive stuff as we return to our `home-base,' Istres, near Marseilles in France.

Missions like what I experienced on my sortie on the Rafale are a snap-shot of what the Indian Air Force will be able to do in the not-too-distant future. The Rafale is the winner of the IAF's Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition and was shortlisted by the IAF after coming up tops in the flyoff against the best fighters the US, Russia, Sweden and a European consortium had to offer. Dassault, the manufacturers of the Rafale are presently in top-secret negotiations with the Defence Ministry to arrive at a final price among a host of of details bound to accompany what has been labelled the world's biggest defence deal, easily worth more than 15 billion dollars for 126 jets.

Its not that the simulated mission I flew was extraordinary. Not at all. Ground attack and air-to air missions have been bread and butter operations of any competent Air Force since the First World War. What makes the Rafale experience different is the level of automation, the incredible man-machine interface and the highly fused sensor suite the French top gun employs. In simple terms, the Rafale does the same job with more precision and safety for the pilot.

Over the last few years, I have had the opportunity of flying a dozen odd sorties on some of the greatest fighter aircraft including 4 of the 5 jets the Rafale had to beat to win the Indian Air Force's comprehensive trials conducted across the country. While each of the competitiors, whether the Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet (USA), the MiG-35 (Russia), the Gripen NG (Sweden), the Eurofighter (European Consortium), or the F-16 IN (USA) are formidable platforms, the Rafale came out tops in perhaps being the most capable fighter in its present state of development.

An out and out 9 g fighter capable of dog fighting with the best of its lighter single engine rivals like the F-16, the Rafale also retains the ability of lifting 9.5 tonnes of ordinance for missions across the spectrum of operations in air warfare including nuclear strike. The Rafale can conceivably engage enemy fighters, strike ground targets and fire an anti-ship missile at a warship all in the same mission. With air to air refuelling and support from airborne early warning radars, the Rafale has demonstrated its ability in being at the forefront of international campaigns.

In March last year, pilots of the 1/7 Squadron based in St Dizier, not too far from Paris, flew a 9 hour long mission into Libya, in the first wave of attacks against Moammer Gaddafi's armed forces.

Using secure high-rate data links, Rafale fighters in the early days of the conflict were able to receive intelligence images and video real-time through a system called Rover (Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver) from friendly forces on the ground. Using this information which was also shared with Intelligence analysts onboard AWACS jets, Rafale fighters were instantly vectored to new targets. Using a combination of its Damocles laser designation pod, which can mark targets for laser guided bombs and its Front Sector Optronics system which provides high resolution images, pilots were able to acurately identify and hit targets at long ranges.

The `hitting' itself was done, quite frequently, by a remarkable new munition, the AASM, a rocket boosted air-to-ground precision guided weapon, called the SBU-38 `Hammer' by NATO. Using the Hammer, Rafale pilots were able to designate upto 6 independent targets and hit all of them simultaneously. All the pilot needed to do was to `pickle' (depress the trigger) once for the release of all 6 bombs. An incredibly versatile weapon system, the Hammer, it was seen, even had a robust capability against moving targets, an unprecedented capability for a weapon of its class.

For me, personally, the sortie on the Rafale, a rare privilege for a civilian, came out of the blue. With Rafale winning the IAF competition, there was really no need for Dassault the manufacturers of the jet, to make a statement in the Indian media. It was quite an honour then to be invited, a project that we at NDTV felt quite keen to take on.

I have flown on French fighers in the past as well. In fact, during the Kargil war, I was invited by the Indian Air Force to fly rear-seat in the very same Mirage 2000 jets which had hit Pakistani bunkers on Tiger Hill with laser guided bombs a few weeks earlier.

The Rafale was designed to ultimately replace the Mirage 2000 providing an incremental step up in capability compared to the old French jet. Even though hundreds of Mirage 2000s have been upgraded over the years, the jump in capability from the Mirage to the Rafale has to be seen to be believed.

One of the most impressive technologies on offer in the Rafale is the advanced terrain following system which allows the jet to skim the surface of the earth using the Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS). Operational in two modes, the AFCS, allows the pilot to conduct a fully automated attack run ("hands off the controls") using either digital terrain following or a radar terrain following mode. With digital terrain following, the AFCS maneuvers the Rafale over terrain (hills, valleys, peaks) based on a three dimensional map database which is pre-programmed into the AFCS software. An even more reliable way of coming in low to hit a target (or to escape) is by using the radar terrain following mode of the RBE-2 AESA radar which scans the terrain ahead and safely flies the jet over all obstructions before resuming nap-of-the-earth operations.

3D demonstrated both modes to me during my sortie including a hair-raising ultra-low level run over the sea at no more than 100 feet at a speed nearing 500 knots (926 kilometres per hour). This was, quite clearly, the most thrilling experience I have ever had on any fighter jet I have flown, far more thrilling than the gravity-defying "thrust-vectored" maneuvers I have experienced on the latest generation of Russian fighters such as the Sukhoi-30 or MiG-35.

Racing over the Mediterranean, 3D tells me, over the Rafale's voice-activated intercom, "Look Vishnu, no hands." I look forward to see 3D's raised hands in the front cockpit. He clearly isn't kidding !

"At this altitiude and at this speed, its safer for the radar to fly the plane than me" explains 3D. Just then, the Rafale banks to the left following the pre-programmed heading fed into the Rafale's auto-pilot system, an even more incredible experience. For the next several seconds, I am overwhelmed by the sensation of the sea, now less than thirty metres from me, staring me in the face as we charge past. The Rafale suddenly levels out and then banks to the right, giving me another peak at this other-worldly experience.

We wrap up this part of the sortie with a high G maneuver, going straight to 8.5 G, which feels like being weighted down by 8.5 times one's body weight.

I have been up to 9 G several times in the past but, in my experience, anything beyond 6 G is just painful. But its always a challenge, and I certainly wasn't about to let go of the opportunity to experience 8.5 G onboard the French superfighter.

As we neared 8 G, at the apex of a sharp vertical climb, I began sensing the onset of a grey-out, with peripheral vision slowly disappearing. As the G forces increased, and my vision became a touch blurry, I realised I couldnt be too far from a black-out (caused by blood racing from the head to ones feet). But high G maneuvers like this last just a few seconds and soon we were back to straight and level flight.

To deal with the onset of high Gs, all pilots on the Rafale (like all fighters) don a G suit which slows down the flow of blood from the head during a high-G maneuver through the inflation of air into bladders around the waist and legs. However, unlike some of the other fast jets I have flown on, a chest extension to the G-suit (which squeezes the pilot's chest to reduce the flow of blood to the legs) is optional - the angle of the ejection seat on the Rafale ensures that G forces can be dealt with effectively with only a standard G-suit kit.

After a one hour, twenty five minute sortie, 3 D guides our Rafale back to Istres, the landing speed of the jet significantly lower than what I have experienced on jets such as the American F-16. With a touch down speed a little over 200 kilometres per hour, the Rafale actually feels as if its hanging in the air, particularly after all the high speed runs we had been doing all afternoon. This is a boon for pilots, particularly as they try to land on shorter runways. Enaging auto-throttle during the final approach to land, once the landing gear has been deployed, ensures that both airspeed and the angle of attack needed to come into land is automatically taken care of, the Rafale landing without any fuss whatsoever.

For me, the sortie on the Rafale was a dream come true, a chance to experience, first hand, a platform the Indian Air Force rates as the best fighter of its class in the world. When the Rafale eventually enters frontline squadron service with the Indian Air Force (assuming negotiations actually end up in a contract), the IAF may well become the most potent Air Force in the world this side of the United States, all within the next 15 years. Flying a mix of Russian Sukhoi 30 heavy fighters, PAKFA stealth fighters being jointly developed in Russia and the Dassault Rafale, the IAF's fighter fleet will have formidable capabilities - covering the entire spectrum of offensive and defensive air operations.

(Vishnu Som, NDTV's Editor Documentaries, is an aviation enthusiast who has has flown and reported on a range of fighter jets around the world.)
abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by abhijitm »

Vishnu man thats awesome! I envy you. And your expressions during 8G are priceless :D
Raja Bose
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19478
Joined: 18 Oct 2005 01:38

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Raja Bose »

Vishnu wrote: In March last year, pilots of the 1/7 Squadron based in St Dizier, not too far from Paris, flew a 9 hour long mission into Libya, in the first wave of attacks against Moammer Gaddafi's armed forces.

Using secure high-rate data links, Rafale fighters in the early days of the conflict were able to receive intelligence images and video real-time through a system called Rover (Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver) from friendly forces on the ground.
oops! Did Vishnu inadvertently reveal the involvement of "non-state actor" French/western SF on the ground in libya? :mrgreen:
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Singha »

no I think the french defmin had himself said they airdropped Milan ATGMs to the western mountain rebels (the berbers).
obviously someone who need to be on ground to train them and organize these ATGM teams.
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4665
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by putnanja »

Good one Vishnu!
member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by member_20453 »

Congrats, you truly are fortunate, that said...

We will never know if indeed Rafale is considered the best by the IAF, it is certainly cheaper than the EF and thats the main reason it won, due to price. Lets not go so far as to say the SPECTRA is the best EW suite based on a fighter in the world, the DAS going on board the F-35, The super Bug Growler and the EW suite on the Raptor will eat it for breakfast, lunch and dinner any day. Apart from having a higher useful payload and range, the EF can do all the same and more, expensive as it is, EF on any given day is a better bird. It's faster, flies higher and has more potential for the future, bigger AESA, all aspect TVC etc. The EF can easily fly at the same low level inverted all by itself. The F-16IN too can fly a pre-programmed ultra low level flight. Ef can deploy the Meteor faster and at a higher cieling thus allowing for max effective range. Sure, we would have had to put in effort to have developed the EF into the way we want it, but nothing like being involved from the ground up in such developements.

Indeed Raffy is a great bird, however with it's current French weapons pack, it is no where as effective as bird it can be, it would be a better killer if IAF does the smart thing and goes for an US weapon's pack on it. I hope they order thousands of proper, obviously better and cheaper weapons than spending billions on buying stuff that doesn't even begin to dent the enemy's will to fight.

MICA-RF, AASM, Storm shadow are all very expensive weapons with little advantages, people forget that the cost of drop 6 AASM simultaenously at 6 targets costs well over 700 K euros while a single CBU-97/105SFW can take out 40 targets at roughly the same cost. Our potential enemies need to be dealt with overwhelming firepower by deploying extensive volume, that simply cannot be done with an expensive limiting french weapons pack.

No doubt AASM, MICA etc are great weapons, they are just not for us, they were built for the French AF which hardly has a proper enemy to consider. They had shortages as soon as the Libyan campaign started and Unkil had to ship thousands of PGMs to cover them.
member_19930
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 4
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by member_19930 »

I envy you Vishnu!
member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by member_23694 »

Hi All,

After following this site for at least 7+ years.....my first post....feeling good about it..... :D

Vishnu gr8 post...and most definitely envy you for the fun that u have on these fighters :)

Can the Super SU 30 MKI and Rafale complement each other vis a vis say a J-20....or they will still have to be
dependent on a PAK-FA for a stealth adversary.

With fighters having such load carrying capacity of 8 - 9 tonnes, should we not try for some weapons which can be considered as a mini- MOAB to shell shock and overwhelm the enemy troops and at the same time not cross the nuclear threshold.

I think we should take the best parts of Super Su 30, Rafale and PAK FA for the LCA ....and simply build the numbers.....Having 4 type of fighters with advanced avionics, AESA and phenomenal weapons capability with a couple of variant of UAV and UCAV all data linked....should make IAF a fantastic force
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by RoyG »

Septimus P. wrote:Congrats, you truly are fortunate, that said...

We will never know if indeed Rafale is considered the best by the IAF, it is certainly cheaper than the EF and thats the main reason it won, due to price. Lets not go so far as to say the SPECTRA is the best EW suite based on a fighter in the world, the DAS going on board the F-35, The super Bug Growler and the EW suite on the Raptor will eat it for breakfast, lunch and dinner any day. Apart from having a higher useful payload and range, the EF can do all the same and more, expensive as it is, EF on any given day is a better bird. It's faster, flies higher and has more potential for the future, bigger AESA, all aspect TVC etc. The EF can easily fly at the same low level inverted all by itself. The F-16IN too can fly a pre-programmed ultra low level flight. Ef can deploy the Meteor faster and at a higher cieling thus allowing for max effective range. Sure, we would have had to put in effort to have developed the EF into the way we want it, but nothing like being involved from the ground up in such developements.

Indeed Raffy is a great bird, however with it's current French weapons pack, it is no where as effective as bird it can be, it would be a better killer if IAF does the smart thing and goes for an US weapon's pack on it. I hope they order thousands of proper, obviously better and cheaper weapons than spending billions on buying stuff that doesn't even begin to dent the enemy's will to fight.

MICA-RF, AASM, Storm shadow are all very expensive weapons with little advantages, people forget that the cost of drop 6 AASM simultaenously at 6 targets costs well over 700 K euros while a single CBU-97/105SFW can take out 40 targets at roughly the same cost. Our potential enemies need to be dealt with overwhelming firepower by deploying extensive volume, that simply cannot be done with an expensive limiting french weapons pack.

No doubt AASM, MICA etc are great weapons, they are just not for us, they were built for the French AF which hardly has a proper enemy to consider. They had shortages as soon as the Libyan campaign started and Unkil had to ship thousands of PGMs to cover them.
Don't you ever get tired of changing usernames and posting the same stuff over and over again. First you were shouting that the "AMERICANS WILL WIN!!" and now this...give me a break.
member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by member_20453 »

Don't you get tired of minding your own business, if you have nothing worthy to counter, why do you bother posting?
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Viv S »

Septimus P. wrote:Congrats, you truly are fortunate, that said...

We will never know if indeed Rafale is considered the best by the IAF, it is certainly cheaper than the EF and thats the main reason it won, due to price.
Well, to be fair he did say that the Rafale is the most capable of the lot in its current state of development. By 2015 that situation will probably favour the EF and post-2020, the F-35 will clearly rule the roost but as of today the Rafale is certainly the most mature fighter in production. The DASS upgrades will be concluding only by next year and the DAS/EOTS/Barracuda wouldn't be qualified till about 2018.

You're right about the munitions though. Buying those from France is ... unaffordable. For a whopping $1.25 billion, each Mirage in the IAF gets about 5 MICAs each. Far too few for a drawn out fight especially against the kind of numbers the PLA can field. Even the Meteor despite being a 'best in class' munition seems heading in the same unaffordable direction (unless we can get a deep ToT and license produce them). Same for air to ground munitions - the SDB along with an improved Sudarshan kit is still the best combination the IAF can get, though I doubt we'll see either on the Rafale.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by vasu raya »

Vishnu wrote:One of the most impressive technologies on offer in the Rafale is the advanced terrain following system which allows the jet to skim the surface of the earth using the Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS). Operational in two modes, the AFCS, allows the pilot to conduct a fully automated attack run ("hands off the controls") using either digital terrain following or a radar terrain following mode. With digital terrain following, the AFCS maneuvers the Rafale over terrain (hills, valleys, peaks) based on a three dimensional map database which is pre-programmed into the AFCS software. An even more reliable way of coming in low to hit a target (or to escape) is by using the radar terrain following mode of the RBE-2 AESA radar which scans the terrain ahead and safely flies the jet over all obstructions before resuming nap-of-the-earth operations.

3D demonstrated both modes to me during my sortie including a hair-raising ultra-low level run over the sea at no more than 100 feet at a speed nearing 500 knots (926 kilometres per hour). This was, quite clearly, the most thrilling experience I have ever had on any fighter jet I have flown, far more thrilling than the gravity-defying "thrust-vectored" maneuvers I have experienced on the latest generation of Russian fighters such as the Sukhoi-30 or MiG-35.

Racing over the Mediterranean, 3D tells me, over the Rafale's voice-activated intercom, "Look Vishnu, no hands." I look forward to see 3D's raised hands in the front cockpit. He clearly isn't kidding !

"At this altitiude and at this speed, its safer for the radar to fly the plane than me" explains 3D. Just then, the Rafale banks to the left following the pre-programmed heading fed into the Rafale's auto-pilot system, an even more incredible experience. For the next several seconds, I am overwhelmed by the sensation of the sea, now less than thirty metres from me, staring me in the face as we charge past. The Rafale suddenly levels out and then banks to the right, giving me another peak at this other-worldly experience.
Excellent! lets see how it fares when they use this over the mountains. we have had atleast two accidents of CFIT, one involving a Mig-29 in the himalayas and another a low flying Jaguar in the desert
JaiS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2190
Joined: 01 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: JPEG-jingostan
Contact:

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by JaiS »

Vishnu,

Saw the terrain following video, it is insanely awesome !

Congrats on living the dream.
eklavya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2159
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by eklavya »

Viv S wrote:Well, to be fair he did say that the Rafale is the most capable of the lot in its current state of development. By 2015 that situation will probably favour the EF and post-2020, the F-35 will clearly rule the roost but as of today the Rafale is certainly the most mature fighter in production.
How does EF become the most capable in 2015? Has any air force ordered a EF with an AESA radar?

How do you know if F-35 will be more capable than the PAK-FA?
Viv S wrote:You're right about the munitions though. Buying those from France is ... unaffordable. For a whopping $1.25 billion, each Mirage in the IAF gets about 5 MICAs each.
Thought IAF ordered about 500 MICAs for about 50 Mirages. Thats makes it about 10 each. Please get your facts correct. No one expects Mirage 2000 fleet to take down PLAAF all by itself. There are also 3 squadrons of MiG-29, several squadrons of Su-30 MKI, several squadrons of Rafale after 3-4 years, etc.

The rest of your post is pure propaganda. Let's wait and see what munitions IAF orders for the Rafales ....
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by SaiK »

well by 2015 think about taking down both plaafs and pilafs across the yellow sea together.
I am sure LCA, and AMCA would take a bigger stage.. LCA Mk2 will be the fighter platform for the left side, while the right side, we need massive qualitative and quantitative analysis to check out all possible combinations for a win in not more than few weeks. Long ways to go, just plaaf alone.

good video vishnu, but all the while the camera was fixed on you rather on the Rafale panels [perhaps it was intended and deliberate to keep things secret for public view.] :wink:
member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by member_20453 »

How does EF become the most capable in 2015? Has any air force ordered a EF with an AESA radar?

How do you know if F-35 will be more capable than the PAK-FA?

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... 35-345010/

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... commitment

EF will recieve it's AESA by 2015, The Captor-E is more than a generation ahead of the RBE-2 AESA due to having much higher T/R modules of of around 1500+, 100 degree FOV and ability to move.

EF also has a better flying qualities with supercruise, higher top speed of mach 2+ and a higher flight cieling of over 60K feet.

F-35 will be pretty advanced eletronically, it's simple DAS has already demonstrated ability to pick up IR signatures of rocket launches from over 1200km away. It will be tough to beat the F-35 in eletronics.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Viv S »

eklavya wrote:
Viv S wrote:Well, to be fair he did say that the Rafale is the most capable of the lot in its current state of development. By 2015 that situation will probably favour the EF and post-2020, the F-35 will clearly rule the roost but as of today the Rafale is certainly the most mature fighter in production.
How does EF become the most capable in 2015? Has any air force ordered a EF with an AESA radar?
NETMA issued a formal RFP to Eurofighter last month, for an AESA radar to be fielded around 2015. As for why it'll be better - its broadly speaking comparable to the Rafale in terms of performance (better in some flight regimes, less so in others) but the one feature that does set it apart is the radar. I've always liked the Rafale but it unfortunately has an undersized nose and consequently an undersized radar.

How do you know if F-35 will be more capable than the PAK-FA?


I don't believe the PAK-FA will be operational by 2020. Also, while the PAK-FA does field a larger radar, better flight characteristics and a bigger missile complement, AFAIK it features no equivalent to the F-35's EOTS, DAS or SDB. Also the F-35 will have a lower RCS, lower IR signature, better EM emission control and a far superior EW system, sensor fusion and man-machine interface.

Thought IAF ordered about 500 MICAs for about 50 Mirages. Thats makes it about 10 each. Please get your facts correct. No one expects Mirage 2000 fleet to take down PLAAF all by itself. There are also 3 squadrons of MiG-29, several squadrons of Su-30 MKI, several squadrons of Rafale after 3-4 years, etc.
That's 450 missiles including IR variants for WVR combat. For BVR each Mirage is still restricted to 5 maybe 6 missiles. And given the MICA's lower range compared to the Aim-120C5 or the newer PL-12 variants, the lower Pk necessitates a larger missile inventory. Point being, the missile stocks need to be larger and the MICA isn't economical solution unlike say.. the Astra.
The rest of your post is pure propaganda. Let's wait and see what munitions IAF orders for the Rafales ....
Yeah almost like a page out of Goebbels' manifesto.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by SaiK »

On the contrary I'd think they need to reconsider redesigning a bit for space on the frontal.. they have gone great length for blending the fuselage to wings and nose to inlets.. fantastic job, but failed to consider enough real estate for say retractable re-fuel pods, or other retractable pods, more t/r panels, either beneath, side or above, etc. Now, we have to wait and see if next generation of t/r modules with advanced MMICs could help counter the numbers.. but, I think a slight redesign means quite a lot for rafale.
nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by nakul »

I know that this is speculation but the Rafale may have been built around the limitations in engine technology. The French wanted a domestic built plane and they would have had to consider the options available to them. Hence, they made it a smaller plane right from the beginning so that it would be agile when running on French engines. There is a lot of weight cutting in Rafale which is a boon (agility, future improvements) and a bane (size of radar, engine thrust) at the same time.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Singha »

having to fit on a smallish carrier with non-folding wings is also a size issue.
nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by nakul »

I think that the IAF has learnt their lesson from the French when specifying the engines for the AMCA. They have kept it at 90 kN (2 x 90 kN per plane) that is the same as the LCA's requirements. The Kaveri in its current form can deliver 70 kN which is not very different from 75 kN from Rafale's engines. Inshallah, GTRE can deliver a 90 kN before the arms lobby plays its tricks.
eklavya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2159
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by eklavya »

Viv S wrote:NETMA issued a formal RFP to Eurofighter last month, for an AESA radar to be fielded around 2015.


None of the EF partner countries have ordered this AESA. I understand that their idea is to entice export customers with the promises about this system. No one knows whether it will work, when it will be ready by, which weapons it will integrate with, etc etc etc Sounds like a very risky proposition.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Cybaru »

Can we just keep this thread about Vishnu and Rafale?

Thanks for posting your write up Vishnu!
Ravi Karumanchiri
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
Contact:

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Ravi Karumanchiri »

^^^^ I have several points to offer RE: several of the above posts. Please forgive me, they come in no particular order...

To simple-mindedly compare the specifications or performance characteristics of each aircraft 'one-up'; spec-for-spec, is completely stupid. Thankfully, that's not what the IAF did in the MMRCA; which is why they picked the right fighter for the IAF (all things considered). FIRST, before even inviting bidders, the IAF started with a 'concept of operations' (encompasing the full gamut of considerations during wartime and peacetime alike). This gives both planning and warfighting a context, without which you will likely spend too much money, do too much dying, and probably lose the war. Within this context, the IAF picked the right plane, for a number of technical, political, practical and operational reasons. In war, there is very definitely many examples of 'too much of a good thing' that the MMRCA tender for Rafale seems to cleverly avoid.

Bigger radars mean more cooling, which means power management issues and less space for other equipment (like larger-calibre guns with more ammo). More moving parts means more to maintain, and also more to go wrong at the worst time (which is why a fixed refueling probe is truly a beautiful thing). Simple-minded accounting of T/R arrays is sooooooo incredibly asinine, I'm not even going to......

Also; having sleeker lines and a higher top speed, also means you'll have a higher landing speed....

I thought it was a critically important aspect of the MMRCA, the ability to land on a roadway, and with minimal support from one truck and a limited ground crew, be able to refuel, pivot and take-off again within X minutes. This is a necessary wartime capability added-in because airfields are prime targets during wartime, and the MMRCA winner had to be able to continue the fight, even with degraded support facilities. From what I understand, the Rafale's incredibly low landing speed (which also gives it an advantage in naval operations from carriers), makes it the easiest plane to land on an Indian road (which I am sure everyone can appreciate is no mean feat!). This is the kind of capability that wins wars, not stupid marketing claims like the ability to spot a missile launch 1200 km away (and good luck taking a shot at it from an F-35).

Never mind the F-35..... I believe the program may already be doomed. (Long story short: those who live in 'Partner Nations' have been receiving a lot of information via the press lately that indicates significant political and military backlash against the F-35; with even American service branches publically weighing other options). Here in Canada, where the role of the F-35 was supposed to involve a lot of 'Arctic Patrol', the single engine is (finally) being seen as a major weakness of the F-35, and there is now a government committee reviewing the no-tender awarding of a contract for the F-35. It is possible the committee will conclude the choice needs to be revisited.

In the Indian context: If you look at the pitiful range of the F-35, and the picayne warload, never mind the fact that it only has one engine, the climb rate and turning radius of an Airbus, and significant interoperability issues with other platforms in the USAF itself (never mind the IAF, with its extensive inventory of Russian aircraft); altogether, I believe that all of the projections for 2500 copies of F-35 by the year 2035, these projections are HOGWASH. The Americans don't have the money for it, and more importantly, neither do they have the enemies for it either.

Not to mention; until someone builds a 'stealth refueling tanker aircraft', the F-35 will never be able to do anything resembling 'deep penetration'; which is very obviously the critical warfighting role that will be assigned to many IAF Rafales, each of which will be able to carry 8-9 tonnes per sortie.
nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by nakul »

There is no real need to improve the F-35. The nations procuring American craft buy them due to American political pressure and not because of the aircraft's merits. For the few who make their choices, Rafales, Eurofighters, Grippens and Migs are available anyway. The largest user of the F-35 i.e. USAF also possesses the F-22 which will more than make up for its shortcomings. Lockheed Martin has really done themselves well this time. Both mainstays of the US armed forces (F-22 & F-35) are made by them. With the price ballooning to 140 million $, we might see a reduction in the no of F-35s by the USAF. The USN at the moment don't have a replacement for their carriers and will probably by the F-35 by the truckloads.
Raveen
BRFite
Posts: 841
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
Contact:

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Raveen »

nakul wrote:...The nations procuring American craft buy ... not because of the aircraft's merits.
Nakul...I don't know how to respond to that but I feel like I must. It is a generalization that simply is not true. We aren't buying Apache or C-130 because of pressure, are we?
nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by nakul »

There is no pressure on India for the Apache and C 130J officially. (But according to Sanku ji & Wikileaks USA wanted India to reciprocate for the nuke deal by buying weapons)

In most cases, the company need not rely on superior products to win competitions, US lobbying does the trick. Out of the 238 C 130Js sold so far, 200+ sales would have been generated by being an American product.

In the case of the Apaches, we are using a watch & go tactics. The sanctions are still fresh in the mind of the users. I believe that the Apache was better than the Russian counterpart according to the trials but if you check the majority of the Apache's sales, they were not competing with Russian helicopters. Bottomline is, superior products will help in outlier markets like UAE, India & Malaysia but American aircrafts bread & butter is saved by US & allies' orders in the absence of external competition.
Ravi Karumanchiri
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
Contact:

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Ravi Karumanchiri »

^^^^^^
The F-35 is a failure because it has no cogent concept of operations. To fly the F-35 from an a/c carrier would be a joke, because the combat radius is pathetic. On top of which, the F-35 is expensive, so you'll only want to send it into 'santized' airspace, and fly it against a high-value ground target (because it doesn't have any of the flight characteristics needed to actively hunt competitive aircraft). It's truly a plane without a mission.

The Amreekhans have this 'video game' concept of air combat, wherein a large phalanx of American aircraft penetrate and are met frontally by an opposing force. The Americans with their (supposedly) better electronics, intend to fight from a distance, take many winning shots and evade counterfire for a clean escape. BUT, the F-35 has very low endurance, and within a very short time, will have to turn around and head back to base for fuel/weapons, whereupon it will effectively have to turn its back (exposing its IR-intensive rear), and therefore also a blind eye, while making a slow escape. This is not survivable, even less so when considering a second wave of aircraft entering after the initial engagement.

The 'video game' concept of operations (if you wanna call it that), is only going to 'fly' according to Lockheed Martin and its paid agents in the American press, and in the postings of Septimus P.

BTW: The USN is much more likely to skip the F-35 altogether, and begin induction of UCAVs, plugging that gap in the interim with new F-15s like the ones they've just sold the KSA.

Added later: Raveen, the Apache and C-130 are fine choices, not lame ducks like the F-35. Big difference there.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by SaiK »

Vishnu, on the G-suit you were given, are you saying you did feel near-blackout or the suit worked as intended? btw, is there anything specific to Rafale about G-suit, [like interfaces to any external devices for any reason whatsoever?]?
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5720
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Kartik »

vasu raya wrote: Excellent! lets see how it fares when they use this over the mountains. we have had atleast two accidents of CFIT, one involving a Mig-29 in the himalayas and another a low flying Jaguar in the desert
Controlled Flight Into Terrain class accidents have happened even with fighters equipped with Terrain Avoidance software. The first Rafale accident was one where the pilot ploughed the fighter into the ground after deactivating 2 ground warning/collision avoidance warnings. The system will not recover the aircraft by over-riding the pilot- and I'm not sure if the recommendation to develop an Auto-Recover facility activated by the pilot has been developed for the Rafale as yet.

Rafale crash article
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Surya »

I'm not sure if the recommendation to develop an Auto-Recover facility activated by the pilot has been developed for the Rafale as yet.

and even that might not helpt because it requires one to know that you are disoriented and punch it. if you keep trying to figure out - it will be too late
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by NRao »

RK,

I want some of whatever you have been drinking.

eg: I got it till the UAV stuff.But, USN and F-15s? When did that happen? Is the 5 a type, instead of a 8? TIA.

And, am I missing something (sorry Vishnu,et al, specially CY), my impression was that the F-35 had to be reinvented because Chicom stole their "secrets". No? Wrong impression?
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5720
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Kartik »

Septimus P. wrote:
EF will recieve it's AESA by 2015, The Captor-E is more than a generation ahead of the RBE-2 AESA due to having much higher T/R modules of of around 1500+, 100 degree FOV and ability to move.
How does one get one generation ahead by simply adding more T/R modules? And as for the swashplate mechanism that increases FoV, while it offers operational benefits, it also is a mechanical piece that has a far higher rate of failure than any other component on the AESA radar and hence it'll increase maintenance requirements. There is a trade-off and the Rafale's designers have emphasized that it has been designed keeping in mind maintenance reduction features. There are many lessons they've learnt from the Mirage-2000 (itself a maintenance friendly fighter compared to some other fighters of its generation) that have been applied to the Rafale and then its been improved upon further.
EF also has a better flying qualities with supercruise, higher top speed of mach 2+ and a higher flight cieling of over 60K feet.
Flying qualities? You've an authoritative source to tell you that its FBW is superior to that of the Rafale? Top speed is a nearly useless feature to compare fighters since there is hardly an operational scenario where Mach2 is going to offer you that much more than Mach 1.8. As for supercruise, the Rafale can reportedly supercruise as well (although in both fighters you'd employ afterburners to get over the drag hump encountered at the Mach barrier). The higher flight ceiling is another marginal advantage and may not be an operationally significant feature.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5720
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Kartik »

Viv S wrote:
That's 450 missiles including IR variants for WVR combat. For BVR each Mirage is still restricted to 5 maybe 6 missiles. And given the MICA's lower range compared to the Aim-120C5 or the newer PL-12 variants, the lower Pk necessitates a larger missile inventory. Point being, the missile stocks need to be larger and the MICA isn't economical solution unlike say.. the Astra.
Viv, you're changing your argument now.

You originally said that India is paying $1.25 billion that translated to 5 MICAs per Mirage. Now, that was a fallacious claim of the kind that a SAAB marketing guy would make. its actually $1.23 million, i.e. $20 million less than you quoted, and that was for a total of 10 MICAs per Mirage, which is not a bad reserve.

Now, since the MICA-IR and MICA-EM are essentially the same missile except for the warhead, it is upto the IAF to choose what numbers of MICA-EM it wants out of 450. And, if you had claimed that only 5 MICA-EMs were to be bought for the Mirage fleet, then you should have also only quoted half the price of the $1.23 million price for the entire deal. You instead made it look like the IAF would get only 250 MICAs for $1.23 billion. Its not that the MICA isn't an expensive missile, but you're again making up the claim of its Pk being lower. The Pk isn't affected by the max range of the missile and on the contrary, I've only read that the MICA has a very high Pk (although not really proven in combat).

Besides, when speaking to an F-15 pilot recently, I enquired about what the distance for a positive ID was in most engagements they had during exercises and he claimed that it varied in a huge range. It could be as low as 5 km on certain days due to atmospheric affects and the size of the opposing aircraft, or could be as high as 50 km on certain days. Now, 50 km falls well within the range of the MICA and even the Derby, something that explained why an Air Force like the Israeli AF, which has more air combat experience than most other Air Forces must've been alright with the 50 km range of the Derby BVR missile. Any longer range really may not translate into that big an advantage due to issues with positive ID and the fear of fratricide or worse.
Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Virupaksha »

Thank you Vishnu for the excellent write up.

For all the fighting others, choose another thread.
negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by negi »

Vishnu sir quick question what is the longest time you remember having experienced a 7g+ maneuver ? Also if you know of top of your head what is the typical figure for the same for a pilot ? :D
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5720
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Kartik »

Using secure high-rate data links, Rafale fighters in the early days of the conflict were able to receive intelligence images and video real-time through a system called Rover (Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver) from friendly forces on the ground. Using this information which was also shared with Intelligence analysts onboard AWACS jets, Rafale fighters were instantly vectored to new targets. Using a combination of its Damocles laser designation pod, which can mark targets for laser guided bombs and its Front Sector Optronics system which provides high resolution images, pilots were able to acurately identify and hit targets at long ranges.
Hi Vishnu,

Nice write up and congratulations on the wonderful experience. If you built up contacts, or got any nuggets of info, I'd like to ask you some questions-
Did you glean any information on the Rafale's datalink and whether or not the IAF will replace it with the ODL being developed indigenously?

You stated that the FSO could provide high rez images of the target, did you get any information on the possible ranges for it in aerial and ground modes? I'm asking this since the FSO would be very useful in a positive ID of an aerial or even ground target before weapons are launched. At BVR ranges (of course, with the caveat that BVR ranges would vary day to day based on the atmospheric visibility conditions), this would be a very handy feature, but since it uses a tele-lens, the range is what interests me.

Were you able to find out about whether the IAF will order the Areos recce pod with the Rafales? Its datalink feature is very useful since near real-time images can be shared with a ground station, but its a capability the IAF possesses with the Su-30MKI's ELM-2060P recce pod. So, if required, can the ELM-2060P be used on the Rafale instead of having to purchase a completely new recce pod and its ground exploitation system? Elta claims that its easy to integrate this recce pod on even fighters like the MiG-29, so perhaps the Rafale should be an easy candidate.

And what about Litening 3 LDPs in place of the Damocles? There have been multiple reports from good sources that the Damocles doesn't fare as well as the Litening 3 and since the IAF already is a Litening operator, if they want, will Dassault integrate the Litening on the Rafale? Is that part of the negotiations for final configuration for the IAF?

Sorry if these are too many questions.
Vishnu
BRFite
Posts: 274
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Vishnu »

SaiK wrote:well by 2015 think about taking down both plaafs and pilafs across the yellow sea together.
I am sure LCA, and AMCA would take a bigger stage.. LCA Mk2 will be the fighter platform for the left side, while the right side, we need massive qualitative and quantitative analysis to check out all possible combinations for a win in not more than few weeks. Long ways to go, just plaaf alone.

good video vishnu, but all the while the camera was fixed on you rather on the Rafale panels [perhaps it was intended and deliberate to keep things secret for public view.] :wink:
Hi SaiK ... Don't think there was anything classified in the cockpit. I have the full HUD recording with all communication between the pilot and me. I wasn't carrying a handheld camera (its a serious liability if you are pulling serious gs) and a camera mounted behind me would be a no no since it could foul the ejection seat process.

Cheers
Vishnu
Vishnu
BRFite
Posts: 274
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Vishnu »

Hi Kartik ... A few half-answers ... !
Did you glean any information on the Rafale's datalink and whether or not the IAF will replace it with the ODL being developed indigenously?
Sorry ... no information on this ! I didnt ask.
You stated that the FSO could provide high rez images of the target, did you get any information on the possible ranges for it in aerial and ground modes? I'm asking this since the FSO would be very useful in a positive ID of an aerial or even ground target before weapons are launched. At BVR ranges (of course, with the caveat that BVR ranges would vary day to day based on the atmospheric visibility conditions), this would be a very handy feature, but since it uses a tele-lens, the range is what interests me.
The FSO offers outstanding resolution on ground targets. We didn't track the L-39 and Mirage 2000 accompanying us using the FSO. I can tell you, in having experienced the optronic pod on the F-16 IN that tracking targets at BVR ranges for ID purposes is certainly possible. We tracked an F/A-18 on a reciprocal heading from Yelahanka at clear BVR ranges on the pod.
Were you able to find out about whether the IAF will order the Areos recce pod with the Rafales? Its datalink feature is very useful since near real-time images can be shared with a ground station, but its a capability the IAF possesses with the Su-30MKI's ELM-2060P recce pod. So, if required, can the ELM-2060P be used on the Rafale instead of having to purchase a completely new recce pod and its ground exploitation system? Elta claims that its easy to integrate this recce pod on even fighters like the MiG-29, so perhaps the Rafale should be an easy candidate.
The recce pod is INCREDIBLE and I was provided a demonstration of its capabilites by intel officers attached to the 1/7 Rafale Squadron at St Dizier. They showcased two things:

1. An image of Paris taken by a Rafale in a single pass at a range of 60 kms. The resolution was good enough for me to NEARLY see the number plates of cars on the road.
2. An image of a forest in Libya with a number of "anamolies" in the image. By zooming in, these could be identified EASILY as 6-7 T-55 tanks.
And what about Litening 3 LDPs in place of the Damocles? There have been multiple reports from good sources that the Damocles doesn't fare as well as the Litening 3 and since the IAF already is a Litening operator, if they want, will Dassault integrate the Litening on the Rafale? Is that part of the negotiations for final configuration for the IAF?
Didn't ask. Let me try and enquire.

Cheers
Vishnu
Vishnu
BRFite
Posts: 274
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

Post by Vishnu »

negi wrote:Vishnu sir quick question what is the longest time you remember having experienced a 7g+ maneuver ? Also if you know of top of your head what is the typical figure for the same for a pilot ? :D
Hey ... I haven't checked ... but most of the video I uploaded was of a g load above 7 g ... I would think a total approaching 8-10 seconds. I forgot to tighten my gut (DDMitis) so felt the impact more than I should have.

I can also share that I have experienced a g load for a second or two beyond 9 g (I suspect well beyond 9 g) in the Gripen NG. Don't want to get too specific.

Something else interesting .. In the Rafale simulator which I flew in St Dizier, I didn't adjust throttle enough to match my vertical climb. Air speed fell like a brick and PARS (the pilot recovery system) got activated. They had designed this feature specifically for DDM and I can tell you, it works.

Cheers
Post Reply