Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: UK Pilot flight test the Rafale F3
Bluewings12    11/9/2009 1:57:05 PM
By Peter Collins : Chapter 1 , the aircraft : "Most advanced Allied air forces now have operational fleets of fourth-generation fighters (defined by attributes such as being fly-by-wire, highly unstable, highly agile, net-centric, multi-weapon and multi-role assets). These Western types include the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon and Saab Gripen NG. The Boeing F-15E and Lockheed Martin F-16 have an older heritage, but their latest upgrades give them similar multi-role mission capabilities. Of the above group, only the Super Hornet and Rafale M are capable of aircraft-carrier operations. As these fourth-generation fighters' weapons, sensor systems and net-centric capabilities mature, the likelihood of export orders for such an operationally proven package becomes much more realistic. On behalf of Flight International, I became the first UK test pilot to evaluate the Rafale in its current F3 production standard, applicable to aircraft for both French air force and French navy frontline squadrons. The "proof-of-concept" Rafale A first flew in 1986 as an aerodynamic study, leading to the programme's formal launch two years later. The slightly smaller single-seat Rafale C01 and two-seat B01 for the French air force and single-seat M01 and M02 prototypes for the navy flew from 1991. The first production-standard Rafale flew in 1998, and entered service with the navy's 12F squadron at Landivisiau in 2004 in the F1 (air-to-air) standard. Deliveries of the air force's B- and C-model aircraft started in 2006 in the F2 standard, dubbed "omnirole" by Dassault. Since 2008, all Rafales have been delivered in the F3 standard, which adds reconnaissance pod integration and MBDA's ASMP-A nuclear weapon capability. All aircraft delivered in earlier production standards will be brought up to the F3 configuration over the next two years. The French forces plan to purchase 294 Rafales: 234 for the air force and 60 for the navy. Their Rafales are set to replace seven legacy fighter types, and will remain as France's principal combat aircraft until at least 2040. To date, about 70 Rafales have been delivered, with a current production rate of 12 a year. Rafale components and airframe sections are built at various Dassault facilities across France and assembled near Bordeaux, but maintained in design and engineering configuration "lockstep" using the virtual reality, Dassault-patented Catia database also used on the company's Falcon 7X business jet. Rafale software upgrades are scheduled to take place every two years, a complete set of new-generation sensors is set for 2012 and a full mid-life upgrade is planned for 2020 SUPERB PERFORMANCE The Rafale was always designed as an aircraft capable of any air-to-ground, reconnaissance or nuclear strike mission, but retaining superb air-to-air performance and capabilities. Air force and navy examples have made three fully operational deployments to Afghanistan since 2005, giving the French forces unparalleled combat and logistical experience. The commitments have also proved the aircraft's net-centric capabilities within the co-ordination required by coalition air forces and the command and control environment when delivering air support services to ground forces. Six Rafale Ms recently carried out a major joint exercise with the US Navy from the deck of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier the USS Theodore Roosevelt. The air force's B/C fighters have 80% commonality with the navy's Rafale M model, the main differences being the latter's navalised landing gear, arrestor hook and some fuselage longitudinal strengthening. Overall, the M is about 300kg (661lb) heavier than the B, and has 13 hardpoints, against the 14 found on air force examples. Dassault describes the Rafale as omnirole rather than multirole. This is derived from the wide variety of air-to-ground and air-to-air weapons, sensor pods and fuel tank combinations it can carry; the optimisation of aircraft materials and construction; and the full authority digital FBW controlling a highly agile (very aerodynamically unstable) platform. This also gives the aircraft a massive centre of gravity range and allows for a huge combination of different mission stores to be carried, including the asymmetric loading of heavy stores, both laterally and longitudinally. Other attributes include the wide range of smart and discrete sensors developed for the aircraft, and the way that the vast array of received information is "data fused" by a powerful central computer to reduce pilot workload when presented in the head-down, head-level and head-up displays. The Rafale is designed for day or night covert low-level penetration, and can carry a maximum of 9.5t of external ordinance, equal to the much larger F-15E. With a basic empty weight of 10.3t, an internal fuel capacity of 4.7t and a maximum take-off weight of 24.5t, the Rafale can lift 140% of additional lo
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34   NEXT
Bluewings12       11/21/2009 10:12:23 AM
Hamilcar , you know that you have a biased attitude and you also know that you twist words and facts for them to fit your BS .
Exemple :
""It is what every customer who looked at Rafale told the vendor We want missiles, engines and radar that works.  .""
 
No , mister the troll . No customer ever said that and I defy you to prove me wrong .
Do you think that the Eurofighter Team wants the Aesa technology because the Captor radar is not working ? Nope , they want it to increase the performance .
It is exactly the same with the Rafale and its possible customers . What they say is something like "Mica is fine but we want Meteor , Pesa RBE2 is ok but we want the Aesa RBE2 , the M88-2ECO is a fine engine but we want even more thrust " .
You invented the facts that nothing works on the Rafale .
You troll , you lie , you take people for fool , you revise history , etc ... Hamilcar , you are still using the Herald way and it is crystal clear . You never learn ...
 
1-5-5-E :
""The best for a 4 or 4.5 gen fighter is to keep a single supersonic central fuel tank . If the aircraft 's 3D numerical signature is manageable through active ECM , it is even better ;-) (BW)
This does sound like a great capability.  Can you tell us more about it?""
 
On SP , we 've been talking about it countless times already . It has nothing to do with active cancellation but with the capability to jam simultaneously and very precisely the radar bands were the Rafale s RCS spikes are showing . 
The way to archive this is well known as long as you have what the knowleadge and the hardware . No secret technology here . To make it short :
-1) you know the exact RCS of your fighter under various conditions (angle of arrival , radar band used , etc)
-2) thus , you have a databank : the 3D EM signature
-3) you have top of the range interferrometry capability to precisely locate the adverse emitter and analyze the bands used
-4) you use an active Aesa jammer for fast frequency shifting and hoping , as well for power modulation
-5) you have powerfull computers to do it in real time
-6) you have a bit of French "genie"
 
All is left to do is to find a good name for the suite : Spectra .
 
Lynstyne :
""See recent comments on RAM on fuel probes , several people explained why it wasnt done, and why there would be no point fitting a half inch bit to the base.""
 
Nobody explained anything because there is no one here on SP knowleadgeable enough on the subject . 
So far , I am still unable to find where Dassault did exactly put the RAM on the Rafale , I can 't prove myself right and/or my detractors wrong . What I know is that some RAM foam has been designed to do exactly that : coating various parts or shapes usualy not treated . These foam based RAM coatings could well be the "bracket" that we see around Rafale 's refueling probe .
Note that I say "could" and not "are" . So , instead to scream bloody murder at me , maybe some should look into it and try to find some material on the subject . That would be helpfull and more constructive .
 
""Ive just re read my post and think i may have been a tad aggressive and personal
So i will say my comments all stand I reckon im correct on all counts,
however i didnt perhaps mean to be quite so rude""
 
No worries , you didn 't insult anyone . No , you are not correct on all counts .

Cheers .
 
 
 

 

 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       11/21/2009 11:06:55 AM
BW there are plenty of people who are knowledgeble enough about the subject., that between them can form an informed judgement - you just refuse to listen.
 
Tell you what though ill drop you a bloody great hint   why do you think i mention L1011 in the discussion about air refuieling
 
 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       11/21/2009 11:18:32 AM

Hamilcar , you know that you have a biased attitude and you also know that you twist words and facts for them to fit your BS .

Exemple :


""It is what every customer who looked at Rafale told the vendor We want missiles, engines and radar that works.  .""

 Maybe a tad harsh however the point stands that customers want better engines etc

No , mister the troll . No customer ever said that and I defy you to prove me wrong .

Do you think that the Eurofighter Team wants the Aesa technology because the Captor radar is not working ? Nope , they want it to increase the performance .


It is exactly the same with the Rafale and its possible customers . What they say is something like "Mica is fine but we want Meteor , Pesa RBE2 is ok but we want the Aesa RBE2 , the M88-2ECO is a fine engine but we want even more thrust " .

You invented the facts that nothing works on the Rafale .


You troll , you lie , you take people for fool , you revise history , etc ... Hamilcar , you are still using the Herald way and it is crystal clear . You never learn ...

 

1-5-5-E :

""The best for a 4 or 4.5 gen fighter is to keep a single supersonic central fuel tank . If the aircraft 's 3D numerical signature is manageable through active ECM , it is even better ;-) (BW)
This does sound like a great capability.  Can you tell us more about it?""

 

On SP , we 've been talking about it countless times already . It has nothing to do with active cancellation but with the capability to jam simultaneously and very precisely the radar bands were the Rafale s RCS spikes are showing . 

The way to archive this is well known as long as you have what the knowleadge and the hardware . No secret technology here . To make it short :


-1) you know the exact RCS of your fighter under various conditions (angle of arrival , radar band used , etc)
 
thats great but now youve launched a weapon youve got huge spikes from the hard point which renrder the above even if possible ineffective as the profile has now changed.

-2) thus , you have a databank : the 3D EM signature


-3) you have top of the range interferrometry capability to precisely locate the adverse emitter and analyze the bands used


-4) you use an active Aesa jammer for fast frequency shifting and hoping , as well for power modulation


-5) you have powerfull computers to do it in real time


-6) you have a bit of French "genie"

 

All is left to do is to find a good name for the suite : Spectra .


 

Lynstyne :


""See recent comments on RAM on fuel probes , several people explained why it wasnt done, and why there would be no point fitting a half inch bit to the base.""

 

Nobody explained anything because there is no one here on SP knowleadgeable enough on the subject . 
 
 
See previous

 
So far , I am still unable to find where Dassault did exactly put the RAM on the Rafale , I can 't prove myself right and/or my detractors wrong . What I know is that some RAM foam has been designed to do exactly that : coating various parts or shapes usualy not treated . These foam based RAM coatings could well be the "bracket" that we see around Rafale 's refueling probe .


Note that I say "could" and not "are" . So , instead to scream bloody murder at me , maybe some should look into it and try to find some material on the subject . That would be helpfull and more constructive .

 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       11/21/2009 11:44:21 AM
On SP , we 've been talking about it countless times already . It has nothing to do with active cancellation but with the capability to jam simultaneously and very precisely the radar bands were the Rafale s RCS spikes are showing . 
The way to archive this is well known as long as you have what the knowleadge and the hardware . No secret technology here . To make it short :
-1) you know the exact RCS of your fighter under various conditions (angle of arrival , radar band used , etc)
-2) thus , you have a databank : the 3D EM signature
-3) you have top of the range interferrometry capability to precisely locate the adverse emitter and analyze the bands used
-4) you use an active Aesa jammer for fast frequency shifting and hoping , as well for power modulation
-5) you have powerfull computers to do it in real time
-6) you have a bit of French "genie"
 
Wow.  That's some heady science fiction you have there.  I figured that was going to be the story though.

In real life, the only way what you are proposing could ever work is with active cancellation.  In fact that's pretty much what you just described.  Otherwise, in order to do what you claim, it would have to be able to do noise jamming powerful enough to drown out its spike returns to a ground-based search radar - and that ain't gonna happen on a fighter without a massive amount of generator capacity.
 
Here's the real story - and here's where you are going to get your panties in a bunch.  The fighter uses its RWR to locate emitters so it can stay away from them, or attack them.  Its defensive ECM takes signals from threat emitters (like missiles), modulates them for deception, and transmits them back at the emitter.  It's a real nice setup, but it's not anything different from what systems like ALQ-184 have been able to do for decades. The main difference is that on this airplane the systems are all integrated into the airframe whereas most other aircraft before the '00s slapped that capability on with pods.
 
The rest is just wishful thinking.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/21/2009 2:57:24 PM
In real life, the only way what you are proposing could ever work is with active cancellation.  In fact that's pretty much what you just described.  Otherwise, in order to do what you claim, it would have to be able to do noise jamming powerful enough to drown out its spike returns to a ground-based search radar - and that ain't gonna happen on a fighter without a massive amount of generator capacity.
we've been through this issue of processing power, onboard generation, extant real estate issues on Rafale and active cancellation issues starting from 5 years ago. in fact 3-4 of us have had this debate with him.

he doesn't get it.  just like he didn't understand signal management and the impact of poor panel fit - even though it was supported by both pilots who flew real LO aircraft, even though it was supported by other pilots who experienced the results first hand - and even though I cited radar engineering handbooks with ISBN numbers for him to go and look up.  - and yet he is still banging on about active cancellation (without saying it) on a small airframe with limited real estate and a known power output, and he is still banging on about non existent RAM on AAR  probe.

abandon any hope of having reasonable debate because he will trot out the same rubbish again and again and again.  he's not interested in how things work in real life - only in how he thinks things should work.

and FFS crapping on about the magic of inferrometry as though its a capability exclusive to Rafale is another classic example of how the hans christian anderson approach to tech discussions holds primacy.  again, he regularly demonstrates zero awareness of what the tech sets actually arr and what they actually can do, and yet dribbles on and on and on as though its a special capability 

I'm almost tempted to start a thread quoting all of his idiotic claims with all the evidenced counter claims just to remind him of how often he stuffs up.  

 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       11/21/2009 4:02:54 PM

Hamilcar , you know that you have a biased attitude and you also know that you twist words and facts for them to fit your BS .

Exemple :
***************************
FULL QUOTE:


Hamilcar    Assertions are not facts.   11/20/2009 7:33:28 PM
That is for the benefit of someone who needs to understand the difference.

""A more powerful engine, a new air-to-air missile and cutting-edge radar systems are some of the requirements the UAE has made to Dassault and its French partners, Safran, Thales and MBDA, according to media reports in September.""
 
Everything that I said was wrong with that crap aircraft.
 
Missiles.
engine
radar. 

Word for word.
 
Now that is evidence HE supplied that I used against his assertions.
 
It is what every customer who looked at Rafale told the vendor We want missiles, engines and radar that works.  .
 
UAE is just the latest in a long line.
********************************

No , mister the troll . No customer ever said that and I defy you to prove me wrong .
 
I just did. 

Do you think that the Eurofighter Team wants the Aesa technology because the Captor radar is not working ? Nope , they want it to increase the performance .

The CAPTOR  works, as does AMRAAM, as does the EJ2000 60 kNewton drythrust engine. CAPTOR is being improved to exploit METEOR flyout, if METEOR ever is fixed, that is. What was that seeker problem about, again, I wonder?
 

It is exactly the same with the Rafale and its possible customers . What they say is something like "Mica is fine but we want Meteor , Pesa RBE2 is ok but we want the Aesa RBE2 , the M88-2ECO is a fine engine but we want even more thrust " .

You invented reported the facts that nothing works on the Rafale .


You troll , you lie , you take people for fool , you revise history , etc ... Hamilcar , you are still using the Herald way and it is crystal clear . You never learn ...

 

1-5-5-E :

""The best for a 4 or 4.5 gen fighter is to keep a single supersonic central fuel tank . If the aircraft 's 3D numerical signature is manageable through active ECM , it is even better ;-) (BW)
This does sound like a great capability.  Can you tell us more about it?""

On SP , we 've been talking about it countless times already . It has nothing to do with active cancellation but with the capability to jam simultaneously and very precisely the radar bands were the Rafale s RCS spikes are showing . 
 
Nonsense. that means exactly zero.  The radar spike out of a radio reflector is not something that is STATIC like some feature that sticks out of a fixed stricture. They (physicists) don't call them radio waves  for nothing.

The way to archive this is
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       11/21/2009 5:56:42 PM
1-5-5-E :
""Wow.  That's some heady science fiction you have there""
 
Not at all . I only described in plain and easy to understand english what Spectra does . If you don 't know the technology , it is not my fault .
 
""In real life, the only way what you are proposing could ever work is with active cancellation""
 
No , you are confusing active deception jamming with active cancellation . Spectra doesn 't integrate the signal then change it to an out of phase signal then transmit it back to the adverse emitter , which is active cancellation . What Spectra does is to jam and make noises on the bands where Rafale 's spike are showing under a certain condition without any regard to what the adverse fighter radar is doing (more or less and to make it short) . 
It is the reason why Pierre Chaltiel (Spectra Team manager) said that there are ways to make an aircraft almost invisible .
It is not about fooling the adverse radar with "active cancellation" , but to saturate with low or high powered jamming (noises) the bands where the Rafales 's spikes can be detected .
This is different . As far as I know , we are the only one so far to have used this idea to build a new breed of ECMs .
So , what you , gf and Hamilar said is just irrelevant . The Rafale is not using active cancellation , it is out of reach for now .
 
I don 't know if FS knew the "know-how" behind Spectra but he is correct when he says that the fighter ECM suite is lowering the Rafale 's RCS by a good magnitude . The radar "spikes" still exist but they are hard to detect because of the generated EM noise . 
Now , some posters (mainly Americans) don 't like the idea that the French could use the actual technology better than the USA in the ECM field . Again , it 's not my fault .
 
Cheers .
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/21/2009 6:14:57 PM
Nobody explained anything because there is no one here on SP knowleadgeable enough on the subject . 

what rubbish.  3-4 people have spent copious amounts of time trying to explain how signal management works across a number of vectors - the problem is that you don't understand or don't want to make the effort to be  reasonable.  you're the worst combination, a troll and a technical ludite pretending to comprhend this stuff when you clearly repeatedly don't.  thats why you're treated with contempt.  people make the effort - people who clearly have more than an internet insight into this subject and yet you blithely continue on spouting absolute teenage nonsense.

So far , I am still unable to find where Dassault did exactly put the RAM on the Rafale , I can 't prove myself right and/or my detractors wrong . What I know is that some RAM foam has been designed to do exactly that : coating various parts or shapes usualy not treated . These foam based RAM coatings could well be the "bracket" that we see around Rafale 's refueling probe .

well sport there are enough close up photos of the Rafale running around to see whwre it would and could be put - you obviously don't understand the concept at all otherwise you'd know that RAM on a flanged bracket for a refueling probe is just trite nonsense.  If you can't understand why then what hope is there for you to start understanding the rest of the craft?

and you cannot be serious about that bracket being RAM foam?  Do you have any ferking clue at all about the principles involved here?

Note that I say "could" and not "are" .

don't behave like a teenage troll and people will cut you some slack.  I've seen this nonsense coming from you since 2004 - you haven't improved - in fact you've got worse.  if you were genuine you'd make the effort to listen to people who actually have more than an idea how some of these technology sets work.  and FFS don't trot out the "woe is me" line when you're the idiot who makes sweeping statements, gets proved wrong (even by your own countrymen) and then appeals to the audience as though you are the aggrieved party.

 So , instead to scream bloody murder at me , maybe some should look into it and try to find some material on the subject . That would be helpfull and more constructive .

CREF the previous comment.  You're not interested in learning, you're here to flag wave and have a pi$$ing contest.  Demonstrate some genuine intent and people will react to you differently.  And again, if you knew anything about signal management rather than preach to others you'd have a fair idea as to where it would/should/could be applied.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/21/2009 6:19:04 PM
So , what you , gf and Hamilar said is just irrelevant . The Rafale is not using active cancellation , it is out of reach for now .

How about we start trotting out all your old posts where you said that Spectra was actively managing the signature footprint?  

Sweet mordred, you can't even lie properly because you forget all the times you made that exact claim about Spectra




 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/21/2009 6:25:28 PM
It is the reason why Pierre Chaltiel (Spectra Team manager) said that there are ways to make an aircraft almost invisible .

It is not about fooling the adverse radar with "active cancellation" , but to saturate with low or high powered jamming (noises) the bands where the Rafales 's spikes can be detected .


thats just nonsense.  quote him properly because it makes him look stupid.  at least give the correct citation so that we can understand what he actually said..

if you are actively saturating/managing signals then you have a flying transducer/transmitter.  its why you manage signals passively so as to not turn into a variation of a flying transducer.  if you don't do it passively then by rote it is active - and Spectra is not an active signal management system

 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics