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: Rafale Proves Itself
SYSOP    8/7/2011 7:59:23 AM
 
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 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54   NEXT
BWisBack       12/19/2011 8:13:17 PM
Herald , I 'm a good guy and I give you some numbers :
 
""The War in Libya has not ended yet, but seven months after the beginning of the conflict the French Ministry of defense is summarizing the ammunition it spent through the conflict. According to the French Ministry of defense, from 19 March to 30 September 2011, the Air Force and Navy (the Charles de Gaulle carrier air group and maritime patrols) spent 20,000 operational flight hours on roughly 4,500 missions. THese missions represent 25% of the total operational missions carried out y the coalition forces and 35% of the offensive missions over Libya, hitting 750 military targets. French combat helicopters performed the majority (90%) of coalition helicopter combat missions over Libya, claiming 550 targets destroyed. According to  Mr. Gérard Longuet, Secretary of Defense and Veterans Affairs, 950 guided guided bomb were dropped by French Air Force and Navy Rafale and Mirage 2000s, these included an unspecified number of laser guided bombs and 240 air-launched missiles – including 15 SCALP cruise missiles and 225 GPS guided Hammers (AASM); in addition, French helicopters have launched 431 HOT missiles. The French Navy vessels have also fired 3,000 rounds from 100mm and 76 mm guns. Other ordnance used included an unspecified number of rockets fired by helicopters and naval vessels. ""
 
From :
h*tp://defense-update.com/20111012_france-spent-over-1000-bombs-and-missiles-in-the-7-month-libyan-campaign.html
 
I don 't give you the 2380 sorties yet , find the link . You can .
 
Cheers .
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       12/19/2011 8:14:12 PM
@45 sh
flip up left engine pump (lower  right side of cockpit) after opening APU switch engine, start aircraft power. mini throtlle to idle then norm . after normal battery settings,   (L first), then right starter on. when left engine is up, put mini throttle of right engine to idle then norm (left side of cockpit). Turn battery from left to right. switch pump to on, then u can start right engine, wait for it to spool up. Same for left, then have fun!
 
Of course you can do that on a flight simulator, like claiming you flew on FRONT seat (aka main pilot)...Claims are a thing, competence another, when you mix a written ten ton class on a site with a ten ton assumption etc, how would i trust you?
 
Btw why do you ask ppl to claim credencies you dont?
 
Please stop answering to straight questions you were given by side stepping about your "expertise" and your supposed to be ability as a fighting pilot. Given the tons of imaginary data you spammed previously, it is just questionable. If you assume weird numbers, you have to prove credits. No less. We poor ignorant forumers rely on companies/air forces assumptions, none of ANY you gave. If there is a  way to private message here, i'll give you a protected adresss ([email protected]) where you can show me your credencies AND prove me you are right. Until then, you just invent fantasy numbers from your expert armchair.
r
 
Quote    Reply

BWisBack    @halloweene   12/19/2011 8:29:17 PM
I don 't know who you are Sir , but if you wanna have a quick talk , you 'll find me on air-defense where you can send me a perso message , if you want to . But only if you want to , of course .
 
Cheers .
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

BWisBack    @halloweene   12/19/2011 8:30:26 PM
(sorry for the double post)
Look for Bluewings .
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       12/19/2011 8:36:09 PM
think i messed between foumers quoting each others, so at the end i didnt know who said what...
However, Indian evaluation is fairly interesting as they completely separated technical from financial/politics aspects. Boeing said they were ok after debrief from Indian MoD. I agree that Rafale is 4++ gen aircraft (if anyone can expalain me what is a 4 or 5 gen aircraft apart from LM commercials), still way ahead (in late 2012 first batch with AESA radars) of nannies teens aircrafts...
 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       12/19/2011 8:41:01 PM


(sorry for the double post)

Look for Bluewings .

 

Cheers .
done, with lil christmas surprise!
 
Quote    Reply

BWisBack       12/19/2011 8:45:05 PM
Halloweene , use Bluewing12 . I think I gave you a VERY old account .
Sorry
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       12/19/2011 8:46:31 PM
rofl u can use prof.566, but that was the surprise rofl
 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter    Imprecise thoughts   12/19/2011 8:47:05 PM


Far more parasitic drag,wing chord on the Rafale's cranked delta is optimized for thick air. Not a true statement therefore.
This is BS! The Delta wing has a very small Aspect Ratio and therefore a very high Parasitic Drag! This is exacerbated by the Canards at low angles of attack, ( Cruise and Top Speed!) and helped at high AoAs! ( ACM!) Note that just because the canards help at high AoAs, do not think they make the Delta's lower AR equal to the higher AR Plane!
 
We have only manufacture's claims (OF SHORT TBOs) about M-88 ECO as opposed to actual user data (Of incredibly long TBOs!) on F-100s, so comparisons have a HUGE fudge factor on sustained core temp op-limits. Best guesses are what thew Armee del'Aire report-NOT Jane's. 

A 50% increase in TBO from 200 to 300 hours still stinks compared to 4-6000 hours between shop inspections! It is my idea that this is one of the biggest reasons why the Rafale has not sold! No one wants to take a flier on a plane with a weak engine that might have to be replaced TEN to TWENTY times before the first OVERHAUL on an American Engine! That is also one of the reasons why America is not willing to give large TOT concessions! In over three decades of actual use by foreign National Air Forces, the American engines are well known for their durability!


Name         Weight  DryThst MaxThst  DryT/W&SFC   Max T/W & SFC  Mx

F110-132    4,050lb 19,100   32,130     4.71 / .64             7.9/2.09               TBO 4,000 TACs

F100-232    4,065lb  22,000   32,500    5.41 / .73?          8.0 / 1.91              6,000 cycle depot insp
- Numbers are for ideal inlet, installed thrust less 

M88-2-4     1,978lb  10,950   16,404    5.54 / 0.8            8.29 / 1.72            Hot section TBO 600hrs

EJ200         2,180lb  13,490   20,250    6.19 /.74-.81       9.29 / 1.66-1.73    Mx interval >400 hrs

F414          2,470lb   14,756   22,000    5.97/.85?            8.9 / 1.85?            2,000hr hot section  
  - est SFC with F404-400 numbers

Standard caveat - these are all standard day, sea level, 0 airspeed.  I've generally gone with the higher performance numbers versus derated efficiency settings.  Bottom line, the F100 & F110 have some lower engine T/W ratios, which seems to largely be the result of more robust construction for a longer lifespan.  The also enjoy better Mil SFC, but worse Max SFC.  The EJ200 and F414 seem to have a performance edge, although F414 SFC numbers aren't published.  With the M88 having quite a bit shorter TBO cycle, and having twice as many engines, the F-16s should enjoy an engine in engine mx time, although at the loss of redundancy.

A F-16blk60 and Rafale C have virtually the same empty weight, fuel (w/CFTs for Blk60), and very clue thrust to weight.  The F-16 should enjoy a slightly longer radius at Mil power on internal gas only, but will burn thru his gas quicker at high AB settings.  The Rafale enjoys a 60% greater wing area, so it should have a large advantage in instantaneous turn and probably a sustained advantage, while the smaller frontal area and wetted wing of the F-16 may give better unloaded acceleration.
http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Load.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);" target="_blank">link......
Far more parasitic drag,wing chord on the Rafale's cranked delta is optimized for thick air. Not a true statement therefore.
 
We have only manufacture's claims about M-88 ECO as opposed to actual user data on F-100s, so comparisons have a HUGE fudge factor on sustained core temp op-limits. Best guesses are what thew Armee del'Aire report-NOT Jane's.   
 
H.


 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       12/19/2011 8:51:32 PM
Damn these adresses work like a prg14...
Sry to other forumers about perso messages, no offence intended, but there is no private message here!
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics