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
MK       11/12/2009 3:49:03 PM

MK,  dassault never got back on the F1 upgrade intent, so can't comment at this point in time.

No problem. But thank you for the effort anyway.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    Uhmmmm.   11/12/2009 3:53:08 PM







What's funny is people talking about "omnidirectional" jammers vice little MMIC arrays and claiming they are some kind of expert.  Because I guess an expert on ECM wouldn't have heard about Rotman lenses and mini-TWTs in use on U.S. and no doubt other Western ECM systems since the late '70s.  There's more than one way to skin a cat.

Some of us have.






Not talking about theory, but about systems that have F in the air since the late 1970s.  If you think beam steering antennas for ECM are new, it's because you don't know anything about ECM and get your G2 from the back cover of Combat Air Forces International Monthly.
I am NOT one of the Bobbsy twins, guy. I just noted a Georgia Tech development of which I was personally aware.
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       11/12/2009 4:24:21 PM


I am NOT one of the Bobbsy twins, guy. I just noted a Georgia Tech development of which I was personally aware.


No problem dude, was just emphasizing the point that this stuff was in the air long before the "precision finger of SPECTRA" was even a napkin sketch.
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       11/12/2009 5:19:15 PM


Well so far there is just one US aircraft with a more or less comprehensive EWS in service the Super Hornet with its IDECM. What the suite is exactly capable of is classified and not much info on it has been released at all. 


Oh come on, even if you're just talking about fighters, TEWS on the Eagle was really the first of its kind, ASPIS I/II is on quite a few Vipers out there, and Falcon Edge IEWS is an American system that has more flying examples than there are Rafales, just to name a few.  ASPIS and Falcon Edge are both buzzword-compliant Digital/DRFM/Directional, with most of the interesting stuff being classified so claims of better or worse are pure speculation.
 
What I really like about reading these threads is the absolute metaphysical certitude some folks like to display about how well their system works, as if it's possible to drop your favorite fast jet into a battlespace unsupported and its ECM will work like magic.  Fact is nobody's invented one yet that doesn't rely heavily if not absolutely on prior intelligence.  Unless the other guy's emitters are in your threat library your DECM is not going to do you any good, and doing ELINT by soaking up SAMs is not the path to a long and distinguished career.
 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/12/2009 5:32:20 PM
Oh come on, even if you're just talking about fighters, TEWS on the Eagle was really the first of its kind, ASPIS I/II is on quite a few Vipers out there, and Falcon Edge IEWS is an American system that has more flying examples than there are Rafales, just to name a few.  ASPIS and Falcon Edge are both buzzword-compliant Digital/DRFM/Directional, with most of the interesting stuff being classified so claims of better or worse are pure speculation.

It was maybe a somewhat unlucky expression. That other types have EWS as well is nothing disputed here, it's more about the range of systems and capabilities (as far as known). Which US fighter combines RWR/ESM, DECM, MAWS, LWR, dispensers and possibly TRD in a single package fully integrated into the aircraft and was designed with that from start? What about fusing the EW data with other onboard and possibly offboard sensors etc. The Super Hornet blk II is the only aircraft in US service I'm aware of that posses ALL these capabilities to a more or lesser extend.
 
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       11/12/2009 6:24:14 PM

It was maybe a somewhat unlucky expression. That other types have EWS as well is nothing disputed here, it's more about the range of systems and capabilities (as far as known). Which US fighter combines RWR/ESM, DECM, MAWS, LWR, dispensers and possibly TRD in a single package fully integrated into the aircraft and was designed with that from start? What about fusing the EW data with other onboard and possibly offboard sensors etc. The Super Hornet blk II is the only aircraft in US service I'm aware of that posses ALL these capabilities to a more or lesser extend.

Kind of splitting hairs there.  The Viper Block 60 Falcon Edge does all of that save the TRD, and if you're going to argue that Block II Super Bug was designed with IDECM then by that logic Viper Block 60 was designed with Falcon Edge.  Remember the initial Super Bug came with ALQ-165 not ALQ-214 and IDECM been a spiral development from the start.
 
Anyway the concept is nothing new, as stated TEWS was the first of its kind and considering how analog it was it displayed quite a lot of integration - no mutual interference between radar/DECM/RWR for example, quite a feat for the time.
 
Quote    Reply

MK       11/12/2009 6:46:27 PM

Kind of splitting hairs there.  The Viper Block 60 Falcon Edge does all of that save the TRD, and if you're going to argue that Block II Super Bug was designed with IDECM then by that logic Viper Block 60 was designed with Falcon Edge.  Remember the initial Super Bug came with ALQ-165 not ALQ-214 and IDECM been a spiral development from the start.
 

Anyway the concept is nothing new, as stated TEWS was the first of its kind and considering how analog it was it displayed quite a lot of integration - no mutual interference between radar/DECM/RWR for example, quite a feat for the time.
Does Falcon Edge include a LWR as well? And to my knowledge the Falcon Edge included the same AN/ALR-56M as found on those late 80s/early 90s vintage F-15E and F-16 blk 50/52. Not a bad system, but certainly not the latest advanced one either, without ranging capabilities, no ELINT/SIGINT...
 
It's of course correct and valid to refer to other EWS and point out that a Spectra for example is nothing ground breaking new which never existed before. But I think it's a fair assessment to claim that Spectra brings the EWS technology to another level in comparison to most conventional EWS we are aware of. Albeit the has to be put into the perspective of other recent developments in that regards such as DASS or IDECM and of course INEWS, which lacks a jamming component in its current form however. I'm also not aware of the AAR57 being currently fitted to the Super Hornet or not and I haven't seen any references about a LWR. Btw is the ALE-55 operational by now or is the ALE-50 still the only TRD available for the Super Hornet?
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       11/12/2009 7:16:32 PM

Does Falcon Edge include a LWR as well? And to my knowledge the Falcon Edge included the same AN/ALR-56M as found on those late 80s/early 90s vintage F-15E and F-16 blk 50/52. Not a bad system, but certainly not the latest advanced one either, without ranging capabilities, no ELINT/SIGINT...

No, the Falcon Edge uses the LR-105 RWR, it's a totally different all-digital channelized system with long- and short-base interferometry.  It is advertised as doing single-ship geolocation and ESM.
 
As far as ALE-55, it completed operational testing and acceptance in '08 and DOD placed an order for 401 of them with delivery starting in FY10.  So they are probably not flying yet but on order.
 
They are actually working on IDECM Block 4 now, with additional capabilities for ALR-67(V)3 and a new onboard jammer.  IDECM Block 4 scheduled IOC 2014 with service on both Super Bug and C model Hornets.
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       11/12/2009 11:02:52 PM
Gf0012
However Mr Collins participated to definition studies of JSF during 4 years flying on simulator until 1993, and having access to initial spec, flew some over fighters like M2000 or F16, belongs to British test pilots community and so have some access to info (and confidences).He knows certainly more than other peoples here and even me.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/13/2009 1:28:33 AM

Gf0012

However Mr Collins participated to definition studies of JSF during 4 years flying on simulator until 1993, and having access to initial spec, flew some over fighters like M2000 or F16, belongs to British test pilots community and so have some access to info (and confidences).He knows certainly more than other peoples here and even me.

nope, strongly disagree.  referring to JSF specs in 93 is akin to referring to Have Blue specs against the last block of 
F-117's. or an F-16B to a Block 52 etc.....

they might look the same, but technically, operationally they might as well be on different planets.

considering that substantial changes in material sciences, ewarfare systems, flight management systems, etc have occured in the last 15 months - then referring to 1993 association is a complete canard.

as another example. look at the definition studies done for rafale or typhoon compared to the current flying products.  on paper both original designs didn't even look like todays end product - let alone the systems maturity issues twixt then and now.





 
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