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
Lynstyne       11/14/2009 6:30:16 PM




And carrier capable, if youd gone with replacing the melbourne.



 



With its internal weapons bay and RCS of  0.001 KM all it would need is Spectra and 2 x mica and it would be the best 4.8 gen carrier capable aircraft today. providing we bought french RAM technology for the refuelling probe.






Please quit doing that. I spilled tea all over me. Now I have to change pants.......again.
Sorry about the trousers and i hope the tea wasnt to hot.
 
P.S Tea - I didnt think tea was that popular accross the pond.


 
Quote    Reply

warpig       11/14/2009 9:10:32 PM

P.S Tea - I didnt think tea was that popular accross the pond.


When you go as far north as his neck of the woods, it is.  That, and back bacon, eh?

 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       11/15/2009 3:26:21 AM
The UK wanted to put some pressure on the US but failed to do so and now , the British find themselves trapped by the US . It 's already costing them an harm and a leg just to participate at the crappiest program in history of fighter aircraft .
 
And you know it's crappy how?  Oh, I know.  It's not French.
 
What would you do with the same budget : Buy 150 Rafale M-F3s now or bet on buying 50 F-35s around 2013-2015 with the hope that the aircraft will be a flyable machine ?
 
Buy F-35s later, because I know they'll at least have all the kinks worked out and won't need an upgrade in a few years.  Also, because the F-35 is a 5th-gen fighter whereas the Rafale is only 4th gen.  And also because the gorram carriers won't be built for another five or six years, so buying Rafale Ms would be a) more expensive in the long run and b) useless and c) won't be able to do anything in the strike role the Tornado can't and d) won't be able to do anything in the A2A role the Typhoon can't.  True, the Rafale can likely do both jobs, but the Brits already have the Tornado and the Typhoon.
 
When you compare the actual capabilities of Typhoon , Gripen , F-35 (?) against Rafale 's , the difference is enormous .
Yet , the Dassault fighter is the cheapest .
In fact , the only other aircraft able to more or less compete are the SH and the F-15K . I say "compete" to not upset the US posters as the Rafale is superior to any F-teen .
 
Which is why people are just lining up around the block to buy the Rafale, right?
 
Geez, BW...just about the time I've gotten comfortable having an intelligent conversation with you, you have to post crap like this. 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       11/15/2009 9:52:00 AM
jackjack :
 ""now that you have been banned for being a TROLL at keypublishing for a month,""
 
Huh ? I 've never been a member of this forum and I 've never posted anything there . You are confusing me with someone else .
 
""i ask again, perhaps you will have time to pick up the dassault topic and show us that it isnt a bracket, but 1/2 cm of ram as you claimed""
 
I am still looking into the matter and I cannot find anything definitive yet . I might well be kind of AN-74 like the one from Emerson and Cuming (a 3 cm thick three layered foam absorber that specs 20 db RCSR down to 3.5 GHz) but with less thickness . When I 'll have something new , you can be assured that I 'll post it .
 
Stevo :
""Bluewings,
That Article about the RN is incorrect. The UK defense minister stated in Parliament a couple of days later that:
a) Both QE and PoW will be fully capable and to the same standards.
b) Planned F-35 acquitions have not changed.""
 
I did not know and I stand corrected . I apologize for posting outdated stuff .

""Your trolling is getting rather annoying""
 
I wasn 't trolling (I never do) , I was unaware .
 
""Is the Rafale cheaper then the Gripen?""
 
Of course not . I gave the price for Typhoon , Rafale and JSF only . If I would have included the Saab fighter price , I would have chosen the Gripen-NG . I didn 't .
 
""F-18E/F has much better sensor integration et al then Rafale (or Typhoon and Gripen for that matter).""
 
In your dreams only . Rafale 's Integration , Sensor Fusion and MMI are in F-22 league (to say the least) . If the SH can compete with Rafale in something , it is not in sensor integration but in versatility , in multirole and in Carrier capability .
 
""However the F-35 is in a whole new league""
 
Negative . The F-35 is in the prototype league (less than 30% of the flight test have taken place) . We can still talk about the probable capabilities of the futur aircraft but with more than a pinch of salt for now .
 
MK , yes the MN lost 2 Rafales . A collision can 't take place with one aircraft only , I had a brain fart :-(
I said :
""When you compare the actual capabilities of Typhoon , Gripen , F-35 (?) against Rafale 's , the difference is enormous ""
Your response :
It's capabilities are certainly good, but not better in all areas.
 
In multirole , the actual Gripen is ahead of the actual Typhoon . The Rafale F3 also is .
In AtG , I also choose the Raf F3 : better integration , better survivability , OSF , AASM , Exocet , ASMP , etc ...
In AtA , it is a close call in between the Typhoon and the Rafale (the Gripen comes a bit short in real performance but its intranetwork ~data fusion in between Gripens~ is second to none) . Whatever say the fanboys , the various Rafale-Typhoon encounters did not bring a clear winner , far from it . However and for the sake of truth , it seems that the Typhoon won 2-1 against the Rafale during the S-Korean eval (it also won 4-0 against the F-15K) .
MK , I am sure that you are also aware of the French pilots saying that they can detect a Typhoon waaaay before they can detect another Rafale , which definatly proves the RCS difference . It is also why the Typhoon Captor , while having a better range than the Pesa RBE2 , don 't give the Eurofighter any edge in detection range .
 
gf , when I quote Peter Collins , it is not a "hallmark" comment (?) from me .
""so Peter Collins has ignored the entire history of British procurement""
 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       11/15/2009 10:36:58 AM
""i ask again, perhaps you will have time to pick up the dassault topic and show us that it isnt a bracket, but 1/2 cm of ram as you claimed""

 

I am still looking into the matter and I cannot find anything definitive yet . I might well be kind of AN-74 like the one from Emerson and Cuming (a 3 cm thick three layered foam absorber that specs 20 db RCSR down to 3.5 GHz) but with less thickness . When I 'll have something new , you can be assured that I 'll post it .

 I thought  we had all covered this, and i thought you had accepted conventional wisdom  .To Whit There is no point applying ram to the base - see Dasault thread for various reasons  by myself , G.F ,Sentinal and others.  (there were many responses dont feel offended if you were not mentioned by name)
 

Stevo :

""Bluewings,
That Article about the RN is incorrect. The UK defense minister stated in Parliament a couple of days later that:

a) Both QE and PoW will be fully capable and to the same standards.




b) Planned F-35 acquitions have not changed.""



 



I did not know and I stand corrected . I apologize for posting outdated stuff .


fair enough can be wrong - myself i never saw a (credible) report cancelling the carriers

-who else thinks Eagle ,Ark Royal ,  or glorious and furious would have been better names



""Your trolling is getting rather annoying""

 

I wasn 't trolling (I never do) , I was unaware .

I have to say that whether intentionally or not you do appear to be Trolling at times.
""Is the Rafale cheaper then the Gripen?""

 

Of course not . I gave the price for Typhoon , Rafale and JSF only . If I would have included the Saab fighter price , I would have chosen the Gripen-NG . I didn 't .


 


""F-18E/F has much better sensor integration et al then Rafale (or Typhoon and Gripen for that matter).""

 

In your dreams only . Rafale 's Integration , Sensor Fusion and MMI are in F-22 league (to say the least) . If the SH can compete with Rafale in something , it is not in sensor integration but in versatility , in multirole and in Carrier capability .

See ref about trolling - you have no experience in aviation - youre knowledge of aircraft is from sales brochures, forums and wiki non of which can be taken as gospel - many aircraft can do what the rafale does electronically - but if some one disagrees with you youre response is instant dismissal.
 
on that note DASS was designed into the tiffy from the start - the germans (i think ) pulled out 9for a while at least) thats why it gets the impression it wasnt designed for the tiffy --  that and politics but dass does interferomettyr along with a million other systems
 

 
""However the F-35 is in a whole new league""

 

Negative . The F-35 is in the prototype league (less than 30% of the flight test have taken place) . We can still talk about the probable capabilities of the futur aircraft but with more than a pinch of salt for now .
 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       11/15/2009 11:00:58 AM
For got in the Tanker bit
 
Most fighters can buddy tank but the preference is to use a dedicated tanker  (as pointed out by GF) such as an L1011
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    Why bother?   11/15/2009 11:11:58 AM
Its a waste of time with this one. 

Example:
 
"gf , when I quote Peter Collins , it is not a "hallmark" comment (?) from me .
""so Peter Collins has ignored the entire history of British procurement""
 
Are you nuts ?! He surely knows far more than you do about British procurement , lol ! Sorry to say .
You are some kind of "scratch-paper" and he was a Squadron leader and a test pilot ."
 
=====================================
 
1. gf IS still connected to the global community of government and industry professionals who talk to each other about procurement issues. Peter Collins has never been "inside"  for at least a decade.
 
2. Squadron leader and test pilot how far back was Peter Collins? Currency is another word for technical competence, as it is for money.
 
=====================================
 
Example 2; 
 
"5. Integration of Meteor BVRAAM."
 
So far, the only successful live fire trials are from a GRIPEN and VIGGEN. Tha Rafale tests from the Charles de Gaulle (2005) were telemetry and carry tests to see if the missile could survive launch and recovery operations. There have been other "carry" tests conducted by the British, and some ramjet verification shots, but to this point, aside from the Swedish, no AIRCRAFT launched live fires that result in target hits.
 
If anyone can be said to be integrated and coded as I write this, it would be GRIPEN and VIGGEN (the planes have actually destroyed drones with hand-built validation weapons). The other candidate aircraft Typhoon, the Captor radar needs a card upgrade, whule the Rafale with its punt RBE2  cannot even exploit the mid-range flyout endurance band of the Meteor. (ROTFLMAO).  When has Rafale fired one?
 
Here's a hint:
 
 

Eurofighter Nations Delay Meteor Missile until 2015

By: Chris Pocock

February 18, 2009
Defense

http://www.ainonline.com/images/single-news-page-7d.jpg" alt="Single News Page" title="Single News Page" width="240" border="0" height="156" />

The four partner nations in Eurofighter have agreed to delay until 2015 the introduction of the Meteor, the advanced rocket-ramjet beyond visual range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM) designed by MBDA. The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) is managing the development of Meteor, and is the only country to have committed to production so far.

However, the MoD told the UK National Audit Office that it was falling into line with Germany, Italy and Spain. After reviewing the ?likely environment? (meaning the threat), the MoD said that the Raytheon AIM-120C AMRAAM missiles currently carried by the Typhoon would ?provide sufficient capability out to 2015.

The Meteor was scheduled to enter UK service in August 2012, after an eight-year development period. That date has been redefined as the ?platform-ready In-service date,? but subsequent integration onto the Typhoon will take three more years.

France and Sweden are also partners in the project, intending to buy Meteors for the Rafale and Gripen, respectively. An informed source suggested to AIN that the timetable of those two countries for integrating the new missile would be driven by the export prospects of the two fighters.

 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       11/15/2009 12:48:24 PM
Lynstyne :
""I thought  we had all covered this, and i thought you had accepted conventional wisdom  .To Whit There is no point applying ram to the base - see Dasault thread for various reasons  by myself , G.F ,Sentinal and others.  (there were many responses dont feel offended if you were not mentioned by name)""
 
I still say that what we see around the refueling probe is some kind of Radar Absorbant Material . I am still looking for the definitive proof .
 
I said to Stevo :
""In your dreams only . Rafale 's Integration , Sensor Fusion and MMI are in F-22 league (to say the least) . If the SH can compete with Rafale in something , it is not in sensor integration but in versatility , in multirole and in Carrier capability .
 
You responded with :
See ref about trolling - you have no experience in aviation - youre knowledge of aircraft is from sales brochures, forums and wiki non of which can be taken as gospel - many aircraft can do what the rafale does electronically - but if some one disagrees with you youre response is instant dismissal.
on that note DASS was designed into the tiffy from the start - the germans (i think ) pulled out 9for a while at least) thats why it gets the impression it wasnt designed for the tiffy --  that and politics but dass does interferomettyr along with a million other systems
 
Stop shooting at the messenger and discuss the facts , thank you . I know of what I am talking about .
Furthermore, while the DASS is a powerfull ECM system and uses interferometry for geo-location , it doesn 't use AESA active antennas for precise jamming through multi-bands and is not LPI either . I could also say that DASS 's databank and data fusion is also less advanced than Spectra .
 
""see ref about trolling  how can you say future capabilities about the F35 and others need to be taken with a pinch of salt yet you claim future rafale capabilities are definate and gospel- its inconsistent and thats why you get accused of trolling.""
 
The capabilities of the futur Rafale provided by the new hardwares have already been tested onboard various other aircraft , Aesa RBE2 , Damoclès pod , Exocet Blk3 , ASMP-NG , few components of the Carbone system to name a few .
We know what they do , it is a matter of integration and not about flight tests like with the F-35 . I repeat again , I don 't troll .
 
""agreed If Rafale comes 2nd best to Typhoon it is down to weapons integration and NATO standard weapons types carried. Rafale ough to get sidewinder amraam etc these will make it more viable for foreign airforce . Brimstone for youre own guys wouldnt hurt either"" 


Well , I agree that the Brimstone is a very clever weapon .
The Rafale uses many NATO weapons (US weapons or derivatives in fact) and integration is excellent . It is up to the customer to ask the US for AMRAAM integration for exemple . The Rafale is wired for :

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/449/dassault10he7.jpg" width="352" height="640" />
 
I said :
""To start with , I agree with P. Collins . That being said , I also disagree strongly with the STOL choice . It is a bad choice .
Mainly for 3 reasons :
-1) Cost of maintenance and higher failure rate with STOL aircraft
-2) ma
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    The diagram offered is for carriage.   11/15/2009 12:58:44 PM
Its up to the customer to actually arrange to code for the US weapon (Israel?) since the French actually don't.
 
Good luck with that.
 
As for the rest........just more noise.
 
Meteor is in trouble, hence the delay and the extended British testing. Something about that seeker..........
 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       11/15/2009 1:04:33 PM
There has obviously been a loss of translation or term change
CTOL conventional Take off and landng
STOL Short take off and landing
 
CTOL and STOL are the same thing  ie uses a runway STOL just means it can stop/start quicker . Thats why i wondered if you were refering to STOVL a la harrier.
 
Re upgrades Youre claim is all future rafale bits are flown and proven ok thats possible but dismiss the F35 as it hasnt flown - that does not mean its radar , ecm, avionics, etc havent flown on a different airframe.
 
Re the refuelling probe - i will explain it again there is a big metal ball on the front because of this the rcs will never be as small as you think the ball is bigger than that, and placing ram material at its base would be a waste of effort.
 
For once im going to pull rank on the forum - for want of a better expression-
 
I am damn sure I know more about this subject than you. So unless France has introduced some revolutionary material that probe is not RAM coated. Be told you are wrong.  - Its nothing to be ashamed of it happens to all of us
 
I am damn
 
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