F-22 vs. Rafale dogfight

Anything goes, as long as it is about the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5868
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post26 Nov 2019, 06:53

zero-one wrote:
to be fair, I don't see a reason why we should doubt their supercruise claims. Put enough thrust on a brick and it will go super sonic. just look at the F-4 :wink:

I think a Rafale and Typhoon still has substantially less drag and more thrust to weight than the F-4 even if it had a bag and 4 missiles.
Its not unreasonable to think that they can break the barrier with AB and maintain Mach 1.2 in Max mil power at certain altitudes. 40K maybe


Sure it's fair.........Jon Beesley once said even the Amraam (AIM-120) had a big impact of flight performance. In addition the weight and drag of an external fuel tank. Is so high that it consumes half of the fuel held within.


Which, is not to say the Rafale can't. Just saying we have good reason to question the claim.... :wink:
Last edited by Corsair1963 on 26 Nov 2019, 06:58, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5868
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post26 Nov 2019, 06:56

Also, let's say for the sake of argument. The supercruise claim of Mach 1.2 with missiles and tanks is accurate. The drag would still be considerable and even on military power. Would consume a great amount of fuel.



In short the duration would likely be very short.... :wink:
Offline
User avatar

linkomart

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 411
  • Joined: 31 May 2010, 07:30
  • Location: Sweden

Unread post26 Nov 2019, 14:14

Corsair1963 wrote:
zero-one wrote:
to be fair, I don't see a reason why we should doubt their supercruise claims. Put enough thrust on a brick and it will go super sonic. just look at the F-4 :wink:

I think a Rafale and Typhoon still has substantially less drag and more thrust to weight than the F-4 even if it had a bag and 4 missiles.
Its not unreasonable to think that they can break the barrier with AB and maintain Mach 1.2 in Max mil power at certain altitudes. 40K maybe


Sure it's fair.........Jon Beesley once said even the Amraam (AIM-120) had a big impact of flight performance. In addition the weight and drag of an external fuel tank. Is so high that it consumes half of the fuel held within.


Which, is not to say the Rafale can't. Just saying we have good reason to question the claim.... :wink:


Well, the Rafale and the Typhoon carries the missiles in tandem and semi-recessed and that is a lot of less drag than (a pylon and) a AMRAAM under the wing. Also the Typhoon is slender compared to the F-35 and adding extra cross section to the F-35 punishes it more than the Eurofighter. (remember the added area is both pylon and Missile)
Also if you look at the Rafale tanks they are arearuled to minimise the cross sectional area. This minimizes supersonic drag, so for me it's highly plausible that they can go supersonic with bags and missiles, and perhaps even supercruise at some altitudes.
And... You always use AB (or a dive) to go through transonic unless you have extremely much excess power dry.... don't know of any airplane that likes to stay in the transsonic regime.

regards
Offline
User avatar

linkomart

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 411
  • Joined: 31 May 2010, 07:30
  • Location: Sweden

Unread post04 Dec 2019, 09:05

A small correction to my last post, Rafale does not AFAIK carry missiles in tandem, and not semi recessed either. But it has two small pylons under the rear fuselage that probably are very low drag.

my 5 cent
Previous

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests