F-22 vs Rafale dogfight results - French souce

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

wil59

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 164
  • Joined: 05 May 2015, 09:50

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 09:57

1. The dog-fight is a 'random' exercise in: "The F22 did not show superior the the Rafale" ... could also be said: "The Rafale is at the same level than the Raptor in dogfight." It is my professional opinion.
capitaine-romain. I remember my first years in the Air Force. I was a student pilot. My classmates and I had spent a good time watching the picture presented by the newspaper "Air and Cuckoos''as that of a Mirage IV: it was a Mirage 2000N.
Today, to be honest, I do not read the newspaper.
ATLC : L'interview du commandant de l'escadron de chasse 01.007 Provence !!! - capitaine-romain http://indiandefence.com/threads/eurofi ... 8/page-362 look interview
Offline

armedupdate

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2015, 21:11

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 10:00

Also what happens if the enemy uses AESA radar as a RWR? Wouldn't the gain be exactly the same meaning the exact same intercept range as the same detection range?
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2362
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 10:12

eloise wrote:
wil59 wrote:In terms of agility, AIM-120D and Meteor can both pull 40 g at Mach 4 and MICA IR can pull 50 g at Mach 4. This means that maximum turn rate is 18,54 deg/s for AIM-120 and Meteor and 23,2 deg/s for MICA IR. Comparing this to respective aircraft turn rates (36,4 deg/s ITR for Rafale and 35 deg/s ITR for F-22), it can be seen that both aircraft have a good chance of evading any of the missiles listed (missile needs to at least match aircraft’s turn rate, and in some cases have twice as high turn rate, in order to hit).


missiles doesnt need to match aircraft turn rate to hit , they are intercept not trying to follow aircraft path
also what you mentioned is ITR, which mean aircraft cannot sustain that turn rate for long and also lose alot of speed and altitude after perform it ,let say you perform very hard turn to dodge first missiles what will happened when the second missiles come ?


This is true. There are many thing that are wrong with the above comparison:

1. Missiles have the highest speed when they are flying at high altitude and speed decreases significantly at low altitudes
2. Aircraft have the highest maneuverability at low altitude and relatively low speed
3. Turn rates do not tell us much about ability to evade missiles as tightest possible turn would mean turning in place which would not help much to avoid missiles. Having low speed and very high turn rate would get one killed as the aircraft would not get away from the flight line of the missile even if it turns at much lower rate.
4. Aircraft might achieve those turn rates only in perfect conditions, flying very slowly and at low fuel state and with no stores.
5. When missile starts turning very tightly, it will lose speed and thus turn rate will actually increase until enough speed is lost and there is not enough energy and lift to maintain turn.
6. Timing the turn is difficult against BVR missile as it must be very difficult to see such a small missile with no smoke trail. Evading old and very large SAMs is much easier due to large size and big smoke trails. Even with missile launch and approach warning systems it's difficult due to small amount of time to react.

So in real life escaping from missile is far more complex than simply comparing turn rates in totally different altitudes and situations. I see it rather difficult against modern missiles if missile is launched within or close to NEZ. Evading using speed, stealth and countermeasures must be much more reliable methods. Of course maneuvering is one trick in the bag, but not necessarily in the way picard578 thinks it is.
Offline

wil59

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 164
  • Joined: 05 May 2015, 09:50

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 11:02

Helples, right it might be, but sorry, it is a hard maneuvering F-22 at the very least and it do hit a nerve doesn't it?
[​IMG]


This is NO "cross hair" but a proximity warning; proving that the Raptor is climbing in full A-B (can see the plumes against the background) with vortexes and all at high g, from the minimum combat level and Rafale is diving on it, it is a camera shot which have to be AXIAL, slightly out of gun sight, the F-22 is visibly maneuvering hard, so is the Rafale on an AAM fight this would be a kill...

btw, Lieutenant-colonel Fabrice Grandclaudon was there and his comments were reported accurately.

Now, go and dig an official, signed article from Flight Global saying this!

I know Craig Hoyle and correspond with him regularly, he IS the ONLY official defense editor at F-I and never posted such article, more to the point, the infamous John Lake can post article in their sister edition, using the same website but of course you wouldn't know, would you?
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1425
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 11:06

armedupdate wrote:Eloise why did the new Rafale get IRST removed? Can you give me a source?

here
Some reports suggest that the new OSF-IT will not have an IR channel at all, meaning that Rafale would lose its onboard IRST and FLIR capabilities, relying on the Damocles targeting pod to provide any IR picture. There has been speculation that the loss of the IR is required to make space for the larger AESA radar boxes. Because the OSF-IT and the new radar will be validated together (to save duplication in the flight test effort), the new OSF will not be incorporated until the ‘Roadmap’ aircraft, though it could have been made available much earlier.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... le-214754/

armedupdate wrote:Also isn't all IR vulnerable to phosphorous smoke? If the F-22 is using red phosphorus flares it can blind the IRST when providing

IR radiation maynot penetrate smoke , but if F-22 drop flare , it will be vulnerable in that case because enemy's IRST will look at the location of the flares and know where it is , also they dont carry that much flares

armedupdate wrote:Also what happens if the enemy uses AESA radar as a RWR? Wouldn't the gain be exactly the same meaning the exact same intercept range as the same detection range?

no radar would always have better processing gain since it know the frequency , waveform , PRF of the signal it send out
while RWR have advantages that it received more powerful signal
Last edited by eloise on 08 Dec 2015, 11:12, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

armedupdate

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2015, 21:11

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 11:11

wil59 wrote: slightly out of gun sight, the F-22 is visibly maneuvering hard, so is the Rafale on an AAM fight this would be a kill...

The problem is if that was a guns only engagement(which was the only type of engagement the F-22 fought the Rafale), their will be no missile kill since there was no missiles. If the rules were no missiles, the F-22 can have the comfort of getting in the Rafale's range if there were missiles.

Also the problem is the neither the French or Americans claim the Rafale beat the Raptor. Both reports say the F-22 won.
Offline

armedupdate

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2015, 21:11

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 11:17

eloise wrote:IR radiation maynot penetrate smoke , but if F-22 drop flare , it will be vulnerable in that case because enemy's IRST will look at the location of the flares and know where it is , also they dont carry that much flares

Er....that is quite a lot of flares enough for a smoke screen with a burst of 10-20. Also if the F-22 detect the missile launch from before terminal phase and does an evasive run away from the missile's direction the missile will be unable to get full midcourse updates from the IRST to find range and velocity of the evasive run(plus unablity to lock on to the F-22 due to its stealth), and more likely to fall short.
Image
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1425
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 11:26

armedupdate wrote:Er....that is quite a lot of flares enough for a smoke screen with a burst of 10-20. Also if the F-22 detect the missile launch from before terminal phase and does an evasive run away from the missile's direction the missile will be unable to get full midcourse updates from the IRST to find range and velocity of the evasive run(plus unablity to lock on to the F-22 due to its stealth), and more likely to fall short.
Image

the flares will fall down while aircraft moved ahead so it don really see the potential for the flares to block the whole IRST , IR missiles FoV here
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2362
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 11:35

armedupdate wrote:
eloise wrote:IR radiation maynot penetrate smoke , but if F-22 drop flare , it will be vulnerable in that case because enemy's IRST will look at the location of the flares and know where it is , also they dont carry that much flares

Er....that is quite a lot of flares enough for a smoke screen with a burst of 10-20. Also if the F-22 detect the missile launch from before terminal phase and does an evasive run away from the missile's direction the missile will be unable to get full midcourse updates from the IRST to find range and velocity of the evasive run(plus unablity to lock on to the F-22 due to its stealth), and more likely to fall short.


Flares would not really work much against imaging IRST systems, especially when used in conjunction of radar or laser (to find range). Problem is that flares drop from aircraft to the rear and only burn for a relatively short time. So they would work best if enemy is at six o'clock and be much less effective from other directions. Short burning time means the effect would be short lived. I also doubt that flares would confuse IRST systems that much even in passive ranging, but I also doubt the ability of passive ranging being used for missile engagements in most situations. FSO has laser rangefinder which could be used and might well be the best system for Rafale against F-22. However I seriously doubt Rafale ability to see and get close enough to F-22 to use that capability in real situation before meeting AMRAAMs.
Offline

armedupdate

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2015, 21:11

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 11:49

The flares don't create the cover they are too small, the smoke does, that is the whole point, you want the flares to burn very fast to produce the smoke to blind the IR sensor(phosphorus type cannot be penetrated by IR). Also I believe the type the Su-27 series uses instantly throws out smoke. Smoke is also a common coutermeasure in ground combat systems in soft kill munitions to blind IIR sensors. It can definitely defeat non-LRF passive ranging such as motion anyalsis. If IR systems get better and better, the Raptor and JSF will have to make some countermeasures to counter anti-stealth sensors especially if the enemy has ramjet missiles like R-77PD and PL-15. Yes LRF is limited in range putting it in the effective range of the AIM-120 AMRAAM.
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1425
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 15:27

armedupdate wrote:The flares don't create the cover they are too small, the smoke does, that is the whole point, you want the flares to burn very fast to produce the smoke to blind the IR sensor(phosphorus type cannot be penetrated by IR). Also I believe the type the Su-27 series uses instantly throws out smoke. Smoke is also a common coutermeasure in ground combat systems in soft kill munitions to blind IIR sensors. It can definitely defeat non-LRF passive ranging such as motion anyalsis. .

aircraft is constantly moving hence the smoke will only blind the seeker for 1-2 seconds top, and only in certain direction
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7484
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 17:10

armedupdate wrote: Also the F-22 can use its MAW as an 360 IRST like the DAS.


No, the system on the F-22 is MAWS only. While it does gather the info as an IIR video image, that video is never passed to the rest of the avionics system, it only passes MAWS tracks.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

armedupdate

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2015, 21:11

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 18:58

eloise wrote:

Not if it turns 0 degrees to the target at tries to outrun the missile. Seconds can be the difference between intercept and miss. IRST is poorer at measuring velocity.

SpudmanWP wrote:No, the system on the F-22 is MAWS only. While it does gather the info as an IIR video image, that video is never passed to the rest of the avionics system, it only passes MAWS tracks.

Er, LM says it can be used as an IRST.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/d ... mld-pc.pdf
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7484
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 20:14

Te operative work in that PDF is "development".

The USAF has not asked for it and has not paid for it.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 604
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post08 Dec 2015, 20:19

wil59 wrote:1. The dog-fight is a 'random' exercise in: "The F22 did not show superior the the Rafale" ... could also be said: "The Rafale is at the same level than the Raptor in dogfight." It is my professional opinion.
capitaine-romain. I remember my first years in the Air Force. I was a student pilot. My classmates and I had spent a good time watching the picture presented by the newspaper "Air and Cuckoos''as that of a Mirage IV: it was a Mirage 2000N.
Today, to be honest, I do not read the newspaper.
ATLC : L'interview du commandant de l'escadron de chasse 01.007 Provence !!! - capitaine-romain http://indiandefence.com/threads/eurofi ... 8/page-362 look interview


Stupid.

At least F-22 gained at least a victory against Rafale in dogfight, but Rafale gained no victory on F-22. So F-22 has an advantage.

And, french pilots admitted that F-22 has better nose pointing and better energy retention. That is clearly a significant advantage in dogfight. Poor rafale.
PreviousNext

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests