eloise wrote:Yes, some of my assumptions are more in favor of Rafale, but fantasy- No
additionally, things are not always what they seem
for example: most people would think even old jet fighter can easily have helicopter for lunch
yet when they clash the first time in J-CATCH exercise, many fighter pilots had a big surprise
That comparison of yours would be akin for a F-35 pilot deciding to engage an enemy non-stealth fighter aircraft like your Rafale at short range instead of a longer range where it could shot the Rafale without being detected.
So I fail to see the purpose of your analogy above regarding this discussion (which is maximum BVR detection range).
eloise wrote:An assumption is something that you assume to be the case, even without proof. You do not have classified data of spectra and APG-81, so same as me, you were assuming.
My "assumptions" are based on facts and above all on the
absolute fact that newer technology always obliterate older technology.
You "assumptions" are based on pure fantasy because they fail to acknowledge the very basic fact that newer technology always obliterate older technology!
eloise wrote:If Spectra can detect APG-81 aka bypass LPI, then it will detect APG-81 before APG-81 can detect F-35. Signal have to travel 2 ways for radar and 1 way for ESM.
And here you go with the false premisse that the Rafale always fly with its Radar turned OFF while the F-35 always fly with its radar turned ON
eloise wrote:Personally, i think F-35 IR reduction is better than Rafale.
Praise the lord for that. There's still hope in manking...
eloise wrote:On the other hand, FSO is LWIR + MWIR while EOTS and DAS are MWIR, and LWIR could detect an object with lower temperature.
Like Hornetfinn replied to you, MWIR sensors are better in the type of engagement that we're talking about.
LWIR are only better to detect stuff coming from the space/orbit or in the very upper stratosphere. This is NOT the case here!
So the F-35 IR signature reduction will give the advantage over the Rafale even on the IR spectrum.
You should learn from and with Hornetfinn. He's a very knowledgeable guy here at F-16.net
eloise wrote:The rising of getting shot down sound like an emergency to me. Bombs are more expensive than fuel tanks, and i can recall plenty of time pilot drop their bombs along with the racks when they get bounced
The "rising of getting shot down" means that the aircraft (this case the Rafale) will know that there's an incoming enemy aircraft firing at or getting ready to fire at.
And what you completely fail to grasp is that if the opposing aircraft is the F-35 the Rafale will never know that:
1- A F-35 is present.
2- A F-35 just shot at (your Rafale)
3- Or resuming, the Rafale will only know that the F-35 shot at it when the incoming AMRAAM goes active which would be already too late!
You also completely fail to grasp or simply decided to ignore that there won't be any considerable gain in terms RCS (or tactically revelant RCS gains) by dropping External Fuel Tanks.
But, free to believe otherwise. Guess you can also believe in pixie dust and fairies as well...
eloise wrote:What if AAM are stored in stack centerline position
You know that image that you posted above is PURE BS, right?
The Rafale doesn't carry AAMs in the centerline pylon, let alone two of them.
For what's worth I made the mistake of posting that same image as being a fact but quickly learned here that it wasn't.
eloise wrote:ricnunes wrote:- Much superior Sensor Fusion.
There isn't enough data to compare this.
LOL, above I though/said that there was still hope in "mankind" or more precisely hope regarding yourself. With that latest part of yours there's clearly not.
Well, with that last comment of yours above all I can say that I'm finally done with you here! I'm not willing to discuss with a sort of a Hallowenee/Cavok/etc... part II wannabe...
As such I'll let others continue with the discussion. I just feel that I wasted too much time here already.