Operational Performace Comparison: Viper, Beagle, and Stubby

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1725
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post24 May 2019, 17:12

ricnunes wrote:You don't know how much range F-35 IR reduction measures can cut from IR sensor (IRST) but you assume as being a fact that:
1- Spectra can detect APG-81.
2- Spectra can jam the APG-81.
3- Spectra can geo-locate with pinpoint accuracy a F-35, or more precisely its APG-81 radar - which as opposed to a ground based radar is a target always on the move and moving very fast and changing course very often - and with that cue with also pinpoint accuracy an EO Sensor at the F-35.
4- And all of the above before the F-35 can detect the Rafale with either its APG-81 radar or with its EOTS in IRST mode.

I don't assume these as fact, i assume these as uncertain and when I design a strategy and i meet an uncertain factor, I will assume worst case scenario so i don't get caught by surprise.
About your points, they can be flipped the other way. You are assuming:
1- Spectra can't detect APG-81
2- APG-81 is immune to Spectra jamming
3- Spectra can't cue FSO toward F-35 location. For ESM system,range finding to an airborne target is hard but direction finding isn't
4- Duplicate point.

ricnunes wrote:So lets see, you put into doubt the already known FACT that the F-35 has extensive IR reduction measures which effectively means that the enemy IRST will detect it a shorter ranges compared to aircraft with much less comprehensive if any IR reduction measures which is the case of the Rafale

Rafale does have IR reduction measures, but we don't know how effective it is

ricnunes wrote:Hence why they are dropped in EMERGENCY situations. Reducing the aircraft's RCS from 1 m2 to 0.8 m2 or so is NOT AN EMERGENCY situation, capiche?
(having been shot with a missile is!)

The bottomline is you assume Rafale clean RCS is 0.8 m2 and RCS with fuel tank is 1 m2
I assume Rafale clean RCS is 0.1 m2
So the effect of dropping fuel tank is very different.
Secondly, drop fuel tank will improve your RCS, acceleration, speed and agility. All are vital for air combat.

ricnunes wrote:To conclude and since you like scenarios, I'll give you a couple of scenarios:
- The F-35 ESM (AN/ASQ-239) geo-locates the Rafale's RBE2 radar (while the F-35 has its APG-81 radar turned off) and cues the EOTS to the Rafale and then cues an AMRAAM and BAM! Rafale dead!
Or another:
- Both the F-35 and the Rafale have their radars turned off but since the F-35 has in-built and extensive IR-Reduction measures the F-35 IRST will detect the Rafale first than the Rafale IRST will be able to detect the F-35. AMRAAM cued, BAM! Rafale dead!
How's that for a scenario?? Happy now??

Both of your scenario ignore F-35 greatest strength aka RF stealth.
The difference between F-35 and Rafale IR signature is much closer than the difference in their respective rcs

ricnunes wrote:What I find puzzling and at the same time amusing is that when people (like yourself) devise these "anti-F-35 tactics" forget that the F-35 will also be able to use those same tactics AND MUCH MORE EFFECTIVELY so.

If you read my post again, i was devise "anti-Rafale" tactics for F-35.
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 430
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43

Unread post24 May 2019, 20:48

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Looking at the AESACalc sheet and the assumptions (there are always assumptions) that I am using for the APG-81 I see a 1m^2 detection at 133nm with wide area search, tracking at 104nm. With that refueling probe it seems folly to assume the Rafale is 0.1 clean. I can't see less than 0.5 myself. For the sake of discussion we will go with 0.1 just to be pessimistic. I see 6 aams (MICA is very finny, unsure how Meteor intakes look RCS wise), one tank, and three LO pylons as being 0.41m^2. This has a tracking range of 83.7nm with no jamming. I will agree that Spectra is the best EW system outside the US. I do not think it is up to par with the Barracuda. Anti AESA EW equipment needs AESA level tech. The RBE-AA is not as advanced as the APG-81, so there is no reason to assume that Spectra is. If I assume that Spectra can even detect the APG-81 it's jamming capability will be minimal. For the purpose of the radar sheet I will call it an increase of receive noise of 20dB. This moves the tracking range to 28nm/52km. Even if OSF is cued by Spectra, this is far beyond any stated laser rangefinder for OSF. Without range info you can't launch. So, even giving the Rafale every advantage I can, it is still going to be engaged by AIM-120D outside passive targeting range.

Then there is the issue that Meteor needs a radar track to guide. Want to know the range at which a meteor can track an F-35 (0.0005m^2)? If I model it as a PESA with a 10x10 element with 5W power per element (it an MSA not a PESA afterall) then it "might" track at 2.3nm per the sheet. Oops, Barracuda vs MSA radar. Let's add 45dB noise to the receiver. 0.3nm. Meteor is not going to be successful against an F-35.

"Well what about spectra vs the AMRAAM? It's a MSA too!" Okay. Lets make the same seeker assumptions for both missiles. No Jamming? 8.3nm. Add 35dB noise (Spectra isn't Barracuda afterall)? 1.7nm. Oops, AMRAAM-D has 2-way datalink to the APG-81. Let's cut the jamming effect in half. 17dB noise. 3.8nm.


Very well explained. 133nm vs 1m2 seems more realistic for the APG-81. The range advantage should be at least 50% compare to the RBE. And 1m2 for the Rafale should closer to reality with AAM's and EFT's then 0.1m2
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3271
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post24 May 2019, 21:10

swiss wrote:


Very well explained. 133nm vs 1m2 seems more realistic for the APG-81. The range advantage should be at least 50% compare to the RBE. And 1m2 for the Rafale should closer to reality with AAM's and EFT's then 0.1m2


Exactly. It's laughable to think a combat configured Rafale is anywhere near .1m^2. A clean Rafale likely isn't even .1m^2.
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1266
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post25 May 2019, 02:08

I could believe the slanted AESA on Gripen E and Typhoon along with high composites and RAM and curved inlets internally giving them something close to 0.1 sq m but not the Rafale with its jutting refueler and flat AESA sending back signals*. I think the Gripen E is probably the best at this type of ESM/IRST anti stealth approach with its GaN ESM and Pirate-evolved Skyward IRST but the IRST will still have to guide the Meteor all the way and that would be hard with evasive maneuvers possibly into clouds and jamming of the seeker head. It's better than nothing but the pK would be low. MICA-IR is probably a more effective missile against F-35 but you still have to get past the incoming AMRAAMs.

* Over their time both BAE and Saab have made very bold RCS claims about Typhoon/Gripen but Dassault not so much highlighting their EW/ESM instead.
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1725
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post25 May 2019, 10:20

Simulated F-16 rcs is about 0.5m2
2752F485-C8D9-4E39-BA57-34641D33658C.png

7C743E69-4CAC-45E4-875C-73BC389F30F5.png
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1725
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post25 May 2019, 15:22

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Looking at the AESACalc sheet and the assumptions (there are always assumptions) that I am using for the APG-81 I see a 1m^2 detection at 133nm with wide area search, tracking at 104nm. With that refueling probe it seems folly to assume the Rafale is 0.1 clean. I can't see less than 0.5 myself. For the sake of discussion we will go with 0.1 just to be pessimistic. I see 6 aams (MICA is very finny, unsure how Meteor intakes look RCS wise), one tank, and three LO pylons as being 0.41m^2. This has a tracking range of 83.7nm with no jamming. I will agree that Spectra is the best EW system outside the US. I do not think it is up to par with the Barracuda. Anti AESA EW equipment needs AESA level tech. The RBE-AA is not as advanced as the APG-81, so there is no reason to assume that Spectra is. If I assume that Spectra can even detect the APG-81 it's jamming capability will be minimal. For the purpose of the radar sheet I will call it an increase of receive noise of 20dB. This moves the tracking range to 28nm/52km. Even if OSF is cued by Spectra, this is far beyond any stated laser rangefinder for OSF. Without range info you can't launch. So, even giving the Rafale every advantage I can, it is still going to be engaged by AIM-120D outside passive targeting range.

Then there is the issue that Meteor needs a radar track to guide. Want to know the range at which a meteor can track an F-35 (0.0005m^2)? If I model it as a PESA with a 10x10 element with 5W power per element (it an MSA not a PESA afterall) then it "might" track at 2.3nm per the sheet. Oops, Barracuda vs MSA radar. Let's add 45dB noise to the receiver. 0.3nm. Meteor is not going to be successful against an F-35.

"Well what about spectra vs the AMRAAM? It's a MSA too!" Okay. Lets make the same seeker assumptions for both missiles. No Jamming? 8.3nm. Add 35dB noise (Spectra isn't Barracuda afterall)? 1.7nm. Oops, AMRAAM-D has 2-way datalink to the APG-81. Let's cut the jamming effect in half. 17dB noise. 3.8nm.

Very well put, best reply so far.
But i object on 3 points:
1- Spectra has AESA transmitter, it doesn't use RBE2 to transmit but antenna on Rafale vertical tail and inlet are AESA
2- I don't have any source for FSO laser range but if the range ín't enough, it can use targeting pod such as Talios. Talios is newer than ATFLIR so i think we can assume their laser are atleast equally powerful.
3- Meteor has 2-way datalink. Rafale didn't have that initially but that was added later
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4484
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post25 May 2019, 18:37

I didn't say Spectra wasn't AESA, just that it's not as advanced as Barracuda.

Adding a targeting pod will increase RCS, and thus the range at which the F-35 can fire.

I have never read anything yet about Raffle getting two way data link.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post26 May 2019, 08:31

eloise wrote:Very well put, best reply so far.
But i object on 3 points:
1- Spectra has AESA transmitter, it doesn't use RBE2 to transmit but antenna on Rafale vertical tail and inlet are AESA
2- I don't have any source for FSO laser range but if the range ín't enough, it can use targeting pod such as Talios. Talios is newer than ATFLIR so i think we can assume their laser are atleast equally powerful.
3- Meteor has 2-way datalink. Rafale didn't have that initially but that was added later


I'm not doing well with your 3.
1. This is indeed news to me. Can you please provide a dassault link to this fact. That the Transmitter/s are aesa. There are two directional RF receivers and 2 laser detectors up front. Again not aesa. You mentioned aesa radar antenna and the rafale not using that for EW. I don't need to say more.

2. The FSO wasn't that good. I can point to credible, pilot sources, at the time posted on the forums. It may have been updated. Has there been a significant upgrade you can point to in recent times? A quick look showed Talios isn't an A2A search and track targeting pod, Dassault claim A2A target identification. Again you are welcome to provide a link, if you disagree. If newer is better, Gripen E rules the sky.

3 I thought that was possible. Again I couldn't find a reference and this year they are still talking one way. Again I would welcome a link to this .
Last edited by optimist on 26 May 2019, 15:35, edited 2 times in total.
Aussie fanboy
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 430
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43

Unread post26 May 2019, 09:34

marsavian wrote:I could believe the slanted AESA on Gripen E and Typhoon


Both AESA have a movable plates. Which is not helpful for a lower RCS.

https://twitter.com/jrvianney/status/11 ... 8469730305

Offline

fbw

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 27 Dec 2012, 02:47

Unread post26 May 2019, 14:46

Rafale does not support the two way datalink of meteor. French poster claimed this was due to existing datalink for mica. IIRC, superhornets needed both hardware and software mods to datalink to support the Aim-120D.

I’d be curious if Typhoons modified for meteor can still support Aim-120C
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1725
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post26 May 2019, 15:29

optimist wrote:I'm not doing well with your 3.
1. This is indeed news to me. Can you please provide a dassault link to this fact. That the forward and aft transmitters are aesa. There are two directional radar receivers in the base of the wings. Again not aesa. You mentioned aesa radar antenna and the rafale not using that for EW. I don't need to say more.

D1AF7CD1-13DF-4582-8F41-39622E46663D.jpeg


optimist wrote:2. The FSO wasn't that good. I can point to credible, pilot sources, at the time posted on the forums. It may have been updated. Has there been a significant upgrade you can point to in recent times? A quick look showed Talios isn't an A2A search and track targeting pod, Dassault claim A2A target identification. Again you are welcome to provide a link, if you disagree.

FSO is replace in F4, Talios can be cued by spectra.
Secondly, they will improve A2A capability of Spectra
4394FC98-4464-41F9-9341-863DF4622424.jpeg

3508EE55-6D13-4A5A-9078-819E160DEE08.jpeg




optimist wrote:3 I thought that was possible. Again I couldn't find a reference and this year they are still talking one way. Again I would welcome a link to this .

I remember this wrong. Rafale doesn't have 2-way datalink
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post26 May 2019, 15:43

1..If you would like to quote a specific part. That confirms it's the case that they are aesa, that would do. Putting up a page is of no value. I had a quick look and saw active phased array with the front directional RF, The main jammer at the back isn't mentioned in this.

2. so come 2030, it might work enough to add to mission effectiveness. Got it.
Direct talios to do what exactly, in a2a search, track and target? That is at odds to what Dassault claim for it.

3, Thanks, That is how I recall it.
Aussie fanboy
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23326
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post26 May 2019, 16:16

RAFALE Latest Standards TWO PAGE PDF attached below has been OCRed meaning one may copy/paste the text in it.

RAFALE In The Air THALES Supplement one page PDF OCR attached also.
Attachments
RAFALE Latest Standards pp2 OCR.pdf
(684.12 KiB) Downloaded 68 times
RAFALE THALES In The Air OCR.pdf
(382.94 KiB) Downloaded 69 times
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1725
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post26 May 2019, 17:24

optimist wrote:1..If you would like to quote a specific part. That confirms it's the case that they are aesa, that would do. Putting up a page is of no value. I had a quick look and saw active phased array with the front directional RF, The main jammer at the back isn't mentioned in this.

75046A59-EFE4-46A3-BD79-1BFA5056D4B2.jpeg


optimist wrote:2. so come 2030, it might work enough to add to mission effectiveness. Got it.

2025, not 2030 or 2050.
It is roughly the same timeline as F-35 Block 4 or block 5 when F-35 get sidekick launcher.
FA5EEA61-DB34-46F0-B371-28724E621B1F.jpeg

optimist wrote:Direct talios to do what exactly, in a2a search, track and target? That is at odds to what Dassault claim for.

Cues Talios for targeting, same way eagle cue their sniper-XR
s. This has included efforts to add powerful AN/APG-63(V)3 active electronically scanned array radars, conformal fuel tanks, and new cockpit displays, as well as integrating Lockheed Martin's AN/AAQ-33 Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod (ATP) on the jets.

The latter system offers a long-range identification capability, day or night, as well as a secondary intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance functionality. It primarily finds its targets by slaving the optics to the F-15C's radar. The pilot can also manually steer the Sniper ATP's camera or can cue it to their Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... -in-alaska
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2171
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post26 May 2019, 18:18

eloise wrote:I don't assume these as fact, i assume these as uncertain and when I design a strategy and i meet an uncertain factor, I will assume worst case scenario so i don't get caught by surprise.
About your points, they can be flipped the other way. You are assuming:
1- Spectra can't detect APG-81
2- APG-81 is immune to Spectra jamming
3- Spectra can't cue FSO toward F-35 location. For ESM system,range finding to an airborne target is hard but direction finding isn't
4- Duplicate point.


Yes, you do assume. You assume very best case scenarios for the Rafale which borderlines with fantasy (well, they actually are fantasy) while at the same time you assume the worse case scenario for the F-35 a worse case which is even lower than the most modest expected capabilities for the F-35.

In the end, what you're trying to devise here with your "fantasy scenarios" (sorry there's no other way to put them) is the same thing as someone devising a scenario where a WWI Sopwith Camel can win against a WWI Spitfire, simple as that.

And NO, I'm NOT assuming the above. What I'm assuming here (heck, what I'm 99.99% sure of) is plain simple:
- Even if the Rafale's Spectra can detect the F-35's APG-81 emissions and jam it the F-35 will still detect the Rafale first (well before the Rafale can detect the F-35) either by using its own APG-81 Radar or by using its EOTS and better still a combination of both (You know: REAL SENSOR FUSION).


eloise wrote:Rafale does have IR reduction measures, but we don't know how effective it is


LOL, really??
You really want to compare the level of IR reduction of the F-35 compared to the one in the Rafale :doh: - it if really has any significant level of IR signature reduction (which I doubt)?
These have been discussed to death here at F-16.net but here are a few hints:
- In the F-35 you have the engine (a single one!) buried well inside the fuselage and shielded by the fuselage fuel cells with cooled fuel while the Rafale doesn't have any of this and still with the Rafale you have two (2) engines which aren't concealed regarding the fuselage itself.
- The engine exhaust - one of the biggest sources of heat on an aircraft - is much better shielded on the F-35 which does provide a much better IR reduction level than the engines exhausts you see on the Rafale - there's "tons" of posts here at F-16.net which indicate and prove this. Strange that you didn't read any of this or worse even in case you decided to ignore such sources!

Since you're the "assumption"/scenario person here, tell me which one looks to be better built to have the lowest IR signature?
This:
Image

Or this:
Image



eloise wrote:The bottomline is you assume Rafale clean RCS is 0.8 m2 and RCS with fuel tank is 1 m2
I assume Rafale clean RCS is 0.1 m2
So the effect of dropping fuel tank is very different.


And I pretty much doubt that assumption of a clean Rafale having a RCS of 0.1 m2 (even frontal). I've said that here several times and I don't believe that for a second!
But ok, lets go with that figure/assumption with out scenario/example: By doing a rough calculation, you'll have a clean Rafale with that same 0.1 m2 RCS but with missiles (fuselage and wingtip mounted) plus the Targeting Pod it rises to 0.3 m2. Plus two external fuel tanks it will rise again, this to 0.5 m2. So by dropping the (expensive remember!) external fuel tanks you'll get back from 0.5 m2 RCS to 0.3 m2 RCS - gee, what a gain in terms of RCS... :roll:

eloise wrote:Secondly, drop fuel tank will improve your RCS, acceleration, speed and agility. All are vital for air combat.


And which part of the external fuel tanks being expensive and thus being only dropped in EMERGENCY situations didn't you get?? :roll:
AGAIN: reducing the aircraft's RCS from 0.5 m2 to 0.3 m2 (happier with this scenario/situation/possibility?) is NOT an emergency situation!


eloise wrote:Both of your scenario ignore F-35 greatest strength aka RF stealth.
The difference between F-35 and Rafale IR signature is much closer than the difference in their respective rcs


No they don't! They show you that the F-35 has the advantage over the Rafale in terms of:
- All abroad signature, being it RF or IR. Granted that the RF advantage of the F-35 over the Rafale is bigger than the IR advantage of the F-35 over the Rafale but still and nonetheless the IR advantage of the F-35 is still very big (reasons above) compared again to the Rafale.
- Has a much superior Radar and other sensors including the ESM that you so much brag about regarding the Rafale.
- Much superior Sensor Fusion.
- I could go, on and on and on like the Duracell Rabbit commercial but I don't fell like it, I've been there and done that too many times over...

eloise wrote:If you read my post again, i was devise "anti-Rafale" tactics for F-35.


Then your scenarios are even more pointless than I though! You want an "anti-Rafale" tactic for the F-35?? Simple - Use the same exact same tactics as used again a F-15, F-16, F/A-18, Typhoon, Gripen, Mig-29, Su-27/30/35, [insert any 4th/4.5th gen fighter here], etc...
For the F-35 engaging a Rafale will be the same as engaging any other 4.5th gen fighter aircraft - the F-35 will detect first, shoot first and the opposing 4.5th gen will never know what hit it! Period.
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests