F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

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

optimist

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1254
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post09 Jan 2018, 00:17

mas wrote:Actually it's not even just late models, even a Su-27SK is going to be picking up a combat laden PESA Rafale (missiles and tanks) at 80nm beyond its 75nm radar unlike the MSA Typhoon which will be picking up the Su-27 at 100nm and its missiles are better recessed than the Rafale and its tanks slimmer so its combat RCS will be less too meaning it will be detected around 75nm fully laden in AA mode.

Even the Su-30 will only be picking it up just over 100nm so a tie with the legacy Typhoon but then Typhoon's tanks can be dropped before the merge to give it an RCS advantage.This is fundamentally why these two European blocs diverged 20 years ago to create 2 fighters, the French were happy with fighting their way in rather than stalking/sniping opponents at long range.

Really? an APA kopp and Co chart

This judging a 'radar' by how many tr modules and max watts may not really show what it's qualities are. I think you can add it to the. "mine flies higher, faster, with lots of TR and watts. we win" way of thinking. The problem with the rafale radar, is that the back end is still 1980. You could put a 10,000 TR ground array on it and it is still the same story.
(I use the term radar, loosely. The newer gen, do far more than that. It's like saying your iphone is just a phone.)
Aussie fanboy
Offline

tailgate

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2017, 02:46

Unread post09 Jan 2018, 02:11

steve2267 wrote:
gta4 wrote:My only question is, can f22 beat typhoon and rafale without using thrust vectoring?


From F-22 pilot interview(s) I have read, the only times F-22's lost were when thrust vectoring was used by relatively new, low time pilots fell in love with it. That is, he got so slow / low energy and commanded a maneuver that commanded thrust vectoring, and his low energy state gave him up.

I believe that when the F-22 maintains its energy, it has yet to be beaten.

That all being said, I'd love to hear tailgate's answer to this question.


You can’t turn “off” TVS, it’s integrated into the aircraft. To put it mildly, you are playing a dead mans game when you are out of energy, period. If you aren’t killed by your pursue, you’ll more than likely end up as a kill marking on his wingman’s sill. Energy and speed are two things you avoid giving up at all costs. Any aviator will tell you this. Air shows, demos, and all the fancy ITR, STR rates are great eye candy. But let’s be honest....it’s more for “selling” than anything else.
Like I’ve said, I fight to my aircraft strengths, and so does every other aviator out there. If I’m fighting a Typhoon, Rafael, Hornet, etc,etc......I can pretty much tell you what they can do and so I will stay out of there “optimum” envelopes.....a Typhoon pilot likewise knows this. ACM is man and machine against man and machine......and may the best man win......I personally keep the Raptor high and high energy......nobody could touch me when I was there........
Offline

tailgate

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2017, 02:46

Unread post09 Jan 2018, 02:18

It’ football time.......
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2558
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post09 Jan 2018, 02:33

Tailgate, you've got mail...

I probably could have written that better. I did not mean to state or imply that one can "turn off" or "turn on" TVC on the Raptor. However, my understanding is that at high(er) speeds, the FCS calls for little, if any TVC -- please correct me if I am wrong. Rather, TVC is progressively used more at lower speeds. For all I know it is used more at high alpha too, but if you are at high alpha, I doubt Q is very high.

The gist of what I recall from the F-22 pilot comments were that most (if not all) the F-22's killed by non-F-22's were younger, inexperienced pilots. He described them as either falling in love with turn rate, or pulling on the stick and as a result, they ended up slow, where TVC really kicked in. He either stated or implied that it was letting their energy state get low (where TVC progressively become more and more prominent) that led to their demise (in the exercise).
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1300
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post09 Jan 2018, 03:16

steve2267 wrote:Tailgate, you've got mail...

... The gist of what I recall from the F-22 pilot comments were that most (if not all) the F-22's killed by non-F-22's were younger, inexperienced pilots. He described them as either falling in love with turn rate, or pulling on the stick and as a result, they ended up slow, where TVC really kicked in. He either stated or implied that it was letting their energy state get low (where TVC progressively become more and more prominent) that led to their demise (in the exercise).


I actually think the issue was not low energy state so much as .... when you use TVC the center of moment shifts, and the pitch is notable to alert pursuers. This allows an instant in time where immediately available lift is insufficient, and something like a reactionary high Yo-Yo can get you a shot before you are back in the grinder. It's hard for the F-22 to get trapped in a low energy state when he has extra energy (high T/W) spilling out of the glass.

MHO and shakey memory,
also interested in Tailgate's thoughts,
BP
Offline

tailgate

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2017, 02:46

Unread post09 Jan 2018, 04:15

Absolutely. I think in the only stories I heard it was to teach younger “sticks” that the Raptor was not an end all cure all.....you will get to ride the silk if you get silly. You mostly see the TVS during high aoa maneuvers or during “hard directional turning”. One maneuver is at the top, post stall, you can really pull and the Raptor literally changes direction within the length of the aircraft. It’s a risky still. I’ve done it and even though your out of energy you can gain enough back quick enough to point your nose just about in any direction. Couple that with the HHOBS 9X, and you were lethal. Cheers
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1300
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post09 Jan 2018, 05:29

blindpilot wrote:.... when you use TVC the center of moment shifts, and the pitch is notable to alert pursuers. This allows an instant in time where immediately available lift is insufficient, and something like a reactionary high Yo-Yo can get you a shot before you are back in the grinder....
BP


Thanks tailgate. To explain the above for Steve and others. When "flying" the aircraft moves (pitches etc.) around the center of lift. With TVC it changes to being around the CG. Even the most neutrally balanced designs will have some difference here. Especially with the Russian TVC birds, that change will cause a noticeable twitch in pitch or yaw based on bank. Since it momentarily coincides with a lower lift skid, the ability for the vectoring aircraft to gain altitude or get vertical is inhibited (not necessarily prohibited if speed is up). If the attacker is ever going to gain a high position that's the time to do it. So a high Yo-Yo can get a shot in. Of course as Tailgate notes ... you better be quick, because the F-22 is going to get his nose on you shortly thereafter. As Tool Time Tim said, "Mo Power !!! is goooood!"

MHO,
BP
PS: Keep in mind I am not an expert, and even my old F-15 hotdog sources are retired now. So Viper guys and such here are better sources than I am. I just had an aero degree way back when, and that's probably out of date these days.
Offline

splittingatoms

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2017, 17:46

Unread post09 Jan 2018, 15:18

blindpilot wrote:
blindpilot wrote:.... when you use TVC the center of moment shifts, and the pitch is notable to alert pursuers. This allows an instant in time where immediately available lift is insufficient, and something like a reactionary high Yo-Yo can get you a shot before you are back in the grinder....
BP


Thanks tailgate. To explain the above for Steve and others. When "flying" the aircraft moves (pitches etc.) around the center of lift. With TVC it changes to being around the CG. Even the most neutrally balanced designs will have some difference here. Especially with the Russian TVC birds, that change will cause a noticeable twitch in pitch or yaw based on bank. Since it momentarily coincides with a lower lift skid, the ability for the vectoring aircraft to gain altitude or get vertical is inhibited (not necessarily prohibited if speed is up). If the attacker is ever going to gain a high position that's the time to do it. So a high Yo-Yo can get a shot in. Of course as Tailgate notes ... you better be quick, because the F-22 is going to get his nose on you shortly thereafter. As Tool Time Tim said, "Mo Power !!! is goooood!"

MHO,
BP
PS: Keep in mind I am not an expert, and even my old F-15 hotdog sources are retired now. So Viper guys and such here are better sources than I am. I just had an aero degree way back when, and that's probably out of date these days.


Dumb question, but as the Russian birds appear to gimble each nozzle independently in 2D and at an angle to the typical Z-axis, wouldn't single engine vectoring (needed for "3-D" vectoring) be expected to create yaw movements as a matter of course?
Offline

tailgate

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2017, 02:46

Unread post09 Jan 2018, 15:44

Greetings Blind Pilot. You are probably much more versed in this than I am. But here goes....the noticeable sensation you get in the 22 with TVS is that the CG actual shifts with its use, especially in high alpha. You get the feeling of being "pulled" around the corner instead of "pushed" like was the feeling in the 15 for example. In the 22 you don't have to "pull the black of the stick" like it felt in the 15 to get the hard maneuvering.
2b vs 3D vectoring is interesting in that I think 2d is all you need, especially in twin tailed aircraft. I assume 3D in a single tail would only help in the yaw regime, I could be wrong. In both the 15 and 22, the big vertical tails provide outstanding yaw authority especially in the slow speed realm. BP could probably go allot more in depth on this. Just my opinion on the subject of vectored thrust....lol
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1300
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post09 Jan 2018, 20:50

splittingatoms wrote:Dumb question, but as the Russian birds appear to gimble each nozzle independently in 2D and at an angle to the typical Z-axis, wouldn't single engine vectoring (needed for "3-D" vectoring) be expected to create yaw movements as a matter of course?


IF I remember correctly, the F-15 pilot's account ...

This is not a "nose pointing maneuver" quality at all. It's not something you can manage with vectored compensation. In the Russian (SU-30MKI) aircraft they actually would lose altitude and the tail drop from the CG shift. The F-22 - because of "MO POWER!" - would not have that accentuated, but it would be noticeable and momentarily have the vertical options limited until it regains energy.

MHO,
BP
Offline

monkeypilot

Banned

  • Posts: 187
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2017, 09:35

Unread post10 Jan 2018, 14:51

@tailgate i would be very interested of your opinion about the effect of the introduction of a new generation of missiles such as Meteor coupled with AESA radars?
Offline

tailgate

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2017, 02:46

Unread post11 Jan 2018, 01:59

Greets BP. Good discussions on here I see. I’m not very versed in the Meteor missile but what I’ve heard it’s a definite upgrade in capabilities for our NATO brethren. AESA radar coupled and I think it’s a game plan. I think the Meteor was developed to more offset the “R77” and new CHICOM missiles under development. Especially the exrtended range “XXXXjet” missiles. It addresses that threat but gives them that almost extended range weapon I think they need. Couple that with the stealthy aspects of AESA and you might get a” stealthy “ shot off before he knows he’s been shot at. Maybe the advantage that overcomes overall stealth. Don’t think the 22 or 35 will see much outside of what we field currently besides software upgrades. Still have to be able to target in order to get the shot off.
With aircraft advanced designs, suppression of heat sources, and emissions being control extensively it will be interestingly to see where missile development goes. My opinion is that I think missile tech will go the way of “disturbance” and “wake” type tracking and targeting...just thinking out loud
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3613
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post11 Jan 2018, 05:05

tailgate wrote:Greets BP. Good discussions on here I see. I’m not very versed in the Meteor missile but what I’ve heard it’s a definite upgrade in capabilities for our NATO brethren. AESA radar coupled and I think it’s a game plan. I think the Meteor was developed to more offset the “R77” and new CHICOM missiles under development. Especially the exrtended range “XXXXjet” missiles. It addresses that threat but gives them that almost extended range weapon I think they need. Couple that with the stealthy aspects of AESA and you might get a” stealthy “ shot off before he knows he’s been shot at. Maybe the advantage that overcomes overall stealth. Don’t think the 22 or 35 will see much outside of what we field currently besides software upgrades. Still have to be able to target in order to get the shot off.
With aircraft advanced designs, suppression of heat sources, and emissions being control extensively it will be interestingly to see where missile development goes. My opinion is that I think missile tech will go the way of “disturbance” and “wake” type tracking and targeting...just thinking out loud

The F-22/35 will be getting LREW/SACM/MSDM.
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 456
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43

Unread post11 Jan 2018, 17:00

Thanks for the intersting inside view of a Dogfight tailgate and blindpilot.

tailgate wrote: Couple that with the stealthy aspects of AESA and you might get a” stealthy “ shot off before he knows he’s been shot at. Maybe the advantage that overcomes overall stealth. Don’t think the 22 or 35 will see much outside of what we field currently besides software upgrades.


Is it so difficult to detect a Meteor? or goes that for all AAM?

So for a modern Dogfight thrust/acceleration is more important then a 3D TVC?
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 633
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post11 Jan 2018, 18:48

swiss wrote:
tailgate wrote: Couple that with the stealthy aspects of AESA and you might get a” stealthy “ shot off before he knows he’s been shot at. Maybe the advantage that overcomes overall stealth. Don’t think the 22 or 35 will see much outside of what we field currently besides software upgrades.


Is it so difficult to detect a Meteor? or goes that for all AAM?


I think tailgate meant radiation from AESA active homing seeker on Meteor could be designed much harder to be picked up by target's ECM.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests