F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

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

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 983
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 12:58

magitsu wrote:Yeah, it seems that all relevant competitions starting from the Finnish one will include Growler. The main obvious reason is that Boeing can't hope to get a sale with only SH in this market.

Even stand alone, I think the SH is better than what is being said on this thread, but no matter. The S/DEAD EW is offboard and together the super and growler is something not to be taken lightly.
I think Boeing are wasting their time with the fins, they will get the f-35.
Germany was a surprise to me, but they have that many US assets stationed there, do they even need a defence force :mrgreen:
Aussie fanboy
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7703
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 13:05

f-16adf wrote:Jello and Sunshine are suppose to have a podcast on the Dassault Rafale tomorrow or Sunday. I don't know if they are going to do just a general comparison, or talk with an actual ADA/Marine Rafale pilot or a USN Rafale exchange pilot. However, it should be very interesting. I imagine they both flew against the jet in the Hornet, so lets see what they say.

Just finished the podcast and it appears both were impressed by the Rafale's performance which the former French Navy pilot described as a "rocketship" able to zoom from sea level to 45k feet in under a minute and supercruise at M1.4 though it wasn't mentioned at what configuration. Neither of the US pilots apparently flew against it .
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 983
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 13:06

gta4 wrote:
gta4 wrote:High supersonic drag doesn't mean high subsonic drag. In fact SH is pretty efficient at subsonic.

Comparison of acceleration at low altitude:

A 18920 kg flanker (very low fuel remaining) has an average subsonic acceleration of 9.3m/s^2
A 17241 kg SH (carries much more fuel than a 18920 kg flanker) has an average subsonic acceleration of 10 m/s^2

From flight manual:

https://postimg.cc/vgJxnQYn
https://postimg.cc/zLFVB93z
https://postimg.cc/F104m9LL
https://postimg.cc/hhH3DwmQ


Well I though you guys like this but it seems none of you are interested :mrgreen:


Nope, it doesn't put the SH in a bad enough light. but at least they are comparing similar aircraft and not trying to match the f-35 8)
I think the SH with the canted pylons doesn't help and is similar to the f-35c. In that they both hit the transonic wall hard, after that it isn't too bad.
Aussie fanboy
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 983
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 14:07

wil59 wrote:
optimist wrote:For a fair eval of the super hornet. You need to add the other half of the system, being the growler. That picks up where a stand alone super seems lacking. They work as a team. The hornets have all had off-board assets as a team, being previously the prowler. Unlike the f-35 that has full onboard EW and doesn't need the the off-board asset.

no the comparison is 1 vs 1, if you add an additional asset it distorts the result, an airplane should be able to attack and defend itself , so in this case the f-18 or it takes 2 planes for a mission to be able to limit the risks clearly the F-18 super hornet is not versatile, I simply translate your thoughts, although for me the F-18 super hornet remains an excellent aircraft.

I take the danish and swiss eval at face value, that it found the rafale better than the typhoon.
While the super was better in 3, the same as the typhoon in 2 and worse in DCA, I don't know why it would be worse in counter air, It would probably say in the full report. Perhaps time to target, is the only thing I can think of.
For the SH to come ahead of the typhoon in a 1vs1 isn't a bad effort considering the USN isn't spending money to make it a stand alone asset.

It's a shame there isn't a public eveal on the rafale and SH, using the same criteria and mission sets. I don't know how helpful it is using one nations against another, but that is all there is.

The evals I'm aware of have different teams on different parts, sometimes not knowing the origin. They are a pass fail, whether they reach the required specs that are set down
Aussie fanboy
Offline

wil59

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 05 May 2015, 09:50

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 14:53

optimist wrote:
magitsu wrote:Yeah, it seems that all relevant competitions starting from the Finnish one will include Growler. The main obvious reason is that Boeing can't hope to get a sale with only SH in this market.

Even stand alone, I think the SH is better than what is being said on this thread, but no matter. The S/DEAD EW is offboard and together the super and growler is something not to be taken lightly.
I think Boeing are wasting their time with the fins, they will get the f-35.
Germany was a surprise to me, but they have that many US assets stationed there, do they even need a defence force :mrgreen:

Pentagon quote: Citation :

French aircraft opened the manned phase of ground attack when the French Air Force dispatched a strike package of eight Dassault Rafale, two Dassault Mirage 2000-5 and two Dassault Mirage 2000D combat aircraft to support Operation 'Harmattan' on 19 March. The Rafales established a CAP over Benghazi to stop the advance of loyalist ground forces, with the support of six Boeing C-135FR tankers from the GR V 02.091 Bretagne squadron at Istres-Le Tubé airbase on the French Mediterranean coast.



Citation :

French aircraft have destroyed four loyalist armoured vehicles and are working to degrade and destroy Libyan ground-based air defence assets. End citation ////The Rafale must have a very good EW suite, and that corresponds to the ratings, 6.95 for the Rafale, 6.97 for the F-35, which is remarkable for a plane that is said 4 generation
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3437
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 15:26

popcorn wrote:
f-16adf wrote:Jello and Sunshine are suppose to have a podcast on the Dassault Rafale tomorrow or Sunday. I don't know if they are going to do just a general comparison, or talk with an actual ADA/Marine Rafale pilot or a USN Rafale exchange pilot. However, it should be very interesting. I imagine they both flew against the jet in the Hornet, so lets see what they say.

Just finished the podcast and it appears both were impressed by the Rafale's performance which the former French Navy pilot described as a "rocketship" able to zoom from sea level to 45k feet in under a minute and supercruise at M1.4 though it wasn't mentioned at what configuration. Neither of the US pilots apparently flew against it .


Rafale can supercruise at mach 1.4? This is the first I've heard of such a thing. Even completely clean, that's an incredibly impressive number.

Did I just miss this, or has that been documented before??
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

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

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 15:49

skyward wrote:
I think you have misread your our url source. It clear stated the RBE2 has a desertion range of 140 km against a 3m2 target. This is align with the 1000 TR it have. The APG-80 have 1000 TR with a desertion range of 165 km against a 5m2 target. Which it about 140km against for a 3m2 target.


They speak about current Radar, the RBE2 PESA. The text was written in 2009. The first AESA was delivered in 2012.

The present radar air-to-air modes include long-range search; multi target track and engagement; air combat modes; Non-Cooperative Target Recognition (NCTR); and look down/shoot down functions. In air-to-air mode, the RBE2 gives a tracking range beyond 60 nautical miles against a 30-square-foot target, with detection ranges up to 75 nautical miles. The radar can track and prioritize up to 40 targets simultaneously and engage up to eight with Mica, and soon Meteor, air-to-air missiles.


If this were the figures for the AESA Radar, the Range of the old RBE2 would be under 100km. This would be really bed. Because the RDI Radar from the Mirage had roughly 100km Range vs a 5m2 traget in Volume search in the 80s.

https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFA ... 200550.PDF

marauder2048 wrote:[

It's not; the SABR is a smaller aperture designed to stay within the ECS limits of the vanilla F-16.


This concur also with the figures they are available. The APG-83 has over 30% more range than the APG-66(V)3.
The APG-80 has up 100% more range the the APG-68. Which has slightly more range thane the APG-66.

https://airforcesmonthly.keypublishing. ... ight-test/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/APG-80
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

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

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 15:59

mixelflick wrote:
popcorn wrote:
f-16adf wrote:Jello and Sunshine are suppose to have a podcast on the Dassault Rafale tomorrow or Sunday. I don't know if they are going to do just a general comparison, or talk with an actual ADA/Marine Rafale pilot or a USN Rafale exchange pilot. However, it should be very interesting. I imagine they both flew against the jet in the Hornet, so lets see what they say.

Just finished the podcast and it appears both were impressed by the Rafale's performance which the former French Navy pilot described as a "rocketship" able to zoom from sea level to 45k feet in under a minute and supercruise at M1.4 though it wasn't mentioned at what configuration. Neither of the US pilots apparently flew against it .


Rafale can supercruise at mach 1.4? This is the first I've heard of such a thing. Even completely clean, that's an incredibly impressive number.

Did I just miss this, or has that been documented before??


mach 1.4 is with 6 micas. And mach 1.3 is with 6 micas and 1 EFT (1250L)

http://rafalefan.e-monsite.com/medias/f ... t-2011.jpg

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=6094&p=376482#p376482
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 767
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 17:37

magitsu wrote:
loke wrote:That leaves Finland. They will go for F-35 of course.

Yes, Growler likely won't help in the end. But Boeing at least shows pictures that they intend to offer it to Germany, Canada and Switzerland.

I knew about Germany -- but I did not know Growler had been offered to Canada and Switzerland?? Actually this article says that Growler is not being offered to those countries...

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/21 ... ets-future
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 767
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 17:58

optimist wrote:
magitsu wrote:Yeah, it seems that all relevant competitions starting from the Finnish one will include Growler. The main obvious reason is that Boeing can't hope to get a sale with only SH in this market.

Even stand alone, I think the SH is better than what is being said on this thread, but no matter.

Better than what? The Danish eval ranks the SH significantly higher than the F-16 block 50, and slightly above the Typhoon. The Typhoon is known to be a quite good a/c, so to be ranked slightly above it is actually very good. Of the 4.5 gen, only the Rafale would probably rank higher than the SH :P
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 983
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 18:13

wil59 wrote:
optimist wrote:
magitsu wrote:Yeah, it seems that all relevant competitions starting from the Finnish one will include Growler. The main obvious reason is that Boeing can't hope to get a sale with only SH in this market.

Even stand alone, I think the SH is better than what is being said on this thread, but no matter. The S/DEAD EW is offboard and together the super and growler is something not to be taken lightly.
I think Boeing are wasting their time with the fins, they will get the f-35.
Germany was a surprise to me, but they have that many US assets stationed there, do they even need a defence force :mrgreen:

Pentagon quote: Citation :

French aircraft opened the manned phase of ground attack when the French Air Force dispatched a strike package of eight Dassault Rafale, two Dassault Mirage 2000-5 and two Dassault Mirage 2000D combat aircraft to support Operation 'Harmattan' on 19 March. The Rafales established a CAP over Benghazi to stop the advance of loyalist ground forces, with the support of six Boeing C-135FR tankers from the GR V 02.091 Bretagne squadron at Istres-Le Tubé airbase on the French Mediterranean coast.



Citation :

French aircraft have destroyed four loyalist armoured vehicles and are working to degrade and destroy Libyan ground-based air defence assets. End citation ////The Rafale must have a very good EW suite, and that corresponds to the ratings, 6.95 for the Rafale, 6.97 for the F-35, which is remarkable for a plane that is said 4 generation

Ok I'll bite, I'm missing your point. The french did go in first and had a successful mission. Without taking anything away from their bravery. If you read what they were up against in the area. I think the rafale could take on heavier threats just as easily. They would have had a good idea what they were going against, but still a lot of uncertainty and unknowns at the time.

who said the f-35 and rafale have similar standard EW and under what testing? What block f-35 were they talking about. They don't even give a RCS number untill the contract to purchase is signed. ( I hope no one asks for a link, I remember it but not from where)
Aussie fanboy
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 983
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 19:00

optimist wrote:I take the danish and swiss eval at face value, that it found the rafale better than the typhoon.
While the super was better in 3, the same as the typhoon in 2 and worse in DCA, I don't know why it would be worse in counter air, It would probably say in the full report. Perhaps time to target, is the only thing I can think of.
For the SH to come ahead of the typhoon in a 1vs1 isn't a bad effort considering the USN isn't spending money to make it a stand alone asset.

It's a shame there isn't a public eveal on the rafale and SH, using the same criteria and mission sets. I don't know how helpful it is using one nations against another, but that is all there is.

The evals I'm aware of have different teams on different parts, sometimes not knowing the origin. They are a pass fail, whether they reach the required specs that are set down


Just to expand on why I said I take the danish and swiss evals at face value and we can only use what is there.


https://hushkit.net/2015/12/18/typhoon- ... inal-word/
""""The leaked evaluation report from the Swiss fighter contest of 2008/09 put the Rafale ahead of Typhoon in almost every category tested, what do you make of this?

Any fighter evaluation depends on the details of the assessment criteria for each exercise and without seeing those, I cannot possibly speculate. However, one thing which is worth noting is that the Typhoon sent to Switzerland was apparently a tranche 1 and one with problems. Someone involved in the competition told me in person that ‘the Swiss told us [Typhoon] that technically speaking we had brought the finest jet of the bunch, but it was as if we had brought a Mercedes sports car where the door wouldn’t shut properly and the air conditioning was broken’.""""""
Aussie fanboy
Offline

skyward

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 64
  • Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 13:33

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 19:31

swiss wrote:
They speak about current Radar, the RBE2 PESA. The text was written in 2009. The first AESA was delivered in 2012.


They have been testing it since 2006 from the article. I guess they don't know the radar performance till it is on the plane. The whole section was about AESA. Maybe you should have pick a better source. It seem logical it match the performance AN/APG-80 with the same TR numbers and around the same time of development.
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 983
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post02 Mar 2019, 19:56

mixelflick wrote:
popcorn wrote:
f-16adf wrote:Jello and Sunshine are suppose to have a podcast on the Dassault Rafale tomorrow or Sunday. I don't know if they are going to do just a general comparison, or talk with an actual ADA/Marine Rafale pilot or a USN Rafale exchange pilot. However, it should be very interesting. I imagine they both flew against the jet in the Hornet, so lets see what they say.

Just finished the podcast and it appears both were impressed by the Rafale's performance which the former French Navy pilot described as a "rocketship" able to zoom from sea level to 45k feet in under a minute and supercruise at M1.4 though it wasn't mentioned at what configuration. Neither of the US pilots apparently flew against it .


Rafale can supercruise at mach 1.4? This is the first I've heard of such a thing. Even completely clean, that's an incredibly impressive number.

Did I just miss this, or has that been documented before??

Might as well say Mach 2, Just looking at the T/W specs suggest that it is unlikely. you really want a low bipass engine. When it was using US engines early in the piece it was said, it did supercruise at, I forget. In another comp, I also forget, think singapore with the f-15? it failed to supercruise. Take it FWIW it was 15 years ago and I'm old.
A simple question, are there any comps where it is said that the rafale supercruised?
Aussie fanboy
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

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

Unread post03 Mar 2019, 00:11

optimist wrote:
https://hushkit.net/2015/12/18/typhoon- ... inal-word/
""""The leaked evaluation report from the Swiss fighter contest of 2008/09 put the Rafale ahead of Typhoon in almost every category tested, what do you make of this?

Any fighter evaluation depends on the details of the assessment criteria for each exercise and without seeing those, I cannot possibly speculate. However, one thing which is worth noting is that the Typhoon sent to Switzerland was apparently a tranche 1 and one with problems. Someone involved in the competition told me in person that ‘the Swiss told us [Typhoon] that technically speaking we had brought the finest jet of the bunch, but it was as if we had brought a Mercedes sports car where the door wouldn’t shut properly and the air conditioning was broken’.""""""


Well Justin Bronk is a big supporter of the Typhoon. Interestingly, even the upgraded EF in the 2nd evaluation lost against the PESA equipped Rafale. So they send 2 "broken" Typhoon to both evaluations. :wink:

skyward wrote:
swiss wrote:
They speak about current Radar, the RBE2 PESA. The text was written in 2009. The first AESA was delivered in 2012.


They have been testing it since 2006 from the article. I guess they don't know the radar performance till it is on the plane.


Yes. The AESA was in service 2013. So it's clear at the time the current Radar was the RBE2 PESA. And even if don't belive this. You really think the AESA Radar has only 40 km more Range than the Mirages RDI Radar 30 years bevor? Even the RDY Radar from the 90s had a range of over 100 km. :wink:
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests