Page 197 of 200

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Aug 2019, 05:39
by element1loop
ricnunes wrote:@euromaster

Jezz, never I thought that someone could spell so many erroneous, just to not say nonsensical BS in a single (huge) post :doh:

I don't have either the time or patience to address all of what you said since again, it's a huge post where everything is just plain wrong that even hurts my eyes and moreover it's clear that you haven't paid a single attention to everything that was told to you. I'll address only a few of the points that I was able to read:


lol ... I too thought I was reading a Carlo Kopp diatribe from 1998. :mrgreen:

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Aug 2019, 06:13
by element1loop
garrya wrote:Bay opening might increase RCS for a few seconds, but that doesn't mean F-35 suddenly have the same RCS as Typhoon or 747. Heat from weapons such as SPEAR, JSM, GBU-53 is negligible, much smaller than aircraft itself. Besides, one important drawback of IR system is that their max range is only achieved at minimum FoV. With wide Fov, the range is much shorter, so unless they already looking at F-35, the distance which they can detect the heat signature from the weapon is even smaller. What else? Infrared radiation can't penetrate cloud so F-35 can actually hide the missile launch very easily.


On top of that you have a fusion engine and MDF cues to tell a pilot where the OPFOR EW sensors are and your detectability from each of them with orientation.

Plus F-35 has huge tail feathers and integration of all flight control surfaces which allows the aircraft to sustain a high yaw angle, or else sustain a high AoA in any required vector or orientation, in order to face the open weapons bays away from any active sensor that is within a detection footprint. An advanced auto-pilot sequence could take advantage of the fusion and MDF cueing to automatically orient the aircraft so that it can always launch A2A or A2G weapons without the opening bay being exposed to even a temporary detection potential.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Aug 2019, 08:09
by element1loop
euromaster wrote:
garrya wrote:I would love to see how a Su-35 want to press forward after half his friend just got shotdown


This is not even a response to what I said. Your simply re-claiming the F-35 group will somehow shoot all the SU-35's down again despite having been informed how unlikely that is again a high end target with only AMRAAM. Your not getting any long range shots, not with bad PK and not enough missiles to burn. Unless your saying you want a whole squad of F-35's to expend their bays for every one SU-35...


What amazes me is that you entirely fail to realize that 20 to 30 squadrons of F-35A will cruise in quietly with a bit of noise at FL450 to FL500, and empty their internal weapon bays of thousands of JDAMS, LGBs, SDBI & SDBII on to all of the opposing force's airbases.

While you're still pondering how the super-duper S400 SAM is going to survive via orbiting MiG35s and Su35s around them, to try and protect it from F-35s. :doh:

And the 'mental imagery' of how the MiG35s and Su-35s etc., are going to swoop down and pounce on those poor defenseless little F-35s! ooh-lala! :mrgreen:

Which pre-supposes some future F-35 variant will be built without DAS, EOTS or MADL and sans a fusion-engine! When we all know the comms, sensors, computers and software are all scheduled to be upgraded significantly in performance at about the same time as new AAMs will be fielded on the F-35, in something like double their present numbers. :mrgreen:

I'm also fascinated by your presumption that only a Typhoon pilot would be clever enough to launch a long-range cruise missile at an S400 from outside its tracking or engagement range! That's just diabolical! :mrgreen:

JSOW? JSM? JASSM-ER? :doh:

I'm also astonished that you think F-35A won't be able to carry very large numbers of new advanced AAMs, both internally and externally - as many as 16 of them! But deary, deary, it'll need an "arsenal" plane! :doh: :mrgreen:

I'm convinced! :mrgreen: :thumb:

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Aug 2019, 15:07
by southernphantom
Corsair1963 wrote:
dat_boi wrote:It's funny that euromaster is speaking this way about stealth when the French and Germans are going to be using stealth a lot more in their next aircraft program.

Looking at the F-35 order book from various countries as well as the supposed far ahead Europeans is evidence enough of its success :D


You won't find any former Typhoon Pilots now flying the F-35. That would prefer to switch back....(speaks volumes) :wink:


Indeed. Any publicized DACT results from Italy and the UK should be highly amusing.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Aug 2019, 21:17
by XanderCrews
element1loop wrote:
ricnunes wrote:@euromaster

Jezz, never I thought that someone could spell so many erroneous, just to not say nonsensical BS in a single (huge) post :doh:

I don't have either the time or patience to address all of what you said since again, it's a huge post where everything is just plain wrong that even hurts my eyes and moreover it's clear that you haven't paid a single attention to everything that was told to you. I'll address only a few of the points that I was able to read:


lol ... I too thought I was reading a Carlo Kopp diatribe from 1998. :mrgreen:



Its a throwback for sure LOL

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 19 Aug 2019, 03:40
by boogieman
Hi all. Long time lurker, first time poster here.

I always find it amusing when people talk about employing active radar missiles against VLO platforms like the F35. A missile like Meteor has a relatively tiny radar seekerhead that has to be precisely guided to a specific point in space so that it can then acquire a regular 4th gen aircraft (that lacks VLO features) in its terminal phase. Traditionally I've understood that the transition to active terminal homing occurs somewhere around ~10nm from impact for most missiles of this type.

Now introduce a target with an RCS orders of magnitude smaller than any 4th gen aircraft and your missile must close to what? ~1nm of its target before it can have a hope of seeing it? When you add EW into the mix I have no confidence whatsover that the Meteor would be able to reliably find and hit an F35.

It is no wonder that future medium range AAMs seem to be heading in the direction of (presumably) higher power AESA solutions coupled to IIR seekers. Meteor is not one of these weapons.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 19 Aug 2019, 04:29
by Corsair1963
boogieman wrote:Hi all. Long time lurker, first time poster here.

I always find it amusing when people talk about employing active radar missiles against VLO platforms like the F35. A missile like Meteor has a relatively tiny radar seekerhead that has to be precisely guided to a specific point in space so that it can then acquire a regular 4th gen aircraft (that lacks VLO features) in its terminal phase. Traditionally I've understood that the transition to active terminal homing occurs somewhere around ~10nm from impact for most missiles of this type.

Now introduce a target with an RCS orders of magnitude smaller than any 4th gen aircraft and your missile must close to what? ~1nm of its target before it can have a hope of seeing it? When you add EW into the mix I have no confidence whatsover that the Meteor would be able to reliably find and hit an F35.

It is no wonder that future medium range AAMs seem to be heading in the direction of (presumably) higher power AESA solutions coupled to IIR seekers. Meteor is not one of these weapons.



Many good points..... :wink:

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2019, 08:36
by spazsinbad
11 pages of French NavAv goodness with the last two pages about helos but hey youse can't win'em all - they may rescue!

Pages gleaned from The Aviation Magazine - Sep-Oct 2019 attached belowbelow with MUCHOS RAFALE M terrificness.

FRENCH AIRCRAFT CARRIER CHARLES DE GAULLE
Sep-Oct 2019 ARTICLE & PHOTOGRAPHY BY JORIS VAN BOVEN/ALEX VAN NOYE

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2019, 15:37
by sprstdlyscottsmn
beautiful pictures! Thanks for sharing that.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 02 Nov 2019, 10:01
by spazsinbad
OLDie story but a GOLDie
India's Rafale deal: What the controversy is all about [MEGA HUGE story best read at source]
Fighter jet deal caught in web of overpricing, abuse of authority and cronyism charges
12 Feb 2019 Jay Hilotin

"[best read at source with more stories underneath this one]"

Photo: https://imagevars.gulfnews.com/2018/10/ ... 5_base.jpg

Source: https://gulfnews.com/world/asia/india/i ... 9975118566

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 03 Nov 2019, 13:45
by litzj
http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/2019/11 ... ocket.html

As I saw AASM in ADEX 2019, then, I have analyzed why AASM made small rocket motor on there.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 04 Nov 2019, 03:17
by Corsair1963
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:beautiful pictures! Thanks for sharing that.



I second that..... :D

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 12 Nov 2019, 15:42
by swiss
Very interesting interview with a Rafale pilot.

https://hushkit.net/2019/11/11/flying-f ... t-veteran/

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 12 Nov 2019, 16:27
by f-16adf
Thanks Swiss,

I love basically anything Dassault. Rafale is a true beauty.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 12 Nov 2019, 16:57
by steve2267
swiss wrote:Very interesting interview with a Rafale pilot.

https://hushkit.net/2019/11/11/flying-f ... t-veteran/


Getting any fighter pilot worth his salt to admit being inferior to any plane is nigh impossible. Reading between the lines, though, sounds like the Viper is damn competitive to the Rafale, and he may even fear (perhaps the wrong word) the Hornet / Super Hornet. The Raptor, though? No problem! Lol.