F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

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

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 741
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 17:06

The only disadvantage the Raptor could possibly have is that it is "large", yet not as large in the sense of the F-15 or F-14. But it is still big (as I have said before, in more of a "compact" way). I guess as far as size comparison of Rafale v F-22: would kinda be akin to F-16 v F-15. The Eagle was always called the "Tennis court". So I think the French pilot is inferring about relative sizes here.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2765
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 17:49

Hmmm. Raptor is 1.66’ shorter but has close to 2’ more wingspan than the Eagle.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4547
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 18:01

and a 33% bigger wing area. Area is what gets a pipper put on it.
"Spurts"

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

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2765
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 18:19

Actually, for many of us old guys who learned a-a gunnery using stadiametric ranging, wingspan relative to a given reticle size was what we used. In some aircraft you could ‘dial in’ a wingspan number for a set range, or eyeball the range for a fixed wingspan/reticle size.
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2243
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 18:22

In the Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper thread, I posted several images an acquaintance had taken of a flyover @ Edwards AFB a few years back.

The second image would seem appropos here:

Image
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

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 741
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 18:35

I was actually meaning in form. Raptor has a bigger wing than Eagle and smooth wing body blend. F-15 still seems more bulky. Both may be Tennis courts, but still not as bulky as F-14. Additionally, it is rather hard to believe that it weighs around 43,000lbs empty.
Attachments
F-22 Raptor side.JPG
F-22 Raptor side 2.JPG
F-15 Eagle side.JPG
F-15 Eagle side 2.JPG
F-14A side.jpg
F-14A front.jpg
F-14A front 2.JPG
F-15 Eagle side 3.JPG
F-22 Raptor side 3.JPG
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 741
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 19:04

The Rafale, like the F-16 is a midget to all three.
Attachments
Dassault Rafale.jpg
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2765
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 19:09

“...weighs around 43,000lbs empty.“

Yeah, as they say, ‘empty spaces are heavy.’ F-35 being another example.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2765
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 19:17

f-16adf wrote:The Rafale, like the F-16 is a midget to all three.


As an aside, I read the hushkit interview w the Rafale dude, and noted his comment about cockpit size (large) relative to his experience in the Super E. I can vouch for that. I had the occasion to sit in a Super E in my previous life; it was tighter than the TA-4J from flight school experience.
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 741
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 19:26

The A-4 Skyhawk head on.
Attachments
A-4 Skyhawk.JPG
Last edited by f-16adf on 13 Nov 2019, 00:18, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2765
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 19:42

How? I flew it for about 4 1/2 mos. Even got a prize at the end...
Attachments
6B5AAE68-A26F-47F4-B59E-6ED0C59BADFD.jpeg
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23603
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 20:55

Heheh. We talked about the roominess of the TA-4 cockpit compared to the A-4 (not A-4M) earlier on another thread? 8)
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 450
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 21:14

steve2267 wrote:
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.


Yep that's quite interesting. And he is definitely not impressed of the Typhoon. Also when it comes to sensor/sensor fusion.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2253
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 23:35

swiss wrote:Very interesting interview with a Rafale pilot.

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


With all due respect and in my humble opinion that interview is a bunch of ego "macho" BS (with one of two interesting points in the middle).
While the Typhoon isn't an aircraft which "caters me the most" saying that a “Typhoon is a joke, very easy to shoot.” when flying any other fighter aircraft is a huge pile of BS!

The fact (IMO, of course) is that aircraft such as Rafale, Typhoon, Hornet, Super Hornet, F-16, etc... have impressive agility and have their strength (and weaknesses) against each other. So when I see anyone saying stuff such as beating "Typhoons with my Rafale like baby seals", "beating Super Hornets with my F-16 like baby seals", "beating F-16s with my Typhoon like baby seals", all I have to say is that's all IMO a big pile of crap (with all due respect to these pilots out there).
So yes, the "Typhoon versus Rafale" statement above is just a big pile of crap/BS (again with all due respect)!


Another statement that doesn't impressed me much is the pilot's first impression about the Rafale's performance which quoted was: "It’s a space shuttle!", this given the pilot's background.
For "Christ sake" the man comes from a Super Etendard! Or course that compared to a Super Etendard the Rafale is a "space shuttle"! Heck, even a F-5 (yes, the Tiger II) compared to a Super Etendard is a "space shuttle".


And then there's finally this "last gem" which in some ways is probably even worse than the "Typhoon comment" above:
So come and get me with your S-400 if I’m at 200 feet above the ground — that’s not going to happen anytime soon. So I’m not afraid

All I can say is LOL! First of all, if he's flying a fighter aircraft like the Rafale at 200 feet he would still likely "eat a S-400 missile up into his tailpipe" since that even the S-300P has a minimum engagement altitude of 25 meters or around 82 feet (which is much lower than 200 feet) - The S-400 won't of course have a higher minimum engagement altitude compared to the S-300P.
Moreover at 200 feet he risks being hit by a bunch of enemy weapons ranging from Assault rifles, to machine guns (including heavy), all sorts of AAA guns and of course SHORAD and Medium Range missile such as Tunguska, TOR, Pantsir, SA-11/17 you name it! Heck at 200 feet he and his Rafale would even be extremely vulnerable to a bunch of Cold War relics such as the Shilka, SA-13 or SA-8, so good luck flying over enemy territory at that altitude!
I guess that he never heard about a conflict/operation called Operation Desert Storm :roll:
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 741
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post13 Nov 2019, 00:15

https://news.usni.org/2018/06/03/rafale ... per-hornet


And according to Super Hornet pilot:

“The Rafale is a rocket,” Lt. Brandon Rodgers from the Golden Warriors of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 87 War Party said while speaking with the media aboard Bush.

In general, the Rafale and Super Hornet have about the same maneuverability, Rodgers said. While flying training missions and practicing engagements, Rodgers said the difference has really come down to which pilots know how to handle their aircraft best.

The Rafale is a lighter airframe but doesn’t carry the same type of armament as the Super Hornet. Still, when not fully loaded, Rodgers said the Rafale can pull some moves outside of the Super Hornet’s capabilities.

“When the Rafale is light, when nothing’s on it, it can pretty much stand on its tail and go straight up,” Rodgers said. “When you’re on the deck and watch them go straight up, you’re like, alright, I guess I can’t do that with you. It’s pretty cool.”



And he is referring to the Rafale Marine Version, not the lighter C model.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gta4, MSN [Bot] and 4 guests