F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

[Corsair1963]

- To keep certain aerospace companies open in the fighter aircraft market (Boeing in the case of the Super Hornet and F-15, Dassault in the Rafale case and Airbus in the Typhoon case).

Statements of the US Navy are quite supportive of new Super Hornets. The Navy does not seem to be in love with F-35C. I do agree that jobs in St Louis and potential exports make this an easy political sell in Congress.

That is your opinion and not reflective of the USN Senior Leadership........

[XanderCrews]

@ rictunes

Put a cordon of snipers around their airbases.
If they can not hit huge tagets as airplanes at 3 miles?
Each sniper can take out at least 3-5 and recover to safety.
.

Did not know that airbase commanders are that clueless. Once a single plane is taken out by a sniper they are just going to keep launching them?

And if you are talking about doing this in China how do the snipers get there in the first place and then just walk away to safety?

LOL, youve just been viltered. he specializes in non sense scenarios and hollywood tactics and passes them off as if theyre plausible. Hes actually promoted P-47s to beat ISIS and that a piper cub dropping hand grenades was impossible to shoot down.


I'm not making this up. you can check his post history in his profile and then do a search from there. Have popcorn

[XanderCrews]

Statements of the US Navy are quite supportive of new Super Hornets. The Navy does not seem to be in love with F-35C.

if you were around when the Tomcat retired they made it sound like all of Naval Avaition was on the verge of a mutiny

its the a simple matter of having all the Super Hornets already in the mix, vs the F-35 which is still getting squadrons set up. plus theyre trying to get rid of Block I Super Hornets. its a "Round Robin attrition" Block Is replaced with Block IIIs indirectly. Naval aircraft have high attrition thanks to the tougher lifestyles. The Navy's primary concern is keeping its carriers well stocked and theyre still working through all the big level maintaince issues and the big bucks theyre spending to get the mission capability rates up.

If you have a fleet of 600 some odd Super Hornets you are endlessly juggling and someone offers you more Super Hornets, youll gladly take it.

[Corsair1963]

Many see the low numbers of F-35C and jump to all of the wrong conclusions. The low rate is really tied to two things. First, the USN wanted a fully capable aircraft (blk 4+). So, it wouldn't have to waste time and money to upgrade them later. Second, much of the USN Budget is tied up with New Ship Construction. (Arliegh Burke Flight III, Ford Class Aircraft Carriers, Virginia SSN's, New SSBN, FFG-(X), etc. etc. etc.)


Then to add to that Congress has been making many additional demands. Which, is putting pressure on the Navy Budget. Including Maintenance and Service Issues....

Honestly, the budget pressure is enormous at the moment.

This is why the USN proposed retiring the USS HARRY S. TRUMAN over the summer. While, recently suggesting similar cuts to Aegis Cruisers and Destroyers! Not because they want to or even believe the US Congress would approve them. Just to get their attention!

[kimjongnumbaun]

Put a cordon of snipers around their airbases.
If they can not hit huge tagets as airplanes at 3 miles?
Each sniper can take out at least 3-5 and recover to safety.

[quicksilver]

“First, the USN wanted a fully capable aircraft (blk 4+). So, it wouldn't have to waste time and money to upgrade them later.“

Well giddyup cowboy. Let’s just wait til Block 6 and buy some more Block III SHs instead.

[optimist]

Australia also was expecting maritime block 4 in their F-35a 2012 procurement

[notkent]

LOL, youve just been viltered. he specializes in non sense scenarios and hollywood tactics and passes them off as if theyre plausible. Hes actually promoted P-47s to beat ISIS and that a piper cub dropping hand grenades was impossible to shoot down.


I'm not making this up. you can check his post history in his profile and then do a search from there. Have popcorn

I did not even get dinner and a movie. I feel used.

[spazsinbad]

UhOh Razzamattaz - Razzamattaz UhOh - repeat then RAZZAMATTAZ sung to the tune of UhOh Razzamattaz - Antistatic!

Razzamatazz Ad - Anti Static - Albert Park 1979/1980 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7XHtjgSBqA

Flying & fighting in the Dassault Rafale: Interview with a Rafale combat veteran
11 Nov 2019 HushKittyKitty [lots of pictures also in article]

"From the perilous[??? why?] deck of an aircraft carrier, Pierre-Henri ‘Até’ Chuet took the Dassault Rafale M into combat in Iraq. We spoke to him to find out more about the Rafale, a remarkable fighting machine, a masterpiece of design and a strong contender for the title of best combat aircraft ‘all-rounder’....

...Which aircraft have you flown DACT against?
“Against F-16, against Typhoon, against Super Hornets. Against Harrier. Against Alpha Jet. Against Mirage 2000.”

…which was the most challenging? 9.52
“The F-16 is pretty cool. Typhoon is a joke, very easy to shoot. F-16 actually was a good surprise actually, I found it to be a pretty good aircraft. I think the most challenging was the F-16, it’s a pretty small jet so it’s easy to lose sight of it. So I think that was the big one. The Harrier can really turn around pretty fast, so you have to play it very close so you have to be careful with that. And with the Alpha Jet don’t go into a slow fight with it. It can manoeuvre and do some rolls at pretty low speed, some barrel rolls at pretty low speeds so you really want to pay attention. You can easily be tricked at low speed by an Alpha Jet. So you want to keep your energy high.”...

Against a Super Hornet?
“Honestly the issue is comparing aircraft all the time. Life isn’t that easy. Combat is unfair. It’s never going to be fair. It isn’t designed to be fair. If you get into fair close combat you’re a bad pilot. Don’t put yourself in a fair fight in real life as that’s stupid. Manoeuvre — take advantage and surprise your enemy. It’s not about one individual defeating an enemy, you’re here to get results. We are result-driven personnel. It’s not all about me. You’ve got thousands of people building a Rafale, and building and maintaining carrier. There’s thousands of people making sure I can take-off -— if I want to go fair-against-fair, I’m stupid. What I want to is make sure I win. Why do I say that? If I’m going to fight against a Super Hornet, I’m going to find a tricky way to defeat him. Look at the Messerschmitt 262 back in World War Two, most of them got shot down on landing. An aircraft shot down still makes the count. If we have to face the US Navy, it’s going to be disproportionate in terms of numbers – it’s going bring entire tactics to another level. Now, you want me to do a fair 1-v-1 fight with a Hornet in close combat, actually I’d rather a Super Hornet; I find the C to be more manoeuvrable than the Super Hornet. As a Rafale we can take an advantage on a Hornet again. What I would be careful of is their AIM-9X and helmet visors. So I would be very careful about that.”...

…The Rafale and Typhoon are often compared, how confident would you be fighting against a Typhoon? And why?
“I don’t know why they’re compared so often – it’s really not the same design, ideas or philosophy. We’re a truly omnirole platform. Typhoons are great, they like to use their big engines at 40,000 feet. I can’t count how many times I’ve shot down Typhoons at 45,000 feet in the contrails. And my radar off, everything off, I was coming from 100 feet below, supersonic in the climb from below. Absolutely undetected. So I have absolutely no fear of the Typhoons. Both the tactics used by the Typhoons, the agility and the cockpit of the aircraft make it easier for us to take the advantage — basically we have better fusion of the sensors — so we can be way more aggressive in terms of tactics. It’s a great aircraft at high level, but we’re not dumb enough to try to fight Typhoons at 50,000 feet or 45,000 feet. We’re going to put them outside their comfort zone. Against devious tactics. Now if you want to rate a Typhoon with AMRAAMs against a Rafale at 50,000 ft, then, yeah, Typhoon is going to have better performances for sure. But as a Rafale pilot, I’m stupid if I take him on like that, so I’m going to move the combat a bit. I”l fake a combat at 50,000 feet and I’m going to send a guy sneakily low level to surprise the Typhoon, it’s more easy than you think!”

...What are the differences between the C and the M? Are there performance differences?
“C and M difference is about 650 kg, we have a bigger landing gear, bigger structure, a small hydraulic pump, we have access to the flight-deck that’s integrated in the aircraft – and we have much better pilots of course. In terms of performance, because you have a 650-kg difference, the nose is going to feel heavier in a Rafale M. Rafale C might be able to endure better in air-to-air combat because it’s lighter. But it’s no major difference – no concern.”...

...Tips for new Rafale pilots?
“Keep it simple and stupid. Back to basics. Fly the aircraft first and don’t get tricked into trying all the buttons and the screens. Make sure you fly the aircraft. It isn’t giving you any feedback so you’re your own worst enemy in the cockpit — so make sure you don’t **** up. It’s going to accelerate very fast. Scan your instruments and make sure you keep that airspeed under control.”

How would you rate the Rafale’s ability to land back on deck with a heavy load of unused munitions and fuel?
“It’s much less of an issue than it was maybe for the Super E, you have a better and more reactive engine so honestly when you come back heavy there is not a big difference for the pilot....

…What should I have asked you?
“What was the biggest shock on Rafale? When you reduce the power. Go idle power power, airbrakes out at a low level — it’s impressive how fast it decelerates. It’s just insane. It’s actually almost more astonishing than the acceleration. When you cut the engine, go to idle power and put the ‘boards’ out – it’s impressive. On the other side, above mach 0.69 on the afterburner at low levels at air shows you’re just holding on to the stick and it’s a pretty unique sensation.”

What did you feel on your first deck launch and recovery?
“First deck launch is fun, you don’t have to do much. First recovery you’re stressed, you’re getting graded… there’s a lot of pressure and you’re just relieved.”

Navy or air force pilots…and why?
“Not sure I even have to answer that question. People will know anyway. Jokes aside, if the air force could land on a boat they would be doing it. We’re truly omni-role, we don’t have a choice. And also we have a more diverse type of flying. I was flying airshows and then I deployed like two weeks after switching from airshows to combat mission in a very short amount of time develops unique sets of adaptability. And most important a respect of timing – In Navy we try to go plus or minus two second s when we land. Lots of reasons behind it, but a small aircraft carrier gives you lots of constraints. so we’re really into precision and we’re more disciplined than the air force guys. I’ve got nothing against air force pilots, my dad was air force fighter pilot — they’re good guys. It’s just a bit different- our environment is so much more complex — so we have that increased discipline that really makes a difference.”...

…Do you feel confident flying against modern air defences in a non-stealthy aircraft?
"Great question. I’m not sure an aircraft’s stealthiness is going to make much difference anyway against very modern stuff. We’re not afraid of low level penetrations in the french air force. 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. It’s something we’re trained in and so it’s part of the job. And if you want a lot munitions or stores you’re going to lose on your stealthy signature anyway. So it’s not something of much concern – that’s why we train to keep current at very low level penetration. Which is really good as we get to fly at low level – which is awesome. I can’t complain.”...

...When did the French Navy procure the Rafale M and where were you trained?
“We got it in 2000/2001 as a replacement for the F-8 Crusader. I got trained back in 2014. I got my ground training with the French air force and I was fully trained. We all had different trainings possible and I went the full solo direct. I never flew with the air force. I only flew single seat Rafale M directly. So ground school with the air force and back to Landivisiau. Taxi the aircraft up to 200<100?> knots, abort the take-off. Then next mission you take off and you fly on your own, you break through the sound barrier and all that stuff. I did all my training on a single-seat Rafale never flew a two-seater.”" [LONG LONG article - small bits excerpted here]

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

[marsavian]

Rafale interview discussed earlier

viewtopic.php?p=429977#p429977
viewtopic.php?p=430571#p430571

[spazsinbad]

Rafale interview discussed earlier
viewtopic.php?p=429977#p429977
viewtopic.php?p=430571#p430571

OOPs I wonder why some do not quote at least the article title - anyway my bad - I'll look for URLs next time.

Second URL is in the F-22 forum. Oops I NEVER go there - I MIGHT get shot down - BVR. At least there are quotes there.

[outlaw162]

so we’re really into precision and we’re more disciplined than the air force guys. I’ve got nothing against air force pilots, my dad was air force fighter pilot — they’re good guys.

Yep, just a bunch of happy-go-lucky undisciplined clowns without a boat.

Salt water appears to have a positive effect on one's self image. I must make an effort to get to the beach more often.

if the air force could land on a boat they would be doing it.

Didn't the Finnish Air Force just do that? (on exchange of course)

[spazsinbad]

YEAH BUTt youse have to have a THICK SKIN to resist a BOLLOCKING an AirForceJOCK would get 'landing on de boat mun'.

[optimist]

So the Rafale gets slapped silly at high alt with the typhoon and low alt with the hornet. He seems to contradict himself with the ability to draw the typhoon low and I guess draw the hornet high, in his 1vs1, guns, ww1 analogy, where surprise is the winning factor. If they know the rafale is there, it's dead. Both exceed the Rafales capabilities, with radar, missiles and HMS. So even with it's 4.5gen peers, it comes off second best. Have we finished trying to compare it to the F-35 yet?

[gta4]

Did you see that? Fighting a super hornet is equivalent to fighting a ME262 in WW2