F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

[charlielima223]

I've been following these recent posts on and off for a bit.

Is someone seriously suggesting that the Rafale has some kind of 360 degree radar coverage by having miniature AESA radar antennas embedded in certain parts of the aircraft? Does someone seriously believe that the Rafale's Spectra EWS is a 360 degree radar system?

That would be like saying that the PAKFA's (I'm going to keep referring it as PAKFA until it formally enters service with final engine, radar, and actual weapons capabilities...) embedded L-band radar arrays in its wings can detect stealth aircraft...

[ricnunes]

I've been following these recent posts on and off for a bit.

Is someone seriously suggesting that the Rafale has some kind of 360 degree radar coverage by having miniature AESA radar antennas embedded in certain parts of the aircraft? Does someone seriously believe that the Rafale's Spectra EWS is a 360 degree radar system?

Yes, halloweene is "seriously" suggesting that!
And as you can see (actually read) the rest of us are posting educated arguments and evidence why such thing (360º radar on the Rafale) is simply not feasible

[halloweene]

I've been following these recent posts on and off for a bit.

Is someone seriously suggesting that the Rafale has some kind of 360 degree radar coverage by having miniature AESA radar antennas embedded in certain parts of the aircraft? Does someone seriously believe that the Rafale's Spectra EWS is a 360 degree radar system?

Yes, halloweene is "seriously" suggesting that!
And as you can see (actually read) the rest of us are posting educated arguments and evidence why such thing (360º radar on the Rafale) is simply not feasible

ricnunes, you are getting really tiring. Please top quoting me for your childish "war for truth" (i am citing you) on forums. Noone ever said Spectra is a 360° radar. Spectra has 360° small AESA antennas aimed at precisely locate threats (using interferometry) and precisely smart jam these threats. There is a nice series of article IN PORTUGUESE (as you seem to be a portuguese speaker) about *Rafale (and spectra) by a very educated brazilian test pilot (namely vianney riller JR) on "defesanet" excellent website (he tested Rafale for a full 2 weeks). Luckily, the guy is very easy to talk with on twitter... And a nice guy so you may educate yourself asking him. NExt time, find a reliable source instead of your "in portuguese" unknown, but citing wrong numbers website. RBE2 ranges were quite well reported by serious publications

Hint : during ATLC 2009 these antennas allowed Rafale to locate threats F-16 CJ had missed.....

The potential (and imo the evolution towards) of a 360° radar is quite obvious : flat tile architecture of AESA modules, and Physical separation of antennas in an array of "subantennas" etc. Finally, a slide from a Thales presentation....

Hornett finn DID educated remarks about power management, i'll talk about that later. you did not make any educated remark, for obvious reasons.

[hornetfinn]

Sure RBE2 AESA has more than doubled PESA range, that's what's expected with that technology. SImilarly other AESA radars have 2-3 times the range over previous MSA or PESA radars.

Are you sure?

I'm asking this because I have my doubts that AESA more than double the detection range over PESA counterparts, specially for an AESA based on a previous PESA radar, like for example the RBE2-AA (AESA version) which is based on the RBE2 (PESA).
If my memory doesn't fail me, it is claimed that the detection range of the RBE2 (PESA) is supposedly against a 1 square meter target around 100km while the detection range of the RBE2-AA (AESA) (also supposedly against a 1 square meter target) is around 140km.
That's not even half of a gain in detection range.

Yes, I'm sure about that. Even if RBE2-AA AESA is based on RBE2 PESA, there can be very little in common. In PESA there is single transmitter which amplifies RF signal coming from modulator. This signal (usually pulse) is the directed via waveguide to phase shifters which form the radar beam. In reverse the signal goes first to phase shifters which form the receive beam and direct it to receiver via waveguide assembly. In AESA there is no single transmitter, waveguide or phase shifters. All that functionality is included in individual T/R modules. Basically only major components that could be retained from RBE2 PESA is the receiver and signal processing unit. All AESA radars are thus pretty much totally new radars as there is very little that can be retained from MSA or PESA systems.

About RBE2 I've found this:
http://www.aviationtoday.com/2009/06/01/serious-squall/

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.

So your recollection about RBE2 PESA is about correct. However most French sources I've seen, seem to give RBE2 AESA twice the range over PESA version. This would be in line with others going from PESA/MSA to AESA and even that AESA calculator gives that as perfectly possible performance for Rafale radar even with 840 or so modules.

I found this interesting page (which compares PESA and AESA radars) which unfortunately (for most here) is in Portuguese:
https://tecnomilitar.wordpress.com/2017 ... a-vs-pesa/

However using google translator you can read it in English (link of the translated page below):
https://translate.google.pt/translate?s ... t=&act=url

In the last paragraph you can read the following (in the original page):

Um radar AESA chega a ter um ganho no alcance de detecção 50% a 80% maior do que sua versão PESA de mesma potência de pico, isso sem falar nos demais parâmetros de desempenho como capacidade LPI, ECM, ECCM, confiabilidade…

Which translated to English is:

An AESA radar achieve a 50% to 80% gain in detection range over its PESA version of the same peak power, not to mention the other performance parameters such as LPI, ECM, ECCM, reliability...

Which is closer to the reported detection range difference between RBE2 (PESA) and RBE2-AA (AESA) (namely the 50% value).

Well, that is pretty much true when radar power is the same. However AESA can easily have higher power than PESA or MSA radar. For example RBE2 AESA has about 8-10 kW peak power with 10W modules. RBE2 PESA range performance is very similar to 4-5 kW peak power radars of similar size (AN/APG-65/66/68/73 and RDI for Mirage 2000-5 for example). So it's likely that RBE2 AESA has about twice the power of RBE2 PESA. This would increase the range by about 20 percent which would mean roughly twice the range when range would increase "only" about 70 percent if power rating was equal.

I think 360 degree IR system is much more cost effective (like EODAS and DDM-NG) and versatile.

I fully agree!
But for now, the DDM-NG (found on the Rafale) can only perform the function of Missile Warning System. Sure there are "possibilities" or "potential future plan" (I repeat "possibilities" or "potential") of "updating" the DDM-NG in order to have capabilities somehow similar to DAS which can be read in the brochure which by its turn can be downloaded here:
http://www.mbda-systems.com/product/ddm-ng/

But of course even if such plan would ever go ahead this wouldn't be a "straightforward" update since it would certainly require extensive software development and also hardware modifications, not to mention LOTS of money/funds.

Exactly. Same problems exist with any additional sensors. F-35 is unique in that it has all those sensors designed in and also ties them very closely together with very high speed networks to sensor fusion engine. It would be real pain trying to add similar (or even close to it) capability to any 4th gen aircraft, including Rafale (which is near the top of all 4th gen fighters when it comes to sensors). Even adding capabilities to existing sensors seem to be problematic. For example to use DDM-NG for other than MAWS system would require sending the IR images to central processing system with hardware and software to handle those images. Not very easy or cheap to do at all and given the small production numbers, unit cost could rise significantly.

[halloweene]

For example to use DDM-NG for other than MAWS system would require sending the IR images to central processing system with hardware and software to handle those images. Not very easy or cheap to do at all and given the small production numbers, unit cost could rise significantly.

That is exactly why DDM-NG isn't used up to its full capabilities yet (must be plug and play with DDM). Will come with F3R standard next year.

[eloise]

Hint : during ATLC 2009 these antennas allowed Rafale to locate threats F-16 CJ had missed

Do you have the source for this?

[halloweene]

Hint : during ATLC 2009 these antennas allowed Rafale to locate threats F-16 CJ had missed

Do you have the source for this?

Here is one http://secretdefense.blogs.liberation.f ... x-emirats/

[eloise]

Here is one http://secretdefense.blogs.liberation.f ... x-emirats/

I meant something official or from reputable publications not blog.
Version from air cosmo only states that Rafale with Spectra can work the same job as F-16CJ.

[loke]

Version from air cosmo only states that Rafale with Spectra can work the same job as F-16CJ.

Do you have a source for this?

[ricnunes]

Yes, halloweene is "seriously" suggesting that!
And as you can see (actually read) the rest of us are posting educated arguments and evidence why such thing (360º radar on the Rafale) is simply not feasible

ricnunes, you are getting really tiring. Please top quoting me for your childish "war for truth" (i am citing you) on forums.

@halloweene or Mr. Pagot (or whatever you are called - By the way, my name is ALWAYS the SAME!)

I was trying very hard to reset my attitude towards you in my latest posts but now I really lost my patience with you!
Are you mentally retarded or what?? (feel free to report me and yes I'm really insulting you) Or don't you have a mirror to look yourself into??
First, I'm calling you mentally retarded (again, feel free to report me) because:
1- Where in my post (that you quoted) I said any lie?? This is what this thread has become -> You are defending (propagandizing is a more accurate word) that the Rafale can/could/would have a 360º radar while ALL OTHERS HERE are proving you that either that won't be possible or even if possible it wouldn't be technically feasible and specially effective (very small detection range from the other angles except the frontal arc) and that's what it was written by me in my last post you prick (again another insult, you can report me again)!
2- All you do here at f-16.net is to post Rafale/Dassault/French/Thales (or Tàles??) propaganda, most of the times without any sort of evidence and in the rare cases where you post an "evidence" it is not reliable since it is either based on some blog's wishful thinking or at best it is a potential future but still non-existing plan like the case of this supposed/imaginary/magical 360º Rafale radar of yours!
3- Due to the reasons mentioned in both point 1- and 2-, it's you who's getting really and really tiring! I cannot speak for others but I suspect that some or even many others here may agree with me, regarding you that is!
Your behaviour borders (borders not, in fact is) the behaviour of a Troll!

Noone ever said Spectra is a 360° radar.
Spectra has 360° small AESA antennas aimed at precisely locate threats (using interferometry) and precisely smart jam these threats.

I never said that you said that the Spectra is a 360º radar - however you said that SPECTRA was a (active) Stealth device, remember that Mr. Pagot??
Again, what is being said here is that you can't simply convert the "Spectra antennas" into a 360º degree radar or at least convert it into an minimally effective 360º radar.

There is a nice series of article IN PORTUGUESE (as you seem to be a portuguese speaker) about *Rafale (and spectra) by a very educated brazilian test pilot (namely vianney riller JR) on "defesanet" excellent website (he tested Rafale for a full 2 weeks). Luckily, the guy is very easy to talk with on twitter... And a nice guy so you may educate yourself asking him. NExt time, find a reliable source instead of your "in portuguese" unknown, but citing wrong numbers website. RBE2 ranges were quite well reported by serious publications

Are you proposing more Rafale propaganda?? No thanks, I believe that I read enough Rafale propaganda (coming from you) for my entire lifetime!

Hint : during ATLC 2009 these antennas allowed Rafale to locate threats F-16 CJ had missed.....

And your point is???

The potential (and imo the evolution towards) of a 360° radar is quite obvious : flat tile architecture of AESA modules, and Physical separation of antennas in an array of "subantennas" etc. Finally, a slide from a Thales presentation....

Hornett finn DID educated remarks about power management, i'll talk about that later. you did not make any educated remark, for obvious reasons.

If you weren't so mentally retarded (again, feel free to report me) and fully blinded with your "Rafale fanatism" or both, you would have paid MINIMAL attention to what hornetfinn told you before in where EVEN IF (and a REMOTE IF) a 360º radar could be implemented on the Rafale like you say the detection range would be very small to be of any use in a real battlefield and this not to mention the technical and economical hurdles needed to implement such system.


Finally, please feel free to report me of my insults towards you. I know what I've said and I'm willing to defend myself or defend my actions and even take/suffer the consequences for my acts.
Let's see if you are man enough (even because you cannot seem to stick to a name over the web, can you Mr. Pagot?) and lets see if you're willing to accept the consequences of your French/Rafale/fanboyism trolling! Resuming, let's see if you're man enough to do the same?!

[ricnunes]

Yes, I'm sure about that. Even if RBE2-AA AESA is based on RBE2 PESA, there can be very little in common. In PESA there is single transmitter which amplifies RF signal coming from modulator. This signal (usually pulse) is the directed via waveguide to phase shifters which form the radar beam. In reverse the signal goes first to phase shifters which form the receive beam and direct it to receiver via waveguide assembly. In AESA there is no single transmitter, waveguide or phase shifters. All that functionality is included in individual T/R modules. Basically only major components that could be retained from RBE2 PESA is the receiver and signal processing unit. All AESA radars are thus pretty much totally new radars as there is very little that can be retained from MSA or PESA systems.

About RBE2 I've found this:
http://www.aviationtoday.com/2009/06/01/serious-squall/

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.

Hi hornetfinn,

First of all thanks for the link.
But please notice that the part that you quoted is in the "AESA Radar" chapter which means that data is about the RBE2-AA (AESA) radar and not about the RBE2 (PESA) radar.
So this actually seems to confirm my previous range about the RBE2-AA (AESA) radar range of around 140 km (75 nautical miles = ~139Km).
So and again that data seems to be about the AESA version of RBE2 and not PESA.

My recollection about the RBE2 PESA variant detection range (all assuming a 1 square meter target) was around 100km. If my memory doesn't fail me I read this in an aerospace magazine (which I can't remember the name) in the early 2000's (but could have been in the late 1990's).
If this is the case, and knowing that the AESA has a detection range of around 140 km than this is not twice of a gain, at least not for the RBE2.
Perhaps the reason for this was exactly what you mentioned - That the RBE2-AA (AESA) is a quite different radar from the RBE-2 (PESA)?

[gta4]

So I think halloweene agreed on this?

"A single Rafale cannot lock on a bandit in its rear hemisphere and shoot it down with LOAL"

[wil59]

[quote="gta4"]So I think halloweene agreed on this?gle Rafale cannot lock on a bandit in its rear hemisphere and shoot it down with LOAL"[/quote ///// yes it does http://www.portail-aviation.com/2013/04 ... radar.html //// With the confirmation of this ability, the Rafale becomes clearly very dangerous for any opponent. He has often been criticized for the limited range of his RBE2 Radar in the air defense mission (now filled with the arrival of RBE2 AA). But if it is capable, thanks to its sensors, and especially thanks to the merging of all its data within the system, to be able to precisely detect the position of a hostile to 360 °, and to fire a missile rearward. diagram represents solution of fire on hostil rear//Shooting Down an Aggressor on My Six!// How DASSAULT, THALES, SAGEM (SAFRAN group) and MBDA found their very own way to integrate the machine, sensors and weapons. Link
by Vianney Riller, Jr Test Pilot / Aerospace & Defense Analyst//The scope of rbe2 has already been discussed it is about 200klm.

[SpudmanWP]

Go back and re-read the article. It never says that SPECTRA provided the track that appears on the slide or that the track was weapon's grade. In fact, it says that the slide is a result of all the sensors being fused, including the "data link".

Thus, with this combination of "letters" displayed in the lower left corner of the HLD - Head Level Display, we have the representation of the indications that the RBE2 AESA radar, the Infrared / Laser / TV Front - Sector Optronics (FSO) , the internal SPECTRA EW electronic warfare system, the IFF, the MICA IR (infrared seekers) sensors, and the Data Link are providing data together, translated and merged into a clear and unified direct visual representation in the tactical SA (s ituation awareness ) display , which keeps the pilot within the loopsituational, giving a real and instant confirmation of which sensors act at the moment, rarely (we never witnessed during the evaluations) leaving the pilot unnoticed from the 360º scenario around the aircraft.

http://www.defesanet.com.br/rafale/noti ... Introducao

Here is the slide that was Tweeted

[wil59]

Go back and re-read the article. It never says that SPECTRA provided the track that appears on the slide or that the track was weapon's grade. In fact, it says that the slide is a result of all the sensors being fused, including the "data link".

Thus, with this combination of "letters" displayed in the lower left corner of the HLD - Head Level Display, we have the representation of the indications that the RBE2 AESA radar, the Infrared / Laser / TV Front - Sector Optronics (FSO) , the internal SPECTRA EW electronic warfare system, the IFF, the MICA IR (infrared seekers) sensors, and the Data Link are providing data together, translated and merged into a clear and unified direct visual representation in the tactical SA (s ituation awareness ) display , which keeps the pilot within the loopsituational, giving a real and instant confirmation of which sensors act at the moment, rarely (we never witnessed during the evaluations) leaving the pilot unnoticed from the 360º scenario around the aircraft.

http://www.defesanet.com.br/rafale/noti ... Introducao

Here is the slide that was Tweeted

///////////During our evaluations, we performed BVR scenarios - beyond visual range - and WVR - in the visual range (where we had a Mirage 2000 C RDI). scenarios will be discussed in more detail in Part 3 of this article). We had the opportunity to confirm the complementarity of the SPECTRA EW and the maneuverability characteristics of the MICA ER. The SPECTRA EW allowed us to acquire the target from the Laser Threat Detection (EM / IR / Laser Threat Detection) when the threat entered the security bubble around the Rafale. We then executed the launch of the missile "over the shoulder", ie, firing a MICA against the target placed at 6 o'clock (position behind the aircraft), without to change the direction of flight of our fighter Beyond this protection of piloting and high-performance aeronautical capabilities, the Rafale has an electronic "shield" integrated in the fighter. We have the feeling of flying in a secure bubble. The SPECTRA system, developed by Thales and MBDA, integrates the capability to control the situation and gives alerts on multi spectral threats, ie radars, lasers and enemy missiles. Beyond "simply", if we can say that this is simple, giving the driver time and a head start against the threats so that he can make the best decision to avoid them, SPECTRA is also integrated into the Fusion of Rafale data and allows the pilot to turn the threat into an enemy target. Deepen the subject with our examples of a Mirage 2000 C RDI in Part 3.//////
MICA

The MBDA MICA missile is today the main air-to-air weapon of the multi-target type, all-weather, "fire-and- forget) of the Rafale. Thanks to its TCC (Thrust vector control) and its small physical dimensions, compared to similar missiles of short and medium range, the MICA is very agile. It is highly efficient in a radius of 500 meters to 60 km, in IR - infra-red homing seeker - and RF - active radar homing seeker - all equipped with filters that reduce the effectiveness of countermeasures like infrared and electromagnetic decoys (chaff and flares). The MBDA MICA is also capable of LOAL - lock-on after launch - meaning in practice that firing takes place while the target is out of reach of the missile receivers, acquisition of the target making after launch, and being updated by data link with the shooter aircraft.
Google