Page 56 of 203

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 14 Sep 2017, 14:55
by cavok
Some points,

Interferometers can be way more precise than you expect. 15 years ago spectra was quoted of a "less than 1 degree" accuracy. Greatly varies depending on frequency used.

you need a 3rd receptor to precise "front or rear".




However, you are more or less right. on board sensors will not give you the accurate location of a moving object (except if sensors are networked, either by an ifdl (F-35, F-22, Gripen) or via some tweak of L16 ( Rafale until F4 std). As far as one can declare a common time base)) but a rough estimation.
Another way to improve track quality will be to fuse data from several sensors.

Some interesting points here, will develop further. In the meanwhile, SAAB presentation of its Gripen E warfare suite. Note the "precise location" term (abusively?) used. https://www.facebook.com/saabtechnologi ... 943659431/

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 14 Sep 2017, 15:07
by ricnunes
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:The only issue I take with the blanket application of garrya's description is that it assumes you


Actually no, if you read the "Phase Interferometer" chapter you'll see that he mentions several antennas (receivers) and he even mentions a typical number (of antennas) being between 4 or 5.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 14 Sep 2017, 15:39
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Thanks everyone. I don't know the angular resolution was that low.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 14 Sep 2017, 15:45
by SpudmanWP
eloise wrote: I recall they said a single F-35 can geo-locate threats faster than 3 F-16CJ, i will try to find the quote


Here It is:

Three former F-16CJ Wild Weasel instructor pilots, those tasked with attacking surface-to-air missile sites, said a single F-35A can find and attack SAM sites faster and more effectively than three F-16CJ fighters working together.

http://dailysignal.com/2016/08/05/9-ins ... er-pilots/


The Source of the above:

Initially, RWRs were directional and would merely tell pilots which clock position they should search for the inbound missile. Over time, engineers developed methods for estimating the range of known threats, and pilots and engineers working together developed methods to triangulate and bomb the location of SAMs. Anti-radiation missiles were developed, and the pairing was given to SAM-hunting units designated as Wild Weasels. That capability improved with the HARM[6] Targeting System (HTS) of the fourth-generation F-16CJ.

The HTS allows F-16CJs working in flights of two or more jets to triangulate and fire on SAM systems more rapidly by linking and processing the collective data of the formation of jets. The target location solutions that the HTS offers are so precise and timely that missile systems can frequently find and destroy enemy SAMs even after the sites shut down their radar emitters on word of inbound missiles. The HTS gives its pilots markedly elevated levels of situational awareness from both SAM and air-to-air threats, but it comes at a cost. The HTS “pod” is an external, un-jettisonable[7] modification to the F-16 that adds weight and a significant amount of drag to the jet’s sleek lines.

Fourth-generation F-15Cs are now being modified for a next-generation electronic warfare suite called Eagle Passive/Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS). EPAWSS reportedly will give the Eagle sophisticated jamming, geolocation, target-identification, infrared threat-detection, and decoy capabilities[8]—a modification that is postulated to give the F-15C several fifth-generation faculties.[9]

The details of the F-35 threat-detection system or RWR are classified, but interviews of pilots who have flown both the F-16CJ and the F-35 state that a single F-35 has the ability to locate, identify, and triangulate emitter locations faster and with greater precision than can a flight of three F-16CJs that surround the emitter.[10] The associated systems work against air-to-air threats just as well and are all internal to the F-35, forgoing the need for external pods or stores that would slow down the jet or give it a larger radar cross section (RCS).[11] This system alone helps to make all three versions of the F-35 standouts in the air-to-ground mission sets of the multirole fighter community.

http://www.heritage.org/defense/report/ ... concurrent

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 14 Sep 2017, 16:28
by talkitron
That John Venable article was among the best I have read on the F-35. There was no shocking details but it was serious and even had original survey data. I will look for more writing by Venable. Thanks for posting.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2017, 22:32
by swiss
Today i was on the Breitling Sion Airshow in Switzerland. And because Swiss will have soon a evaluation for a new Fighter, all the invited manufacturers where there. Lockheed martin( sadly without a f-35), Airbus, Dassault and Saab.

I talk with a Radar Ingenieur from the Capter-E, a Eurofighter Pilot with 20 year experience, a marketing guy from Lockheed and finally with a Rafale Pilot.

And the Rafale Pilot confirms, they the Rafale can do a 6 o'clock shot with a Mica IR thanks to Spectra on its own, without help from a other Rafale or AWACS. I ask him twice to make sure he understand me right. He also said, the Range doubelt from the Old to the new RBE2 Radar.

Also interesting. There was a brochure where Dassault claims the Rafale can do Supercruis with 6 Micas and one 1250L tank.

Here the Pics. But its written in German.
Image
Image

The German EF Pilot has an incredible knowledge. I has flown 6 year F-4, 4 years f-18 (in Spain) and 10 years EF. until last year. Know he works for Airbus. He makes several claims about Meteor, Rafale, f-22 and also Russians Fighters. I don't know if i can quote him in this thread? Would be a litte of topic. :oops:

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2017, 23:03
by white_lightning35
Do tell s'il vous plait.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2017, 23:06
by juretrn
Swiss, I'd love to hear about all of that.
If you're worried about offtopic, post to appropriate threads, but I don't think anyone would mind if you do it here.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2017, 23:19
by ricnunes
swiss wrote:Today i was on the Breitling Sion Airshow in Switzerland. And because Swiss will have soon a evaluation for a new Fighter, all the invited manufacturers where there. Lockheed martin( sadly without a f-35), Airbus, Dassault and Saab.


From this, I gather that the Lockheed Martin's fighter aircraft that Switzerland is or will be evaluating is the F-16, right?

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2017, 23:37
by steve2267
ricnunes wrote:
swiss wrote:Today i was on the Breitling Sion Airshow in Switzerland. And because Swiss will have soon a evaluation for a new Fighter, all the invited manufacturers where there. Lockheed martin( sadly without a f-35), Airbus, Dassault and Saab.


From this, I gather that the Lockheed Martin's fighter aircraft that Switzerland is or will be evaluating is the F-16, right?


I am pretty sure we have discussed how the F-35, esp. the F-35B, would be perfect for Switzerland, and all discussion has been centered around LM competing the F-35 there. That said, I don't know why LM couldn't compete both the F-35 and the F-16, but at this point, I don't know that even the F-16 has a price advantage over the F-35 (from the same manufacturer, no less).

I understood his statement to mean "it's too bad LM couldn't bring an F-35 with them" which makes sense because there are not many free ones hanging around. They are all being used for training (operational or flight) or testing.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2017, 23:49
by viper12
swiss wrote:Here the Pics. But its written in German.


Was habe ich gesehen ? Meine Augen, meine Augen !

Yes, my eyes tend to bleed when exposed to excessive amounts of German ! :mrgreen:

Just to be sure, the few pages there expose a scenario where a Rafale configured with 6 MICAs and an external 1250L fuel tank takes off for an intercept in less than 500m, reaches an altitude of 40,000ft two minutes after takeoff, at which point it can supercuise at Mach 1.3 ?

And what's EloKa-Signatur ? Is it the Radar Cross-Section (RCS) ?

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2017, 00:25
by swiss
ricnunes wrote:
swiss wrote:Today i was on the Breitling Sion Airshow in Switzerland. And because Swiss will have soon a evaluation for a new Fighter, all the invited manufacturers where there. Lockheed martin( sadly without a f-35), Airbus, Dassault and Saab.


From this, I gather that the Lockheed Martin's fighter aircraft that Switzerland is or will be evaluating is the F-16, right?


No it is definitively the f-35. :wink: They had a F-35 Simulator there.

Ok i try to quote him correct. It was a lot of input, my english is not so good and its late here. :wink:

He was scrambling several Russian Fighters in the "Baltic crisis 2014" Mig-31, Su-27, Su-33 and Su-30. And the Russians never realize when the put the Radarbeam on them. Even with "old" EF Radar. There was no reaction from the Russin Pilots. He also said, that aerodynamically the Russian Fighters where always great but in terms of avionics behind western technology. Even in the cold war. Know it must be at least 10-20 years.

He had several "fights" against the F-22 with the EF. In Dogfights the 2 Fighters are at the same level. In Trust/weight Ratio terms the EF was superior, but the F-22 has advantage in other aspects. He cleary sad in BVR the F-22 is "a other league" then the EF.

He said the RCS of the EF is under 1 m2 and better then the Superhornet.

The Meteor has a superior Range to the AMRAAM. even to the D Version. And the European are happy to have the Meteor know. Because the Americans don't sell the D Modell to other countries.

The Meteor for the UK F-35 is a short version. So its has not the same range then the "normal" Meteor.

Also interesting. He and the "Radarguy" claims that the most important improvement from the Aesa Radar is not the Range. Because all Missiles have a shorter Range then the Radar. Important is that you can do several things in the same time. And its more reliable to identify targets then older Radars. Because mechanical Radars can put the beam only all view seconds on the target. The AESA all the time. Because it scan electronically.

There was some more. But its late. :wink:

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2017, 00:39
by swiss
viper12 wrote:
swiss wrote:Here the Pics. But its written in German.


Was habe ich gesehen ? Mein Augen, mein Augen !

Yes, my eyes tend to bleed when exposed to excessive amounts of German ! :mrgreen:

Just to be sure, the few pages there expose a scenario where a Rafale configured with 6 MICAs and an external 1250L fuel tank takes off for an intercept in less than 500m, reaches an altitude of 40,000ft two minutes after takeoff, at which point it can supercuise at Mach 1.3 ?

And what's EloKa-Signatur ? Is it the Radar Cross-Section (RCS) ?


"It takes less then 500m for Take off. the Rafale accelerate with afterburner to mach 1.3. then he reduces Power and goes without AB to maximal Power. But stay in supersonic. thats its called supercrusing. "

I think EloKa-Signatur means electronic warfare. So he reduce is electronic "footprint". He uses only OFS not the Radar.

Steve you a right. It was a pity that no F-35 was there. :(

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2017, 00:56
by white_lightning35
Tank you for posting; it is always nice to hear the words of pilots.

Regarding the rcs claim with regards to the SH, I wonder if he is basing that statement on experiences in exercises? I don't know if rcs values for 4th gens are highly classified still, so that is perhaps the only way he would know.

His belief that the EF and f-22 are equal dogfighters is in line with other EF pilots it seems. I'm guessing thrust-vectoring would be the advantage the f-22 has in his eyes.

Australia has been wiped off the map! No amraam-d's are being exported anymore! And it is interesting that the Meteor for the f-35 will be shorter ranged. I heard that some modifications to the missile had to be made.

It makes since to me that range isn't really a big deal for the new radar, IF the range was already fairly substantial. Even if your missile can't reach as far as your radar, it should be valuable to be able to know where the enemy is long before the opposite.

Re: F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2017, 01:20
by spazsinbad
OVer on previous page 'swiss' said: "...Because the Americans don't sell the D Modell to other countries...." then curiously 'white_lightning35' said: "...Australia has been wiped off the map! No amraam-d's are being exported anymore!..." which I guess sarcastically means: 'what I am quoting is saying "one day Oz will have AIM-120Ds"'.
Lightning lethality - F-35 weapons
01 Jul 2017 Nigel Pittaway

"...IOC and beyond
When Australian IOC is eventually achieved, the F-35 weapons suite will include the AIM-120D variant of AMRAAM, AIM-9X Block II, GBU-12 and two variants of the 1,000 lb GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM).

These weapons are initially being delivered under the aegis of Air 6000 Phases 2A/B, which is acquiring sufficient numbers of weapons and expendable countermeasures to support Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E), together with five years of sustainment. bWar stocks of the weapons and countermeasures will be acquired under Air 6000 Phase 3 (air to ground) and Phase 5 (air to air).

The AIM-120D is the latest AMRAAM variant, which offers increased range, GPS-guided navigation and a two-way data link over the earlier AIM-120C-7.

The AIM-9X-2 (Block II) is a within visual range infra-red (IR) weapon which has updated electronics’ systems and a new data link, which allows a Lock-On After Launch (LOAL) capability that the earlier variant does not currently boast.

RAAF Hornets and Super Hornets currently use the C-7 version of AMRAAM and the earlier version of AIM-9X is the baseline WVR weapon aboard Australia’s Super Hornets and Growlers. Both AIM-120D and AIM-9X-2 are already on order for the Hornet, Super Hornet and Growler....

...“I sense a definite desire within Defence to step-up F-35 weapons capability from the mid-2020’s and that’s really the area we’re interested in,” Watson said." [Andy Watson, managing director MBDA Australia]

Source: http://www.australiandefence.com.au/new ... 35-weapons