Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Eurofighter Typhoon v/s Dassault Rafale - Analysis

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by jagjitnatt, Apr 29, 2011.

?

which aircraft do you prefer

  1. RAFALE

    177 vote(s)
    54.1%
  2. TYPHOON

    150 vote(s)
    45.9%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. littlejohn

    littlejohn 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2012
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    23
    Well I am not entirely sure actually, it seems to me that we see part of the first compressor stage? I might be wrong...

    Yes, but I would have prefered Cindy, sorry just kiding (well not really)
     
    1 person likes this.
  2. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    Yes, on both plane, if you spend a lot of time finding the right angle and use a strong flash, you will see a very little part of compressors. However, both are really well hidden from ennemy radars.
     
  3. littlejohn

    littlejohn 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2012
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    23
    My german is pretty rough but I think it is 2 X EM AAMs not 4....

    OK, let's do some number crunching now:

    Take-off weight in the "Police du ciel" configuration (please correct me if I am wrong because I could easily screw up on that one):

    Rafale:
    10220 kg (Empty weight with one external tank and pylons)
    4700 kg (internal fuel)
    1000 kg (fuel in supersonic drop tank: 0.8*1250)
    448 kg (4 MICAs)

    TOTAL: 16368 kg / 161 kN

    Typhoon:
    11285 kg (Empty weight with one external tank and pylons)
    4950 kg (internal fuel)
    800 kg (fuel in supersonic drop tank: 0.8*1000)
    304 kg (2 AMRAMs = 2*152kg)
    175 kg (2 IRIS-Ts = 2*87.4kg)

    TOTAL: 17514 kg / 172 kN

    Thrust to weight ratios in the configuration:

    Rafale:
    2*75/170 = 0,95

    Typhoon:
    2*90/172 = 1.05

    That's 11% difference in favour of the Typhoon.

    So If the initial climb rates performances released by the Swiss Air Force are correct (Rafale > 250 m/s versus Typhoon > 200 m/s) that means that in this configuration the Typhoon drags a lot more than Rafale. The difference suprises me a bit in all honesty....
     
  4. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    I think you should check the public document about noise generated, p23 and around (from memory) spund propagation can give interesting data about planes evolution. Although i dnt speak german at all.
    And why put 1250 liters instead of 100?
    Altho i admit that basically, EFA should be better armed for climb rate. (except on lift and drag?)
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2012
  5. nicolas10

    nicolas10 Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    153
    The Rafale carries more fuel (bigger external tanks), and 4 bvr missiles instead of 2 bvr missiles+ 2 wvr missiles. So the payload is not really matching.

    It doesn't change much though. Especially wrt missiles.

    Nic
     
  6. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,462
    Interesting calculation, but you should keep in mind that these specs are from the current versions, although in Swiss and India EF T3B and Rafale F3+ were offered. EF T3B will have the Swashplate AESA radar, which reportedly adds a lot of weight and possibly even needs additional weight in the rear section to balance it again. All this, while the thrust will remain the same, which means, the TWR or climb rates of the T2 should be different to the T3B.
     
  7. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    What would be Typhoon's and Rafale's wing loading, t/w ratio and turning performance with minimal air-to-air loads (say, 4 hat-seeking missiles + bullets)?
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2012
  8. Dare2

    Dare2 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    Likes Received:
    602
    Correct, i can't change that since i can't acces the previous page for some reasons.


    If you are talking about the Swiss configuration; it is theirs, when Rafale is in QRA they carry only two wingtip IR MICAs, we can't compare it to another A2A configuration it is mission specific.

    30 mm are shell not bullets, bullets qualifes up to 12.7 mm if my memory doesn't fail me and the gun/shells would be part of the (configuration) basic empty weight.

    Wingloading would be lower for Rafale empty, Lower for Rafale with 50% internal fuel and 2 X AAMs, note that Eurofighter tries to give the impression of the contrary in their PDF by adding the surface of the canards to the 50 m2 of the wing, the canards are not lifting surfaces in subsonic at least.

    The Rafale tested and therefore the empty weight is that of the B, i think it was the same for Typhoon, a twin seater, i havent beed able to track the accurate internal fiel of the B it's somewhere in my archives (dozen of CDs to seach = galere) with a MinDef PDF.

    If you like to compare starting with empty weights uses the 9.500 kg/11.150 kg of the single seaters for data and their know fuel loads: That's 4.750 kg/5.000 kg internal fuel.

    Something else, initial climb rate is normally function of excess thrust but would only be comparible at equal cL/cD ratios, for an equal cL a Typhoon full of fuel + tank + 4 AAMs will need a higher AoA for an equal vertical speed which was the subject of my post in the first place.

    Then we dont have the detail of the flight profile (Climb profile) which is important.

    As for thrust, again, kN are class thrust, the STATIC thrust are 34.000/40.000 Lb.

    [​IMG]

    See how Eurofighter compares Typhoon to F-22 here...


    So if you want to compute Rafale TWR, you got to use Lbs like Peter Colins does LOL!

    Engines are two Snecma M88-2E4s generating a combined 22,500lb (100kN) of thrust dry and 34,000lb in full afterburner. 13.6% SFC difference at T.O.
    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/flight-test-dassault-rafale-rampant-rafale-334383/

    Since i haven't been able to acces the previous page i didn't start to convert/compute...





    [​IMG]
    Our take-off mass was 16.1t (10.8t basic and 5.3t fuel).
    [​IMG]
    Both images © Véronique Almansa/Dassault

    1 X 1.250 L tank : NO MICA in Collin's test configuration = 10.8t basic.


    So remember that my original point was; initial climb rate is explained by aerodynamics, difference in Service Ceiling by difference in fuel weight when Rafale is at 50.000 ft, Typhoon can reach 5.000 ft more but with a lot less fuel onboard.

    I don't like to use wiki for many reasons but this part is accurate...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_loading#Effect_on_climb_rate_and_cruise_performance
    Wing loading

    Look at the chapter: Effect on climb rate and cruise performance.

    Typhoon achieves its performances at the cost of endurence/fuel fraction, even if there could be a small advantage in eccess thrust in favour of Typhoon EJ200 at altitude it show only 5.000 ft in these conditions, hardly a "trump card".


    We note also that Typhoon empty weight has increased since the T2 and that i am using the T1 Specs as the German Typhoon were not at the latest standards and we do not have the new weight datas.

    If anything the Eurofighter PDF which slide i used to illustrate my comments here gives it at 12.000 t in which configuration i don't know.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2012
    1 person likes this.
  9. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    It still doesn't answer about immediate turn performance, and wether Rafale's fuselage provides any lift (I'd guess Typhoon's doesn't help much). Also, maximum takeoff weight doesn't really help, since no-one sane is going to dogfight with drop tanks and ground attack weapons.

    Eurofighter states that fighter is made with tail-heavy feeling, meaning that Typhoon's canards are there to prevent nose from going up, which should mean that canards actually add to wing loading but still help turn performance. Rafale's canards certainly help turning but, being close-coupled, could also help lift.

    Now, only things I can reliably decide on is that Rafale has better cannon (both are revolver ones, but Rafale's has selectable RoF as well as better maximum RoF) and Typhoon slightly better cockpit visibility (all glass cockpit, no metallic "beams") in single-seater version (in two seater one, Rafale has advantage in that). Also, thrust/weight ratio for both fighters will change, as will manouverability, depending on upgrades; I found no data for these values for AtA combat configuration for either, so I can't say anything there.

    However, Rafale is far more mature platform; I remember that Typhoon had some problems with nose wandering, I don't know if that is solved. RCS should be relatively low for both from front in ideal configuration, althought Typhoon's movable air intakes don't help it at all, but Rafale's RCS should be lower from other aspects, based on Dassault's statement about "selective use of RAM coatings"; as for IR signature, I have no idea.

    Does Rafale have side radar arrays?
     
  10. Bang Galore

    Bang Galore Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2010
    Messages:
    603
    Likes Received:
    341
    Not really, that's a nickname given by the internet fans. The IAF will almost certainly have a nickname but it certainly won't be Katrina.
     
  11. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    immediate tuern performance? simply look at air shows. For more details about wing loading and fuselage lift, better ask Dare2. Rafale cannon is tbh TOO precises as the targeting system that was sensed to com ewith was withdrawn.
    About A2A just type Solenzara 2008
    Conformal arrays will come with F4 standard.
    IR signature is improved of rafale due to a third cold air flush around the prop and air outlets, again Dare2 would be a more reliable source then me.
    Cheers, bit late for me i gonna have a rest;
     
  12. Dare2

    Dare2 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    Likes Received:
    602
    11.0 g vs 9.0 in instantaneous, the rest one could compute with proper data...

    Analyst the world over spend their time (and are payed for) doing just that, compiling data; they start with politico-industrial history (requiered specs, roles, technologies etc), then analysis of design features (aerodynamic, structural), then available data, this results in proper analysis such as those one can find in Jane's books and are used by strategic Analysts even at NATO.

    That's exactly what (and the way) i am trying to do, compile as much documents as i can, update and use the SAME methods to get close to what results in real-life performances.

    I quote:

    C'est seulement impossible pour ceux qui ne se donnent pas la peine d'essayer, l'aviation c'est pas de la politique electorale, c'est un amalgame de sciences.

    [​IMG]
    http://www.jeunes-ailes.org/t6314-passer-son-bia
    La preuve, ca s'apprend meme dans des ecoles...
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2012
  13. Dare2

    Dare2 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    Likes Received:
    602
    Wing surface is computed using the imaginary surface of the wingplan within the fuselage volume, vs weight, this give you a wingloading.

    For fuselage lift that you need results of simulated fluid test to have more precise data than that or base your analysis on true but rough known aerodynamic principles, this is one of them.

    To compute turn rate you need these parameters:
    [​IMG]

    For sustained turn rates you need the result for instantaneous turn rate plus Drag coefficient vs available Thrust.



    It is an important indicator of the ratio between weight and available lift.


    They both are instable statically in subsonic, what you mean is that the center of Gravity is behind the center of Lift, which results in a pitch-up moment, this is true for both but the close-coupled canard also provide with DYNAMIC instability.
    http://ciurpita.tripod.com/rc/rcsd/cntrPress/cntrPress.html

    Since the center of Lift move backward in supersonic (proportionally to the angle of windsweep) and the close-coupled canard dynamic instability doesn't change as much, Rafale might well be less stable in supersonic than Typhoon.


    Thats of SPECTRA, which are scheduled to be upgraded with GaAN technology.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2012
    1 person likes this.
  14. Dare2

    Dare2 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    Likes Received:
    602
    As seen on thew startrek forum. Sour grapes and noisy loosers, juicy!!!

    Read the whole page, I leave it to your conclusions...

    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]
    "at some point in time people start to think it's the truth"
    [​IMG]


    About Capitaine Romain. French Defense Minister Website:
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    Discussion avec Romain, pilote de Rafale dans l’armée de l’Air.
    30/06/2011 19:48
    Discussion avec Romain, pilote de Rafale dans l

    Looks like reality denial is an Eurofighter illness.


    People are not that stupid and don't need "the necessary knowledge" with the amount of documents i post, to verify that what i say is correct, plus they also can LEARN if they wish to.

    Yet, i must be a VERY good troll to manage to succeed where Jon Lake failed with a clearly superior English writing skills in several years of practice... I wonder why?
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2012
  15. Dare2

    Dare2 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    Likes Received:
    602
    ------

    Pour les gars d'Air Defense: Eurofighter Transonic Eurofighter Transonic Pitch Up MitigationPitch Up MitigationandandAuto Low Speed Auto Low Speed Recovery (ALSR) Recovery (ALSR) ConceptConceptHeinz
    http://www.ukintpress-conferences.com/conf/aero04/pres/spoelgen.pdf

    Faite passer SVP.

    ps le Rafale a ete pilote a des vitesses aussi basses que 18 kt pendant un combat simule vs Mirage 2000 AVANT le campagne d'essai aux grand angles, pendant, il a atteins 100*+ et -40 kt.

    Le probleme n'est PAS la vitesse mais les risques de decrochage et depart en vrille, l'indicateur d'AoA etant imprecis a ces vitesses.

    "DEEP STALL", les long-moment arm canard n'en sortent pas, les close-coupled, si, d'ou le beoin de "proteger" le Typhoon en empechant le depart (Departure).


    Spin recovery known to be acceptable for close coupled delta canard (not necessarily so for a long coupled canard configuration):
    MACH Aviation Magazine - på webben

    In the high AOA and spin tests that has taken place since 1996 and recently concluded successfully, the normal tactic was to initiate the tests with a near vertical climb with speed dropping off to near zero and a rapid increase of AOA up to extreme angles, and the aircraft could then be “parked” at 70 to 80 degrees of alpha.

    When giving adverse aileron input there, a flat spin with up to a maximum of 90 degrees per second of yaw rotation started and could then be stopped by pro aileron input. Recovery followed, whenever commanded.
    MACH Aviation Magazine - på webben
    [​IMG]
    On reste PRECIS SVP, on n'a pas besoin de faire les memes erreurs que l'opposition et se mettre en vrac tot ou tard...

    [video=youtube_share;5wIq75_BzOQ]http://youtu.be/5wIq75_BzOQ[/video]
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2012
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page