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

Discussion in 'Europe & Russia' started by 500, Feb 27, 2011.

  1. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,790
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Sancho and Agent_47 like this.
  2. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,958
    Likes Received:
    5,856
    Country Flag:
    India
    Is there any advantage left for Rafale ? If you take F3R.
     
  3. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    EF with P3E will be superior in

    - Flight performance
    - AESA and IRST detection
    - CAP and CAS weapon loads and variety

    Rafale with F3R will be superior in

    - AESA modes
    - long range identification (FSO TV)
    - passive BVR attack with MICA IR
    - EW
    - SEAD
    - heavy and long range strikes (EF has to carry 2 heavy weapons and can only carry a single fuel tank because of design limitation at the centerline station)


    With P4E around 2021, EF will be superior in SEAD as well and catch up at radar modes and EW. The design limitations, can only be countered by CFTs, but if they come is not clear yet.

    Rafale must wait till 2023-25 to get the next big upgrade, the F4.
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2017
    Sathya and Agent_47 like this.
  4. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,790
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    At present Rafale doesn't have FSO. It was removed and inferior to PIRATE.

    AESA is formerly part of P4E for Typhoon except for Kuwait.

    P4E AESA (2021) for Typhoon will be superior to Rafale AESA in size, power (GaN, radar 2) modes and EA attack capability, which RBE2-AA does not have.

    EW- Rafale superior for now possibly (depending on software updates), but maybe not after P4E 2021.

    Rafale SEAD capability - it doesn't have any formal SEAD capability as discussed and proven before.

    Long range strikes - You can't fly with drop tanks over peer rivalry airspace, so irrelevant. The limitation on Typhoon is actually because the landing gear interferes with long loads on inner wing stations.

    For 2024 Japan and the UK are working on an AESA-equipped Meteor for F-35 and Typhoon and the UK will be adopting AARGM-ER, with cut fuel section for F-35B internal carriage.
     
  5. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,328
    Likes Received:
    6,264
    Country Flag:
    France
    1. I do not see how the EF team will, in late 2019, both reduce the gap in detection capabilities in look down and be in a position to produce 9 antennas per year. A delay of almost a year is more likely, maybe even with a delivery in mechanical antenna configuration to retrofit later.
    2. I do not see how they will be able to produce in stabilized series the antennas of the radar 2 to less than 4 years behind or even 6 years if configuration GaN. Which brings to 2024 or 2026 ...
    That said, it would be worse if they still had to serve all the founding customers always quick to fight in industrial returns.
     
  6. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    It has FSO, just not the IR channel. That's why it's inferior to EF in IRST detection, but superior in visual ID.

    Your opinion, not a fact. It can detect and locate a target and guide AASM to it. The range of AASM is the only limiting factor.
    EF reportedly can detect SAM radars, but will be able to locate and attack SAM's only with P4E upgrades.
    Tell that the RAF, which did Storm Shadow strikes in Libya, with their Tornados flying from the UK itself and later from Italy. Both would not be possible with the EF and a single fuel tank.
     
  7. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    Why? EFs with AESA demonstrators are flying for a long time and even Captor E is flying for roughly a year now. So no reason why the radar itself should be much of a problem, except for modes.
    I'm curious though, how they fixed the weight balance issue.

    GaN is speculation so far and mainly aimed at the partner countries, but higher costs will be the main issue. I assume the UK will go ahead with their own program.
     
  8. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,328
    Likes Received:
    6,264
    Country Flag:
    France
    Even Captor M have problems in look down, it could be solve with AESA but it takes time. And do not forget that it took six and a half years between the purchase of the active antenna of the RBE2 and its mass production. And yet for the Rafale also prototype versions were flying for a long time .... and there were no repositioners.
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2017
  9. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,790
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    IRST does target ID too and has much longer effective range. No one else has even bothered with TV for A2A. Not the Russians, Chinese, US or Israelis.

    SEAD - @vstol-jockey - we've done this to death, it has no formal SEAD capability. To kill anything, it has to find it with a targeting pod and then lock it, which is not the same as a HARM/AARGM/ALARM capability. I have posted many links where even the French government admit this, so I don't see the point in rehashing this argument again. It's been done already, it's a fact. Any aircraft with RWR can detect SAM radars. The Typhoon can also geolocate them just not as accurately. Neither is good enough for direct targeting though, only to give a targeting pod an approximate bearing or jam. 1 degree at 60km is a miss by a kilometre. And even 0.5deg is a miss by >500m. And that's assuming perfectly flat topography in order to allow range to be correctly calculated. Unless you're using nuclear warheads that isn't accurate for a SEAD capability.

    The Storm Shadows were launched from over the Mediterranean.
     
    Agent_47 likes this.
  10. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,328
    Likes Received:
    6,264
    Country Flag:
    France
    The angular accuracy of a direction measured by interferometry is the same as the angular accuracy of an AESA Radar using the same technology. The precision of 1 ° or 0.5 ° is only an upper bound of the true precision with the aim of hiding the performance.
    Then if a raw measurement of the sensor gives you an accuracy μ then by accumulating measurements and using a Kalman filter you can arrive at a precision μ / n where n depends on the number of measurements you have been able to make. The BMD calculations do not represent at all, the possibilities of the Rafale that have been demonstrated in Libya. But BMD is autistic and when we are tired of trying to convince him and we give up he believes he has won, without realizing that it does not change the reality of the facts.
     
    randomradio and Sancho like this.
  11. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    We will see about that, but the main factor remains that it's larger size => higher number of TR modules and the wider field of view, provides credible advantages in detection range and volume and that should be visible even with radar 1+.
    Add the advantage of PIRATE and the EF offers an impressive edge over Rafale in terms of detection.
     
  12. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,328
    Likes Received:
    6,264
    Country Flag:
    France
    Not obvious that Radar 1 will be better in detection than RBE2 AESA. At long term, when Radar 2 and 3 will be available RBE2 will have conformal antenna... And a new IR channel for OSF is in development at SAFRAN.
     
  13. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    by having cross bearing fix thru data link, we can get very precise location fit for targeting. two Rafale or two Typhoons can do this job provided they are sufficiently spread apart.
     
    Sancho likes this.
  14. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,790
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Oh sure, so we run into the old classified BS again. There is no way it's as accurate as an AESA radar. If you knew anything about monopulse, or conical scan you wouldn't even suggest it. And the accuracy of a radar depends heavily on the size and frequency too. So to simply say these two little iddy-biddy receivers give the same accuracy as any AESA radar is garbage. Go on, tell BMD that the aforementioned is garbage, I dare you.

    On SEAD, did you think I'd forgotten this post? Please see all the links from your own damn government stating that France needs a SEAD capability.

    http://indiandefence.com/threads/rafale-deal-signed.56201/page-168#post-538765

    I particularly like this one.

    https://www.cairn.info/revue-politique-etrangere-2007-4-page-729.htm

    Meanwhile you have.
    [​IMG]

    Wow, The Unofficial Rafale Blog. Don't you think that maybe sounds a little... unofficial?
     
  15. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    Yes it does, but at lower distances than the FSO TV channel. We have seen the advantage in the results of the Swiss evaluation, where Rafale without IRST was rated higher in visual ID. Even more impressive, we're the results of Rafale and EF BVR combats in the past (in the UAE if I remember correctly), where the RoE required visual ID and Rafale was able to launch missiles first.

    First of all, it is similar, because older Gen SEAD fighters needed to carry pods to detect the radars, which in modern EWs are integrated, so carrying a pod is not an issue. More importantly you simply ignore the fact that SEAD is not limited to launching ARM at radars, but has evolved to PGM strikes to the missiles as well. That's why today cruise missiles, or stand off weapons without dedicated radiation seekers are used too, which also is a lesson learned by the inefficiency of ARMs in the Kosovo war. The US fighters already use JSOW in SEAD and not only HARM, even the EF is planned to get SPEAR 3 to attack SAM sites. AASM does the same, so far to a limited range though.

    Nice distraction, but the Tornados flew a long range to do the strikes and the same is not possible with EF tI'll CFT's are available.
     
    Picdelamirand-oil likes this.

Share This Page