captor is indeed a better radar on pen & paper only as it is not operationalized yet
Again, that's just your opinion only, based on your pure believe but nothing else! As long there is not even a tech demo version available, you don't even know how many T/R modules it will have and that's why your conlcusion is not credible!
Do you know that the Captor E with swashplate design is probably too heavy and that it shifts the weight balance of the fighter to the front? The only solutions to counter that weight is A, add more weight to the rear part and increase the emtpyweight, which then reduces the flight performance again, or B to reduce the size of the radar/smaller diameter, which then again means less performance of the radar.
The Russians have similar problems with the Zhuk AE and the integration into Mig 35, because the promised 200Km detection range would only be possible with a big diameter, but that would have caused too much weight and they had to reduce the size again.
So again, since there is not at least a flying prototype of the Captor E and some official specs all we can't compare it with the RBE 2 AESA, since we don't have any reliable specs for it.
Now u can post many reasons for it's losing ,but it has no value here
LOL, so you don't care about arguments and simply stick with what you belive and you called me a fanboy?
well exactly same thing applies for E captor aesa also as it is for future only & it has not been fielded
No it don't! The AESA radar development and integration is now at least pre-funded by the EF consortium, which means it will be ready and available someday, but that is not the case for the CFT development and integration, nor for the integration of Storm Shadow! Same goes for TVC, for anti ship, anti radiation missiles, Pilum Stand off missile, Brimstone.........................
As I said, the only new weapons that are cleared for integration into EF are Paveway IV (which is already in the final test stages) and in future METEOR. Brimstone, JDAM and Storm Shadow or Taurus were planned in the past for the T3, but since the agreement on T3A, the partners could not find a common weapon package that will be integrated. That's even very logical, since Germany and Spain don't need Storm Shadow but Taurus, but Italy and UK most likely will integrate Storm Shadow to F35 now, just like Brimstone, which is likely to be integrated in the Telemos drone as well.
Latest from the Swiss competition:
The rafale offsets offer would include :
A Rafale final assembly line and maintenance center
The production of structural items
The Mica missile production
The development of the Rafale HMD, the OSF-NG and Spectra self defense system
Several othe military or civilian industrial cooperations (CFM-56 engine, Falcon business jets, military and civilian avionics)
Rafale News: Switzerland, National council approved the new fighter jet acquisition
It was offered for the French forces in the past, but it wasn't integrated and just like most of the EF techs, this Rafale capability is waiting to be funded by export customers (was one of the upgrades the UAE wanted from the start).
well i agree buddy but there are many other things in cluded in sensor fusion just advanced sensors wont mean the plane is having better sensor fusion
Of course, but you it wasn't me that included such things like voice command, nor did you said why there is an advantage for EF without proving it or giving credible reasons, but:
"
i think Typhoon may be having an upperhand as compare to france" says it all.
so thats why they are developing conformal tanks for it to compensate that thing ,but yes it is as usual in developmental stage
That's why the EF consortium is developing some solutions, but there is no real development going on for the CFTs, since no partner country has funded it yet!
But rest all mission s though ef 2000 has not done but it can be done by ef 2000 but as usual in future
And once again, nobody has funded the addition of a recon pod, nobody has funded the addition of any weapon for SEAD... for the anti ship role.. ... ... and as long as nobody funded it? Exactly, the EF won't have this capability anywhere else than on paper!
but can rafale's spectra do that in bvr ranges i doubt can u post a link to prove it as i know it can only provide within bvr range not BVR range ie' IR missiles only
There is nothing like cueing in WVR or BVR, either you can cue weapons at target emitters or not, DASS can't so far, SPECTRA can and even showed it during SEAD missions in Libya, when it destroyed air defences from up to 60Km distance, by infos gathered from SPECTRA, which then were feeded into AASM. MICA has INS navigation capability and SPECTRA can provide target data to it as well, that's why the unique combination of SPECTRA + AASM + MICA gives Rafale passive attack capability against air and ground targets, without the need of the radar and at distances of 60 Km+.
EF needs radar to attack in BVR ranges and can only use LGBs in less than 20Km distance, so it is more detectable in A2A and has to get way closer to any ground target, which increases the risks of beeing attacked by air defences. And we saw this all in Libya!
Rafale penetrated Libyan airspace from day one, before the air defences were taken out, did SEAD missions without the support of dedicated SEAD fighters, attacked ground targets from long and safe distance with high precision and all that in various roles.
EF on the other side was fielded only after the air defences were down and at first only in Air defence roles, later it assisted the Tornado in the strike role, against bigger targets mainly and when no collateral damage was possible.
but what if EF 2000 is selected as winner so wont it be used in air to ground capabilities
If it will be selected it will be used only in CAS until 2018, when (hopefully) all A2G capabilities and the additional techs will be available, because it can't do anything else and that for more than $100 mios flyaway cost per unit!
As I said earlier, IF the Typhoon will be selected not because of it's current capabilities or the performance it offered in the trials, but mainly because of the good industrial and political advantages we will get. To make the EF useful for IAF, we have to pay additional money and fund a lot upgrades, then it might be comparable to EF.
