Claims of ‘Game-Changing’ F-35 Data Fusion Debunked

[randomradio]

How do you know? Do you have a testimonial to share?


Really?

"Rafale features a Multi-Sensor Data Fusion with a "Modular Data Processing Unit" (MDPU) at its core which connects 19 Line-Replaceable Unit in Rafale multiplying the processing power up to 50 times giving an unprecedented advantage to Rafale in terms of weapons integration and battlescape grasping. This, in turn, leads to less work-load on the pilot, more reliable outputs and increased situational awareness." - Harsh B Mishra

Once again, that is TRACK CONSOLIDATION AND CORRELATION via MDPU. Similar to what Eurofighter Typhoon is doing.

From the link you cited:

"Overcoming individual sensor limitations related to wavelength / frequency, field of regard, angular and distance resolution, etc, by sharing track information received from all the sensors,"

READ THIS AGAIN: "By sharing track information received from all the sensors."

---

"Rafale’s sensor fusion in terms of a common picture presented to the pilot is currently slightly ahead of Typhoon although the P3E upgrade being trialled at BAE Warton will close this gap to a significant extent. It is important to remember, however, that both fighters use a post-sensor picture fusing approach to streamline information for the pilot, rather than the much more complex approach being pursued by the F-35 development programme where all sensors feed into a single process which analyses, contrasts and compares them before presenting a single, processed picture to the pilot. Post sensor fusion is where the different sensors are not linked per se but their outputs are combined by an information management system to streamline the displayed data for the pilot."

Source: https://hushkit.net/2015/12/18/typhoon-versus-rafale-the-final-word/

CASE CLOSED

@CriticalThought

First, I wouldn't go by hushkit on anything related to Rafale.

And F-35 level sensor fusion on Rafale was confirmed by very high level French individuals than some mere pilot.

What the Typhoon does, does not overcome individual sensor limitations" anyway. Instead of throwing terms around, I've already mentioned what the MDPU actually does in the post to CriticalThought.

 

[LeGenD]

First, I wouldn't go by hushkit on anything related to Rafale.

And F-35 level sensor fusion on Rafale was confirmed by very high level French individuals than some mere pilot.

What the Typhoon does, does not overcome individual sensor limitations" anyway. Instead of throwing terms around, I've already mentioned what the MDPU actually does in the post to CriticalThought.

This is not a valid argument; more like cherry-picking among sources to advance a notion.

I have already explained to you the difference between sensor fusion logic of European products and F-35.

Pilots [who have flown different aircraft including F-35) have much greater credibility than a bunch of unknown French salesmen trying to impress India. 5th generation capabilities cannot be retrofitted, period.

 

[randomradio]

This continually proved -- at least to me -- that you do not know what you are talking about.

When I said that SPECTRA must sample an incoming signal, you thought I was talking about sampling the sine wave part of the total signal, that is why you brought up quantization errors, A/D conversion, and so on.

That is not the kind of sampling I was talking about.

You continually said what SPECTRA does not do, but never said what SPECTRA does in order to do what it claimed to do, which is create a countermeasure signal in real time.

So nowhere have I said anything about digitized signals having no QE, buddy.

I repeat, SPECTRA must sample the incoming radar signal, but the sine wave and QE is not what I was talking about. See if you figure out what that is.

What you are talking about is Nyquist sampling, typically using lowpass and/or bandpass filters. A signal is sampled at the sampling frequency through a bandpass filter before it goes through the conversion process.

Nope, Spectra doesn't do that for ACT.

What you are basically saying is the signal is sampled using a filter, then converted into a digital signal (where we get QE), then processed by a DSP, then sampled and converted back into an analog signal using a DAC, and then transmitted back. This is ECM, not ACT.

Basically you didn't get the point I was making. Whatever you know about ECM, you have to throw it out the window. The ACT signal is never digitised, so there is no need to sample this signal. It never has to go through the DSP. For ACT, Spectra just reflects the signal back after adding the Rafale's RCS to it. So even the received noise is reflected back.

Everything is killed using destructive interference, including the Rafale's reflected echo. Spectra works in such a way that if ACT is performed in the X band, then there are no X band signals around the aircraft, it's all been destroyed. More sensibly, all X band signals that the Spectra deems as a threat are destroyed. When this works perfectly, it means the threat radar does not see the Rafale at all, total invisibility. Of course, there is no such thing as 'perfect', hence why Rafale's frontal RCS is similar to that of a sparrow instead, and will continue improving as time goes.

This is not a valid argument; more like cherry-picking among sources to advance a notion.

I have already explained to you the difference between sensor fusion logic of European products and F-35.

Pilots [who have flown different aircraft including F-35) have much greater credibility than a bunch of unknown French salesmen trying to impress India. 5th generation capabilities cannot be retrofitted, period.

I guess it doesn't matter really.

Ultimately, we still need to wait for someone who's flown on both the F-35 and Rafale.

Let's hope we will finally see some sort of contest with the F-35 and Rafale competing.