Could Su-35S Deal Edge Out Rafale in India?

[sancho]

Those RCS figures are only useful for the forward hemisphere and mostly in a clean configuration. Both the Rafale and Typhoon have 90 degree corners they can not hide from radars....period, not to mention in a combat configuration those aircraft will be equipped with pylons that hold external fuel tanks and ordinance, this will increase their RCS even further .

True, the question is only to what extend? A Rafale is not only designed to have a small RCS with materials and coatings, but the smal form factor adds to it too, while the form factor if the Flankers will work against it to an extend. So can a small Rafale with AAMs and 2 supersonic fuel tanks, still be harder to detect compared to a larger Su 35 with the same number of AAMs?
Then there is the question of detection of signals, rather than the RCS of the fighter. The IRBIS-E will be detecatable from long ranges, while the RBE 2 AESA might not, which gives the Rafale the chance to position itself outside of the FoV of the IRBIS-E.

 

[ptldM3]

True, the question is only to what extend? A Rafale is not only designed to have a small RCS with materials and coatings, but the smal form factor adds to it too, while the form factor if the Flankers will work against it to an extend. So can a small Rafale with AAMs and 2 supersonic fuel tanks, still be harder to detect compared to a larger Su 35 with the same number of AAMs?

The problem is that no one knows the true RCS figures for the Rafale or the SU-35S, both manufactures claim to have reduced the RCS but the true extent is unknown. The main problem with both aircraft is that they both have 90 corners, cavities, ect, meaning that they can not hide from radar. Assuming that the Rafale has a treated canopy to prevent diffraction from inside the cockpit we can assume it has a very small frontal RCS because it appears the designers made a conscious decision to lower the Rafale's RCS by further adding serrations to the trailing edge canards as well as hiding most of the engines compressor blades as well as using some radar absorbent materials/coatings.


But frontal RCS is not the issue, the issue is that on strike missions the Rafale will have its lower, rear, front and side fuselage exposed. Consider that even dedicated "stealth" aircraft can be seen on radar when the weapons bays open it is only natural to assume that the Rafale will just as easily be seen. Will the Rafale have a smaller RCS then a flanker? Almost certainly. Theoretically if the Rafale has a smaller RCS then say a Flanker, it will be able to penetrate further before detection but this is theoretical; likewise, the Flanker can also theoretically be harder to detect then a Rafale if it has a more favorable flight profile. An aircrafts flight profile, meaning the position of the aircraft relative to the radar will either make it harder to detect or easier to detect. There is a lot of factors to take into account, a lot of people have a romance with the Rafale and always throw around words like "stealthy", from the frontal section it probably is very difficult to detect but on strike missions its frontal RCS will not help it very much. My conclusion, no one knows the Rafale's true RCS besides the designers and maybe a few people in the French and Indian Air Force, the same goes for the SU-35.

 

[SQ8]

True, the question is only to what extend? A Rafale is not only designed to have a small RCS with materials and coatings, but the smal form factor adds to it too, while the form factor if the Flankers will work against it to an extend. So can a small Rafale with AAMs and 2 supersonic fuel tanks, still be harder to detect compared to a larger Su 35 with the same number of AAMs?
Then there is the question of detection of signals, rather than the RCS of the fighter. The IRBIS-E will be detecatable from long ranges, while the RBE 2 AESA might not, which gives the Rafale the chance to position itself outside of the FoV of the IRBIS-E.

Even if they can reduce the RCS of the Rafale to the extent they wish to(size will matter at the end), the weapons hanging off it will have their own RCS. So a reduction in the RCS of the Rafale will have an impact to the point where it reaches the return of the weapons.

Think of it as car audio except in reverse, there is a level where you can turn down load music until you start hearing the sound of the engine, the tires and the air flow after which any further lowering of the volume is pointless. That base level depends on the combined RCS of the stores hanging off it.

 

[sancho]

Even if they can reduce the RCS of the Rafale to the extent they wish to(size will matter at the end), the weapons hanging off it will have their own RCS.

Of course, but that's not specific to the Rafale, but for any fighter than goes from clean config to loaded one. The Su 35 clean config has obviously a lower RCS too, compared to a loaded one with AAMs. The biggest contributer to the loaded RCS however are external fuel tanks, which the Flankers don't need. That's why my question was, how much that would bring the Su35 closer to a loaded Rafale.

Just for an example take an extimated RCS of 1m² for a clean Rafale and 3m² for the Su35. Both in CAP role with 6 x AAMs (+ 2 external fuel tanks for Rafale) and facing head on to the radar.
So how much would the RCS of both fighters increase?

 

[Guynextdoor2]

Most people forget that the first squadrons of SU 30 entered service way back in 1996/1998. Almost 20 years old, though the MKIs came in later. Fact is that in another 10 years or so We will have to start gradually retiring the birds. That plus we are below squadron strength right now means that there is place for FGFA, Su 35 S, Rafale , LCA Mk2 together. AMCA will probably be a replacement for Rafales later on.