Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions [Thread 2]

[dbc]

@dbc why not send some F35 to pakistan and we will test them against rafale? and see which aircraft is good? never mind just kidding..
I think F16 block 70/72 will be enough for us to beat Rafale and we won't need F35 for it.

When you talk about air combat involving 4/4.5 generation of western origin - factors outside the aircraft's capability dictate the outcome. I say western origin because I know more about western platforms.

These factors obviously include ECM, Air borne surveillance and SAMs beyond that training, tactics and most importantly institutional efficiency and political interference will dictate the outcome.

An example of political interference is the USAF being forced to use an inferior AIM-4 Falcon missile when a superior AIM-9 was available and being used effectively by the USN in Vietnam.

F-16 B52 vs Rafale fall in this category the outcome will largely depend on the above factors and not so much on the capability of the platform itself.

In my opinion, the PAF is a superior institution vis-à-vis the IAF. The main advantage the IAF Rafales have is the meteor but this missile represents a greater threat to AWACS and support platforms (mid air refulers etc) than F-16's and JF-17's. Since PAF lack territorial depth this is both an advantage and a disadvantage. I think the PAF should invest heavily in jamming, counter measures and decoys to protect its combat support assets.

 

[JohnWick]

When you talk about air combat involving 4/4.5 generation of western origin - factors outside the aircraft's capability dictate the outcome. I say western origin because I know more about western platforms.

These factors obviously include ECM, Air borne surveillance and SAMs beyond that training, tactics and most importantly institutional efficiency and political interference will dictate the outcome.

An example of political interference is the USAF being forced to use an inferior AIM-4 Falcon missile when a superior AIM-9 was available and being used effectively by the USN in Vietnam.

F-16 B52 vs Rafale fall in this category the outcome will largely depend on the above factors and not so much on the capability of the platform itself.

In my opinion, the PAF is a superior institution vis-à-vis the IAF. The main advantage the IAF Rafales have is the meteor but this missile represents a greater threat to AWACS and support platforms (mid air refulers etc) than F-16's and JF-17's. Since PAF lack territorial depth this is both an advantage and a disadvantage. I think the PAF should invest heavily in jamming, counter measures and decoys to protect its combat support assets.

As territorial depth is concerned we have whole Afghanistan for that purpose in the cause of war.....
Afghanistan is the key player in achieving the strategic depth...........In war times.....

 

[BON PLAN]

All is not fine, you are exhibiting classic signs of unhealthy obsessive behavior.
Please see a professional.

To see the reality of a failed F35 program is, in contrary, the sign of a nice brain health.

 

[dbc]

To see the reality of a failed F35 program is, in contrary, the sign of a nice brain health.

Failed? Are you serious?
LM is making lots of money on the F35. USAF, USN and the Marines are very happy with the bird. There is immense global demand for the aircraft.

So how exactly has the F35 program failed?

 

[BON PLAN]

Failed? Are you serious?
LM is making lots of money on the F35. USAF, USN and the Marines are very happy with the bird. There is immense global demand for the aircraft.

So how exactly has the F35 program failed?

To make money is one thing. To make a nice plane anonther.

Boeing has experienced that just earlier than LM with 737 MAX. Next will be F35.

F35 has so many troubles.... they pushed back every time to a future standart the perspective to solve problems generated by previous patchs.
Block 3i was THE definitive solution.... now block 4... just wait the next item.

 

[Rafale+Meteor+Spectra]

In my opinion, the PAF is a superior institution vis-à-vis the IAF. The main advantage the IAF Rafales have is the meteor but this missile represents a greater threat to AWACS and support platforms (mid air refulers etc) than F-16's and JF-17's

This is so hilariously wrong.
Meteor has veen developed for taking out highly manuevarable fighter jets at ranges that were never dreamt of.
Meteors has a NEZ 3 times larger than a AIM 120C5.
Plus Meteor is also much faster (more KE) and has bettter manuevarability than AMRAAMs.

As for your claim on EW, RAW has transfered it's ELINT/ESM aircraft Global 5000s to IAF after February 2019 (far more advanced than PAF's DA-20).

 

[Haris Ali2140]

This is so hilariously wrong.
Meteor has veen developed for taking out highly manuevarable fighter jets at ranges that were never dreamt of.
Meteors has a NEZ 3 times larger than a AIM 120C5.
Plus Meteor is also much faster (more KE) and has bettter manuevarability than AMRAAMs.

As for your claim on EW, RAW has transfered it's ELINT/ESM aircraft Global 5000s to IAF after February 2019 (far more advanced than PAF's DA-20).

Your meteor will be facing the likes of PL15.

And ELINT is not Jammer.

 

[Rafale+Meteor+Spectra]

Your meteor will be facing the likes of PL15.

And ELINT is not Jammer.

RAW's Global 5000s (now transferred to IAF) has ability to jam secure communications of enemy ground and airborne assets.

Your meteor will be facing the likes of PL15

PL-15 is significantly inferior to Meteor as it usea older dual pulse motors which means its NEZ is mich much less than Meteor.

It has an AESA seeker but that is an advantage against Meteor seeker only when target is of less than 0.15m2 RCS

 

[Shah_Deu]

This is so hilariously wrong.
Meteor has veen developed for taking out highly manuevarable fighter jets at ranges that were never dreamt of.
Meteors has a NEZ 3 times larger than a AIM 120C5.
Plus Meteor is also much faster (more KE) and has bettter manuevarability than AMRAAMs.

As for your claim on EW, RAW has transfered it's ELINT/ESM aircraft Global 5000s to IAF after February 2019 (far more advanced than PAF's DA-20).

You seem to be better marketeer for France than the French themselves!

 

[Haris Ali2140]

RAW's Global 5000s (now transferred to IAF) has ability to jam secure communications of enemy ground and airborne assets.


PL-15 is significantly inferior to Meteor as it usea older dual pulse motors which means its NEZ is mich much less than Meteor.

It has an AESA seeker but that is an advantage against Meteor seeker only when target is of less than 0.15m2 RCS

Global 5000 is an ISR aircraft. If you claim otherwise show me an article about its equipment as I couldn't find one.

Regarding PL 15 we will see when the time comes.

 

[dbc]

This is so hilariously wrong.
Meteor has veen developed for taking out highly manuevarable fighter jets at ranges that were never dreamt of.
Meteors has a NEZ 3 times larger than a AIM 120C5.
Plus Meteor is also much faster (more KE) and has bettter manuevarability than AMRAAMs.

As for your claim on EW, RAW has transfered it's ELINT/ESM aircraft Global 5000s to IAF after February 2019 (far more advanced than PAF's DA-20).

Not really, longer range means more time for decoys and electronic counter measures. Besides, the AMRAAM is tested against full scale aerial highly maneuverable targets such as the QF-16 (remotely piloted F-16's). I am not aware of a single Meteor test against a full scale aerial target - lots of subsonic targets but no fighters. So I am not convinced the skid-to-turn Meteor will be agile enough in the end game. Sure against lumbering bomber, AWACS and refuelers the Meteor will be deadly. The F-16's routinely defeated long range highly agile Russian missiles with thrust vector, I don't think the Meteor is something the PAF pilots will fear.

Just my thoughts and opinions...

 

[BON PLAN]

Meteors has a NEZ 3 times larger than a AIM 120C5.

official NEZ data released in europe is "in excess of 60km". That means more in reality.... 70? 80?
when AMRAAM 120 C7 is nearly 20 to 25km.

PL-15 is significantly inferior to Meteor as it usea older dual pulse motors which means its NEZ is mich much less than Meteor.

It has an AESA seeker but that is an advantage against Meteor seeker only when target is of less than 0.15m2 RCS

MICA NG will have AESA seeker.
As Meteor RF seeker is a direct brother of those of MICA, you can be sure Meteor will have a direct evolution of those of MICA NG. saying in 2025.

Not really, longer range means more time for decoys and electronic counter measures.

Not every time.
Since Mirage 2000-5, the modern radars don't change the emission mode before firing. That avoid a detection of a possible shoot by the ennemy.
Add to that the greater range of Meteor, combined to it's less IR trace at launch that's also avoid (or reduce) a IR detection of a missile shoot by ennemy. So the target has only the time between ignition of seeker and hit : a couples of seconds.

 

[UKBengali]

PL-15 is significantly inferior to Meteor as it usea older dual pulse motors which means its NEZ is mich much less than Meteor.

It has an AESA seeker but that is an advantage against Meteor seeker only when target is of less than 0.15m2 RCS

Does not matter as PL-15 can be fired in volleys to destroy IAF aircraft.

You use one Meteor to destroy PAF jet and they need to use 2 to destroy one IAF jet. As PL-15 will cost half that of the Meteor, it works out the same in terms of cost.

 

[dbc]

Not every time.
Since Mirage 2000-5, the modern radars don't change the emission mode before firing. That avoid a detection of a possible shoot by the ennemy.
Add to that the greater range of Meteor, combined to it's less IR trace at launch that's also avoid (or reduce) a IR detection of a missile shoot by ennemy. So the target has only the time between ignition of seeker and hit : a couples of seconds.

You mean a combined "track while search" mode. I think you misunderstand the concept, tracking requires higher PRF pulse repetition frequency, narrow pulse and beam-width. The RWR Radar warning receiver is programmed to differentiate between search and track and convert that into a different alert/warning symbol on the HUB and a different tone in the pilots ear - the audible warning for target track is much more annoying and insistent.

 

[BON PLAN]

You mean a combined "track while search" mode. I think you misunderstand the concept, tracking requires higher PRF pulse repetition frequency, narrow pulse and beam-width. The RWR Radar warning receiver is programmed to differentiate between search and track and convert that into a different alert/warning symbol on the HUB and a different tone in the pilots ear - the audible warning for target track is much more annoying and insistent.

NO.
During the first international training of the Mirage 2000-5, every opponents were virtualy destroyed because the radar never changed of wave form, freq and so one between search phase and firing phase, so the opponent were unable to detect they were engaged. It's now classical.