Know Your 'Rafale'

[p2prada]

The Aviationist » Rare video shows F-22 Raptor shot down by the French Rafale in mock air-to-air combat

 

[Decklander]

The Aviationist » Rare video shows F-22 Raptor shot down by the French Rafale in mock air-to-air combat

I am not talking about this video. there are other videos from recent engagements and Rafale has completely dominated those WVR fights with F-22 unable to break free or get back at Rafale. FYI, @halloweene is a very respected Defence journalist from France.

 

[p2prada]

I am not talking about this video. there are other videos from recent engagements and Rafale has completely dominated those WVR fights with F-22 unable to break free or get back at Rafale. FYI, @halloweene is a very respected Defence journalist from France.

Okay, as far as I know only one was released, this one.

Also, I know about halloweene.

 

[Decklander]

Okay, as far as I know only one was released, this one.

Also, I know about halloweene.

Those are a set of about five videos. I have them but can't post without his permission. Also I wanted him to share the SPECTRA directed launch of MICA on a target at six o'clock position. All using passive just to tell you that passive is not just about IRST. If you go thru the real capabilities of SPECTRA, you will realise that it is a complete detection, tracking and guidance and jamming system. Infact in one recent EFT v/s Rafale BVR engaement, Rafale defeated EFT as EFT cud not even lockon due to heavy active cancellation and jamming done by SPECTRA.

 

[p2prada]

Those are a set of about five videos. I have them but can't post without his permission.

Would be interesting.

Also I wanted him to share the SPECTRA directed launch of MICA on a target at six o'clock position. All using passive just to tell you that passive is not just about IRST.

That's because the missile seeker can tag targets at such small ranges. It has more to do with the missile than the onboard equipment. There is a 15Km region around the aircraft marked by a red circle on the HUD where the Spectra can do that. This is not a BVR capability.

Aircraft could tag targets at the back using EW equipment since a long time. It was the advancement of missiles that allowed the aircraft to engage at six o'clock.

It is entirely different if you are able to pick up F-22 transmissions from 100 Km away and then track it consistently to allow your own missiles to be used against it. However passive tracking is way too dependent on the enemy to emit. It is worse if the enemy knows how to send out false positives and force the enemy into ambushes. In the end radar is your best bet for accurate information because a radar is stochastic and controllable while passive systems are predictable. EW has always been a double-edged sword. Spectra on a group of Rafales could very well be chasing two emitting F-22s completely oblivious to the fact that there are 4 F-22s right behind it, getting into firing position. That's why the emphasis for very powerful radars on Russian and American aircraft along with the reliance on stealth.

If you go thru the real capabilities of SPECTRA, you will realise that it is a complete detection, tracking and guidance and jamming system. Infact in one recent EFT v/s Rafale BVR engaement, Rafale defeated EFT as EFT cud not even lockon due to heavy active cancellation and jamming done by SPECTRA.

The lack of an EW suite on EF has always been bad for it. EF is like the MKI we purchased a decade ago. Only radar and IRST. It is not yet a complete platform like Rafale. So I would definitely place Rafale above EF, like most other air forces have done over the last decade during tenders.

Anyway, I am looking forward to your analysis on the videos.

PS: Captor is obsolete.

 

[Decklander]

@p2prada, Below is my analysis of the videos sent to me.
These are very interesting videos. If you follow the HUD imagery of Rafale it explains all. The vertical scissors fight is attempted by those aircraft which have good TWR, good slow speed handling and not so good turning ability. The fact that in all engagements F-22 was doing vertical scissors show that its pilots do not have much faith in its turning ability and its turning ability is probably overhyped. Even more shocking is that in few places of combat, Rafale cud have shot him down using guns only but target was probably a bit away. Another aspect of Rafale is the G it is pulling at such low speeds which allowed its pilot to stay behind F-22 and also maintain a safe distance to not get into high overshooting speeds at anytime of combat. One more surprising thing is that Rafale was able to generate better Kinematic performance than F-22 and it was for this reason that F-22 was never able to build up a lead from Rafale to such an extent that F-22 cud use the sky to get back at Rafale. Rafale had kept him completely pinned down. You need to notice the way Rafale slows down and also accelerates. It is great. It clearly proves that all the shit about turning performance of F-22 is bullshit. If this is what F-22 does, I fear what will be the fate of F-35?

Second to second analysis is not possible but yes, if any fighter pilot who knows real classic air combat sees thiese videos, He will die of laughter at the foolishness of US pilot. In each shot you see the F-22 go from left to right or right to left in the HUD shot. That also shows that the Rafale pilot had already started reversing before F-22 appears in his HUD view. This means that the French Pilot flying Rafale was a seasoned guy who knew his aircraft well and also was able to predict the game of F-22 pilot. F-22 pilot was most foolish, either he was trying to rely on his sensors or he had no clue where Rafale was. If I see my opponent reversing like this and if I have TVC, I will pull into him rather than go across his nose. That will force a very low nose tail separation and force my attacker to overshoot the turn. In all these videos, there is not even one instance where the Rafale has ever had such a problem in keeping behind F-22 or F-22 pilot has been able to dictate anything to Rafale pilot. This shows that probably F-22 pilots have learnt the lesson about TVC. If you remember my posts regarding usefulness of TVC, I had always maintained that TVC is last ditch and not normal combat tactics. In the videos it is very clear that while the Rafale pilot has started his reversal before F-22 crosses its nose, he maintains higher nose angle during reversal to reduce his speed to shorten his turning radius and then pulls his nose down sharply at high G of 2.5-3G at such low speeds to pull his nose sharply onto F-22. Please notice the speed at which Rafale is pulling those Gs. He is doing it at as low as 80kts.
You will also notice in all these videos that F-22 pulls his nose down to build up space for himself to be able to generate space to outmaneuver Rafale, but Rafale is able to quickly speed up and stop this from happening. At all speeds from extremely low speeds to very high speeds and also very high G pulls which you hear when the pilot of Rafale is grunting to fight off the G forces, Rafale has completely out performed F-22.
Scissors fight whether in vertical or in horizontal requires a very precise visual contact with opponent and the timing of reversal is extremely important. After most scissors fights we used to come home with our neck stuck on one side or the other as while trying to maintain contact with opponent and pulling high G, our neck used to suffer strain. We used to even do weight training with our neck just to make it strong and withstand high G forces for WVR combat.
I remember my days when we used to kick against the rudder pedals of Sea Harrier to try and push it faster. You won't believe the kind of frustration we pilots can have in the cockpit during combat with our aircraft. Rafale seems to have behaved like a loyal loving wife, following and submitting herself to the wishes of her master and meeting all his demands without any problem.
Tell me which fighter pilot on earth would not like to fly such an aircraft and which men would refuse such a wife? Dreams rarely come true, Rafale is a dream which has come true.

 

[halloweene]

You can post Deck, a,d thx for the compliments

 

[halloweene]

Btw just heard from the grave (is it the proper expression) that MLU ay be more extensive then expected. Still nothing fixed.

 

[p2prada]

Thank you for the analysis. We rarely get such posts from ex-pilots.

These are very interesting videos. If you follow the HUD imagery of Rafale it explains all. The vertical scissors fight is attempted by those aircraft which have good TWR, good slow speed handling and not so good turning ability. The fact that in all engagements F-22 was doing vertical scissors show that its pilots do not have much faith in its turning ability and its turning ability is probably overhyped.

Isn't there a chance there were limitations on both aircraft in terms of using AoA and speed? Rather I would like to know what the ROEs were and which aircraft was benefited. No point if it turns out that the F-22 was restricted in using its higher AoA. Looks to me the F-22 used vertical scissors only because the pilot believed (or probably knew) that he had the better T/W. Overall there is not much difference between the two aircraft and their T/W. If we go by Dassault's releases and Col. Ternof's giving away of Opsec info, both have very similar STR, don't know about F-22's ITR.

Second to second analysis is not possible but yes, if any fighter pilot who knows real classic air combat sees thiese videos, He will die of laughter at the foolishness of US pilot. In each shot you see the F-22 go from left to right or right to left in the HUD shot. That also shows that the Rafale pilot had already started reversing before F-22 appears in his HUD view. This means that the French Pilot flying Rafale was a seasoned guy who knew his aircraft well and also was able to predict the game of F-22 pilot. F-22 pilot was most foolish, either he was trying to rely on his sensors or he had no clue where Rafale was.

So isn't this a fight between a rookie and an expert? There is no point claiming platform superiority if the F-22 pilot was clueless and made elementary mistakes. I don't know these things, I am only going by your words.

I remember my days when we used to kick against the rudder pedals of Sea Harrier to try and push it faster. You won't believe the kind of frustration we pilots can have in the cockpit during combat with our aircraft. Rafale seems to have behaved like a loyal loving wife, following and submitting herself to the wishes of her master and meeting all his demands without any problem.
Tell me which fighter pilot on earth would not like to fly such an aircraft and which men would refuse such a wife? Dreams rarely come true, Rafale is a dream which has come true.

I for one am not disappointed that we chose Rafale.

 

[Decklander]

There was no indication of any restriction in the combat as far as I cud make out from HUD readouts. The fights were probably guns only fights as on many occasions Rafale cud have taken a missile shot but it continued till it got into gun shoot position. These videos were from Advance tactical Leadership Course so it will be highly wrong to assume that F-22 pilot was a rookie pilot. Also the best of USAF pilots get converted to F-22.

IMHO, there seems to be a huge diff in the TWR of F-15 and F-22 as USAF uses F-15s for DACTS with F-22 and that misperception probably resulted in F-22 pilots treating Rafale like a F-15 while Rafale is far more agile.

 

[halloweene]

This fight took place "aside" of ATLC. Remember F22 did not participate to ATLC. Ok now some near classified info (although not classified). F22 Sqd requested BFM fights to 1/7 Provence. Standard rules, head to head, break etc. (i dont know break altitude).
Now the fun part...This video was not officially allowed to be released. In fact an officer in charge said to Bruno (the guy that released it) "i cant prevent you from releasing it, and even if i could i wouldn't". There were some nervous breakdowns in AdlA top generals, a small inner message in the army in order to control their communications. US Air Force was pissed off with that "Gross mistake" and threatened french participation. A very well known US journalist (D. M.) explained privately to US officers that french officers (from junior to senior but not generals) were piassed off after certain declarations from US officers o a well known Rafale bashing journalist. In the end it appeared that the jorno's quotes were quite fancied....
Everything cooling down atm.

 

[Decklander]

I was actually shocked to see those videos. In every fight, Rafale dominated the fight completely. I am pretty sure that Rafale has a hand in cancellation of further orders of F-22.

 

[p2prada]

IMHO, there seems to be a huge diff in the TWR of F-15 and F-22 as USAF uses F-15s for DACTS with F-22 and that misperception probably resulted in F-22 pilots treating Rafale like a F-15 while Rafale is far more agile.

The F-15C has better T/W than F-22. 11 tonnes of thrust for each engine on a 12.5 ton airframe + 6 tonne fuel vs 16 tonnes of thrust on a 20 tonne airframe + 8.3 tonne fuel. But Rafale is definitely more agile. Probably because it responds better being a newer and more updated design.

Anyway, cross posting from milphotos,

Air Forces Monthly had an article, "The Big Fight", about the Advanced Tactical Leadership Course (ATLC) in its April 2010 issue.

The successive article (same issue), "Justifiably Proud!", was an interview with Lt. Col. Fabrice Grandclaudon, Commander of EC 1/7.

"AFM: You apparently said 'the Rafale rubbed F-22 - the most modern fighter of the USAF. During six encounters the F-22 hit its goal only once'. The 27th FS doesn't remember the engagements that way and say the F-22 scored several victories against Rafale. Did you offer DACT to the Raptors and did they decline?

LCL G: I did not say we 'rubbed them', I said that there was only one shot claimed (ie a simulated kill) for the six that were set-up. I read in a recent issue of Air et Cosmos that it was two. As far as I am concerned, one or two shots of six Basic Fighter Manoeuvres (BFM) encounters is a victory for the F-22 but not an overwhelming one. Not like the one we claimed against the Typhoons after combat in Solenzara, Corsica during September (9 set-up: 8 to 1 for the Rafale*). The other set-ups versus F-22s were terminated for combat deck, an un-decisive situation or lack of fuel. We never shot them down, but we hope to do so soon since we are quite good opposition for them, and it is in the pilot's spirit not to give up!

Like almost every nation, we offered Beyond Visual Range DACT, of course, but the F-22 was only authorized to do BFM 1v1 Within Visual Range (WVR) versus foreign countries (except the UK, with whom they did not fight even in the BFMs). I wish we could have done so, but we didn't - which bring me back to Air et Cosmos, where its information about BVR engagement with AMRAAM in stealth mode is wrong: besides the fact that we did not even fly BVR vs F-22s! F-22 was fitted with some specific device to increase their radar signature. It enabled us to have contact with them during work ups for example. But that's not the point here."

@halloweene
Is the above info true? It conflicts with the actual video.

@Decklander
The last line in bold, the pilot is talking about the Luneburg reflector.

The absence of the device prevented the F-15D from locking on to the F-22 even in BFM. Of course, I don't know what the F-15 pilot was trying to do, but this is what was reported.

 

[Decklander]

The F-15C has better T/W than F-22. 11 tonnes of thrust for each engine on a 12.5 ton airframe + 6 tonne fuel vs 16 tonnes of thrust on a 20 tonne airframe + 8.3 tonne fuel. But Rafale is definitely more agile. Probably because it responds better being a newer and more updated design.

Anyway, cross posting from milphotos,



@halloweene
Is the above info true? It conflicts with the actual video.

@Decklander
The last line in bold, the pilot is talking about the Luneburg reflector.

The absence of the device prevented the F-15D from locking on to the F-22 even in BFM. Of course, I don't know what the F-15 pilot was trying to do, but this is what was reported.

In BFM that device is of no use as the combat is done visually. That Luneburg reflector probably helped in establishing visual contact between the two aircraft to start the combat or reestablish combat in case they lost visual contact. BFM is guns only fight a pure I vs I.

I think you forgot that F-22 has two engines making it a total of 32 tons and with 50% fuel it has better TWR than a F-15 while a F-15 with 50% fuel will hardly have any endurance to stay and fight in clean config for a BFM.

 

[p2prada]

Found an interesting old article on the F-22.

The F-22 Out Front

Something of note here, perhaps a jibe at both Rafale and EF programs,

"We are not building the F-22 for the threats we face in 2000 or 2005," asserted Maj. Gen. (sel.) Bruce A. Carlson, director of operational requirements, USAF's Deputy Chief of Staff for Air and Space Operations. "We are building it for the threats we will face in 2020," when large numbers of F-22s will be in the force.

"We don't have the resources for building a new fighter every five to 10 years," Carlson said. "We don't want to come back" from a battle in 2010 "with our tail between our legs and say, 'Well, we just didn't want to spend the money on a real capable fighter' " back in the 1990s.

Their assessment is quite correct considering there are two other rival 5th gen contenders and will be operational by the time plenty of F-22s are operational. That gives them at least a 10 year head start.

The reason why the second sentence is a jibe at EADS and Dassault is because both thought the stealth they are working towards is "enough" and that they don't really have the money to go all the way like USAF did with the F-22.

 

[Armand2REP]

Here is a jibe to the F-22...

 

[p2prada]

In BFM that device is of no use as the combat is done visually. That Luneburg reflector probably helped in establishing visual contact between the two aircraft to start the combat or reestablish combat in case they lost visual contact. BFM is guns only fight a pure I vs I.

The lens is to prevent other countries from calculating F-22's actual RCS and it helps civilian and military ATCs in controlling air traffic. Traffic will go for a toss if they can't see the aircraft.

Anyway an aircraft needs it radar in order to cue the gun.
If a F-15 couldn't get gun cue from point blank range for some reason, then the American system of stealth may have some advantages we may be clueless about.

I think you forgot that F-22 has two engines making it a total of 32 tons and with 50% fuel it has better TWR than a F-15 while a F-15 with 50% fuel will hardly have any endurance to stay and fight in clean config for a BFM.

I will give you rough figures for T/W for all three aircraft along with fuel fraction.

F-22 - 32 tonnes of thrust on 19.7 tonnes empty + 8.3 tonnes fuel = 1.14. Fuel fraction = 0.29.
At 50% fuel, it is 1.34. Fuel fraction = 0.17.

F-15, 22 tonnes of thrust on 12.5 tonnes empty + 6 tonnes fuel = 1.18. Fuel fraction = 0.32.
At 50% fuel, it is 1.41. Fuel fraction = 0.19.

The fuel limit is hardly a concern when F-22 has marginally lesser fuel in comparison.

F-15 has always had higher thrust compared to F-22. There were some levels of criticism that F-15 had greater range than the F-22 during subsonic and transonic flight even if F-22 had the advantage in supersonic flight. F-22 is more draggy than the F-15 too. Regardless, the F-22 has the better climb rate.

Rafale, 15 tonnes of thrust on 9.5 tonnes empty + 4.7 tonnes of fuel = 1.05. Fuel fraction = 0.33
At 50% fuel, it is 1.26. Fuel fraction = 0.20.

All three are very similar and Rafale has the lowest T/W. In comparison, Rafale has only 2.35 tonnes of fuel at 50%. The aircraft won't have enough time to continue the fight with weapons dangling.

None of these aircraft are a Flanker when it comes to fuel fraction.

Overall, IMHO, both F-22 and Rafale will demonstrate better maneuverability than Su-27 and F-15 due to inherent design qualities rather than pure T/W comparisons.

 

[Decklander]

You do not need a radar to cue the gun. who told you this. There are two ways to aim one is to use the gyro sights of old and other is the CCIL which you see on the HUD shot in above post. CCIL or computer calculated impact line is a line generated by the computer which tell the pilot as to where his bullets will impact if he fired them at that time. this line is generated keeping in view the ballistics of your own gun and the ac motion which will effect the bullet trajectory. You will notice that this line ends in a square. The pilot tries to bring the target in this square and tracks it till the CCIL comes to the centre of this square which means that if he keeps the target and the CCIL within the square, the bullets will hit the target. The range is calculated by angular method. this square has a particular size and at diff ranges a target subtends diff angular size. So based on the size of the target of the ac you know at 1000yds how much will it cover of the sighting square. once you get the picture correct, you fire.

 

[p2prada]

You do not need a radar to cue the gun. who told you this.

On 4th gen and higher.

How Does A Fighter Jet Lock Onto And Keep Track Of An Enemy Aircraft? - Forbes

An important thing to note is that a radar lock is not always required to launch weapons at a target. For guns kills, if the aircraft has a radar lock on a target, it can accurately gauge range to the target, and provide the pilot with the appropriate corrections for lead and gravity drop, to get an accurate guns kill. Without the radar, the pilot's own judgement must be used.

As an example of that, let's take a look at the F-16"²s HUD (heads-up display) when in the process of employing guns at a radar-locked target:

It becomes really simple: That small circle labeled "bullets at target range" is called the "death dot" by F-16 pilots. Basically, it represents where the cannon rounds would land if you fired right now, and the rounds traveled the distance between you and the locked target. In other words, if you want a solid guns kill, simply fly the death dot onto the airplane. Super simple.

But what if there's no radar lock? Well now the HUD looks like this:

No death dot — but you still have the funnel. The funnel represents the path the cannon rounds would travel out in front of you if you fired right now. The width of the funnel is equal to the apparent width of a predetermined wingspan at that particular range. So, if you didn't have a lock on your target, but you knew it had a wingspan of 35 feet, you could dial in 35 feet, then fly the funnel until the width exactly lined up with the width of the enemy aircraft's wings, then squeeze the trigger.

"Death dot" on the F-16 is very famous. CCIL is a secondary system for achieving gun kills.

 

[Decklander]

On 4th gen and higher.

How Does A Fighter Jet Lock Onto And Keep Track Of An Enemy Aircraft? - Forbes


"Death dot" on the F-16 is very famous. CCIL is a secondary system for achieving gun kills.

I stated that you do not need radar for gun shoots and you have proven it by the pix posted above. But if you have very accurate range measurement, you can use less bullets to kill. The OLS-K system of Mig-35 when cued to its gun system can take out an ac in just 3-5 bullets. Atleast this is what russians claim.