Unfortunately it's also impossible for enemy to see Rafale at long ranges without emitting. And some sources (like IR) cannot be masked anyway.
Yes, that works as a disadvantage. But still it does not make them useless, nor does it make 5th gen strike planes able to replace 4.5 gen fighters with greater emphasis on A2A than F35, as these planes can still have equal/superior offensive capabilities thanks to modern technology combined with their inherent aerodynamic performance.
For example a BVRAAM launched by Su-35 can be fired from a much higher altitude, while flying at much higher speeds than F35 - that gives the said missile a lot farther range.
These two types can at best compliment each other. For example RAF will use Typhoons for air cover while F35 attacks ground targets.
Rafale radar+SPECTRA sensors would detect J-20 at the same or even longer ranges than F35's radar+sensors. Rafale has placed a much greater emphasis on passive detection techniques than F35 or any other fighter, save for except PAK-FA.
That is extremely relative. Even the most basic RF transmitters on Rafale are based on AESA architecture and are set to receive a GaN upgrade.
That's just one job of Spectra. Plus a system that can mimic & re-transmit your signals with enough accuracy to make it seem as if the target you're looking at has a much smaller RCS than what it really has - means this system has placed a great emphasis on signal-processing power beyond that of most EW suites.
Can the same Active Cancellation techniques be put on, say Tejas EW suite, without changing up the whole architecture, adding new sensor arrays? I don't think so.
I don't think 80km is a poor range. Atleast for a target with little to no IR-suppression methods like flat nozzles. J-20 doesn't have any. In tail-chase that range is 130km. Future upgrades will enhance the range further.
As I said, when Rafale wants to see a target that does not want to be seen, no one sensor will work alone - the IRST will be in conjunction with the radar, EW sensors and even the TV sensor (to ID the target if it's actually that close). IRST only needs to notice spikes in IR signature at those ranges (~80km) and then the radar is told to pick up scan rates in that sector while interferometry sensors also listen to waves from there.
Same is true for other sensors. If EW picks up suspicions transmissions from a sector, radar+IRST can focus there with enhanced range capability. SPECTRA does everything possible to provide best chances of tracking the enemy actively+passively.
That's right the techniques are the same. But it's the emphasis placed on these techniques in the Rafale that makes it better/unique. For example F35 would never give such importance to active cancellation because it has a stealthy airframe to begin with. But Rafale does, because it wants to obtain the advantages of electronically-reducing RCS without sacrificing aerodynamics by going for a stealthy airframe.
Besides, even the Spectra transmitters are going to get GaN at the same time as the radar does.
Sir, working in a datalinked group only increases your chances of detection. That's why aircraft with a full-on emphasis on stealth like F-117/F-22 were originally designed to work without data-link.
Besides Rafales too will be operating in groups.
But still it's likely that PAK-FA's RCS will be bigger than F35's on a clean load. By the equation you have given, F35 will be better than PAK-FA at air combat because it has lesser RCS. It doesn't work like that unfortunately. PAK-FA will still dominate any F35, F22, J20 at air combat, at any ranges.
Please refer to the Swiss evaluation reports. I suppose they were discussed on this forum also?
