Know Your 'Rafale'

[vampyrbladez]

Low flying for strike is going to be thing of the past., Now there are smart missiles which can do the job that the aircraft did, the aircraft will be only stand off delivery platform. For example Does SCALP or Brahmos really need plane to have low flying ability? They have a range of 29kms +
In fact flying low will also make the plane a target for enemy MANPADS and SR SAMS

Are you fucking kidding me? Next you will say no need for planes, lets go back to trebuchets and catapults!

Two words : Cost and Range!

 

[vampyrbladez]

...........................................................................................................................................

 

[vampyrbladez]

Rafale has 50/75kN engine which compares poorly with Typhoon. I am not sure how Rafales got supercruise with weapon loads. The Rafale itsel weighs 10.3 ton. It has internal fuel of 4.7ton. The total itself becomes 15tons. Now if we add external stores, it will add weight as well as drag. How can you expect a 100/150kN engine (twin 50/75kN) to supercruise with such drag and weight?

The key is a high TWR. The OEM brochure is the closest you'll get to official statistics and not "crowdsourcing" facts. Rafale is also drag optimised and has much lower RCS and weight than EF.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Few points here, the http://rafalefan.e-monsite.com/medias/files/fiche-rafale-le-bourget-2011.jpg
Is the information at Paris air show, Thus the manufacturer can give whatever information they want and the same would be incorporated. Thus whatever the manufacturer declares its mentioned there.

When MMRCA was declared, Rafale was one of the declared and used MRCA.. F/A-18, F-16 and Gripen were others,.Eurofighter Typhoon and MiG-35 were mostly marketed as Air superiority plane that can also conduct. some strike. UK was using Tornado as their premier strike plane and Typhoon was their air superiority plane.
The Germans also used the same way. Thus in a way, Rafale was one of the few planes with strike ability and with weapons and avionics dedicated to strike. The other planes were of course Gripen F-16 and F/A-18
The other planes had American content and hence GoI was afraid of sanctions as happened in the past thus the planes that had twin engines and capable planes were Rafale and Eurofighter. But Rafale won due to commercial bid..Rafale is not Stealthy nor can it super cruise in A2G role. Though Rafale fan boys try a lot to spin 5th gen stealthy ability for Rafale, unfortunately, it is not.

Again your explanation is pure BS. The OEM document clearly states Mach 1.4 capability demonstrated to IAF during trials with a weapon load. If you don't have any other proof, OEM documentation is most reliable hereon.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Tejas Mk1 has wing area of 39m^2 whereas Rafale has Wing area of 46m^2. For Tejas MK2 or MCA, the wing size will increase and hence the wingspan will be about 44 m^2 very close to rafale

Let us look at performance:

MCA will have empty weight of about 7.5-8 ton (IAF to Navy) and fuel of 3.3 ton, totaling 10.8-11.3 ton. Rafale has weight of 10-10.6 ton (Airforce vs Navy) and fuel of 4.7ton totaling 14.7-15.3 ton. The engine for MCA will be Kaveri at 62/97kN while for rafale will be 100/150kN.

Let us take a scenario of of a sortie:

For same performance, Rafale and MCA will need fuel at 3:2 ratio. So, taking external fuel tank weight for rafale as 2 ton and MCA as 1.3 tons, pylon and overhead weight as 500kg each and payload of 3ton each. We get MCA with total weight of 15.6-16.1 tons and Rafale with weight of 20.2-20.8 ton. The wing area of MCA is same as Rafale and engine is about 97kN and 150kN respectively while take-off.

Now, take-off ground requirement:

The ratio of engine thrust to weight in MCA and Rafale will be: 0.615-0.6 and 0.742-0.72 while wingloading will for MCA and Rafale be: 354-366 and 439-452 while take-off.

The extra lift to MCA due to lower wingloading will be compensated by higher thrust per weight of Rafale and hence while carrying 2.5ton payload, the take-off runway for above mentioned scenario will be same for rafale and MCA.

Conclusion:

Rafale being a twin engined fighter than is more expensive and consumes more fuel than MCA, iRafale is economical compared to MCA only when the payload to be delivered is 4-5ton. MCA is economical when payload to be delivered is under 3.5 tons. Since carrier has run way limitation, the payload has to be limited.

In cases of sub-3ton payload or carrier operations, MCA is more economical and fit than rafale/ Rafale can't take off from a carrier with full load and the lighter loads can be carried by MCA too, making Rafale redundant for carrier operation.

The difference is MCA will have first flight in mid 2020s and will be inducted before 2030. Rafale till then will become a mid range aircraft. Infact by then we will have FGFA so whole scenario becomes redundant.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

The difference is MCA will have first flight in mid 2020s and will be inducted before 2030. Rafale till then will become a mid range aircraft. Infact by then we will have FGFA so whole scenario becomes redundant.

MK2 will be inducted from 2026 with FOC in 2025. Rafale is coming to India by 2023. In 2022, the last rafale will be delivered and by 2023, they will get Indian upgrade.

Let Dassault give ToT for rafale and only then we will buy more. There is no need to go for rafale with mediocre performance. @BON PLAN tries to show Rafale as some 5th gen plane whereas it is jut 4.5 generation one.

The key is a high TWR. The OEM brochure is the closest you'll get to official statistics and not "crowdsourcing" facts. Rafale is also drag optimised and has much lower RCS and weight than EF.

Are you out of your mind? How is Rafale having better TWR than Typhoon? Typhoon has same weight as rafale but 60/90kN engine which is 20% more thrust. How did TWR of rafale become better

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

The difference is MCA will have first flight in mid 2020s and will be inducted before 2030. Rafale till then will become a mid range aircraft. Infact by then we will have FGFA so whole scenario becomes redundant.

MK2 will be inducted from 2026 with FOC in 2025. Rafale is coming to India by 2023. In 2022, the last rafale will be delivered and by 2023, they will get Indian upgrade.

Let Dassault give ToT for rafale and only then we will buy more. There is no need to go for rafale with mediocre performance. @BON PLAN tries to show Rafale as some 5th gen plane whereas it is jut 4.5 generation one.

The key is a high TWR. The OEM brochure is the closest you'll get to official statistics and not "crowdsourcing" facts. Rafale is also drag optimised and has much lower RCS and weight than EF.

Are you out of your mind? How is Rafale having better TWR than Typhoon? Typhoon has same weight as rafale but 60/90kN engine which is 20% more thrust. How did TWR of rafale become better?

 

[BON PLAN]

Your unimpressive explanation about Rafale's supercruising capabilities with full weapon loads is just a fan boy blaberring 'my toy is the most beautiful' which is available in OEM brochure or its stooges media for advertisement of their product since everybody has doubt over the supercruising abilities of the mighty f22 with full weapons loads.
Rafale's Terrain hugging capabilities is concerned you seems to forget that there are also other better terrain hugger from LM and to me it seems like that rafale is Jack of all master of none sort of aircraft.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

F22 full load : what is it?
Cruise missile? NO
only SDB and AtoA missiles.

And F22 is a heavy and so costly aircraft.... Compare what is comparable.

 

[smestarz]

Its funny, when what Western OEM declares its authentic, and when Russians OEM declares something its exaggerating the facts hahaha

Again your explanation is pure BS. The OEM document clearly states Mach 1.4 capability demonstrated to IAF during trials with a weapon load. If you don't have any other proof, OEM documentation is most reliable hereon.

 

[Kchontha]

http://www.defens-aero.com/2017/04/missile-air-air-meteor-integre-rafale.html

View attachment 27828

Traduction : Meteor Missile is integrated on Rafale. News from 10 april 2017. From the french DGA (Direction générale de l'Armement). Nothing more official.

And, just for you, don't forget that Rafale is the first to have an AESA and Meteor. Eurofoghter will be the next, but not before 2019 in an intermediate standard if all go according to the last plan (some delays already occured...)

Lol! If Rafale's airframe shaping is not fourth gen than it is either a third or sixth gen stealth shaping with its protruding refuelling probe, protruding antenna and framed canopy. Just claiming doesn't translate into reality.
With regard to meteor missile and for your kind information it was the swede who integrated it successfully for the first time. Rafale was initially for mica. In that case you have a lot to explain......!

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

 

[vampyrbladez]

MK2 will be inducted from 2026 with FOC in 2025. Rafale is coming to India by 2023. In 2022, the last rafale will be delivered and by 2023, they will get Indian upgrade.

Let Dassault give ToT for rafale and only then we will buy more. There is no need to go for rafale with mediocre performance. @BON PLAN tries to show Rafale as some 5th gen plane whereas it is jut 4.5 generation one.

Are you out of your mind? How is Rafale having better TWR than Typhoon? Typhoon has same weight as rafale but 60/90kN engine which is 20% more thrust. How did TWR of rafale become better

EF 2000

General characteristics

• Crew: 1 (operational aircraft) or 2 (training aircraft)
• Length: 15.96 m (52.4 ft)
• Wingspan: 10.95 m (35.9 ft)
• Height: 5.28 m (17.3 ft)
• Wing area: 51.2 m² (551 sq ft)
• Empty weight: 11,000 kg (24,000 lb)
• Loaded weight: 16,000 kg (35,270 lb)
• Max. takeoff weight: 23,500 kg (51,800 lb)
• Fuel capacity: 5,000 kg (11,020 lb) internal
• Powerplant: 2 × Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofan
  • Dry thrust: 60 kN (13,500 lbf) each
  • Thrust with afterburner: >90 kN (20,230 lbf) each

Performance

• Maximum speed:
  • At altitude: Mach 2 class (2,495 km/h or 1,550 mph at 10,975m altitude)
  • At sea level: Mach 1.25 (1,530 km/h or 950 mph)
  • Supercruise: Mach 1.5
• Range: 2,900 km (1,800 mi)
• Combat radius:
  (with 3 external 1,000 l tanks)
  • Ground attack, lo-lo-lo: 601 km (325 nmi)
  • Ground attack, hi-lo-hi: 1,389 km (750 nmi)
  • Air defence with 3-hr combat air patrol: 185 km (100 nmi)
  • Air defence with 10-min. loiter: 1,389 km (750 nmi)
• Ferry range: >3,790 km (2,350 mi with 3 drop tanks)
• Service ceiling: 19,812 m (65,000 ft)
• Rate of climb: >318 m/s (62,600 ft/min)
• Wing loading: 312 kg/m² (63.9 lb/ft²)
• Thrust/weight: 1.15 (interceptor configuration)
• Maximum g-load: +9/−3 g
• Brakes-off to Take-off acceleration: <8 sec
• Brakes-off to supersonic acceleration: <30 s
• Brakes-off to Mach 1.6 at 11,000 m (36,000 ft): <150 s

Rafale

General characteristics

• 
  
  
  • Crew: 1–2
  • Length: 15.27 m (50.1 ft)
  • Wingspan: 10.80 m (35.4 ft)
  • Height: 5.34 m (17.5 ft)
  • Wing area: 45.7 m2 (492 ft2)
  • Empty weight:
    10,300 kilograms (22,700 lb) (B)
    9,850 kilograms (21,720 lb) (C)
    10,600 kilograms (23,400 lb) (M)
  • Loaded weight: 15,000 kilograms (33,000 lb) ()
  • Max. takeoff weight: 24,500 kilograms (54,000 lb) (B/C/D) ()
  • Fuel capacity: 4,700 kg (10,400 lb) internal for single-seater (C); 4,400 kg for two-seater (B)
  • Powerplant: 2 × Snecma M88-2 turbofans
    • Dry thrust: 50.04 kN (11,250 lbf) each
    • Thrust with afterburner: 75 kN (16,860 lbf) each

Performance

• 
  
  
  • Maximum speed:
    • High altitude: Mach 1.8 (1,912 km/h, 1,032 knots)
    • Low altitude: Mach 1.1 (1,390 km/h, 750 knots)
  • Range: >3,700 km (>2,000 nmi) with 3 drop tanks
  • Combat radius: >1,852 km (>1,000 nmi) on penetration mission with two CFTs (2,300 L), three tanks (5,700 L), two SCALP-EG and two MICA AAMs.
  • Service ceiling: 15,235 m (50,000 ft)
  • Rate of climb: >304.8 m/s (>60,000 ft/min)
  • Wing loading: 328 kg/m2 (67.1 lb/ft2)
  • Thrust/weight: 0.988 (100% fuel, 2 EM A2A missile, 2 IR A2A missile) version B
  • Maximum g-load: +9/−3.6g (+11g in emergencies)

EF 2000 is heavier than Rafale and thus TWR is comparable. The higher TWR in the case of Rafale compared to most 4.5 gen fighters gives it supercruise ability.

 

[smestarz]

Seems you dont really understand the post you reply to do you?
I was talking about F/A-18 and Tejas, Why do you have to make it Rafale centric, haha well thats how Rafale fan boys do.

Tejas has LERX and that means two less surfaces that can reflect back, With Canards there is advantage of Aerodynamics but disadvantage for VLO optimisaion.

So the point is that F/A-18 should not be difficult to make ski jump take off.

BTW, Folding wings are required by Indian navy because the space on carrier is limited and we would like to have more planes on carrier.

"should" A word to forget in the plane or missile world.
If Tejas, a tail less Delta (without couple canards) is able to take of from ski jump, a Rafale designed to operate from carrier, with close coupled canards, and studied by the world master in Delta surly could.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Its funny, when what Western OEM declares its authentic, and when Russians OEM declares something its exaggerating the facts hahaha

Russian stuff looks great on paper but doesn't deliver as hoped for. Case in point, all our hardware. Western stuff delivers exactly as specified. French stuff is a mid point between the two.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Seems you dont really understand the post you reply to do you?
I was talking about F/A-18 and Tejas, Why do you have to make it Rafale centric, haha well thats how Rafale fan boys do.

Tejas has LERX and that means two less surfaces that can reflect back, With Canards there is advantage of Aerodynamics but disadvantage for VLO optimisaion.

So the point is that F/A-18 should not be difficult to make ski jump take off.

BTW, Folding wings are required by Indian navy because the space on carrier is limited and we would like to have more planes on carrier.

____________________________________________________________

EF Typhoon
Weights
Empty: 24,250
Fuel (50%): 5,510lbs

Weapons: 2,267lbs
4 x Meteor A-A missiles 1628 lbs
2 x IRIS-T A-A missiles 384lbs
150 rounds: (255 lbs [2lbs per round])

combat Weight: 32,027lbs

Thrust:
Dry: 26,980
AB: 40,460

T/W ratio:
Dry: 0.84
AB: 1.26

Wing Loading: 58.13/sq ft
_____________________________________________________________
Rafale
Weights
Empty: 21,000
Fuel: 5,180 lbs (50%)

Weapons: 2,265lbs
4 x Meteor A-A missiles 1628 lbs
2 x Magic A-A missiles 387lbs
125 rounds: (dont know the weight, estimate 250 lbs [2lbs per round])

combat Weight:28,445

Thrust:
Dry: 22,500
AB: 34,000

T/W ratio:
Dry: 0.79
AB: 1.20

Wing Loading: 57.81/sq ft
___________________________________________________________

 

[smestarz]

If you have some common sense you will see that the planes are just platform to carry better and effective missiles or you do not see the evoulution?
During WW2 the divebombers were there because they had to get the bomb on the target, which was one bomb one target theory. A-10 followed the same with Maverick missiles. Do you see A-10 doing dive bombing?
It would be stupid if the French planes flew low and got shot by SR SAMs
Ah perhaps you are not well versed about new Air defence technology ...

Look at the most effective planes which carry out strike, thats not Rafale or F/A-18 that is MQ-9 Reaper,,
Unmanned, and able to carry out strike from longer distance.. It does not need to divebomb to hit the target.
Most of the time the target does not even know the plane is there

And you by some chance are stuck in early 90s

Are you fucking kidding me? Next you will say no need for planes, lets go back to trebuchets and catapults!

Two words : Cost and Range!

 

[smestarz]

Russian stuff delivers but the problem was not Russia the problem was INDIA. When all it needs is just fewbribes to be paid for product to be purchased what can you expect.
There is a story going on as to how UPA stalled Rafale negotiations because they were negotiating kickbacks !!!

Russian stuff looks great on paper but doesn't deliver as hoped for. Case in point, all our hardware. Western stuff delivers exactly as specified. French stuff is a mid point between the two.

 

[smestarz]

And what are you trying to say? that you can copy and paste better?
Bravo,, Do see the post for which you posted the reply.
Very similar to BP,... the topic is something else and you come up with Rafale centric reply.. LOL

____________________________________________________________

EF Typhoon
Weights
Empty: 24,250
Fuel (50%): 5,510lbs

Weapons: 2,267lbs
4 x Meteor A-A missiles 1628 lbs
2 x IRIS-T A-A missiles 384lbs
150 rounds: (255 lbs [2lbs per round])

combat Weight: 32,027lbs

Thrust:
Dry: 26,980
AB: 40,460

T/W ratio:
Dry: 0.84
AB: 1.26

Wing Loading: 58.13/sq ft
_____________________________________________________________
Rafale
Weights
Empty: 21,000
Fuel: 5,180 lbs (50%)

Weapons: 2,265lbs
4 x Meteor A-A missiles 1628 lbs
2 x Magic A-A missiles 387lbs
125 rounds: (dont know the weight, estimate 250 lbs [2lbs per round])

combat Weight:28,445

Thrust:
Dry: 22,500
AB: 34,000

T/W ratio:
Dry: 0.79
AB: 1.20

Wing Loading: 57.81/sq ft
___________________________________________________________

 

[smestarz]

Su-57, looks great on paper, excellent 5th Gen engine.
Su-35 super maneuverable, out maneuvers and out performs Rafales.
What else do we need?
And yes French plane is the point between the two, very average I mean

Russian stuff looks great on paper but doesn't deliver as hoped for. Case in point, all our hardware. Western stuff delivers exactly as specified. French stuff is a mid point between the two.

 

[vampyrbladez]

And what are you trying to say? that you can copy and paste better?
Bravo,, Do see the post for which you posted the reply.
Very similar to BP,... the topic is something else and you come up with Rafale centric reply.. LOL

If it is about something else, find the appropriate thread and post on it. Tag the chap you want to invite and dig in. Don't shit up this place.

 

[vampyrbladez]

If you have some common sense you will see that the planes are just platform to carry better and effective missiles or you do not see the evoulution?
During WW2 the divebombers were there because they had to get the bomb on the target, which was one bomb one target theory. A-10 followed the same with Maverick missiles. Do you see A-10 doing dive bombing?
It would be stupid if the French planes flew low and got shot by SR SAMs
Ah perhaps you are not well versed about new Air defence technology ...

Look at the most effective planes which carry out strike, thats not Rafale or F/A-18 that is MQ-9 Reaper,,
Unmanned, and able to carry out strike from longer distance.. It does not need to divebomb to hit the target.
Most of the time the target does not even know the plane is there

And you by some chance are stuck in early 90s

Strike - Range, Payload, Survivability

Multirole fighters meet all the above. A 10 was originally designed as a tank popper. The 30 mm DU shells striking the top of your tank will insta-kill you if not careful. MQ 9 is Walmart disposable drone. Unfit for war in a contested environment. MQ 25 however in a strike role is a different story.

There are still dive bombers today. We call them cruise missiles. B 52 is also good only for CAS in uncontested environment.