That's among the hottest parts of engine, need to be Ttanium usually to withstand heat & structural integrity.
Still u can't figure out why it is a problem after giving picture & diagrams which don't match?
Best of luck on ur own homework. I don't wanna go in circles.
Plume is a very long thing but nozzles are just 1-2 ft. Converging them or leaving gap doesn't affect plume. If u wanna explain further then please use a drawing.
R.I.P. 5th & 6th gen design R&D & tax payer's money. The entire world should purchase Rafale.
After giving so many pics & diagrams, me incapable of understanding basic concepts, says a person who mixed up nozzle, cooling channel & blade cooling, hence the smileys
Whichever field we talk about - engineering, banking, law, architecture, arts, etc, we need to use terms & standards of that professional domain. So tech domain measurments have SI & imperial units, but u wanna use ur own personal units & standards, that's good for ur personal understanding but confusing to others.
U can write whatever u want in ur personal blog. Even most defence journalists, youtube channel owners, etc are not even technically qualified & make content like they want. Back in my college days i also wanted to mke my own blog site.
Tomorrow FCAS, Tempest, Su-57 pilots will say they reach Mach-1 at 40%, 50%, 60% throttle, what will it mean without mentioning total values? Have u seen any technical paper or speaker in seminar mentioning only %? NO. Why not? Bcoz those values depend on altitude, airframe design & load also. There are so many engine makers with series of engine, is there any engine considered as benchmark? NO. Is Rafale or any other jet the benchmark? NO.
My post was only on "Indian" Rafales that too on its engine, nozzle but u pulled me into comparative performance. After that also i shared only theoretical diagrams & pics from conceptual PoV until now lately i had to give some specific pics & calculations.
All the ratios u mentioned can be for light, medium, heavy jets, depends on multiple factors. I showed u the calculation that a heavy jet like F-22 has higher T/W ratio bcoz making a strong engine was a priority. Tomorrow FCAS & Tempest will require even better engines than F-22/35.
Before Rafale they tested Mirage-4000 also but cancelled it. Rafale could have been bigger jet but perhaps they didn't have a bigger better engine then. There are many geopolitical, economic, strategic, business factors including export to customers otherwise a product can fail or come under heavy criticism like F-35. Most European countries are small & have NATO support which may not require a cross-country huge jet like Sukhoi with double internal fuel. Hence light to medium jets like Grippen, EF-2000, Rafale have worked well in 4th gen category.
But now it seems the era of light jet is over or only for poor countries bcoz technology has progressed, more sensors, equipment, cooling, internal fuel & weapons, etc needed means more space & weight. Our LCA is a classic example of massive delays & "can't spit, can't swallow" hence they are inflating the same airframe to MWF & calling it Tejas MK2. U can consider it as 1 engine Rafale. Then we will have TEDBF which is so identical to Rafale bcoz we don't have our own original R&D money being 2nd most populous country with high corruption & scandal rates.
In future we will still see 1 engine jets like F-35, Su-75 but they won't be lean & slim like F-16 for example bcoz new tech consume space & weight.
Every product cannot have everything otherwise its cost will be unsustainable. So choices & priorities have to be made. if u prioritize stealth u hav to exclude canards & include TVC & vice-versa. I'm not USA fan but it is a rich country & their firms like Lockheed & Northrop are leading some R&D since 1940s with vast funding & test facilities. How many countries have an entire X-series, space shuttle & jets like SR-71, B-2, F-117, etc? So as per their tests, they had to choose if they wan't to take risk of getting shot in BVR, or prioritise stealth & include TVC. And the result is that F-22 is costliest jet but Europe had to dump 5th gen & directly move to 6th gen to close the gap. All they could do is improvise with 4++ gen with composite materials & avionics within their budget.
So i never negated Rafales performance which u think. I said that i witnessed impressive performance of Rafale & other jets F2F, i hope u hav that experience. It is much better than a video. I also said it will take care of Pak & Chinese jets, what more u want me to say?
Your country also purchase Rafale so u r blind supporter of it, i don't feel compelled like that bcoz i simply consider both +/- points of any product.
Outcome is either death or survival, a live pilot or his/her coffin, that's the final thing. But it won't be same everytime. In every excercise, local or international, repeated BVR & dogfights are done & results could vary each day. You are so fixed on Rafale's performance that u don't wanna acknowledge anything about any other jet just bcoz ur country purchased it while i still acknowledge other jets where they desrve & raise concerns like with J-10C, etc. I already said that we should be smart customer, not marketing preys.
I'm aware of the pilot training during high G maneuvers but watch the 2nd video which u only shared in ur blog how those ex-pilots are making fun of the Rafale pilot & french propagandists. The HUD video also showed G & AoA values which Rafale's FCS allows max to avoid stall. The pilot was taking a lot of Gs due to high inertia. Go comment & discuss on their YT videos & share the screenshots here of their responses. You can watch Russian cockpit videos of MiG-29 OVT, Su-35, Su-57 during TVC maneuvers, they don't scream or even have to gasp much bcoz speed is so low which doesn't create high intertia & G. Rather it is like a roller coaster ride. Individual pilot physical tolerances may also differ. During F-22 & Rafale mock dogfight it also appears that F-22 may not be using much TVC bcoz during exercises they may disable some features as protocols like our MKI didn't use their radar to full limit at Red-Flag. So such minute details are seldom told to public. But TVC jet pilots won't scream, grunt, gasp like others, that's the whole idea behind good TVC to reduce effort, pain, but still maintain orientation, focus & situational awareness.
There are engineers who don't wan't pilot to struggle with high G, they don't wan't the pilot to tightly turn the plane in dogfight but make the missiles make U-turn. That's how technology evolves with time. Who doesn't wan't their pilots & soldiers to win a battle with minimum effort?
So i'm not making up any stuff, i'm merely sharing what i can find. But u don't wanna acknowledge any technical advancement of other platforms just bcoz ur country purchased Rafale & feel oblidged.
A typical radar lock was characteristics till 4th gen. Since 5th gen it is sensor fused avionics which even Rafale has to considerable extent. The optical sensors can maintain lock with help of digital image processing, just like a phone or CCTV camera detects people, their faces or a Tesla car recognizes so many objects & takes decisions to stop, speed or maneuver the car.
Similarly sensor fused avionics can detect a target by both active RF & passive EO sensors. But it depends on programming efficiency of engineers to control the radar & sensors & integrate them together.
If a radar takes several seconds to establish lock then either the H/w or the programming is obsolete. You can check this with some IT engineer in your friend circle if any.
F-22 has 6-axis AN/AAR-56 DAS, precursor to F-35's AN/AAQ-37 DAS. The 6 +ve & -ve axis positions give spherical coverage with no blindspots. And the RF antennas are there on spine, belly, rear, wing edges, rudder, again spherical coverage.
While Rafale's 2 DDM MAWS do give hemi-spherical coverage but the airframe acts as blindspot for lower sectors. The belly holds the weapons & fuel tanks hence no 4th gen can mount sensors there, except on chin.
The 3 jammers & 3 RWRs doesn't seem to give spherical coverage but only in horizontal plane. They jam & warn of RF radiation, don't lock a target. I'm not aware of additional antennas if any.
"Indian" Rafales got 3 more SPECTRA sensors "on demand"!!, not seen on oter Rafales. I'm not sure if vertical +/- axis are covered bcoz belly has loads & spine doesn't show add-ons.
So there is a diff. b/w "would be" & "it is" better. technically MLUs don't have limits but budget has.
In the mock digfight b/w the clouds the Rafale lost locks & took time to lock like u said but the F-22 was maintaing a sensor-fused spherical awareness actively or passively at all times & angles, that was the whole idea since beginning. Its HUD will always maintain a target pointer. In some 1990s documentaries it was shown, deleted on YT & elsewhere now.
France will develop FCAS to have all these things, close the gap & hopefully have DEW also.
U r artist in side-tracking the focus somehow after telling u repeatedly abt my post's focus. From where my post began at aft end of the jet & where it has landed to front end? You could have made ur own independent post on Rafale's aerodynamics or usage of canards. It is common sense by natural observation & simple physics that compared to a traditional tandem bi-plane design or a regular delta, a canard addition will give additional lift, but i didn't ask u to give huge documentation for exact position of canards. I thought naturally 2 decades back in 1990s even without reading that co-planar canards will partially disrupt air flow for wing hence being at different level is better. Since 25 years i'm maintaining a folder of such docs but my profession is different & have to manage family hence very less time to read everything. Imagine the kind of documentation flood i can bring here but nobody will read. Hence i prefer labeled diagrams & pics to which the members can correlate easily.
I wonder what the EF-2000, Sukhoi, Chinese guys have to say, although EF-2000 has canards at higher level.
Su-57 makers might say levcons are best, not canards. Our Naval LCA test jet has levcons but TEDBF is identical to Rafale, what a split in thinking.
From diagram of long & close canards J-20 doesn't have long ones, it is also just ahead of wing. I already said J-20 didn't impress me but J-10C is a concern. And larger jet will require larger canards. U can imagine a bigger Rafale, then canards may have to be increased also. MKI's canards are bigger than Rafale's bcoz it depends on jet's size, design, weight, agility, etc.
YF-23's V-tails were almost big as F-16's wing & they rotated very quickly. Who would think to rotate an entire wing like a stabilizer, but it all depends on design requirement & maker's abilities. Now Su-75 is coming up with V-tail & no canards. FCAS has lowered V-tail but no canards, Tempest has delta wings but no canards. I wonder what the 6th gen guys are up to?
And what is FCS limit of Rafale? How much it got to during mock dogfight? 31?
Max limit demo is useless if FCS has to be limited & can't be used in battle, period. Either u survive or u r dead, that's all matters in end. Hence F-22 or any TVC jet was specifically designed overall with TVC to increase FCS limits get rid of unrecoverable stalls & spins.
I used 9,900Kg. Did 350Kg difference create a huge difference in T/W ratio or in the mock battle? NO.
If u think both jets gained weight then pls mention the potential components also.
Which is more capable, smaller, cheaper & lighter - a late 1990s PC or today's cheap range smart phone? Electronic component are getting smaller, lighter, cheaper, more efficient, so how r the jets becoming heavier?
And i myself showed u the variants of improved M88 engine, same might have occured for F-22 also.
If Rafale has F4 variant currently the F-22 is also going under 11 billion USD MLU Advanced Raptor Enhancement and Sustainment (ARES). It has already undergone Raptor Enhanced Development & Integration II (REDI II, readiness and software updates), etc.
But as per ur logic U just praised a lighter 6.8T jet Grippen above for high AoA, so it is far better than Rafale in dogfight i guess. And FCAS will be bigger & heavier, so will other jets.
Hmm, says a guy who mixed up parts & concepts of engine & admitted to fail to understand why some jets need to have more space & weight.
As as per ur logic all bigger & heavier jets are worse than Rafale & all lighter jets are better than Rafale
U feel oblidged as ur country purchased Rafale, i don't. I praised it a lot where it deserves, i criticized it where it is lags. There is no product which has everything or it will be unsustainable.
BTW, it is not my take but that of millions of people including ex-pilots. Go comment on their videos, ok? But it is natural to have people on both sides, so i don't hav any issues at all with other people's belief. However, the HUD video itself tells a lot.
Rafale doesn't go to airshows globally?
Apply same logic to compare Rafale with 3++ gen jets