AESA's advantages are also in detection, identification, classification, tracking, prioritization, multitasking etc over PESA. It is also more advanced in terms of EW, it is capable of high power ECM functions. It is also be great at data dissemination.
Advantages in detection? Can you prove it or explain it? Rest of the features have more to do with the background computer rather than the radar itself.
I'll keep it simple.
It has less to do with the computer and more to do with the hardware and software. The ability to change the power of each module gives you the option of switching between high and low gain antennas to get the best result. So, you can choreograph the antenna to perform multiple tasks at one. This way the radar is performing volume scan, target tracking, PD scanning and other modes all at the same time. So you are studying all the basic characteristics at once on AESA. On a PESA you can't perform all of them at the same time. You definitely need processing power, but it is secondary considering you need the radar hardware first.
We don't need high power systems for EW, we need very low power now, in the region of tens of watts. The entire radar is not used for EW, but only a part of it. The value of a radar based EW is important for all types of fighters, not just one or two.
F22 is somewhat inferior when you compare it with F35, ET and Rafale when avionics is concerned. Only after some upgrades, it would retain its superior position in world.
All the Rafale Specs are heavily inflated at best, its AESA ranges are lower than the Block 60s, the IRST is at best similar in ranges to the OLS. As for the Jammers, well yet to be case where the Spectra could effectively jam even a regular block 50, let alone an MKI. You severly at best underestimate the jammers and ECM on current 4th and 4.5 gen aircraft. In a 1vs1, Mig-29K/Rafale/MKI, both will have degraded performance i.e missile launch evelope will decrease and in such cases the R-27/OLS combo allows for better launch envelopes even if degraded, Mica can't match that, hence the newest R-27 version were ordered for the MKI/29 fleets. The Mig-29K is a formidable enemy in its current stage, we'll talk about Rafale when it gets a helmet that can cue targets operationally.
F-22 is not inferior to the F-35 and certainly not the Rafale, F-22 had adequqtae tech to supress all comers and thats what matters. It still has no real worthy competitor that stands a chance in a real combat scenario, whether in BVR/WVR, the F-22 will always shoot first and talk later.
F22 has been out of production for past 7 years . The US Congress was critical of the project , as what you mentioned that It has no real competitor and also its stupidly high costs.
The range I have given states "best range." The reason we can't compare just internal fuel for Rafale and Mig-29K is because when they are on strike missions, they will fly with tanks. This is a real world comparison.
RCS isn't calculated like that. B-2 bomber is 10 times bigger than a Mig-29. It's payload alone is twice the weight of the Mig-29K, but its RCS is 0.0001m2.
OLS-35
You don't get it. RWR is just a radar warner. MAWS and LWS are entirely different. If you launch a missile from 50 Km away, the Missile Approach Warning System will pick up the missile. MAWS come in two types, active and passive. Active system like the one on EF consists of antennas that work like radar. They detect airborne missiles. A passive MAWS can either be infrared or ultraviolet. Both have their uses. Rafale has an infrared detector which detects heat from the missile, be it the burner or skin friction. The F-35's EODAS can detect ballistic missile launches from 800 Km away. So, Rafale's MAWS is quite similar. RWR is worthless in this scenario because it requires the missile's seeker to be switched on. By the time the RWR picks up the missile it will be too late because the missile is already within its No Escape Zone.
The more I read your posts the more I realize your all your opinions on aircraft are entirely worthless.
I would recommend going through the Know Your Rafale thread. I never realized I was wasting time with your posts.
You read it wrong. Read what I posted about radar again.
You can make calls using any mobile phone, so why do you need a smart phone?
Are you telling me the Himalayas can go up to heights of 18 Km?
As said before, some sources for your claims would be nice. UAE dropped the Rafale because it was far more expensive and for a far lower price F-16 Block 61 would offer mostly the same capability
A single Rafale flew against 3 Singaporean Block 50/52s and beat them.
The Koreans rejected the F-15 for the F-35. So what's your point?
Su-30 range can be extended by aerial refuelling. But realistically its range is sufficient for the missions it is needed.
Is that why the Russians have added drop tanks to the Su-35 and Su-34 and increased their ranges by another 1000 Km, when their internal fuel ranges were already higher than the MKI?
There is nothing called overkill. If the Starship Enterprise was available, I would support its purchase.
We can afford it.
It's pointless. We need the power of twin engines just to sustain operations over the Himalayas while carrying decent payloads. If we use single engine jets, we won't be able to take the war into China, we will end up fighting over our own skies. That was the plan before, but no longer the plan today.
Indian Army alone cannot meet the twin threats of Pakistan and China
India plans US$10bn mountain strike corps to counter China｜Politics｜News｜WantChinaTimes.com
The time you are thinking about is gone.
