It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Eurofighter, Saudi Arabia to buy

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Another case of politics, lobbying prevailing over the better Rafale.

Clearly the Rafale was the better option .... but alas, the Saudis did a 'Singapore' and handed the victory to the white elephant.


How exactly is the Rafale the better option? Please give us the specifics of your bold statement rather than leave us wondering and scratching our .s.




posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
the Saudis did a 'Singapore' and handed the victory to the white elephant.


- Please feel free to detail the relative production numbers/sales performance of each of these aircraft.

Then let us know which one you think fits the term 'white elephant' best and why.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Now, now

What a wise man once said ...




Misconception 1 : Typhoon has better radar range than Rafale:

1. technology-wise Captor is one full generation behind RBE-2..
2. Just like Captor, RBE-2 too comes from a fine and proven radar, namely RDY. Dassault has grown out of slotted array pants years ago
3. Mechanical array of the Captor offers only a very limited simultaneous A-G and A-A.
4. Absolute range figures are less important in AWACS environment where both fighter will be active. Both contenders would be informed about incoming opponents much sooner than their radar would actually pick up the enemies, anyway..
5. Rafale has smaller frontal aspect RCS. That efficiently eliminates Captor's range advantage.

Misconception 2: Typhoon has greater thrust than Rafale
6. Typhoon is way heavier.. Its T/W ratio is so ridiculously greater than one of Rafale that calling that a decisive advantage is a real herecy..
7. Both aircraft are able to supercruise. No real difference here..
8. Despite greater weight I don't see greater figures in terms of max. payload with Typhoon. Carrying draggy dead weight around does not contribute to its range, as well..

Misconception 3: Typhoon has better missiles
9. Meteor is with Rafale, too..Therefore constitutes no advantage for Typhoon at all..
10. Typhoon lacks medium range IR-guided missile for silent interceptions..remember that the Rafale has those Mica's..

Misconception 4: Austria bought the Eurofighter, so its better than the Rafale
11. The Rafale was never even considered for the contract. EADS used the bait of allowing Austria to obtain a greater share of work in their projects to sell them the Eurofighter.

In addition, i remember correctly, the Eurofighter was rejected before the Rafale in the Singapore buy.

Misconception 4: The Eurofighter's subsidary sensors & electronics are better than the Rafale's

Well, then check out what the Rafale's got :

The Rafale carries, for the first time in aviation history, an integrated electronic survival system named SPECTRA which features a software-based virtual stealth technology.

The Spectra [Système de Protection et d'Evitement des Conduites de Tir du Rafale] self-protection suite has been integrated by Thales, but it consists of elements built by various companies. The Spectra consists of a radar-warning receiver (RWR), missile-launch-warning system (MLWS), laser-warning receivers (LWS), a management computer, four chaff/flare dispensers, and a built-in jammer, all integrated into a single automatic system. The RWR and active jamming system were developed by Dassault Electronique (presently Thales) and are integrated as the Détection et Brouillage Electromagnétique (DBEM) system. According to an unofficial source, in the F1 standard, the DBEM can detect transmitters over the frequency range of 2-18 GHz, but this was increased to 2-40 GHz on the F2 standard. The system has a very high accuracy of up to one degree in azimuth. The DBEM automatically detects, classifies, and identifies emitters and inputs information about them into the computer.
The Spectra's active jamming subsystem uses phased-array antennas located at the roots of the canards. The antennas can produce a pencil beam compatible with the accuracy of the receiver system, concentrating power on the threat while minimizing the chances of detection. It also uses other low-probability-of-detection techniques, so the Rafale's electronic-countermeasures (ECM) capability is also compatible with its stealth requirements. The MLWS was developed by Matra (presently MBDA) and is called the Détecteur infrarouge de Départ de Missiles (DDM; missile-launch-detection system). It works in two infrared (IR) bands to increase detection reliability. Its primary detector is mounted on top of the Rafale's tail. The LWS was developed by Thales and is called the Détection et Alerte Laser (DAL). The whole Spectra suite is integrated with three dedicated computers, developed by Thales and MBDA and called the Gestion de l'Interface et Compatibilité (GIC).

Damocles Targeting Pod
The Damocles pod, in its baseline configuration, has a third-generation thermal-imagery camera, working in the waveband of 3-5 µm, and a navigational forward-looking IR (FLIR) sensor mounted in the pylon. The navigational FLIR sensor has a 24x18-degrees field of view. The main sensor is used for targeting purposes, with selectable fields of view: wide (4x3º), intermediate, and narrow (1x0.75º). It is fully stabilized, enabling an observation range of up to 40-50 km. Along with the camera, the Damocles pod is also equipped with two laser sets working in the 1.5- and 1.06-µm wavebands, used for range finding, target designation, and laser spot tracking. The lasers' ranges enables them to be used from outside the firing envelope of many air-defense systems. The Damocles camera and lasers can be cued to the target by other aircraft systems, including indirectly by the RBE2 radar. The pod has also an automatic track mode. The laser-designation system of the Damocles pod is compatible with Paveway II and III, Alenia/MBDA PGM-500 and PGM-2000 HAKIM, and Elbit Lizard guided bombs.

Optronique Secteur Frontal (OSF)
Thales also developed a very advanced built-in electro-optical (EO) targeting system for the Rafale, called Optronique Secteur Frontal (OSF; Front Sector Optronic). The system is mounted in front of the cockpit and consists of two optical modules. The right-side module has a long-wave (8-12 µm) infrared camera used for target search and track. The range of the camera is believed to be up to 90 km in ideal conditions. The left-side module carries a CCD TV camera for daytime target identification. The system also includes a laser rangefinder for use against air targets.

The OSF system does not replace the Damocles pod. Indeed, the OSF system is primarily an air-to-air search, track, identification, and localization sensor, with a limited air-to-ground localization and identification function. The OSF system is to be introduced from the F2 standard onward. In F2.1, it will be air-to-air capable, and in F2.2 it will also gain an air-to-ground capability. From the F3 standard, the OSF system is also to be also adapted for anti-ship missions. A future enhancement has been proposed to the French Air Force and French Navy with a night target-identification function based on a mid-wave IR sensor that would replace the CCD TV camera

Recce NG
The Thales Recce NG is intended to be not just a reconnaissance pod. It will be a complete reconnaissance system. The pod is the airborne element of the system. The ground elements consist of a mission-planning system and a station for receiving, processing, and disseminating intelligence data in real time.

The Recce NG system offers the capability to perform both high- and medium-altitude strategic reconnaissance and low-altitude tactical reconnaissance during the same mission. The system has three digital optronic sensors: two bi-spectral sensors for long-range reconnaissance (IR and visible) and a high-speed tactical IR line scanner for low-altitude reconnaissance. The bi-spectral sensors offer several fields of view – narrow field for medium-range reconnaissance and very narrow field for long-range, stand-off reconnaissance. The optics of the visible and IR cameras are mounted on a flexible bearing, enabling the systems to be directed vertically and at oblique angles in any direction from horizon to horizon, and with significant agility in azimuth.
_______

Misconception 5: The Rafale does not have any stealth features, while the Eurofighter does.

Infact, Stealth was given a greater priority for the Rafale than the Eurofighter.

The requirement for stealth led to redesigning the fuselage, which produced Rafale's characteristic shape.

Thales Group and Dassault Aviation have mentioned stealthy jamming modes for the SPECTRA system, to reduce the aircrafts apparent radar signature. It is not known exactly how these work or even if the capability is fully operational, but it may employ 'active cancellation' technology, such as has been tested by Thales and MBDA. Active cancellation is supposed to work by sampling and analysing incoming radar and feeding it back to the hostile emmiter slightly out of phase thus cancelling out the returning radar echo.

Future upgrades of the system will include the ability to datalink several Rafales together, sharing SPECTRA data among various units of a fighter group.

The radar-absorbent materials initially used caused the dark color of the Rafale C prototype (shown here), but later special electromagnetic-transparent paints were developed so the aircraft could receive any color scheme. (also shown below)











Lastly, the Rafale costs 88 million Euro's a piece, while the Eurofighter costs 120.3 million Euros a piece ( link )

Now you tell me how the Eurofighter is better ?

P.S > Interesting link > click

I have no personal grudge against the Typhoon, and i am not French, however after researching about the Typhoon and the Rafale during the past month, the Rafale appeared to my eyes as the pick of the two.

[edit on 23-12-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
But hey, if the Rafale is "clearly" the better aircraft option, then perhaps you can convince Indian government to buy some, being that the Rafale will "clearly" be a better aircraft than those Su-30MKIs?


LOL ... when the Su-30MKI contract was signed, the Rafale was not yet a service ready aircraft.

Further, the Su-30 MKI with all its bells and whistles (TVC, N011M Radar, Israeli+French+Indian avionics, new ECM's, IRST, etc, etc...)will cost India $22.5 million a unit (compare that to 88 million Euros of the Rafale and 120.3 million Euros of the Eurofighter).



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Hey, StealthSpy, was simply a speculative mention, made in concert with yours.




seekerof



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
Rafale is considered slightly worse than Typhoon. For example it cannot supercruise.


Bulls ... the Rafale can supercruise.

Infact the Rafale-M (which is heavier than the other Rafale variants by 650kg) demonstrated supercruise with 4 A2A missiles installed on it in addition to a central 1250 L fuel tank.



The present M-88-2 engine can make the Rafale supercruise at 1.2M, while the M-88-3 (20% more thrust than the M-88-2) that will get into the Rafale shortly is claimed to be able to supercruise the Rafale at 1.4 M. An M-88-4 with Thrust Vectoring is also said to be in development.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Yeah, thats lovely and all, but what counts is the bottom line, StealthSpy.
Can you guess what the bottom line is?



Eurofighter: 4.5:1
Rafale: 1:1
DERA, the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency






seekerof



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof



Yeah ... that's the pic from the best Eurofighter fan site on the Internet.
In addition, the pic very well says the Rafale's did not use AAMRAMS, while all the others did in those "simulations".

Now shall i post propoganda BS from Rafale fan sites as well ?

[edit on 22-12-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Now shall i post propoganda BS from Rafale fan sites as well ?



Correct me if I am wrong here, stealthspy, but hell, I thought that that was what you had been doing all along?







seekerof



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Correct me if I am wrong here, stealthspy, but hell, I thought that that was what you had been doing all along?


Correct you ... i will. But its a real pity that your sense of humour is the only thing that can save you on your arguments.

And why would i need French fanfare to counter your B.S ?

Hell, here is a British news report on the Eurofighter for you.

www.telegraph.co.uk.../news/2004/01/04/wfarce04.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/01/04/ixworld.html ... just blows away the other misconception that since more aerospace companies worked on it its better.

Read all you want.

[edit on 23-12-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by planeman
I feel a bit sorry for France. The Rafale is an excellent platform and deserves to do well for export

I share the same feelings with you


I quote from the same article from which the 'Oracle'
who forgot to count, posted stuff "for me" on this thread ....
One could ask why such a capable and technically successful aircraft as the Rafale has had such a difficult time finding export orders. Is the Rafale what the Russians call a "golden fish," an expensive but useless piece of military equipment? The Rafale certainly is not cheap. But it is the most impressive aircraft to come out of Europe in two decades. Time will tell whether the Rafale will find a home among the great combat aircraft of the world.


But good news for UK and BAE Systems.

Yes very good news for BAe and UK

(although i am not in agreement with the Saudi decision)

It is also interesting that these eurofighters to be sold to the Saudis will be taken out of the RAF's Eurofighter quota ...



Saudi Arabia has signed an expanded military agreement with the UK government under which the kingdom intends to acquire at least 24 Eurofighter Typhoons to replace its current air force fleet of Panavia Tornado air defence variant (ADV) fighters.

Contained within a so-called “understanding document”, the multi-billion pound Typhoon buy would form the cornerstone of a third phase to the bilateral Al Yamamah arms agreement, which has already covered the delivery and support of 120 Tornado ADV and interdictor strike (IDS) aircraft, BAE Systems Hawk and Pilatus PC-9 trainers and other equipment.

The MoD says this will cover the delivery of 24 aircraft to be drawn from the UK Royal Air Force’s production run of 89 Tranche 2 Eurofighters..

article >>

P.S : Rember that the original Sauidi requirement was for 96 jets.

These 24 are to replace the Tronado ADV's (also sold to SA bu BAe).

Perhaps the Rafale will be chosen to replace the F-5's and others. This has also been hinted here.

Rember that the Saudis had pledged to buy Rafales earlier ( link ) and even French President has held talks with the Saudis about this ( link )

[edit on 23-12-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 04:02 AM
link   
so , if rafale is just so darn good , why are india making the LCA and why are they not buying the rafale which is clearly the better aircraft???



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Stealth spy, what an absolute load of utter nonsense.

Your first post for instance is just subjective opinion (maybe even yours?)

after all, what official or professional sources woulkd use the term

"Dassault has grown out of slotted array pants years ago "


So right at the beginning your quote instantly discredits itself, Dassault doesn't build radars anyway, clearly the whle thing is written by a Rafale fan with an axe to grind.

Next you simply list a load of equipment that the Rafale carries. Well anybody can do that with any fighter, pick up a recent copy of All The Worlds Aircraft and see how its entry on the Typhoon needs to be spread over four pages to contain all the information, long lists don't prove anything.

You also seem to think that quoting the UK press backs up your argument, you clearly then know nothing about the UK press and its stance of appealing to the lowest common denominator, to them ALL advanced aircraft involving the UK are fair game for attack, it has been this way for 40 years and will never change.

Also, you are using the term 'Typhoon fan site' to discredit the table put up by seekerof as if it makes a difference. Important point here - the site didn't make up the table, it was produced by DERA, as for the point that the Rafale didn't use AMRAAMS, again you see this as some sort of discredit for the findings when the info supplied with the table stated that they used MICA's, the standard weapon of the Rafale, which your first post trumpets as a major advantage for the Rafale!!!

As with so many of your p[osts you are employing double standards to try to prove what you WANT to believe. Carry on thinking what you want but nobody else appears to be fooled.



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 04:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

Originally posted by longbow
Rafale is considered slightly worse than Typhoon. For example it cannot supercruise.


Infact the Rafale-M (which is heavier than the other Rafale variants by 650kg) demonstrated supercruise with 4 A2A missiles installed on it in addition to a central 1250 L fuel tank.


The present M-88-2 engine can make the Rafale supercruise at 1.2M, while the M-88-3 (20% more thrust than the M-88-2) that will get into the Rafale shortly is claimed to be able to supercruise the Rafale at 1.4 M. An M-88-4 with Thrust Vectoring is also said to be in development.


1.2 Mach is not supercruise, it's transonic speed. It would be extremely unwise to fly at such speed because the fuel consumption is highest between 0.9-1.2.
Besides just because a plane can go over Mach 1.2-1.4 without AB doesn't mean it can stay there for long. Supercruise is the ability to have SUSTAINED speed app. 1.5 Mach for longer period of time. I don't know how long can EF supercruise, but I think it's more than Rafale, considering it's 2 engines and the fact that no one ever mentioned supercuise by Rafale until it was certain that it's viewed as disadvantage. So I suspect it's just some marketing game from French. I think Rafale would be able to go Mach 1.2-1. 4 without AB - but not more than 1 minute.
And again considering the price difference - I already said price plays no role for Saudies. Besides BAE has fairly established position in Saudi Arabia, I think they make 1/4 of their profits from services for SA airforce and army.



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 04:25 AM
link   
And BTW pleas stop still using those old DERA numbers as factual aircraft performace. They were unreliable already when released and now it's 10 years since then. F-22 has changed, Typhoon has changed, Rafala has changed and russian planes have changed.

[edit on 23-12-2005 by longbow]



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Misconception 2: Typhoon has greater thrust than Rafale
6. Typhoon is way heavier.. Its T/W ratio is so ridiculously greater than one of Rafale that calling that a decisive advantage is a real herecy..


A quick glance at the 2004 Janes tells me that the Typhoon has almost the same wingspan as the Rafale, is 2 feet longer and its empty weight is about 1-2000lb greater, meanwhile the max combined thrust from the M-88 's of the Rafale is 32,000lb while the max combined thrust from the Typhoons EJ-200's is 42,000lb. That to me equates to a thrust to weight ratio advantage, how about you?


[edit on 23-12-2005 by waynos]



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Rafale : Length > Height > Wingspan = 15.27 m m > 5.34 m > 10.80 m
Eurofighter : Length > Height > Wingspan = 15.96 m > 5.28 m > 10.95 m

Rafale empty weight = 9,040 kg
Eurofighter empty weight = 10,995 kg

Rafale maximum take off weight = 24,500 kg
Eurofighter maximum take off weight = 23,000 kg

M88-3 max thrust = 90kN x 2 (M88-2 max thrust = 77 kN x2) the M88-3 will power the Rafale in 2007 and beyond
EJ 200 max thrust = 89.8kN x 2

Rafale internal fuel = 5300 l fuel
Eurofighter internal fuel = 4700 l fuel

Rafale wing loading (kg/m²) = 304
Eurofighter wing loading (kg/m²) = 300

updated

[edit on 23-12-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 07:21 AM
link   
I just dont think the Supercruise thing is an argument for Saudi Arabia. Its an argument for countries that transition their military to force projection tools, like the US has and many european countries (more or less successful) do at the moment. The reasoning behind this is that a homeland defending role for most NATO members is highly unlikely in the foreseeable future. Supercruise is a convenient and economic way to get in and out of a distant theatre, operating from remote and relatively secure airbases.

Seen that way the USA along with the F22 is the only combination where supercruise ability actually makes perfect sense, as it is the only country with the ability, the equipment (that includes airbases all over the world) and the geostrategic reasoning to create an EXECUTIONABLE need for long-distance air intervention.

Saudi-Arabia however only needs aircraft that can fulfill the interceptor (against both air and ground targets) or limited (counter-)attack role. With its central Middle East position, almost all possible areas of engagement lie within a 1500km circle of Riyadh or S-As borders (where most of the Airbases are located), and both the Rafale and the Typhoon can manage that combat radius with internal fuel and a reasonable combat load alone. That being said, IF there ever will be combat with Saudi-Arabian Airforce in it (again, in the foreseeable future) the distances will most likely be less than that 1500km.

Edit: Again I didnt fear unbelievable difficulties and created this extremely professional image




[edit on 23/12/2005 by Lonestar24]

[edit on 23/12/2005 by Lonestar24]



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 07:22 AM
link   
Where are you getting these figures from? I have Janes data that shows the internal fuel capacity of the Typhoon to be more than Rafale with the wing loading ratio's reversed.

Again however I see you are being subjective. I quoted actual directly comparative figures for the engine thrust yet you choose to quote figures for the uprated M88 (almost 2 years away) against the original EJ-200, ignoring the forthcoming uprated version completely. How can we take your figures seriously?


this months Air International

The RAF is eagerly awaiting delivery of its first production Typhoon to be fitted with the newly uprated version of the EJ 200 engine in 2006 which will greatly enhance even further the Typhoons already blistering performance


Funny how the upgraded M 88 still only just meets the thrust levels of the outgoing EJ 200 version?


edit; HANG ON! You just posted that the Typhoon is FIVE METERS longer than the Rafale (10.3 against 15.96)
Do you know what you're doing at all? You're simply making it al;l up to further your 'argument'


[edit on 23-12-2005 by waynos]



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lonestar24
Saudi-Arabia however only needs aircraft that can fulfill the interceptor (against both air and ground targets) or limited (counter-)attack role. With its central Middle East position, almost all possible areas of engagement lie within a 1500km circle of Riyadh or S-As borders (where most of the Airbases are located), and both the Rafale and the Typhoon can manage that combat radius with internal fuel and a reasonable combat load alone. That being said, IF there ever will be combat with Saudi-Arabian Airforce in it (again, in the foreseeable future) the distances will most likely be less than that 1500km.


Since when has Typhoon COMBAT RADIUS 1500 km on internal? It's more like 1300 km, butwith 3 external fuel tanks. without those 3 tanks it would be much less, so you can start drawing new image
.
Defacto Typhoon has less range&payload than fighter which is suposed to replace - Tornado. And Rafale is not better in this aspect, I fear.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join