British/Italian Tempest (GCAP) Fighter : News and Discussion

randomradio said:
So, if the Captor-E uses the same hardware as the RBE-2 AESA, it could even match Irbis-E's 350Km performance. So all these figures are way above the capabilities of the older American radars on the F-22 or the F-35, 'cause we know for a fact that the F-35 falls short of the F-22, and the F-22 definitely falls short of the Irbis-E. Dunno if it's the same case with SH B3 and F-15EX.
Click to expand...
The remarkable performance of the RBE2 EASA is not only due to the improved quality of the T/Rs.
Let me take the example of GaN technology: why does it increase range performance? In fact it is because the efficiency of the component is better, i.e. for a given input power the radiated power is higher, which already increases the range, but it also means that less heat is generated and therefore the input power can be increased, which further increases the radiated power.
This example shows the importance of having a good heat extraction system for good radar performance. This is a point that has been worked on a lot at Thales and it also explains the performance of the RBE2 AESA.
 
Picdelamirand-oil said:
The remarkable performance of the RBE2 EASA is not only due to the improved quality of the T/Rs.
Let me take the example of GaN technology: why does it increase range performance? In fact it is because the efficiency of the component is better, i.e. for a given input power the radiated power is higher, which already increases the range, but it also means that less heat is generated and therefore the input power can be increased, which further increases the radiated power.
This example shows the importance of having a good heat extraction system for good radar performance. This is a point that has been worked on a lot at Thales and it also explains the performance of the RBE2 AESA.
Click to expand...

I didn't touch upon the subject of system design since there's no point in speculating that. There's a good chance that the cooling systems on the F-22 and F-35 are actually better than what's on the Rafale given all the space they get to work with, possibly at least twice as large as in the Rafale. It's also likely that the software used on the Rafale is even better, hence its ability to pick out targets from clutter at greater ranges. There's no way to know these things unless we have Rafale operators who are also operating the F-35 confirming such information. HAF comes to mind.
 
randomradio said:
Long ago I read an article which quoted important people within the program that claimed the F-35 uses the same avionics hardware as the F-22 since they wanted to keep the program cheap. Today there are naturally talks of replacing those avionics, like the radar, with better ones. This naturally means the avionics on the F-35 are now pretty old.

Anyway here's something that repeats the asme.
fullafterburner.weebly.com

Lockheed Martin F 35 Lightning II, The Smartest Guy Around.

It is an American Single Engine, Medium Capability Fifth Generation Fighter. There is a family of different aircrafts based on F 35. The F 35 is currently being introduced in service. F 35 is a...
fullafterburner.weebly.com
The current F-22 production radar is the APG-77v1, which draws heavily on APG-81 hardware and software for its advanced air-to-ground capabilities.

Apparently both use the same 2nd gen TRMs.

Processing power changes every few years, there's nothing strange about that. The MKI's MC has changed 3 or 4 times in the last 20 years. Today it has IMA.
Click to expand...
That's definitely incorrect. Same avionics would imply more than just same TRMs, but we know for a fact that the F-35 has modular avionics unlike the F-22. It's possible it may have used the same TRMs early on but not anymore.


randomradio said:
Yep. It's small. One of the reasons why there was talk of removing the radar and placing it all over the body. Anyway, even if it's small it provides anywhere between an estimated around 250Km against a 3m2 target if you simply double their advertised value for PESA, as per their claim. They claimed double performance over the PESA's 140Km against a 3m2 target, so that actually comes up to 280Km.

So, if the Captor-E uses the same hardware as the RBE-2 AESA, it could even match Irbis-E's 350Km performance. So all these figures are way above the capabilities of the older American radars on the F-22 or the F-35, 'cause we know for a fact that the F-35 falls short of the F-22, and the F-22 definitely falls short of the Irbis-E. Dunno if it's the same case with SH B3 and F-15EX.


View attachment 19159
Click to expand...
Against what target size though?

randomradio said:
We know the 100-150mi refers to a 1m2 target. So that's up to 130-200mi or 210-315 Km against a 3m2 target. So the average comes to 260Km, which is no different from the Rafale's 250 or 280Km. Naturally, 'cause the Rafale uses significantly superior hardware given its size.

So the Captor-E should have the same advantage, possibly even beating the Irbis-E using RBE-2 AESA's TRMs, never mind something better. Whether the software is up to code, that's debatable, that's where even the F-35 is stuck at.
Click to expand...
The Rafale's claims are dubious IMO. Fighter-sized target doesn't necessarily mean 1m^2, it could be 3m^2. The F-22 radar also works as a system with passive sensors, using passive detection to narrow beam the radar.
 
randomradio said:
I didn't touch upon the subject of system design since there's no point in speculating that. There's a good chance that the cooling systems on the F-22 and F-35 are actually better than what's on the Rafale given all the space they get to work with, possibly at least twice as large as in the Rafale. It's also likely that the software used on the Rafale is even better, hence its ability to pick out targets from clutter at greater ranges. There's no way to know these things unless we have Rafale operators who are also operating the F-35 confirming such information. HAF comes to mind.
Click to expand...
Having a good cooling system when you have space is easier, but what is most difficult is to extract heat in the immediate environment of the T/R where the energy density is very high. This means that the cooling system has to operate at very high pressure and having a "swatch plate" makes this operation more difficult because of the junctions that have to be mobile.
It is precisely because there was not much space in the Rafale that we had to compensate for this handicap.
 
Picdelamirand-oil said:
Having a good cooling system when you have space is easier, but what is most difficult is to extract heat in the immediate environment of the T/R where the energy density is very high. This means that the cooling system has to operate at very high pressure and having a "swatch plate" makes this operation more difficult because of the junctions that have to be mobile.
It is precisely because there was not much space in the Rafale that we had to compensate for this handicap.
Click to expand...

Okay, but how do we know the French design is better than the American?

Or are you trying to say TRM hardware is likely to be the same, but the main advantage for the Rafale is actually the cooling system?
 
BMD said:
That's definitely incorrect. Same avionics would imply more than just same TRMs, but we know for a fact that the F-35 has modular avionics unlike the F-22. It's possible it may have used the same TRMs early on but not anymore.
Click to expand...

Then it would obviously be news, since it's a very, very expensive upgrade. Rather the USAF is hoping there's a GaN upgrade coming up following the F-22 MLU. Why waste money on GaAs when the next upgrade is GaN? Plus the F-35 is still not ready, they are literally still fixing bugs in the first system, so who's gonna justify an upgrade on what's merely a WIP? All major hardware upgrades are slated for after Block 4 is complete, probably even later, could be Block 5 or even Block 10.

BMD said:
Against what target size though?
Click to expand...

The Aviation Week clipping refers to 1m2. It's the same for the F-15's 56mi range with a mechanical radar.

BMD said:
The Rafale's claims are dubious IMO. Fighter-sized target doesn't necessarily mean 1m^2, it could be 3m^2. The F-22 radar also works as a system with passive sensors, using passive detection to narrow beam the radar.
Click to expand...

Nobody is talking about a general "fighter-sized" target, the numbers are out there, 1m2 and 3m2.

I'm not referring to using long pulses or pulse compression.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil
randomradio said:
RBE-2 has a shorter range, but the AESA version is RBE-2AA. Just getting semantics out of the way.

The RBE-2AA AESA has similar range as radars of the F-22 and F-35.

The Americans use older component hardware compared to the French, hence the French have taken a lead even though they use a smaller radar. The French use hardware that's a few years ahead. Using the same hardware as the French, the F-22's radar range can be doubled to 400Km, but they decided not to go that way, they are instead waiting for a much more advanced radar through the MLU program which is based on GaN.
Click to expand...
Few people said Teja MK2 gonna get GaN based radars, so what will be the radar range of Tejas Mk2 then? Superior to rafale or equal?
 
randomradio said:
Then it would obviously be news, since it's a very, very expensive upgrade. Rather the USAF is hoping there's a GaN upgrade coming up following the F-22 MLU. Why waste money on GaAs when the next upgrade is GaN? Plus the F-35 is still not ready, they are literally still fixing bugs in the first system, so who's gonna justify an upgrade on what's merely a WIP? All major hardware upgrades are slated for after Block 4 is complete, probably even later, could be Block 5 or even Block 10.



The Aviation Week clipping refers to 1m2. It's the same for the F-15's 56mi range with a mechanical radar.



Nobody is talking about a general "fighter-sized" target, the numbers are out there, 1m2 and 3m2.

I'm not referring to using long pulses or pulse compression.
Click to expand...
Expensive is US DoD spending terms, nope. Bugs with the radar? Can't be the F-22 system then can it?

Aviation Week only gets declassified information, what they want you to believe and estimates.

Such information is more classified than the number of TRMs for sure.

Neither am I, I'm talking about the fact that the F-22 and F-35 radar and passive detection systems are integrated and used together, allowing them to already know where the target is roughly before the radar is even used, reducing both the transmitted and received power requirements for detection and engagement. The Rafale's system is not interlinked in this way.
 
Hydra said:
Few people said Teja MK2 gonna get GaN based radars, so what will be the radar range of Tejas Mk2 then? Superior to rafale or equal?
Click to expand...

There's no way to say. It's a single-engine jet hence comes with limited electrical power. So efficiency is going to be more important than having more peak power.
 
BMD said:
Expensive is US DoD spending terms, nope. Bugs with the radar? Can't be the F-22 system then can it?
Click to expand...

It is expensive by any standards, due to the numbers involved. And the F-22 radar only came with A2A modes, it's all the other modes that are causing problems obviously.

BMD said:
Aviation Week only gets declassified information, what they want you to believe and estimates.

Such information is more classified than the number of TRMs for sure.
Click to expand...

Actually it's not. It's mainly specs that will be classified, basic detection ranges against a particular type of target is not, it's public knowledge.

BMD said:
Neither am I, I'm talking about the fact that the F-22 and F-35 radar and passive detection systems are integrated and used together, allowing them to already know where the target is roughly before the radar is even used, reducing both the transmitted and received power requirements for detection and engagement. The Rafale's system is not interlinked in this way.
Click to expand...

The EW suite telling the radar where to look is far older than the F-22. The Rafale does way more than that.

But we aren't really discussing the Rafale. We are talking about the Typhoon vs Gripen E and why the Gripen E's avionics are a generation ahead and why Saab is better placed than Britain, which made its last fighter jet in the 70s, when it comes to making the next fighter jet.
 
randomradio said:
There's no way to say. It's a single-engine jet hence comes with limited electrical power. So efficiency is going to be more important than having more peak power.
Click to expand...
GaN means no sophisticated cooling system is required, so we can re route the power required for cooling system to the TRMs i guess. Am i right?
 
Hydra said:
GaN means no sophisticated cooling system is required, so we can re route the power required for cooling system to the TRMs i guess. Am i right?
Click to expand...

A good cooling system is always required 'cause the system's going to be used for 15-25 years until the next major upgrade.
 
Hydra said:
GaN means no sophisticated cooling system is required, so we can re route the power required for cooling system to the TRMs i guess. Am i right?
Click to expand...
Better to have a good cooling system, even with GaN, because it allows you to increase power emission and range. When I said it's easy to make a GaN antenna it's because if you modifie a GaS one you don't have to change the cooling system, you can reuse it.
 
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: Bon Plan and Picdelamirand-oil
Bon Plan said:
CATIA.....
Click to expand...
Yeah, and that's about it. Let's not talk about Ubisoft and their in game glitches.:D And it hardly compares to breadth of computing expertise in the US.
Lolwa said:
This is going to be a repeat of the typhoon fiasco. Looks like it was always a Brit problem rather than a German one..
Click to expand...
Look at the state of the Luftwaffe in terms of available aircraft and then rethink that statement. The UK should stick with Italy, too many cooks spoil the broth, see Eurofighter for details.
 
Last edited:
randomradio said:
It is expensive by any standards, due to the numbers involved. And the F-22 radar only came with A2A modes, it's all the other modes that are causing problems obviously.



Actually it's not. It's mainly specs that will be classified, basic detection ranges against a particular type of target is not, it's public knowledge.



The EW suite telling the radar where to look is far older than the F-22. The Rafale does way more than that.

But we aren't really discussing the Rafale. We are talking about the Typhoon vs Gripen E and why the Gripen E's avionics are a generation ahead and why Saab is better placed than Britain, which made its last fighter jet in the 70s, when it comes to making the next fighter jet.
Click to expand...
Not when you have a $700bn defence budget.

Right, so you won't tell your adversary how many modules (even without the module spec), but you will tell them key performance parameters. Sorry but I worked for BAE SYSTEMS and Typhoon aircraft performance specification was classified SECRET, even as an employee I couldn't view it because it wasn't my project, and you're tell me they'll give out accurate radar performance values willingly on the internet? :ROFLMAO:

They aren't actually fused together on the 'fale though, the F-22 radar automatically tracks in sync with the passive systems and performs a narrow search, the 'fale pilot has to point the aircraft in that direction.

Saab's radar comes from the UK and most of the other systems probably do as well. The relationship is well known, it traces back to the 1995-2005 when BAE SYSTEMS owned the majority share of Saab.
 
BMD said:
Not when you have a $700bn defence budget.
Click to expand...

And they still have a deficit.

BMD said:
Right, so you won't tell your adversary how many modules (even without the module spec), but you will tell them key performance parameters. Sorry but I worked for BAE SYSTEMS and Typhoon aircraft performance specification was classified SECRET, even as an employee I couldn't view it because it wasn't my project, and you're tell me they'll give out accurate radar performance values willingly on the internet? :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

Yes, basic detection ranges for radars are public knowledge.

BMD said:
They aren't actually fused together on the 'fale though, the F-22 radar automatically tracks in sync with the passive systems and performs a narrow search, the 'fale pilot has to point the aircraft in that direction.
Click to expand...

Even the LCA does that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom