Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
F/A 18 doesn't have an irst and won't carry one in most scenarios. The OSF of Rafale will pretty much see the f/A 18. Now since both have similar RCS it's a matter of who sees first and with the OSF Rafale has the higher chance.
They don't that's why we bought them.
Exactly what i meant : a dummy antenna presented for an airshow and cooling elements counted. Real photos of the antenna are blurred. In 2013, CEAM disclosed the real number : around 1000. Btw, RBE2 has a real time 3D mapping capability for ground following flights. Doese it make RBE2 AESA superior to AN/APG 79? No. Exactly as GMTT/GMTI modes do not make APG superior to RBE2.I'm talking about fighters are in service now the F4 won't enter service until mid 2020s, bruh. As for F-18 I was talking about the latest block 2 blockIII just entered service and is more capable.
Thales makes it clear.
The AESA RBE2 is the very high performance radar designed for the omnirole Rafale fighter. It has been designed in close collaboration with Dassault Aviation and DGA -French defense procurement agency- to meet expectations of Air Forces by combining advanced fire control radar detection and target tracking needs thanks to innovative technologies.
In a radar, an antenna is said to be «active» when it has a single subassembly for amplification of radiated power and pre-amplification of received power. This is achieved by the antenna front end, which comprises an array of several hundreds transmit/receive modules (T/R modules). By controlling each T/R module individually, the active antenna can steer the radar beam at speeds of an electronic chip. This is called «electronic scanning in space» and effectively allows the radar to overcome the mechanical constraints of steering a single antenna. It also allows the radar to track multiple targets simultaneously in all directions. The active antenna thus replaces the conventional antenna and its mechanical steering system, along with the radar transmitter and the first stage of signal reception.
Active Electronically Scanned Array - AESA RBE2 radar
The AESA RBE2 is the very high performance radar for the omnirole Rafale combat aircraft. It has been designed in close collaboration with Dassault Aviation and DGA -French defence procurement agency- to meet expectations of Air Forces by combining advanced fire control radar detection and...www.thalesgroup.com
"SEVERAL HUNDREDS" it says.
Shall we count?
View attachment 22249
You calling Thales a liar?
Oh and F4 standard Rafale was recently inducted in Air Force, and DGA has proceeded to testing it in May. AND it displays a GMTT/GMTI mode...
Last edited:
I think they do. And it’s supplied by LM
Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet Takes Flight With New Infrared Search And Track Pod
The infrared sensor is part of the Navy's Block III upgrade program and will give its Super Hornets much needed new air-to-air capabilities.
www.thedrive.com
It's a pod. It's integrated to the airframe some thing like thisI think they do. And it’s supplied by LM
They also have all kinds of other advanced sensors too supplied by other US oems that can be mounted externally on ad hoc basis. That’s why USN considers it very mission flexible.Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet Takes Flight With New Infrared Search And Track Pod
The infrared sensor is part of the Navy's Block III upgrade program and will give its Super Hornets much needed new air-to-air capabilities.
This is because USAF doesn't use irst in its air doctrine in general and hasn't ever needed it because of their avionics superiority. Also it's still behind the OSF which is a generation ahead of the su-57's 101KS-O. You can see how badly it will do against the Rafale.
Why don't you provide a brief introduction of yourself to @WHOHE
Otherwise he'd be under the impression you're just another defense enthusiast.
I think they do. And it’s supplied by LM
Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet Takes Flight With New Infrared Search And Track Pod
The infrared sensor is part of the Navy's Block III upgrade program and will give its Super Hornets much needed new air-to-air capabilities.
LM has moved on to Fifth gen EOTS on F35. And can make is backward compatible with Fourth gen fighters.
One benefit of external pods is that the sensor can be rapidly upgraded and integrated in quick time.
Not a single fighter plane or offensive platform...
All the above US weapons systems have alternatives with our armed forces. During war even commercial planes and choppers can be used for transport hence these don't carry any restrictions for use. M777s too can't be blocked from usage and not High end weapons for which we can't service without OEM support.
The only offensive platform in this list is Apache helicopter which are not in huge numbers and won't affect even if grounded during wartime as soon LCH Will come in numbers.
Fighter planes are a complete different case as they need OEM support during war for spares, software updates to integrate new weapon like we did to Mirage 2K during Kargil war to carry PGMs. These can be denied and infact block fighters by blocking access to fighters especially F-35 which can be controlled by alis software, by US govt of that time if that US government doesn't want India to punish Pakistan if it becomes a US Lapdog again or against any US interest. Hence IAF is skeptical of any US fighter planes in its inventory..
Last edited:
Pls stop expecting anything logical from Paddy. He's as disingenuous as anybody else out here but much more clumsy & stupid than others with an agenda. Faux pas to him is the name of another weird French dish.
One must pay close attention to the F-35 thread for Rafale information and Rafale thread for F-35 information.
How will it jam when the OSF could just see the f 18, even if we consider that apg79 can successfully jam an aesa radar it still doesn't change much when a lock could be gained without the radar.That's a comparison done by a random guy called Picard. You can't just look at missile range, it's about radar range vs EW too, and with GaN the larger APG-79(V)4 beats the RBE2 AESA and any future proposed variant of it that could possibly fit in a Rafale. Since the APG-79(V)4 is also configured for EA there is no chance in hell of a Rafale winning BVR, even with AAMs that can reach the moon.
Much like a Spectra with GaN.
防衛費5.4兆円 ８年連続で過去最大を更新 概算要求の主要兵器を全取得へ 軍拡がさらに加速 ：東京新聞デジタル
政府が２４日に閣議決定した２０２２年度予算案で、防衛費は前年度当初予算から５８３億円増（１・１％増）の５兆４００５億円に上り、８年連続...www.tokyo-np.co.jp
Japanese defense budget released - they will buy 12 more F-35s, 8 A versions and 4 B versions - and will also will make a longer range Type 12 Ashm which could be launched from the ground, and potentially the P-1.
F-18E block II's APG-79(V) not APG-79. APG-79 is almost a 20 years old its been upgraded since then.
IRST is relatively short range and the range information it provides can be dubious, by then the Rafale will already be shot down. And you think OSF can outrange that huge pod F-18Es can carry?
They counted the modules of the APG-79 on f16.net, the count was 1368, for the Rafale it's 840. And the (V)4/5 radar in service now has GaN modules too.
See above, the SH's IRST is likely way better than the Rafale's.
So it stands to reason that a small aircraft radar, especially a very small one, like that on the Rafale, will be jammed to the extent that Meteors become useless against APG-79(V)4/5.
That looks the same size as the OLS or any IRST located on the nose.
That's not how it works. Rather it depends on how the array is choreographed. A fighter array performs just one or two functions at a time, so a regular EW antenna is enough, whereas large radars can perform multiple functions at once, since its greater number of T/R modules can be divided many more times.
I mean, if your ground radar has a 3mx3m antenna, then you can divide it into 9 1mx1m antennas to create 9 main beams. So then your fighter radar has enough T/R resources to create 9 beams for EA whereas your dedicated EW suite can only generate a much smaller number of beams at a time.
Whether the Meteor becomes useless or not depends far more on the quality of the hardware and software rather than the size of the antenna. Stuff like this can only be discovered during evaluations, exercises or war. It's outside the realms of speculation.
“These end-user requirements and protection of US defense equipment are universal, non-negotiable"Not a single fighter plane or offensive platform...
All the above US weapons systems have alternatives with our armed forces. During war even commercial planes and choppers can be used for transport hence these don't carry any restrictions for use. M777s too can't be blocked from usage and not High end weapons for which we can't service without OEM support.
The only offensive platform in this list is Apache helicopter which are not in huge numbers and won't affect even if grounded during wartime as soon LCH Will come in numbers.
Fighter planes are a complete different case as they need OEM support during war for spares, software updates to integrate new weapon like we did to Mirage 2K during Kargil war to carry PGMs. These can be denied and infact block fighters by blocking access to fighters especially F-35 which can be controlled by alis software, by US govt of that time if that US government doesn't want India to punish Pakistan if it becomes a US Lapdog again or against any US interest. Hence IAF is skeptical of any US fighter planes in its inventory..
You have an end-user agreement. You can't pick and choose what you will abide by.
The EUM agreement is for the protection of American IP, it has nothing to do with how a weapon system can be used.