Yeah, just like in VietNam your fighters saw first and killed first
Yeah, USAF is also dumbest cause they are developing NGAD despite so called invincibility of F-35
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
So that is your logic?Yeah, just like in VietNam your fighters saw first and killed first
Yeah, USAF is also dumbest cause they are developing NGAD despite so called invincibility of F-35
The Rafale is rubbish because France is building FCAS, with Germany and Spain?
You have to question yourself because he answered you and in his answer he tried to use the same logic as you to show its absurdity.
?? was there a translation error? I used the Rafale to show how silly he was.
In other news
An Israeli F-35 Has Given China Something to Think About
Noted analyst, Rebecca Grant, says an Israeli F-35I which shot down what’s believed to be a Houthi cruise missile has set a precedent which is “bad news” for China.
www.forbes.com
It's called throwing sht at the wall and see what sticks. They are desperate and are grasping at straws arguing for the sake of arguing hoping you get tired of them and don't respond which is a victory for them. Look how he deflects by bringing up a war and aircraft of that era instead of debating why his rafail is better in air to air by explaining its capabilities compared to F-35. He can't. He knows F-35 sensors are superior to rafale. He knows F-35 will always see enemy fighters first giving the F-35 air combat advantaged but they can't admit to that so they instead bring up Vietnam.
The superiority of the Rafale has been explained to you 10,000 times, but by principle on this subject you understand nothing, so there is no point in us explaining it to you a 10,001st time.
This is how it goes: Any F-22 of any block can defeat the F-35, but only the latest blocks of the F-22 can defeat the J-20A. And this is as per the USAF themselves. And this is the reason they gave when they wanted to get rid of 32 F-22s. Even a marine who has flown both jets claimed the F-35 isn't an air-to-air fighter.
Yeah, the F-35 has some advantages against older jets, but that's only restricted to older jets.
USAF: "The F-35 is so invincible that even with NGAD and B-21 we will only have parity with the Chinese."
Try and make that make sense using your extra brain cell.
That's still 2-3 years away.
Right now, the Rafale has better sensors 'cause they actually work. Maybe by June, the F-35's basic capabilities will enter the real world, what was supposed to happen by 2014. Then, 2 or 3 years later, the F-35 will get new sensors, like a GaN radar and additional EW antennas, and take a temporary lead. This will last until 2030-31 by which time the Rafale will introduce a new radar and EW architecture and once again retain their lead.
Where the F-35 shines is in its ability to carry bomb loads in greater numbers and with greater efficiency, with sensor design and placement and stealth more suited for use against SAMs.
By 2040 or so, when airframe design limitations catch up with the Rafale, requiring a replacement jet, and the F-35 undergoes a new modernization, that's when the F-35 has the potential to take the lead in air combat. So, effectively, the F-35 can become an all-round superior jet only 40 years after the Rafale was fielded. But long before then the F-35 will be superceded by NGAD, making this discussion moot, ie, the F-35 has been relegated to a mere strike jet already.
Some small calculations to compare the autonomy and payload of the F-35 and the Rafale.
Breguet's equation gives the range which is equal to [(V*L/D)/g*SFC]*[ln M_Initial - ln M_final] where V is the speed L is the lift D is the drag M is the mass and SFC is the specific consumption. We therefore see that autonomy depends on:
- The quantity of fuel transported.
- Aerodynamic efficiency (ratio between lift production and drag production).
- The efficiency with which fuel energy is transformed into useful work.
- The lightness of the structure in relation to the amount of fuel and payload it can carry.
We know the empty masses and the internal fuel:
Rafale C: 9850 kg and 5750 l which melts 4700 kg with a fuel density of 0.8174.
F-35 A: 13290 kg and 10127 l which melts 8278 kg with a fuel density of 0.8174.
For the SFC we have for the M88:
- Specific dry consumption: 80 kg/(kN⋅h)
- Specific consumption with PC: 170 kg/(kN⋅h)
- Specific dry consumption: 88.6 kg/(kN⋅h)
- Specific consumption with PC: 192 kg/(kN⋅h)
We have ln 14550 - ln 9850 = 0.39 and ln 21568 - ln 13290 = 0.566 and if we correct with the dry SFC (the ratio is approximately the same in post combustion which is rarely used anyway) we must compare 0.39 * 88.6 with 0.566 * 80 or 34.554 with 45.28, the ratio is 1.31 which shows a greater autonomy for the F-35 of 31% for planes carrying only their internal fuel and with the assumption that aerodynamic efficiency is the same.
But even with the same skill in Aerodynamics, the existence of a hold on the F-35 penalizes its aerodynamics to an extent that we will try to evaluate at the end of the following post
So when we put loads under the wings we modify the aerodynamics and that is a source of difficulty for the fan boys because you have to understand a little bit of what is happening and in the end you have to at least know how to make rules of three.
To start, I suggest you read this post:
View topic - Drag index calculation • F-16.net
The example being treated concerns the F-16 and the reference surface (300 ft^2) in question is the wing surface as is traditionally the case.
For the Rafale it is 492 ft^2.
To calculate the drag index of the Rafale we can put ourselves in the same conditions as the example, we therefore need the drag of the Rafale smooth at M 0.8 at sea level. This drag will be balanced by the thrust of the engines or these consume 44 kg of fuel per minute in these conditions, or 2640 kg per hour.
As at this speed we do not use post-combustion, the specific consumption is 0.80 kg/daN·h which gives a thrust of 3300 daN or 7425 lbf.
Calculation of the Rafale Drag index:
Reference surface S of the Rafale: 492 sq. ft^2.
Drag D of the smooth Rafale at 0.8 mach, at sea level: 7425 pounds.
D = Cd * q * S
Cd = D / q*S
q at .8 sea level is 947 lb/ sq ft
S = 492 sq ft^2
n/a Cd = 0.0159
Basic airplane drag index: 159
The index for a 2000 l tank is 20.5 and for a 1150 l tank it is 14.2.
We will now calculate the index of conformal tanks using the same principle as that which allowed me to calculate that of tanks but I only give this calculation once: the difference is that for tanks I suppose that Half of the fuel added by the tanks is used to compensate for the extra drag whereas for conformal tanks I guess it's only 1/4.
We first consider a smooth Rafale
Its range with a full tank of fuel is noted as X in km and a full tank of fuel is noted as Y in liters.
The consumption to travel 1km is therefore Z=Y/X
We now consider a Rafale with two conformal tanks, each containing y liters of fuel.
According to the rule it takes half a tank to compensate for the drag. The autonomy will be (Y+1.5y)/Z and the consumption for 1 km will be
Z1 = (Y+2y)/((Y+1.5y)/Z)
The consumption being proportional to the drag index, the increase in drag index for the plane is 159*((Z1/Z)-1)
Or Z1/Z= (Y+2y)/(Y+1.5y) = 1 +0.5 y/(Y+1.5y) and therefore the increase in the drag index is 159*0.5y/( Y+1.5y).
As the Rafale can carry 5750 l internally this gives:
For a 1150 l tank: 159*575/(5750 + 1725) = 12.23 and as it is for the plane this is half per tank or 6.12.
How are drag indexes used?
Usually we say that the drag index of a Rafale carrying a GBU 12 is 159+4.27= 163.27 and if the range of a smooth Rafale is 1850 km then that of a Rafale carrying a GBU 12 will be 1850*159/163.27 = 1801.61.
In fact, it is the drag that increases and the Rafale is forced to increase its thrust to compensate. It is because we only have only one specific consumption that the rule of three works (but it is an approximation), if the specific consumption varied, it would have to be taken into account.
With this method we calculate the consumption for each segment when loads are released.
This data allows us to calculate interesting things for example we know that the Ferry Range is 3700 Km with 3 tanks of 2000 l :
We therefore have an index of 159 +3*20.5 =220.5 and a fuel volume of 6000 +5750 = 11750 l
At index 159 we could do 3700km *220.5/159 =X but with only 5750l we would do
5750*X/11650 =5750*3700*220.5/(159*11650)=2532.5km which means that the F-35 could cover 1.31 times this distance or 3318 km with our previous calculation which did not take into account the hold penalty.
We therefore have a theoretical F-35 which does not have a hold for which we will try to calculate the index, knowing that we will then calculate the index of the hold which will be added to this theoretical index.
The F-35 will consume 8278 kg to fly 31% further than a Rafale which consumes 4700 kg. To fly the same distance it will therefore consume 8278/1.31 = 6319 kg. Furthermore, the specific consumptions are not the same and as we only want to measure aerodynamic effects we must still correct the mass of fuel required by assuming that we have installed engines of the same efficiency in both aircraft:
the new mass is therefore 6319 * 80/88.6 = 5706
In the Rafale frame of reference the Index of the F-35 is therefore 159*5706/4700 = 193, but we must put ourselves in the frame of reference of the F-35 which has a wing area of 460 sq. ft^2. and so the Index will be: 193 * 460/492 = 180.5
To calculate the hold index we will consider the combat range of the air-air configuration which is 1410 km or 2820 km round trip.
We have 3318*180.5/X = 2820 where X is the drag index with the hold.
We have X = 212.38 and the hold index is 212.38 - 180.5 = 31.88
To start, I suggest you read this post:
View topic - Drag index calculation • F-16.net
The example being treated concerns the F-16 and the reference surface (300 ft^2) in question is the wing surface as is traditionally the case.
For the Rafale it is 492 ft^2.
To calculate the drag index of the Rafale we can put ourselves in the same conditions as the example, we therefore need the drag of the Rafale smooth at M 0.8 at sea level. This drag will be balanced by the thrust of the engines or these consume 44 kg of fuel per minute in these conditions, or 2640 kg per hour.
As at this speed we do not use post-combustion, the specific consumption is 0.80 kg/daN·h which gives a thrust of 3300 daN or 7425 lbf.
Calculation of the Rafale Drag index:
Reference surface S of the Rafale: 492 sq. ft^2.
Drag D of the smooth Rafale at 0.8 mach, at sea level: 7425 pounds.
D = Cd * q * S
Cd = D / q*S
q at .8 sea level is 947 lb/ sq ft
S = 492 sq ft^2
n/a Cd = 0.0159
Basic airplane drag index: 159
The index for a 2000 l tank is 20.5 and for a 1150 l tank it is 14.2.
We will now calculate the index of conformal tanks using the same principle as that which allowed me to calculate that of tanks but I only give this calculation once: the difference is that for tanks I suppose that Half of the fuel added by the tanks is used to compensate for the extra drag whereas for conformal tanks I guess it's only 1/4.
We first consider a smooth Rafale
Its range with a full tank of fuel is noted as X in km and a full tank of fuel is noted as Y in liters.
The consumption to travel 1km is therefore Z=Y/X
We now consider a Rafale with two conformal tanks, each containing y liters of fuel.
According to the rule it takes half a tank to compensate for the drag. The autonomy will be (Y+1.5y)/Z and the consumption for 1 km will be
Z1 = (Y+2y)/((Y+1.5y)/Z)
The consumption being proportional to the drag index, the increase in drag index for the plane is 159*((Z1/Z)-1)
Or Z1/Z= (Y+2y)/(Y+1.5y) = 1 +0.5 y/(Y+1.5y) and therefore the increase in the drag index is 159*0.5y/( Y+1.5y).
As the Rafale can carry 5750 l internally this gives:
For a 1150 l tank: 159*575/(5750 + 1725) = 12.23 and as it is for the plane this is half per tank or 6.12.
How are drag indexes used?
Usually we say that the drag index of a Rafale carrying a GBU 12 is 159+4.27= 163.27 and if the range of a smooth Rafale is 1850 km then that of a Rafale carrying a GBU 12 will be 1850*159/163.27 = 1801.61.
In fact, it is the drag that increases and the Rafale is forced to increase its thrust to compensate. It is because we only have only one specific consumption that the rule of three works (but it is an approximation), if the specific consumption varied, it would have to be taken into account.
With this method we calculate the consumption for each segment when loads are released.
This data allows us to calculate interesting things for example we know that the Ferry Range is 3700 Km with 3 tanks of 2000 l :
We therefore have an index of 159 +3*20.5 =220.5 and a fuel volume of 6000 +5750 = 11750 l
At index 159 we could do 3700km *220.5/159 =X but with only 5750l we would do
5750*X/11650 =5750*3700*220.5/(159*11650)=2532.5km which means that the F-35 could cover 1.31 times this distance or 3318 km with our previous calculation which did not take into account the hold penalty.
We therefore have a theoretical F-35 which does not have a hold for which we will try to calculate the index, knowing that we will then calculate the index of the hold which will be added to this theoretical index.
The F-35 will consume 8278 kg to fly 31% further than a Rafale which consumes 4700 kg. To fly the same distance it will therefore consume 8278/1.31 = 6319 kg. Furthermore, the specific consumptions are not the same and as we only want to measure aerodynamic effects we must still correct the mass of fuel required by assuming that we have installed engines of the same efficiency in both aircraft:
the new mass is therefore 6319 * 80/88.6 = 5706
In the Rafale frame of reference the Index of the F-35 is therefore 159*5706/4700 = 193, but we must put ourselves in the frame of reference of the F-35 which has a wing area of 460 sq. ft^2. and so the Index will be: 193 * 460/492 = 180.5
To calculate the hold index we will consider the combat range of the air-air configuration which is 1410 km or 2820 km round trip.
We have 3318*180.5/X = 2820 where X is the drag index with the hold.
We have X = 212.38 and the hold index is 212.38 - 180.5 = 31.88
Last edited:
The F-35's aerodynamics is fine in the subsonic regime, it's less draggy than the F-16. And the difference becomes even greater with payload.
And 2 new cores are coming, so new SFC numbers, even higher range, decreased maintenance etc.
These are relative differences, not absolute. Air forces concern themselves with absolute numbers.
For example, Rafale does 3700Km with 3 drop tanks. But the F-35 could do that much with internal fuel alone once the two new engine cores become available. Then add range from fuel tanks, even CFTs. So a 2000Km mission is impossible for the Rafale, but possible for the F-35. Similarly, in some cases, more sorties are required to accomplish some missions compared to the F-35 'cause of the difference in bomb load.
Fuel efficiency of new cores could reverse the numbers, when you consider the F-35 could match the Rafale's triple tank ferry range with only internal fuel.
External carriage
0:57
take a moment to point out you know take
0:59
a look at this picture it's pretty bad
1:02
you know I call it the bring it or go to
war picture what we have here is a full
external carriage of
aim nine X's and GBu-32 across the board
and what you don't
see is what we're carrying inside the
bay and those vapes are coming because
we're breaking the sound barrier we've
1:20
got a full weapons complement and we're
still going Mach 1 plus ...
Last edited:
So you are saying if someone builds a new plane like france is...The Rafale is rubbish because France is building FCAS, with Germany and Spain. Got it, I understand now..
Can Fafale even carry 6 1000lb bombs and 4 air to air missiles and fly mach 1-plus?
Rafale in clean configuration in the A model its top speed is mach 1.8 the current model is soooo much heavier and hasn't had a thrust upgrade so logic dictates current Rafael can't reach mach 1.8 in clean config. Who are these cheese eaters trying to fool here, eh?
Can Fafale even carry 6 1000lb bombs and 4 air to air missiles and fly mach 1-plus?
NO. that was an easy answer. They can't carry the fuel with tanks and bombs, that the f-35 can carry, let alone go mach. Like all the 4/4.5 gen with fuel tanks and bombs, they are subsonic. I was surprised that the F-35 could, it really is a step above.
So you are saying if someone builds a new plane like france is...The Rafale is rubbish because France is building FCAS, with Germany and Spain. Got it, I understand now..
You do realize there's an almost 45 to 50-year gap between the two right? The Rafale will quite literally be replaced by it.
France is building FCAS as a direct replacement, whereas NGAD will replace the F-35 by role, possibly in just 5 years versus 45-50 years for the Rafale.
Anyway, that wasn't the point of my post. What it means is the F-35 won't be competitive with the Chinese when the USAF thinks even NGAD and B-21 will only give them parity. It's not a very flattering place to be in for the F-35. Rafale is practically unrivaled today and will at least be a match with its peers from 2030-40. Being superceded after 30 years by other jets is a good thing. But the Rafale even as an older design supercedes the F-35 today. The F-35 quite literally needs a full scale modernization to compete.
Still living in vietnam era?Yeah, just like in VietNam your fighters saw first and killed first
Yeah, USAF is also dumbest cause they are developing NGAD despite so called invincibility of F-35