MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions

[Nikhil]

Yesh, you don't know basic facts and math. Forget replying to me.

Why don't you enlighten me with your superior facts and math.

I would like to clarify that 400 km radar range is in narrow FOV for F 22..... Between 200- 250km in case of Rafale.

 

[Bon Plan]

again with will have. I wonder why you did not quote the whole part ?

and here's the pic of that supposed 1000+ TRM AESA radar which went into the first rafale.

View attachment 16400

This pic is officially from Thales showing 111th production rafale with RBE 2 AESA.
TRM count is 838 period.

For the last time,
The soles pictures of electronic active scanning RBE2 are the "AA" ones. The prototyp.

 

[Bon Plan]

a Radar effectiveness can be gauged by its power aperture product.

Between two AESA radars given everything else is same ( e.g level of TRM or other technology being used )..... the one with higher PAP will have better detection, range and jamming burn through performance.

Since RBE 2 AESA is small with less TRM compared to AN/APG 81 and AN/APG 77.....it will have inferior resolution , LPI characteristics , ECM immunity etc compared to later.
TRM count determines sensitivity, beam steering and finally directivity.

RBE 2 is not a bad radar it's just inferior to American one.

The number of T/R modules is important,
The quality of T/R modules is important (42% increase form US ones to European ones between prototyp and serial RBE2)
The quality of the signal treatment is essential.

J11D, J10C, J16 and Chinese Su 35 can beat rafale anyday.

A F5 can beat a F22 anyday.....

Be serious Bro.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

The F-35's radar is twice as big as the Rafale's radar, but has only 300-350 more T/R modules.

The F-16 Block 60's radar is 1.5 times bigger than the Rafale's radar, but has the same number of T/R modules.

That should tell you all you need to know about the current quality of operational American radars compared to Europe.

The F-22's radar is advertised to do 200-240Km against a 1m2 target, which roughly translates to 260-310 Km against a 3m2 target. The Rafale's PESA radar is advertised to do 140Km against a 3m2 target, and the AESA has apparently doubled that range to 280Km against a 3m2 target. Both are 'advertised' figures, which means both radars are basically on par with each other.

The Americans now have the same type of T/R modules as Europe, but none of them are on operational fighters due to costs. The new modules would have taken the F-22's radar range to 400Km class, competing with the new Russian and Chinese radars, but the USAF is willing to wait for a GaN upgrade instead.

So the current F-22's radar demonstrates a similar capability as the much smaller Rafale's AESA, even though the RBE-2AA is 2.5 times smaller than the APG-77. This shows how advanced the Europeans really are. And interestingly, the Rafale and F-22 are due to get a GaN radar upgrade at pretty much the same time, ie, 2025.

While more modules would be better in absolute , there are other parameters coming into play . Designing the radar and considering the power available, there is an optimum beyond which adding more modules would only provide limited performance increase, while introducing additional challenge.

In the real world, a radar is often limited by power generation and especially by cooling. Adding extra modules isn't going to give you jack if you're limited by your cooling circuit. For example, the F-22 radar used to be limited to max one minute at full power before it would overheat.

In the real world, a radar in scanning mode isn't going to use a very narrow beam because it would take forever for its beam to go over potential targets. A radar that scans a place once every 5 minutes isn't very useful.

It is normally the highest frequency and the maximum scan angle that determines the maximum element distance in the array (the grating lobe criterion). For quadratic grids and 90 degree scan angle the maximum distance is approx. 0,5 lambda (typically 15 mm on a fighter).

So in terms of detection, extra modules present diminishing returns. Unless you move to a larger platform with more power and multiple arrays for detection and tracking, extra modules aren't that useful.

And if one wish to calculate the number of T/R module that could be accommodated in a size/area of antenna, you can use one method in Skolnik's Introduction to Radar System 3rd edition. Which assume 100% "fill factor" (entire face is covered by elements) With following equation :

Nt=(4*A)/Lambda^2

Where :
Nt=Number of elements
A=Antenna Physical Area

RBE2 size of Antenna is around 60 cm and X band imply that lambda is between 2.5 cm and 3.75 cm, if we replace A by 3.14 * (D^2)/4 area of antenna Nt become 3.14 (D/Lambda)^2
For Nt =1000 we find (D/Lamda) ^2 = 1000/3.14 ==> Lamda ^2 = 3600/318.31 ==> Lambda = 3.363 cm which is in the range of X band.
Some dude will say that the antenna is only 55cm so you will have to replace 3600 by 3025 and you will find Lambda = 3.083 cm which is again in the X band range. All that to show that there is no difficulties to make a X band radar with 1000 T/R fitting in the nose of Rafale.

 

[Nikhil]

For the last time,
The soles pictures of electronic active scanning RBE2 are the "AA" ones. The prototyp.

Cool story bro cool story.

The number of T/R modules is important,
The quality of T/R modules is important (42% increase form US ones to European ones between prototyp and serial RBE2)

no proof of that. even if it is true.
US probably supplied old notch radiator to UAE as you claimed this happen back in 2005-2006. AN/APG 81 had it first flight in August 2005. AN/APG 77 (v)1 came much later.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

From AW&ST

BERLIN—
The French Air Force has developed a road map for its Dassault Rafale that could see the fighter serving on the front line until 2070.

In addition to a new, nuclear-tipped missile in the 2030s, the air force wants to add more conventional weapons, avionics, sensors and connectivity to the Euro-Canard that will pave the way for the New Generation Fighter (NGF) being developed with Germany and Spain as part of the Future Combat Aircraft System (FCAS).

The French Navy, operating the Rafale from the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier, is also aligned with the plan.
Such a commitment could be music to the ears of potential export customers. The Rafale is in contention for tenders in Finland, India and Switzerland, and would calm customer fears they might be left with orphaned, expensive fleets.
By comparison, the Eurofighter operating nations have said they want to fly later tranches of the fighter beyond 2040, but none have said, at least publicly, how far beyond.

“The Rafale will be the testbed for new technologies,” Maj. Gen. Frederic Parisot told the International Fighter Conference here Nov. 13. “The F4 upgrade in 2025 will lay the initial building blocks of connected combat, expanding the connectivity and software tools for networked operations.”

An important factor is that air force commanders foresee a need to have a second, cheaper-to-operate platform for operations in which the threats are less complex. Parisot points to the ongoing fast jet operations in Africa using various versions of the Mirage 2000. Once the last Mirage 2000 is retired in 2035, the Rafale will take on that mantle, leaving the NGF to deal with the high-end mission.

Additional aircraft will also be purchased; around 60 more will be delivered over the next decade, replacing early model aircraft.

Rafale upgrades are phased. The Rafale community is currently being equipped with the F3R upgrade, which delivers the integration of the MBDA Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile and the Thales Talios targeting pod, which delivers increased electro-optical acuity and enhanced stabilization. The French Navy is expected to deploy with the F3R-equipped Rafale M in February.

The F4 upgrade, planned for 2023, will introduce the new Mica NG air-to-air missile as well secure radios and satellite communication systems.
Updates to the RBE2 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and the Spectra electronic warfare system are also planned.
The proposed F5 upgrade, planned for 2030, allows for the integration of the ASN4G missile, replacing the ASMP-A. It also paves the way for the use of remote carriers—the unmanned air systems that will complement the FCAS—performing surveillance and electronic warfare while flying ahead of or alongside the Rafale or NGF.
Perhaps the most significant upgrade in F5 will be what Parisot calls a virtual cognitive assistant—an artificial intelligence system capable of reconfiguring aircraft systems in the event of a failure, alerting the pilots to tactical situations, and advising on new routings.
Parisot likened the cognitive assistant to Iron Man’s “Jarvis” from the Marvel comics. Jarvis communicates with Iron Man through voice activation, a feature Parisot says the cognitive assistant will also require, noting it should operate “intuitively without excess chatter ... with a high level of trust, speakability and intelligibility.”
Most crucially, it will monitor pilots’ brain, heart and eye activity, looking out for what Parisot calls “cognitive overload.”
If detected, the system will deliver “cognitive countermeasures,” he explains, with the AI taking back tasks from the pilot and reducing the level of information on visual displays.
Work on the artificial intelligence is already underway through the Man-Machine Teaming advanced study program launched by Thales and Dassault in March 2018.
A critical element in being able to accelerate the upgrade process for the aircraft is ongoing work to separate the aircraft’s flight-critical software from its tactical systems. This is an approach adopted by Saab for its Gripen NG that allows upgrades to onboard systems to be delivered without the need for costly and time-consuming recertification. Additional connectivity could allow mission data to be updated in real time from electronic intelligence gathering such as the planned CUGE platform to replace the Transall Gabriel Sigint aircraft.
Parisot acknowledges the significant efforts underway to support collaborative operations. But he notes that elements of the Rafale force need to be able to operate in a “nonconnected mode of action ... this is critical for the deterrent mission.”
F6 and F7 upgrade plans are also envisioned and will be aligned with the upgrade path for the NGF.
Several studies are also underway to extend the Rafale’s airframe life from the current 5,000 hr. up to 7,500 and potentially 9,000 hr.
There are also studies taking place into whether additional power could be gleaned from the SafranM88 engine when the Rafale receives the new ASN4G.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

 

[randomradio]

While more modules would be better in absolute , there are other parameters coming into play . Designing the radar and considering the power available, there is an optimum beyond which adding more modules would only provide limited performance increase, while introducing additional challenge.

In the real world, a radar is often limited by power generation and especially by cooling. Adding extra modules isn't going to give you jack if you're limited by your cooling circuit. For example, the F-22 radar used to be limited to max one minute at full power before it would overheat.

In the real world, a radar in scanning mode isn't going to use a very narrow beam because it would take forever for its beam to go over potential targets. A radar that scans a place once every 5 minutes isn't very useful.

It is normally the highest frequency and the maximum scan angle that determines the maximum element distance in the array (the grating lobe criterion). For quadratic grids and 90 degree scan angle the maximum distance is approx. 0,5 lambda (typically 15 mm on a fighter).

So in terms of detection, extra modules present diminishing returns. Unless you move to a larger platform with more power and multiple arrays for detection and tracking, extra modules aren't that useful.

And if one wish to calculate the number of T/R module that could be accommodated in a size/area of antenna, you can use one method in Skolnik's Introduction to Radar System 3rd edition. Which assume 100% "fill factor" (entire face is covered by elements) With following equation :

Nt=(4*A)/Lambda^2

Where :
Nt=Number of elements
A=Antenna Physical Area

RBE2 size of Antenna is around 60 cm and X band imply that lambda is between 2.5 cm and 3.75 cm, if we replace A by 3.14 * (D^2)/4 area of antenna Nt become 3.14 (D/Lambda)^2
For Nt =1000 we find (D/Lamda) ^2 = 1000/3.14 ==> Lamda ^2 = 3600/318.31 ==> Lambda = 3.363 cm which is in the range of X band.
Some dude will say that the antenna is only 55cm so you will have to replace 3600 by 3025 and you will find Lambda = 3.083 cm which is again in the X band range. All that to show that there is no difficulties to make a X band radar with 1000 T/R fitting in the nose of Rafale.

I have no idea why the number of T/R modules for the Rafale is still being debated even in 2020.

It's like how Uttam was released with 700+ T/R modules or the Russians released the Zhuk-AE with 600 T/R modules, never understanding the fact that these are prototypes and the number of T/R modules will increase in production models, especially when newer, more advanced T/R modules are used.

 

[randomradio]

Several studies are also underway to extend the Rafale’s airframe life from the current 5,000 hr. up to 7,500 and potentially 9,000 hr.

It's still not done? One assumes it would have reached 7000 hours of testing by the time F4 is released.

If MMRCA 2.0 happens with F4, it's likely we will have to sit out the F5 phase, although F5 software improvements will be possible.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

It's still not done? One assumes it would have reached 7000 hours of testing by the time F4 is released.

I wonder if it is not a misinterpretation by the American journalist, because I have always read 7500 hours for Rafale B and C and 6500 for Rafale M. The mistake may be due to the fact that some Rafales are nearly 20 years old and that normally that makes them approach 5000 hours of flight.

 

[Bon Plan]

US probably supplied old notch radiator to UAE as you claimed this happen back in 2005-2006.

1) UAE is a very demanding customer.... not possible to sell them old junks.
2) I never claimed such a thing. I only said that the RBE2 with US modules didn't demonstrate a range able to satisfy UAE. So Thales studied a solution so as to increas, with the sames modules, the output from 10kw to 14kw. Ultimatelly with US modules, an increase in range of more than 40% vs US modules was demonstrated. It was more than the UAE request.

 

[randomradio]

I wonder if it is not a misinterpretation by the American journalist, because I have always read 7500 hours for Rafale B and C and 6500 for Rafale M. The mistake may be due to the fact that some Rafales are nearly 20 years old and that normally that makes them approach 5000 hours of flight.

That's what I thought as well. In a few years the Rafale-Ms have to come in for MLUs. If service life certification has not exceeded 5000 hours yet, then an MLU will become pointless, so that doesn't make sense.

MKI got certified with full 6000 hours back in 2014, ie, just 10 years after introduction. Granted, it was a modernisation of an older aircraft, but the older Su-30 could only do 4000 hours, maybe not even that. So it could either be a mistake from the journo or it's possible Rafale-B/C are certified for 5000 hours and Rafale-M may have been certified for 6500 hours.

 

[Nikhil]

1) UAE is a very demanding customer.... not possible to sell them old junks.
2) I never claimed such a thing. I only said that the RBE2 with US modules didn't demonstrate a range able to satisfy UAE. So Thales studied a solution so as to increas, with the sames modules, the output from 10kw to 14kw. Ultimatelly with US modules, an increase in range of more than 40% vs US modules was demonstrated. It was more than the UAE request.

that probably because US supplied old notch antenna array while French supplied new notch TSA which are being used in RBE 2 AESA offering far higher bandwidth and better antenna gain thus increasing range despite it's tiny size.

Vivaldi-consatant antenna array on RBE 2 AESA.

you should compare apple to Apple.

 

[screambowl]

The number of T/R modules is important,

number of TR modules basically defines circumference of the radar coverage. 90° 145° 180° 270° in different orientation of the aircraft and sensitivity to weak signals and radiation pattern.

The quality of the signal treatment is essential.

That's amplification. same out put power(ERP) but increased signal strength. More over there are other factors like destructive/blanketing interference, weather, speed of aircraft which affects the range.

For eg: a 1000watt transmitter feeding an antenna with a gain of 4 (6 dBi) will have the same signal strength in the direction of its main lobe, and thus the same ERP and EIRP, as a 4,000-watt transmitter feeding an antenna with a gain of 1 (0 dBi)

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

RAVEL reconfigures the french Rafale Operational Condition Maintenance (OCM)

Awarded six months ago by the Direction de la maintenance aéronautique (DMAé) to Dassault Aviation, the RAVEL contract - or VErticaLIsed RAfale - is targeting the in-depth reorganisation of support for the French combat aircraft. This ten-year contract "symbolises the new generation support contracts" and meets the ambitions laid out by the French Armed Forces Minister Florence Parly when she presented the aviation Operational Condition Maintenance (OCM) reforms in December 2017.

All of the support operations for the aircraft and its equipment are now the responsibility of a single contractor, Dassault Aviation. The only exceptions are the seats and engines, for which maintenance has been entrusted to Service industriel de l'aéronautique (SIAé) and Safran respectively. "With this contract, the company is continuing the through-life support it launched over fifteen years ago, expanding the scope and increasing the Rafales' level of commitment and availability", explains the aircraft manufacturer in an internal document.

​

Dassault Aviation has set up logistical one-stop shops at the aircraft' home bases (Landivisiau, Mont-de-Marsan and Saint-Dizier), in particular to manage stocks, spare parts, accessories and equipment and to provide on-site logistical and technical support. The contract also provides for the aircraft manufacturer taking charge of the support engineering aspects, comprising central technical assistance with airworthiness monitoring, damage processing and repair solutions, but also the creation of a central "integrated Government-industry" technical platform, based in Bordeaux and tasked with implementing the contract. The engineering services also comprise the equipment testability, maintainability and reliability performance analysis. "RAVEL provides the opportunity to make tangible digital progress", explains Dassault Aviation. Among the solutions developed under this contract is a Rafale Fleet information system, "a stock and equipment maintenance tasks manager, connected to the new Field6 documentary viewer". This will replace the technical and logistical systems which are currently being used by the French armed forces. At the same time, the aircraft manufacturer has also developed a big data platform, which is tasked with connecting all data relative to fleet use. This will "monitor the performances of the RAVEL contract, generate feedback and feed into the predictive maintenance algorithms". Dassault Aviation's annual estimates over the duration of the contract provide for 3 200 to 4 000 repairs per year, 700 to 1 000 general services and 150 000 to 180 000 consumables delivered. This first verticalised contract, which will be the template for future armed forces aircraft OCM contracts, will bring others in its wake. Dassault Aviation is therefore targeting "over the coming months" the signature of global contracts for the Atlantique 2, Alphajet and Mirage 2000.

 

[jk007]

@randomradio - After the current antics by China. There will be realisation that China can not be humoured with huge trade deficits etc......and I believe that India will fill up the squadron strength with (relatively) cheap imports [possibly F-16]. Would you agree?

Also, French may be asked to help with price of Rafale [if possible]. Do you agree?

 

[randomradio]

@randomradio - After the current antics by China. There will be realisation that China can not be humoured with huge trade deficits etc......and I believe that India will fill up the squadron strength with (relatively) cheap imports [possibly F-16]. Would you agree?

Definitely, most definitely should not buy strategic combat systems from America. They are cancer.

So no fighter jets, tanks/IFVs, warships etc. Nothing where they feel they have some control over how we use their equipment. They have excellent force multipliers, also transports, and we need to stick with those in the meantime, until we can start building our own stuff.

Also, French may be asked to help with price of Rafale [if possible]. Do you agree?

It's already the cheapest rate possible.

Indigenisation is the only way forward for affordable stuff.

 

[Bon Plan]

Also, French may be asked to help with price of Rafale [if possible]. Do you agree?

The fixed costs for 72 and maybe 96 Rafale are already paid :
- Indian spec,
- 2 air bases accomodation (In France an air base can receive nearly 50 jets, as Nancy for M2000D or Saint Dizier for Rafale).

So any new batch of 36 to 60 bird may be sold in the 90 to 100€ million/jet. Maybe less if partially produced and fully assembled in India in a private aerospace custler to avoid the lazy and costly HAL.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

The fixed costs for 72 and maybe 96 Rafale are already paid :
- Indian spec,
- 2 air bases accomodation (In France an air base can receive nearly 50 jets, as Nancy for M2000D or Saint Dizier for Rafale).

So any new batch of 36 to 60 bird may be sold in the 90 to 100€ million/jet. Maybe less if partially produced and fully assembled in India in a private aerospace custler to avoid the lazy and costly HAL.

36 Rafale At F-3R standard, but able to be upgraded to F-4.2 with only the cost of equipments, will be the following:

• 3.4 Billion for the planes
• 0.8 Billion for weapon
• 0.35 Billion for performance Based logistic (for 5 years)

The total is 4.55 Billion with a 75% availability garanty and an objective of 90%.

 

[_Anonymous_]

36 Rafale At F-3R standard, but able to be upgraded to F-4.2 with only the cost of equipments, will be the following:

• 3.4 Billion for the planes
• 0.8 Billion for weapon
• 0.35 Billion for performance Based logistic (for 5 years)

The total is 4.55 Billion with a 75% availability garanty and an objective of 90%.

You mean the next tranche of 36 Rafales shouldn't be more than 4.55 billion minus the arms package. If I'm not mistaken we've already paid for creating 2 bases at Ambala & Hashimara.