Rafale

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

"Reduced RCS"!!! That's the word I was looking for in order to translate "Discret"!
Thank you Elmayerle!!


I only wanted to precise something. If the Rafale conception led to a reduced RCS design, there are for now several problems with this reduction of RCS.

The first one is that the SPECTRA ECM/ECCM suite, that is presumed to be able of good active jamming (some analysts talked about active cancellation for some parts of the aircraft, but I still have doubts about that), is not fully complete by now. But a soon to come evolution of the software (and more evolutions that have to come later) will continuously upgrade the system.

But the biggest problem of the Rafale right now is it's really SLOW speed of delivery!! less than 1,5 fighter by month!! It's quite not an industrial speed anymore!
This is the source of many problems with the subcontractors and with the job experience of the employees on the production line, leading to problems on some panel joints (bigger than planed) and the surface regularity!
Other bigger problems appeared (a plane was delivered without its internal tank in the wing!!), but were likely erased in shot time (Thanks to the One Year Warranty!!   )


Those problems are identified and most of them will be erased on the next batch of aircrafts (just like the electronic problems on the first Rafale M were quickly resolved), but it is symptomatic of the absolute NEED of export markets for the Rafale... (accelerate the deliveries of the Rafale will mean to close the production line before 2020, something that the government doesn't want).




For the materials in the structure, I don't know what is their composition (I heard one time something about them, but just didn't understand a word of all those barbarian names for composite materials!!   ).
I just know that the parts of the plane that are likely bad for RCS were treated with more (or special) RAM, disposed with in specific positions internally (but well, I still didn't understand a word of all that!!)

I'm sure that if you were at my place, you would have notice a lot of interesting stuffs! I'm sorry that I didn't listen much in Physic class in High School      

For the engine inlets, more stealth inlets were planed, but they were heavier, and the mass problem was a crucial point on the Rafale program.
Talking about RCS reduction, I read that the actual air intakes were a compromise between more stealth inlets and higher performances inlets of the initial design (with supersonic cones, less stealth)
But the engine itself is well hidden by the inlet, and the first stage of the compressor was designed in order to reduce RCS more (I read somewhere that the software that was used to design that was later used to design one of the US engines designed for stealth aircrafts, don't remember which one)



Whatever, the Rafale is not a stealth aircraft, and it could request a lot of modifications to be such. But what about talking about those modifications.

Personally, I think that a rafale with longer and thiner LERX, new designed larger canards, a "lozenge" section nose (ala F-22, F-35 or Makko), new designed tail, engine exhaust ala F-35, engine inlet ala F-35, a one piece canopy ala F-22, and semi-recessed fuel and weapons stealth pods could do a good start point for a stealth fighter.

[Daryl J.]

Rafale CJ?    Or perhaps the Free Republic of Chad?  Libya?
Spain?  And somewhat seriously, Iran?

Daryl J.

[elmayerle]

As I said, there are ways of getting reduced RCS inlets.  NGC has developed a way to combine RAM into one-piece composite inlets to significantly lower RCS.  More than that I probably shouldn't say.  It took them considerable time and money to develop it, but they now have it.

The nozzles could use the treatment applied to the F-35's nozzles, though it's all based on the LOAN program.  The shaping is only part of it, there are some very proprietary materials involved, too.

I'd say one approach to reduce RCS is to replace metallic skin panels with advanced composite ones.  Properly designed, these will cut RCS while still meeting all the other requirements for skin panels.

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

Thanks for the precisions Elmayerle. just a question, what means NGC??


For Dary, you have pretty good ideas here!
The Spanish one always sounds good to me, as it was the first missed opportunity for a collaboration. In 1985, they chose Eurofighter instead of Dassault, but it was very near to be different.
Some artist drawings were even made of a Spanish Rafale, at this time only known as ACF. It was fitted with "souris" (cones) in the inlets, a design that later was canceled.

[rafi]

Hi,

(just like the electronic problems on the first Rafale M were quickly resolved)

You said quickly?

Rafale availability rate in french navy:

2003 : 43 %
2004 : 57 %
2005 : 57 %
2006 : 58 %
2007 : 77 %

Those problems are identified and most of them will be erased on the next batch of aircrafts...

In fact, french military have always lot of problems with Rafale, especially with M88 engines and electronics..

Rafale availability rate in french air force:

2006: 44,8 %
2007: 45,6 %

AESA radar RBE2-AA for 2010/2013, Damoclès pod for 2009...

source: french assemblée nationale

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

The problems on the Rafale M were identified and the solutions were found quickly.
But their is a difference between a correction on the design and the application on all the operational aircrafts.

Concerning the availability rate, don't forget that it does not reflect the reality. I mean that a lot of problems are "fictive", due to the lack of experience of the ground crew (just compare the availability rate of the Marine and Armée de l'Air on the Rafale F2 to see that) and also some... well, some "liberties" taken by Dassault in the Rafale maintain.

Soon, the availability rate will grow up just because of the better training of the ground crews, while the aircraft will be quite the same.
That's natural for a new plane, F-22 and Typhoon had and still have the same problems.

And for the general availability rate of the French Armée de l'Air, it is around -50% for all the airplanes in the French territory, but that's mainly due to cost factors than to the aircrafts themselves (In external operations, the rate is between 85 and 98% most of time).
The RAF sadly have the same problems with its Tornado and Harrier.

[rafi]

5 years to make corrections on navy so called "operational jets"? it's a bit to long, according to me. All navy Rafales M problems are not solved at this time, and it's the same in the Air Force (M-88 engines).

How many french aircrafts are now in external operations? few, very few. Availability rate of 90% in this case is nothing. Rafales in Afghanistan can't launch any laser-guided bombs without assistance of Mirage 2000 Damocles Laser Designation pods...

Sure, the availability rate will grow up, but only if politicians give money.

The availability rate (all aircrafts in condition and those that can be in condition within 6 hours) of the french air force (in french):

http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/budge...8/a0280-tVI.asp

Rafi

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

This is not the question, Rafi. I mean, the actual problems of the operational Rafale are due to lack of money by our politicians, not due to technical problems.
Dassault knows how to solve the problems, but the government just don't put enough money in the program.

But compared those problems to the Typhoon's and F-22's ones, and you'll see that it is not something exceptional (it's even something sadly typical for those programs)

Whatever, what are the problems on the M88 you're talking about? I never heard something about that.

How many french aircrafts are now in external operations? few, very few. Availability rate of 90% in this case is nothing.

I have a different point of view

Of course that's very few, but 12 Rafale were deployed in Afghanistan in 2007. Compared to the 6 Harrier of the RAF, 6-8 German Tornado etc...
It's quite representative of the French deployments in the near past and probably the near future, and after all, that's all that counts. For me, the rate is quite meaningful, moreover if you add to that the very poor number of Rafale operational (in comparison, there are 3 or 4 more Typhoon operational, but none of them is combat proven).

I'm curious to see similar rates (in similar conditions) for the F-22 and the Typhoon when they will be deploy.



Well, whatever, as I said, all of this is very interesting, but not really in the subject, except if we want to imagine an Alternate History where French politicians continue to decrease the investments in the Rafale (among other programs).
It will certainly be very realistic, but not very funny to imagine Rafale evolutions!  
:dum:

[elmayerle]

NGC = Northrop Grumman Corporation

Sorry, I'm so used to using that acronym around work that it's become a habit.

[rafi]

Combat proven in Afghanistan... only against poor talibans with kalashnikov!  France invent a new military concept "VEMACPAK" (very expensive multirole aircraft combat proven against kalashnikov) and is proud of it...

Sur les trois flottes de chasse, la difficulté concerne la disponibilité des moteurs ; pour chacun d'entre eux (M88, M53 et Atar) des plans d'action ont été mis en œuvre et devraient produire leurs effets à partir de 2008.

source: http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/budge...8/a0280-tVI.asp

L'appareil a pu connaître quelques petits problèmes de jeunesse qui sont en passe d'être résolus. C'est ainsi que ce chasseur polyvalent très sophistiqué dispose d'un système automatique de détection de panne sans doute trop sensible qui avait tendance à déclarer l'avion hors service alors qu'il était en parfait état de voler. Ces problèmes sont désormais identifiés et l'état-major de l'armée de l'air se déclare optimiste pour les mois à venir...

source:  assemblée nationale (budget 2008)

Rafi

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

NGC = Northrop Grumman Corporation

Sorry, I'm so used to using that acronym around work that it's become a habit.

No problem  


I wanted now to resume the different markets were the Rafale was in competition, on order to see what are the most realistic possibilities for a what-if:

-Netherlands:
The Rafale was very close to win, but the F-35 won only with a short advantage.
Considering the F-35 delays and over costs nowadays, what if Netherlands knew that, or what if they made the competition after the first problems appeared on the F-35?
It could be a chance to see a Rafale in Netherlands colors!!
What about one in Dutch Navy splinter camo with anti-ship (Kormoran? NSM?) missiles under the wings??

-Korea:
Technically, the Rafale Mk2 was judged better than the F-15. But for political and economical reasons, the F-15 was finally preferred. But what if the Rafale won?
It could have been a chance for the Mk2 variant to have its first customer, and maybe lead to ameliorations on the French Rafale (M88-3, AESA radar sooner etc...) or to a more credible option on following export markets.

-Singapore:
Well, one more time, the Rafale was finalist but lose against the F-15... again!
For me, it wasn't an illogical choice: after all, the F-15 share it's weapons with the already operational F-16, and probably have a common philosophy of maintain. Add to that the historical and political links between Singapore and the USA, and it was probably the good way to go.
But what if the Rafale won? For example, if the Mk.2 variant was already bought by the Korean, maybe it could be a step to the integration of US weapons on the Rafale, something that could convince the Singaporean?
And if we just talk about abilities, a Mk.2 variant with M88-3 and advanced AESA radar would have been a much more serious pretender against the Typhoon and F-15 in Singapore.

-Morocco:
Argh!! Probably the most stupid action of our new government: losing a deal that was impossible to lose!! But never underestimate politicians!  
Whatever, it appears that the deal was finally lose against F-16... or maybe just canceled, with no replacement.
Nevertheless, Moroccan Rafale is just the coolest idea for me, as it allowed ... DESERT SCHEME!      Yum yum!!

-Saudi Arabia:
Just like the Morocco!! Good opportunity for desert camo!! Probably not in real life (as Saudis planed to repaint all their fighters in boring gray), but in what-if, everything is possible!!


-Norway:
I don't really remember the conditions of the market. i think it's quite similar to the one in Netherlands.
But did you ever saw this artist picture of the Gripen N (or Super Gripen) with a Norwegian splinter camo?? It was soooo cool! And whatever the plane that carry it, so it HAD to be done on a Rafale!  


-UAE:
Oh! I almost forgot this one! One of the first attempt of exportation for the Rafale, but the plane was just not mature enough. F-16E and Mirage 2000-9 were bought instead.
Such a pity that all those delays erased all chances to see a Rafale in a low viz camo scheme!!


Well... Did I forgot something?

Combat proven in Afghanistan... only against poor talibans with kalashnikov! France invent a new military concept "VEMACPAK" (very expensive multirole aircraft combat proven against kalashnikov) and is proud of it...

Sans vouloir être désagréable, Rafi, je trouve que ce n'est pas vraiment le sujet
Moi aussi je trouve ça débile de balancer notre fric par les fenêtres de la sorte, mais je ne choisi pas contre qui la France part en guerre (et pour le coup, elle non plus!!   )

Le fait que le Rafale coute cher, qu'il ait des problèmes de jeunesse et qu'il ne soit que l'ombre de ce qui était prévu à la base, c'est désolant, je suis d'accord.
Mais il faut relativiser et voir que ce sont des problèmes qui seront résolus, que le F-16 et le Mirage 2000 ont connu les même (voire pires) en leur temps, et que par rapport au Typhoon (prix, couts de maintenance) et au F-22 (prix, problèmes d'obscolecence et se conception), on est pas forcément les plus mal barrés...

D'ailleurs, tes liens montrent que les choses ne vont pas si mal que ça (il y a des problèmes, ils sont identifiés, et en passe d'être résolus). Enfin, c'est comme ça que je vois les choses.

Si tu veux, on peut continuer dans parler par MP ou ailleurs sur ce forum ou un autre forum


(Reading your links, I supposed that you speak French, Rafi. If it's not the case, just tell me, I'll send you the translation of this message by PM)

Cheers!!    

[dy031101]

And there's always a possibility with ROC (Taiwan) although we can sure wait until the discussion for future customers...... I kinda feel by that time Rafale should have most of its birth pains squared away......

Price might still be a problem, considering the "proud" tradition of opposition parties in general.

[elmayerle]

Well,  from a personal point of view, I'm just as glad the Netherlands stayed with the F-35.  They've greatly contributed to it and their engineers that I've worked with have been excellent folk to work with.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Would it be possible for the Rafale to carry the CT 52 Reconnaissance Pod?  Considering the overall dimensions and shape, it does resemble the 600 gallon fuel tank originally carried by the F-4 Phantom on the centerline fuselage pylon.  If the Rafale is capable of operating with the CT-52, what other interfacing with the airframe would be necessary to make it succeed?

[Archibald]

You mean the huge thing carried by the Mirage IV under its belly ? This technology is a bit obsolete now. But maybe it should be feasible... overall dimensions were similar to the AN-52 nuclear free fall bomb, which was carried not only by Mirage IV, but also by smaller machines such as Mirage IIIE and Jaguars.

Got a Air Fan magazine dealing with Mirage IV recon flights and of course of the CT-52 pod. I'll try to find it ASAP and give you some details ok ?

Btw Jaguars, Mirage IV and  Mirage IIIE carried huge ECM pods called Barrax, Calmar and Boa. They have been withdrawn for 15 years now, but a Rafale with such load would be cool, too.