Typhoon VS Rafale?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 57
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typhoon v Rafael
Can't speculate on how they'd perform one on one but do know that Typhoon has been impressing the US military aviators (F15,16,18) with its capabilities.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: my own, private hell
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a very close call, but I think BAES will just be able to scr*w more money out of the British Taxpayer for Typhoon than Aerospatiale will rake in Euros from the French.
You didn't think there was any other performance issue at stake, did you?
You didn't think there was any other performance issue at stake, did you?
Typhoon Vs Rafale
My first point is that the French aircraft is called RAFALE!
Not bloody Rafael as several people seem to think!
Secondly, the exercise brought up in an earlier post was TLP at BAF Florennes just last week and the Typhoon and Rafale never flew against each other so there was no direct duel. I can say though, that the Rafale cockpit is a work of art.
BV
Not bloody Rafael as several people seem to think!
Secondly, the exercise brought up in an earlier post was TLP at BAF Florennes just last week and the Typhoon and Rafale never flew against each other so there was no direct duel. I can say though, that the Rafale cockpit is a work of art.
BV
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BV
Do you mean like an un-made bed surrounded by fag ends and used condoms, or more like the Mona Lisa?
What I will say about Typhoon is that it's nice at last to have a fighter that can actually fight in 3 dimensions. Compared to it, the performance of the F3 is an embarassment, though, personally, I am not convinced about the concept of single-seat ops, especially for some of the things we want to use Typhoon for.
I am led to believe that the Typhoon is not terribly popular with some of the civvy ATCOs, who, having got used to the way in which the F3 climbs and descends (or doesn't!) find it hard to believe how quickly a Typhoon can comply with coordination requirements. On more than one occasion I have had to pull radar 'tapes' to prove that a Typhoon reached a particular level in time to maintain agreed standard separation from a civvy.
In the 'fights' I have seen, the Typhoon normally does pretty well against most types, but I suspect it will be a while before the tactics are sufficiently well established to form a reliable opinion. BVR performance with Meteor will be interesting, though in my view, BVR isn't everything as the ROE in most modern scenarios make the use of BVR weapons dodgy at best. For now, I am just delighted that Typhoon will get to where I need it as quickly as it can.
Looking forward to seeing it on QRA(I) duties.
STH
the Rafale cockpit is a work of art
What I will say about Typhoon is that it's nice at last to have a fighter that can actually fight in 3 dimensions. Compared to it, the performance of the F3 is an embarassment, though, personally, I am not convinced about the concept of single-seat ops, especially for some of the things we want to use Typhoon for.
I am led to believe that the Typhoon is not terribly popular with some of the civvy ATCOs, who, having got used to the way in which the F3 climbs and descends (or doesn't!) find it hard to believe how quickly a Typhoon can comply with coordination requirements. On more than one occasion I have had to pull radar 'tapes' to prove that a Typhoon reached a particular level in time to maintain agreed standard separation from a civvy.
In the 'fights' I have seen, the Typhoon normally does pretty well against most types, but I suspect it will be a while before the tactics are sufficiently well established to form a reliable opinion. BVR performance with Meteor will be interesting, though in my view, BVR isn't everything as the ROE in most modern scenarios make the use of BVR weapons dodgy at best. For now, I am just delighted that Typhoon will get to where I need it as quickly as it can.
Looking forward to seeing it on QRA(I) duties.
STH
The Typhoon and Rafale are like teenage brothers. They like to be competitive but hate to admit that they're really quite alike.
If there's a big difference, the Typhoon is more of an air-to-air aircraft and the Rafale is more inclined to move mud. Surprise, surprise: when they got started, which of the sponsors had a relatively new bomber in service?
This relates to another difference. The 'phoon is really, really good at supersonic turn and burn, better than the PR machine gets across. This led to some very laborious development in flight control, but it seems that it is sorted now.
On the other hand, the Rafale can really carry freight - it's a bit like a 25 ton supersonic A-4 - so if you want to go a long, long way with big gas tanks and a load of weapons, it's your airplane. The Typhoon's better than you might expect, but can't quite do what the Rafale does. And the videos of the Rafale barreling through the Pyrenees at 5.5 g and 600 mph with a load of iron are quite impressive.
Whatever the French word is for bibbedy-bobbedy-boo, the Rafale's stealth relies on it. The Typhoon is front-sector RCS reduction plus jamming, a reliable technique if not as flash and mysterious.
Both aircraft can land on a carrier but the Rafale can do it more than once...
The French tried to get cute with the radar and backed a dead-end idea, especially combined with the restricted nose volume that is characteristic of most non-huge carrier jets. They need an AESA.
The Typhoon's radar reminds me of the $6000 turntables that you find in audiophile stores because some people don't trust CDs yet. But if it works as well as they say, it does some things better than an AESA, and does a lot better than the sort of AESA you could have baselined in 1996-98.
I bow to Officer Viking's comment about the cockpit, with the observation that it's French. That is, it's a bit like getting into a Citroen DS in 1957 and going "why the *&^% did they do it like this?" and then realizing it makes sense. The oddest feature is what looks like a What The Butler Saw machine sticking out of the panel.
The choice between the two comes down to price and (even more importantly) support, which is why 'phoon salesmen remind you every two minutes that they have contracts for 600-plus aircraft.
If there's a big difference, the Typhoon is more of an air-to-air aircraft and the Rafale is more inclined to move mud. Surprise, surprise: when they got started, which of the sponsors had a relatively new bomber in service?
This relates to another difference. The 'phoon is really, really good at supersonic turn and burn, better than the PR machine gets across. This led to some very laborious development in flight control, but it seems that it is sorted now.
On the other hand, the Rafale can really carry freight - it's a bit like a 25 ton supersonic A-4 - so if you want to go a long, long way with big gas tanks and a load of weapons, it's your airplane. The Typhoon's better than you might expect, but can't quite do what the Rafale does. And the videos of the Rafale barreling through the Pyrenees at 5.5 g and 600 mph with a load of iron are quite impressive.
Whatever the French word is for bibbedy-bobbedy-boo, the Rafale's stealth relies on it. The Typhoon is front-sector RCS reduction plus jamming, a reliable technique if not as flash and mysterious.
Both aircraft can land on a carrier but the Rafale can do it more than once...
The French tried to get cute with the radar and backed a dead-end idea, especially combined with the restricted nose volume that is characteristic of most non-huge carrier jets. They need an AESA.
The Typhoon's radar reminds me of the $6000 turntables that you find in audiophile stores because some people don't trust CDs yet. But if it works as well as they say, it does some things better than an AESA, and does a lot better than the sort of AESA you could have baselined in 1996-98.
I bow to Officer Viking's comment about the cockpit, with the observation that it's French. That is, it's a bit like getting into a Citroen DS in 1957 and going "why the *&^% did they do it like this?" and then realizing it makes sense. The oddest feature is what looks like a What The Butler Saw machine sticking out of the panel.
The choice between the two comes down to price and (even more importantly) support, which is why 'phoon salesmen remind you every two minutes that they have contracts for 600-plus aircraft.
Anyone who has sat in a Rafale, looked at the uncluttered panel, seen the big AMLCDs and felt the deliciously smooth, silky switch action will love it, as BV obviously did, and as I did when the Rafale M (was it the M?) made its first Farnborough appearance.
But I'm told that the switches are not likely to last like the Typhoon's more agricultural tested-to-death items, and that once you want to actually operate the systems in the Typhoon's visually less appealing cockpit it's an intuitive joy, but in the better looking Rafale you're working like a one armed paper hangar, with less intuitive modings and with nothing quite falling to hand.
I wonder which Jagmate got the Rafale? Can't have been BV - he'd have told us!
LO:
Very nicely written summary, and nice analogies. With a touch that sure, and that light, a lot of people will recognise who that writer is! But that turntable has provision for a plug in CD player, with all the buttons, all the software in place, and the makers have demonstrated the ability to plug the CD player in and play CDs in moments.
But I'm told that the switches are not likely to last like the Typhoon's more agricultural tested-to-death items, and that once you want to actually operate the systems in the Typhoon's visually less appealing cockpit it's an intuitive joy, but in the better looking Rafale you're working like a one armed paper hangar, with less intuitive modings and with nothing quite falling to hand.
I wonder which Jagmate got the Rafale? Can't have been BV - he'd have told us!
LO:
Very nicely written summary, and nice analogies. With a touch that sure, and that light, a lot of people will recognise who that writer is! But that turntable has provision for a plug in CD player, with all the buttons, all the software in place, and the makers have demonstrated the ability to plug the CD player in and play CDs in moments.
Shooting Rafale
Jacko,
That was OCCWMF bragging!
Although, I feel it is my duty to point out that it was an easy shot and my Grandmother could have made it!
BV
That was OCCWMF bragging!
Although, I feel it is my duty to point out that it was an easy shot and my Grandmother could have made it!
BV
Bob,
Yeah but your gran, being a senior citizen, obviously flies Harriers. Would she therefore have caught up with a Rafale unless it had its gear down?
I hope that you noticed that I refrained from cheap jokes about this not being the first time someone had been surprised by a Jagmate sneaking up from behind.....
Hat, coat, I know the drill.
Yeah but your gran, being a senior citizen, obviously flies Harriers. Would she therefore have caught up with a Rafale unless it had its gear down?
I hope that you noticed that I refrained from cheap jokes about this not being the first time someone had been surprised by a Jagmate sneaking up from behind.....
Hat, coat, I know the drill.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Where's the requisite Yank-bashing?
Or do we, once again, have to save your sorry asses with our superior equipment and overwhelming numbers?
(Note: it's suppossed to be funny. If not that, than at least an attempt at banter, not to be taken seriously ((unless you live in Idaho..))
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bx
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aaaaaaaaah... 
I'm the French chap in the party !
Hi Jack !
No... The guy you were talking about is no more. He's banned nearly every time he appears on a forum.
Low Observable : your summary is really funny and interesting !
Well... The RBE-2 is not a dead end. It was developped, with in mind the active array coming after. The passive antenna is working well (requirement to detect a 0.1m2 target at 35Nm, according to "Air & Cosmos"), and all the softwares are ready for use with the active antenna (already demonstrated).
Of course, the improved performance of the array will allow to use improved softwares, as well as "advanced modes" currently in development. DRAAMA should fly in 2007.
The first Rafale with an active antenna will leave the plant in January 2012.
Well... Not a single source in France isn't counterdicting you.
Using the Rafale HMI need training, because it's really different. But once it's ok, from every comment's I've read, and even in a report written in french (La polyvalence du Rafale, ou l'objet total, by the "Centre d'études en sciences sociales de la défense"), the systems is clearly very efficient and revoltionary ( "an intuitive joy" ). There's no doubt on that.
=
Sorry for my english skills... I did my best to translate it the more accurately.
In this report, the author also said that when the pilots says that the Rafale is "high tec", they actually refer to the cockpit (HMI -switches, HOTAS, screens and interface readability-, and ergonomics).
For the switches, the requirements are the same (this is what i was told by a man who have worked on both pits, and he also added that the Rafale's cockpit was more innovative, but the two used different philosophies, and so, weren't not comparable).
They only lack DVI for frequency changing.
The design phase of the cockpit came after a comprehensive study on the human body feelings and on cognition, on the body strenghs and weaknesses (resistance under high G, wrong sensations...). This is how they designed the switches (with different shapes and pressures according to the function), this is what they took under consideration for the symbology and colors on the screens... They tested all of this during years to improve it, for all the 3 standards (F1, F2, F3).
The PDF from the MoD site Sorry it's in french...
I hope this helped.
I'm the French chap in the party !
Hi Jack !
Originally Posted by Archimedes
1. Shortly after about this point in the thread a rabidly nationalist French loon materialises to explain that the Typhoon is utterly, utterly rubbish and that the Rafale (and for that matter anything French) is vastly superior to the appalling anglo-saxon rubbish the RAF is buying.
Low Observable : your summary is really funny and interesting !
Originally Posted by Low Observable
The French tried to get cute with the radar and backed a dead-end idea, especially combined with the restricted nose volume that is characteristic of most non-huge carrier jets. They need an AESA.
The Typhoon's radar reminds me of the $6000 turntables that you find in audiophile stores because some people don't trust CDs yet. But if it works as well as they say, it does some things better than an AESA, and does a lot better than the sort of AESA you could have baselined in 1996-98.
The Typhoon's radar reminds me of the $6000 turntables that you find in audiophile stores because some people don't trust CDs yet. But if it works as well as they say, it does some things better than an AESA, and does a lot better than the sort of AESA you could have baselined in 1996-98.
Originally Posted by Jackonicko
But that turntable has provision for a plug in CD player, with all the buttons, all the software in place, and the makers have demonstrated the ability to plug the CD player in and play CDs in moments.
Of course, the improved performance of the array will allow to use improved softwares, as well as "advanced modes" currently in development. DRAAMA should fly in 2007.
The first Rafale with an active antenna will leave the plant in January 2012.
But I'm told that the switches are not likely to last like the Typhoon's more agricultural tested-to-death items, and that once you want to actually operate the systems in the Typhoon's visually less appealing cockpit it's an intuitive joy, but in the better looking Rafale you're working like a one armed paper hangar, with less intuitive modings and with nothing quite falling to hand.
Well... Not a single source in France isn't counterdicting you.
Using the Rafale HMI need training, because it's really different. But once it's ok, from every comment's I've read, and even in a report written in french (La polyvalence du Rafale, ou l'objet total, by the "Centre d'études en sciences sociales de la défense"), the systems is clearly very efficient and revoltionary ( "an intuitive joy" ). There's no doubt on that.
« Il y a beaucoup d’informations sur cet avion mais c’est un avion relativement naturel, tu comprends vite où tout se trouve. Tout tombe sous la main. »
There are a lot of information in this aircraft, but it's a relatively natural plane, you quickly understand where to find everything. All is falling to hand
In this report, the author also said that when the pilots says that the Rafale is "high tec", they actually refer to the cockpit (HMI -switches, HOTAS, screens and interface readability-, and ergonomics).
For the switches, the requirements are the same (this is what i was told by a man who have worked on both pits, and he also added that the Rafale's cockpit was more innovative, but the two used different philosophies, and so, weren't not comparable).
They only lack DVI for frequency changing.
The design phase of the cockpit came after a comprehensive study on the human body feelings and on cognition, on the body strenghs and weaknesses (resistance under high G, wrong sensations...). This is how they designed the switches (with different shapes and pressures according to the function), this is what they took under consideration for the symbology and colors on the screens... They tested all of this during years to improve it, for all the 3 standards (F1, F2, F3).
The PDF from the MoD site Sorry it's in french...
I hope this helped.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: England
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
likewise the Typhoon Cockpit Ergonomics have been a concept from the late 70s early 80s, everything down to colour, size and shape have followed a strict display philosophy, the layout and lighting systems have taken the cockpit to a whole new dimension, one of the only cockpits to reject glaresheild blinds (data entry interference) and use stray light technology down the nth degree to minimise canopy and windscreen reflections, again the only cockpit to use programmable softkeys on MHDDs that give the operator a direct input, reducing the need to select from on-screen menus, DVI, huge HOTAS functionality, and a widescreen class 1 HUD...........a truly great cockpit
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bx
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ErgoMonkey, you're true to remind us what the Typhoon pit is made of.
But don't believe I intended to prove that it's just crap.
I just wanted to comment the Jackonicko opinion (with no offense) and maybe bring some information.
Maybe I should add these data for the Rafale :
-30x22° degrees HUD wich become the main navigation tool. FLIR view superposable
-LHD (middle) 20x20°, collimated to infinity, so as to ensure the eye won't have to accomodate when the pilot was watching through the HUD just before. Used for SA, "divine view", as well as missile envelop information...
-side screens for systems... no keys around, as these are touchscreens to save place (and have greater screens)...
-all of this fully compatible with NVG
-HOTAS with up to 37 functions (switches, buttons and trackballs). It is said that Dassault pretend to be the inventors of the HOTAS concept (in French 3M "Main sur Manette et Manche").
-Contrary to what is often said, the lateral stick has a slite movement (not like the F-16)...
-the 29° inclined seat allow the pilot to cope with 2 additional Gs compared to a classicaly inclined seat (Mirage 2000), wich is much less tiring.
-DVI fully ready for foreign customer (not used on French aircraft to save money).
-HMS for F3 standard.
A truly great cockpit too !
No doubt that the engineers made their best, for both planes.
But don't believe I intended to prove that it's just crap.
I just wanted to comment the Jackonicko opinion (with no offense) and maybe bring some information.
Maybe I should add these data for the Rafale :
-30x22° degrees HUD wich become the main navigation tool. FLIR view superposable
-LHD (middle) 20x20°, collimated to infinity, so as to ensure the eye won't have to accomodate when the pilot was watching through the HUD just before. Used for SA, "divine view", as well as missile envelop information...
-side screens for systems... no keys around, as these are touchscreens to save place (and have greater screens)...
-all of this fully compatible with NVG
-HOTAS with up to 37 functions (switches, buttons and trackballs). It is said that Dassault pretend to be the inventors of the HOTAS concept (in French 3M "Main sur Manette et Manche").
-Contrary to what is often said, the lateral stick has a slite movement (not like the F-16)...
-the 29° inclined seat allow the pilot to cope with 2 additional Gs compared to a classicaly inclined seat (Mirage 2000), wich is much less tiring.
-DVI fully ready for foreign customer (not used on French aircraft to save money).
-HMS for F3 standard.
A truly great cockpit too !
No doubt that the engineers made their best, for both planes.