sea modes are using brute force to detect ships that are massive compared to a tank and the sea has way simpler ground clutter returns than normal terrain
Only when the Rafale has a missile that out-accelerates, out-ranges, and out-maneuvers everything else with an AESA seeker will things be balanced. Wheres MICA NG EM? /s
if thats the type of performance increase we get with a missile still more close range focused and relatively lightweight, imagine the R-77M and AIM-260
1 Like
Interestingly the US and Russia still haven’t come on and stated whether or not their respective missiles will feature AESA yet, that may or may not make a difference in how they stack up against the mica ng em.
Russians have said R-77M is AESA iirc.
USAF/USN have been extremely tight lipped about the AIM-260
all we know for sure is:
- lockheed makes it
- its about the same size as the AIM-120
- its compatible with the super hornet, F-35, and F-22 for sure
- “increased range and effectiveness over existing air to air weapons”
i wish they said as much about the AIM-260 as they did about MICA NG lol
Unfortunately not, no mention of AESA:
I’m surprised by how much the French blatantly tell everyone about their specifications, which is a confidence in of itself too. They straight up showed the Rafale’s AESA radar almost as soon as they made it which showed the amount of TRMs with little to no care, meanwhile several other countries try their best to hide theirs even threatening their own citizens who try to get a peek.
US did similar stuff, showing AESA radar for F-22 and such in 90’s/00’s. but could be a mix of more relaxed security at the time of RBE2 AA and attracting attention for export for newer examples.
strange, not only is it a very popular belief but there are brochures for Russian AESA AAM seekers themselves, ive seen one myself in flanker thread.
What you’re seeing in that thread is just another term for fox-3, “active radar seeker” or also known as “active radar homing” ARHs.
1 Like
You can see the left one is clearly AESA with no moving parts, right one maybe mechanical or Russian style AESA
Also from flankers thread
Could also be a PESA, considering how much PESA was used in their aircraft radars. Though PESA and AESA shouldnt really make a difference in missile seekers.
Answer from @powerfuldoggo
“The serial RBE2 was never shown to the public, let alone the serial RBE2 AESA. They only showed a mockup during the development phase that was modelled around 2005-2007 in specialised press articles (first picture being from 2007 « la nouvelle usine » article), that was later mounted on Rafale B 113-HV for display for the announcement of the delivery of the first serial production radar in early 2010 (second and third pictures). The pictures of the radar simply aren’t representative of the serial model, as that mockup was made at a very early developmental phase where only a few prototypes were being built and tested. Assuming both the early prototypes display mockups and the serial radar should be the same would purely not make sense. As an additional note, if you don’t believe me about the mockup radar pictures, I will let you look at the fourth and fifth picture. The RBE2 AESA (and the RBE2) don’t have any fixations to hold in suspension in the air the radar backend and the front end (array and FSO). The two are attached respectively to the fuselage and to the nose/radome directly and are only physically connected by the plugs for data transit.”
Spoiler
Spoiler
3 Likes
just so you know,
you have the same image in the first and last spoiler
1 Like
Just a reminder, AASMs now have even worse range and kinematics now that the release speed was corrected, even though the AASMs was already underperforming.
At 40,000 ft (maximum release altitude stated by SAGEM) and Mach 1, it doesn’t come anywhere close to hitting 80km, it does just 54km meaning its missing 32% in range. You can test this in-game using the missile testing.
Dare I say it’s the most underperforming air to ground missile now in terms of range?
Spoiler
8 Likes
AGM-84H would take that spot, 140km vs 270km+
3 Likes
Ah somehow that escaped my mind, they straight up ignored that report and continue to.
you could argue for mavericks too
if you include launches from hover
with ~6km range vs ~14km at the alt I was testing at
Rear cockpit view from Indonesian Rafale DI
I’m interested on what that bracket is because I can’t find it on other Rafale backseats.
Spoiler
Am I overthinking it? Is it just a GoPro mount?
4 Likes
i’ve wondered why the main/centre mfd on the rafale is so far forward- makes it annoying to see the other screens as it blocks your vision of them in simulator mode. Makes you have to learn forward and right/left to see the other 2 mfds clearly. 99% of other planes don’t have this issue, and it clearly wasn’t an issue on the newer mirage 2k which also has modernized mfds.
that is only an issue in WT since A the camera is just a single point in space unlike our eyes
B the camera being too low since always directly in front of the HUD
2 Likes
Iraq officially looking to buy a first batch of 14 Rafale after all the mentionned times in media and since the very start of the program.
2 Likes