If Gaijin do this they really need to go back and update/change older models tho,
E.g. the F3R should lose HMD, the Gripen A should lose HMD and Litening. Just so that there is actually a differentiating factor between models that isnt just what missiles they can carry
GaN is basically twice more conductive
side note, GaN and Germanium (useful for IIR sensors) are mostly found in one country, and every country not aligned with it are scrambling to find other sources as we speak.
It’s that important for advanced weaponry
A fascinating subject really
Pretty sure this is completely wrong btw, newest article I can find discussing the RBE2-XG’s performance uplift state a range increase of 20-30%, not even half the “70%+” you’ve claimed…
The only reference I’ve been able to find regarding the “70%” number you’ve stated is this:
Which, if its your source for the “70%+” claim, is a flagrant misreading of what’s actually said. “Tout deux pourraient s’accroitre de 70%.” Does not mean “a 70%+ increase in range”, it would be more accurately translated to “Both features (detection range and resolution) could be improved by up to 70%.”
I’d be curious to see where they got the 70% number in the first place though, seeing as its a fan-site and though they do “have” a source page, they dont actually follow proper source notation making it impossible to tell if there was a source used for the 70% claim in the first place, and if so, what source was used (cant even tell which source was used for the specific article in question, since their source page is for the whole website…), and I have not found any other mention of the performance uplifts of the RBE2-XG over the RBE2-AA besides the “20-30%” claimed in the other article, a far cry from the massive 70% you and that website claim…
Its possible that there’s some older source stating that up to 70% performance uplift was theorized for the RBE2-XG, but that said numbers never ended up manifesting, particularly when you consider the RBE2-XG is as of now working with an 8y delay over initial plans, suggesting maybe things arent going so well with its development…
Nah not necessarily, the F3R can very much keep all its features and we can have an earlier Rafale inserted before, wouldn’t be the first time Gaijin inserts vehicles in a line… They do this all the time.
Actually the F3R should keep its features since it will go up with the meta, while earlier Rafales can come to replace it at current tiers and they’ll be more balanced.
You don’t seem to realize that the F3R came way too early and with its full weapons suite it would be more on par with stuff like the F-15EX or Su-35S, at that tier it will definitely need these capabilities.
Not really, it shouldn’t have a HMD anyway, F.4.1 receives the HMD afaik, also F3R is the 2018 standard is it not?
Well, you know that Mirage 2000-5 barely got any new missiles (up until Seek and Destroy ofc), its A2A loadout is pretty much just the same. I don’t think they really need to add MICA-IR if they want to release F4. Like, the Mirage 2000C we had in the game is the -S5, the latest C Series which had newer engine, radar, and also A2A loadout. I kinda “Believe” that if F4 ever come, then Gaijin had a reason to remove extra MICA Pylons for the sake of F4 being unique.
And the other thing that makes F4 also unique is their engine which iirc, was reported by DS to had newer M88 Engine (which actually can be used to F3-R too retroactively). Other than that, can be simply copypasted for sake of Gaijin slop.
If Gaijin would consider this, then we can expect Rafale M or something earlier Rafale C to be event version 💀
The thing is that they would all be the same br…
Any rafale with micas (which is all of them) are going to be meta,
Even with 2 less missiles it would be still top tier material
Overall, one major advantage of GaN radars is that, because they can get much more power in concentrated areas, they are also much better at jamming. For example, RBE2 XG is also supposed to massively increase the rafale Jamming capabilities
Well the hmd was tested on the F3R I believe which is why Gaijin allowed this. And I agree it would be more realistic to have the F3R without hmd, but I’m not sure it would do that well at higher tiers when it goes up without it
For the next Rafale why not Rafale M since if I don’t get wrong some of us here wait for this variant ?
i hate to break it all,… but i was playing F-2A to grind it’s modules, and this:
that AIM-7M exploded at less than 2meters from the cockpit,…
i’m no expert, but this critical hit only is frugal
It’s literally written in what you posted that 20-30% increase is for RBE2 AESA GaN for late F4 variants
70% is in fact the one associated with the increase rbe2 xg is planned to bring
No point in discussing it that much, the radar doesn’t exist for now. For now it’s sit tight and wait
is “still in development” rather than “not existing”,…
It isn’t, grasping some of these things require knowledge beforehand on how Thales/France presents their range figures.
For instance sources may state RBE2 PESA to RBE2 AESA had a 50%+ increase in range, and if you don’t look any further into it, you may conclude it’s “up to 50%”.
But sources do state that while the range was increased by 50%, in some air to air modes it was increased by up to 100% although we don’t know exactly what those modes are.
Daedalos already covered that the 20-30% is for the RBE2 GaN which is for the Rafale F4.2. I have an image above that RBE2 GaN is for F4.2.
Here’s 70% for RBE2-XG
We already know from experience that 70% is not the upper limit but rather the conservative figure.
The RBE2 AESA with GaN IS the RBE2-XG. The whole article is about the RBE2-XG and the fact that its 8y delay is threatening Indias airpower, particularly with China’s growing technological capability.
The radar does exist, the article points to the fact that 4-6 of them have been exported for testing. France has likely been testing it and working on teething issues and the likes for quite a while.
The news article is slightly mistaken. The RBE2-GaN is intended for Rafale F4.2 and current Rafales even export ones can be upgraded to F4.2 standards. Eventually this is the plan. The RBE2-XG is intended for Rafale F5 and still has not been delivered.
Note how your sources state RBE2-GaN have been under development for awhile and in the testing phase.
Now contrast that with this:
Further evidence that RBE2-XG is intended solely for the Rafale F5.
FRANCAIS - Communiqué de presse - Q3 2024
No it’s not and as far as i could read about other articles gan radar was always planned for 2025 and f4.2 standard.
Rafale f5 is the one that will get RBE2 XG.
No, because I know how to read, and the sentence “its range has been increased by more than 50%” does in-fact mean “50%+”. The wording is completely different than the other source that states “Both features (detection range and resolution) could be improved by up to 70%.”
Once again, you are significantly misreading/misrepresenting what is said in a source.
“Les communications des concurrents de Thales, comme Raytheon, Northrop, ou Saab dans le domaine des radars aeroporte dotes de modules GaN et d’une architecture numerique, evoquent des performances accrues (distance et resolution multipliees de 70%, volume covert par cinq) pour permettre aux appareils non furtifs d’accroitre leur capacite de tir.”
translates to
“Communications from Thales’ competitors, such as Raytheon, Northrop, or Saab, in the development of GaN radars with digital architecture, evoke performance uplifts (70% increased range and resolution, 5x increased search volume) which permits the improved firing capabilities of non-stealth aircrafts.”
The sentence is literally just saying that 70% uplifts in performance and 5-fold increases in search volumes are numbers that have been stated by competitors when discussing their new GaN radars, NOT that the RBE2-XG has a “70%+ increase in range”.
This is clearly the source for that Rafale fansite, and the reason why they had the decency to claim “Both features (detection range and resolution) could be improved by up to 70%.”, since the article is simply alluding to the fact that said numbers could be expected, since those are numbers competitors have claimed to have achieved.
You on the other hand either cannot read/interpret french properly, or are willfully trying to misguide others who can’t read french.
If you’re going to make claims, make sure you actually know how to read what’s being said.
It still stands to point out that Thales has said 50% increased range before, without clarification of “more than” or “+” in addition to that statement for the RBE2-AA.
If you’re going to give condescending advice like this, make sure that you didn’t embarrassingly claim that the RBE2-GaN is the same as the RBE2-XG just a few minutes ago.
Interesting, not sure why they’d waste their time making 2 GaN AESA radars, but it does seem to be the case here.
That being said, still doesnt change the fact that there is no actual claim the RBE2-XG will provide 70%+ uplift in performance.
Thales arent the ones claiming 70% uplift for the RBE2-XG, and very clearly do state “more than 50%” in the source you’ve provided.
Not at all embarrassed that I mistook what is presumably 2 seperate radars for a single one, seeing as no source I can find actually explicitly mention an “RBE2-GaN”, they all refer to an RBE2 radar with GaN, so the assumption they are speaking of the RBE2-XG, the ONLY RBE2 radar I’ve seen with an actual publicly stated name that is known to use GaN T/R modules is a pretty understandable mistake to make lmao.
