Selected, not introduced. I already stated retrofits for the American F-18’s came first and that was in 1997 that it kicked off.
No upgrade has ever been noted or seen for that particular component and the exterior details remain the exact same for Rafale A, Rafale C, Rafale M.
that is true.
for rafale, this is pretty interesting. seeing as we have a 2019 rafale ingame though, and more and more 2000’s stuff for everyone else, i think US and NATO aircraft will be getting more IFF equipment that can do the same thing as the rafale’s ingame.
Tbf in game the only reason we got a 2019 rafale and not an older airframe, even something like a early 2000s rafale is solely based on the ground ordinance, 2 extra missiles (which weren’t originally planed) and IFF HMD (with IFF already existing prior that but only on the MFDs), and radar (but they’d probably model the PESA the same as the AESA currently so…). There are no major electronic and systems differences in game that would change between an F2 and our F3R as far as I know
If we had MICA IR, it would be a later model, mid 2000s I believe, but still.
Not necessarily the case, I think a big reason we got the F3-R was solely just to give it HMS, which wasn’t officially added until the F4.1, but has the potential of being back fitted on the F3-R if a customer wanted, and Gaijin has proven many times now they aren’t afraid of adding something if it’s potentially possible.
We could’ve easily gotten an earlier F3 instead from ~2008 which would’ve still had the same ground ordinance and the same air-air loadout. The major difference would be the lack of HMS and the radar would be the PESA(Unless we got the 2013 F3 that saw the introduction of the AESA) and also the lack of Meteor missiles(for when they’d be added in-game).
The most major difference functionally in-game for the F2 compared to an early F3 on the other hand would be the lack of laser-guided ordinance due to the Damocles not being put into service until the F3 entered in 2008, you’d still have the GPS and IR AASMs however.
Either way, it’s a 2019 Rafale which means how new a system is is no reason to withold the HMD IFF from US aircraft
Well technically Rafale F2 could carry laser guided weapon too but it couldn’t designate the target by himself.
Besides the F2 Standard was kinda a preproduction as it was replace 3 or 4 years after its introduction while the F3 ,and its sub standards, has existed for more than a decade
Buddy lasing isn’t in the game yet which is why I said in-game it wouldn’t have such weaponry.
But if we really want to go there then Gaijin could just give a F2 the ATLIS II pod that was test fitted alongside the AS-30L before both were retired from service. Both never saw operational service on the aircraft but were mounted in at least a testing role similar to the Magic II.
See a yellow D on the thread, click, see a report, click on the report, click on « I have the same issue ».
That’s a good day
People here are making so much report and nothing get added to the game, the most basic stuff that should have uptaded hasn’t been yet, like information missing on the HUD.
Wonder how long it will take to all be implemented
It seems that they do disable on-board optics since the addition of the Harrier GR.7, and have attempted multiple times to fix having dual optics with no luck. I was previously unaware of this. Oh well.
When are they going to fix the HUD and MFDs on the rafale
Is there a bug report that was made for the missing display functions?
The devs returned from holiday this week.
We can expect some bug reports on the rafale coming as soon as the end of the week, or in the next it’s fixed. I can’t say if we are going to get rafale specific fixes, especially HUD tho.
I do however expect a general radar fix for. the newer radars in game. We will see
Hello, has there been a recent bug report concerning the tear speed of the Rafale?
That topic has already been discussed extensively. The tear speed is correct. Community Bug Reporting System
@DirectSupport good news and bad news regarding the IFF situation (depending on who you ask I suppose)
First off, I seem to have been wrong, so sorry about that. The IFF does seem to have its own antennas instead of piggy-backing on the radar like I was pretty sure it would.
That being said, I found the brochure from Thales regarding the TSB 2510 (the specific variant of the TSX 2500 the Rafale uses), and its emitting frequency of 1030MHz falls within the D band of radio frequencies, which means it should be able to be picked up by many RWR’s in-game, particularly if in an always on mode as your bug report would suggest it should act.
Furthermore, if you switch the webpage you quoted to french, it firstly still displays all the text in english (odd but funny bit I figured we could all laugh about) but it also specifies an interesting bit of information.
The Thales webpage about the Rafale specifies “interrogator antenna” singular, implying there is only one, but the brochure for TSB 2510 notes the output power to be 4x700w, suggesting 4 antennas. There are however pictures of the E-scan antenna in a 4 blade antenna form, as well as a singular conformal form, which is what I suspect the Rafale has, since I cant find any of the blade antennas on it.
Another interesting bit of info in the brochure is this:
“Provides target designated or sector scanned interrogation and reports.” Which may imply the IFF’s 2 modes still work mostly as I initially suspected they would, the target needs to be designated or the sector in which the target is needs to be scanned for the IFF to function. Since IFF’s do not designate, nor do they scan sectors to my knowledge, this could suggest the target would still need to be within the scan volume of the radar or other frontal sensors to operate.
So theres a bit of a branch in interpretations I could see here.
I personally believe the second interpretation to be true, since the first one would be catastrophically idiotic for an aircraft thats put so much work into stealth, but at the same time, the second option caves your bug report in, so its a bit of a catch 22. I think the fact the antenna needs to be steered by the IFF also supports the second theory, in that it requires to be electronically pointed somewhere (like where another sensor is already looking).
Feel free to let me know if I’m missing something. There could also be some complicated radio-wizardry at play here that could allow it to always be on but not be picked up as well, but seeing as theres no info regarding said wizardry that I’ve yet found, its not really actionnable for bug reports.
The tear/rip speed is not correct. Sources show that the Rafale’s low altitude and high altitude maximum speeds is given so as to make sure not to damage the ram coating on the intake. I suspect this is the same for the F-35 given its maximum speed of Mach 1.6 but likely could go much higher than Mach 1.6. The real truth however, is that the airframe structure allows for much higher speeds, with primary sources showing production Rafales having exceeded Mach 2 in a demonstrated flight. So we know the 750knots/Mach 1.8 max speed is not true. However, more sources will need to be collected before a report is made so this report is not coming anytime soon just yet.
The IFF antennas on the Rafale could likely receive interrogation or information but choose not to respond back itself. There’s been nothing indicating that the Rafale explicitly uses the IFF antennas to necessarily communicate with other aircrafts, in fact primary sources show that the Rafale uses MIDS/Link 16 to communicate its own position to others. We know for sure that data received from the IFF antennas are fed into sensor fusion, and we also know for sure from primary sources that the Rafale uses L-band to communicate its own position with others for “internal cooperation” as the primary source puts it.
Maybe it has all these antenna so when another aircraft that detects it on main radar sees it and interrogates it, it can respond from any direction. Same would go for Rafale itself, like you said
So it could still IFF from any direction, just that at some angles it’ll have to be initiated by another aircraft
