Solid report, the only thing that bugged me about the Rafale’s acceleration is it had really fast take-off, then mid/okay-ish medium speed acceleration, but then back to really fast acceleration at supersonic. Hopefully with this report it’ll be more consistent throughout the whole range of speed in terms of acceleration.
I wish Gaijin would allow vague reports like this to buff/correct the Typhoon.
Acceleration report, when you dont know the fuel load.
Ambient temperature.
Keep it scientific…
1 Like
-
“Sämtliche Sensoren der Maschine sind miteinander verbunden.”
“All sensors of the aircraft are interconnected.” -
“Durch die Zusammenarbeit der Sensoren ist zudem ein noch effizienteres Aufspüren und Verfolgen von Zielen möglich.”
“The collaboration of the sensors also enables even more efficient detection and tracking of targets.” -
“Sämtliche Systeme: das Radar, IRST, Helmvisier, DASS und der Datenlink sind miteinander gekoppelt und tauschen untereinander Informationen aus.”
“All systems – radar, IRST, helmet-mounted display, DASS, and the data link – are interconnected and exchange information with each other.”
All three of these are more accurate translations than what you provided, and they do not omit the part that gives clear, undeniable confirmation of sensor fusion, with data being shared between sensors.
Where does it say this exactly? Nothing after “auch Abweichungen werden ausgeschlossen.” refers to “ruling out deviations”. Trying to then apply this side note to the rest of the claims as proof that the sensors do not actually communicate is completely unjustified. There are two rather obvious examples, and a sentence that could not be more literal about the Eurofighter’s sensors sharing data.
German text
Sensorfusion:
Ein wichtiges und entscheidendes Merkmal des Eurofighter Typhoon’s ist die so genannte Sensorfusion. Sämtliche Sensoren der Maschine sind miteinander verbunden. Das Angriffsidentifikationssystem AIS (Attack Identification System) wertet die gesammelten Daten aller Sensoren aus und erstellt ein taktisches Lagebild, das standardmässig auf dem mittleren MHDD dargestellt wird. Der Vorteil besteht darin, dass der Pilot nicht mehr einzelne Anzeigen miteinander vergleichen muss, auch Abweichungen werden ausgeschlossen. Damit wird zugleich auch eine höhere Genauigkeit erzielt. Durch die Zusammenarbeit der Sensoren ist zudem ein noch effizienteres Aufspüren und Verfolgen von Zielen möglich. Sämtliche Systeme: das Radar, IRST, Helmvisier, DASS und der Datenlink sind miteinander gekoppelt und tauschen untereinander Informationen aus. So können z.B. das Radar und der IRST Sensor über das Helmvisier auf Ziele ausgerichtet werden usw… Alles in allem wird der Pilot entlastet und maximale Ausnutzung der Sensoren geboten, was nicht unerheblich zur Kampfkraft des Eurojägers beiträgt.
If you want some more ways to translate the quotes:
Literal:
- “All sensors of the aircraft are connected to each other.”
- “Through the cooperation of the sensors, an even more efficient detection and tracking of targets is possible.”
- “All systems – radar, IRST, helmet sight, DASS, and the data link – are linked to each other and exchange information among themselves.”
Alternative phrasing:
- “Every sensor on the aircraft is linked to the others.”
- “The cooperation between the sensors allows for improved efficiency in detecting and tracking targets.”
- “The radar, IRST, helmet-mounted display, DASS, and the data link are all interconnected and actively exchange data.”
Source: (from here)
6 Likes
Typhoon is still a great aircraft, many of these reports will just bring it more in line with the Typhoon I would wager.
3 Likes
The Radar is much better :)
Just need to get used to the turning ability
It’s almost like I don’t speak German…
Besides, I still maintain that the Eurofighter doesn’t possess sensor fusion - at least not to the same extent as the Rafale.
The source above does not prove me wrong in any way. Sensor fusion on the Eurofighter can only filter out deviations in collected data meanwhile Rafale can improve the precision of collected data via sensor fusion.
There are plenty of free tools that provided a more accurate translation; Google Translate, DeepL, and ChatGPT 4.0 all did a better job. It was your choice to omit further information, not a fault of the translation itself.
“Der Vorteil besteht darin, dass der Pilot nicht mehr einzelne Anzeigen miteinander vergleichen muss, auch Abweichungen werden ausgeschlossen.”
“The advantage is that the pilot no longer has to compare individual displays with each other, and discrepancies are also eliminated.”
The part you are referring to comes from the sentence above, and grammatically, it cannot refer to other sentences or to sensor fusion as a whole. In this context, it refers to discrepancies in the pilot’s ability to compare multiple information displays with each other, not a fundamental limitation of sensor fusion. No part of that sentence refers to the capabilities of sensor fusion.
It also seems you overlooked this part: “All systems – radar, IRST, helmet sight, DASS, and the data link – are linked to each other and exchange information among themselves.” and “This also simultaneously achieves higher accuracy.”
Nowhere in the entire paragraph is “filter out deviations” linked to the Eurofighter’s sensor fusion. That is a conclusion you arrived at yourself while interpreting the source, not something the text actually states.
If you are unwilling to accept sources or choose to dismiss them arbitrarily, then I don’t see much point in continuing this discussion.
6 Likes
I used Google translate originally.
Probably refers to the fact that all those sensors are able to display all the information to the helmet sight more than anything. Nothing confirms that the sensors are combined to improve precision in any way.
The text is moot.
From Yandex:
From Google translate:
Can you point to the part which specifically states “higher accuracy,” I only see improved efficiency which has a different meaning.
Oh hold up, I see what you mean @Drag0oon .
It would refer to accuracy being improved due to deviations being excluded then.
“Damit wird zugleich auch eine höhere Genauigkeit erzielt.”
This directly translates to “higher accuracy”, and no, it does not refer to “deviations”. The claim has nothing else to refer to other than sensor fusion.
If the text explicitly states that “All systems – radar, IRST, helmet sight, DASS, and the data link – are linked to each other and exchange information among themselves.” then that is exactly what it means and not what you think it “refers to.” Hope the German grammar lesson helped, though I think you’ve learned enough by now.
Deviations are also excluded.
1 Like
If you want to pick up german I would recommend Duolingo :D /s
So the translation would be:
“…deviations are also excluded. This also simultaneously achieves higher accuracy”
Therefore, the ‘increase in accuracy’ isn’t achieved by comparing and combining data for separate sensors, but only by filtering out deviations.
For example, the Rafale uses data fusion to improve threat localisation:
Eurofighter can only use sensor fusion to eliminate any deviations in collected data, e.g. PIRATE mistakenly detects a cloud as an IR target but through ‘sensor fusion with the radar,’ such a false alarm would be eliminated. The case of the Eurofighter is not so special.
If you are going to completely ignore German grammar rules and make conclusions of your own, sure. If you want to follow German grammar rules and try to actually correctly interpret what was said, then no, that’s not what it said. But seeing as I can’t force you to interpret it correctly, I’ll let you make stuff up.
I’ve told you “deviations are also excluded” does not refer to anything outside of its own sentence due to how German grammar works, yet you explicitly try to apply it to outside sentences and attach external meaning to this “subordinate clause”.
If you’re going to argue the meaning of a German sentence, at least follow German grammar properly instead of bending it to fit a predetermined idea you have in your head. But this conversation seems to have run its course and no longer provides any benefit. :P
Just scroll up if you need any more help :)
3 Likes
Honestly, I hope your not employed as a translator because that was painful and I give up.
nobody ever said that it is only doing that, you need to look at the context of the whole sentence
“Der Vorteil besteht darin, dass der Pilot nicht mehr einzelne Anzeigen miteinander vergleichen muss, auch Abweichungen werden ausgeschlossen.”
- “The advantege (of sensorfusion) is, that the Pilot dosent need to compare the seperate displays, as well that deviations are excluded”
It lists the exclusion of deviations as one of the advanteges and never says that it is only doing that.
…next scentece:
“Damit wird zugleich auch eine höhere Genauigkeit erzielt.”
- “With that you achive a higher accuarcy.”
This relates to Sensorfusion as a whole, because the Article first explained what Sensorfuison is and now it is listing its advantages.
…next scentece:
“Durch die Zusammenarbeit der Sensoren ist zudem ein noch effizienteres Aufspüren und Verfolgen von Zielen möglich.”
- “With the Sensors working together, the finding and tracking of targets is more efficient”
…next scentece:
"Sämtliche Systeme: das Radar, IRST, DASS und der Datenlink sind miteinander gekoppelt und tauschen untereinander Informationen aus.
- “All Systems: the Radar, IRST, DASS and the Datalink are conected with each other and exchange Information.”
we all know that you don’t like the EF but don’t translate it how you want just so that the EF looks bad
iam sure you wouldnt want me to translate french documents about the rafale with google translate, just to get alot of BS
and here the Translation from chatgpt as well
3 Likes
I mean, its the least I can do when discussing the topic?
I would not be suprised if that portion of it got shot-down tbh. The actual explanation in the video does not state passive ranging of missiles, and and sources using artist renditions of something have gotten shot down before. I dont actually see anything that explicitly states any passive ranging capabilities on official spec sheets. For example, theres a vid from BAE iirc showing an artist rendition of AMRAAM’s on a twin pylon on the EFT, Gunjob shot that down pretty quickly (as he should’ve). Its also a single secondary source at best, which technically doesnt reach the benchmark required for a bug report.
Your other sources also state some stuff that could be taken ambiguously, and some info that arguably contradicts the ability to passively range non-emitting missiles. Source 1 for example, which mentions “high precision direction of arrival and passive ranging” explicitly states interferometry being used, which is how an RWR aquires passive ranging, but afaik not how an IIR system would.
Could be a situation where the DDM-NG can passively range, but I’m not sure how it would do so, seeing as it would probably need to know what the actual size of the missile coming at it was to do so, and even then, gaijins not allowing passive ranging on something like PIRATE, which is explicitly stated to have said capability, so I’m not sure how they’d go about justifying adding it for DDM-NG but not for PIRATE (they could just tell the EFT crowd to stfu and go back to ignoring them again like they did in the past tho)
Could argue that radars distributed around the aircraft for jamming or whatever could passively range the missiles, but at that point you’d fall into your own hole of wanting radar MAWS emissions from the Rafale, cuz thats essentially what you’d be saying is what the Rafale is using for MAWS.
Not to say I dont believe it can do passive ranging of non-emitting missiles, its a possibility, I just dont see anything that I think gaijin would consider conclusive evidence.
Couldnt be triangulation unless multiple aircrafts have the missile in LOS. There are only 2 DDM-NG cameras on the jet and they cover FOV’s that are entirely seperate from eachother, seeing as they are on opposite sides of the tail.
Also likely couldnt be stadiametric ranging id think, seeing as it would need to know the explicit size of the exact missile fired at it.
1 Like
Speaking of which, someone should see if Rafales can datalink all this stuff so if 2 or more Rafale have the same thing in FOV of the DDM-NG they get ranging for it
There is a precedent for this too, so I wouldn’t be very surprised if they could