Dassault Rafale - Variants, Characteristics, Armament and Performance

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
,
8167

AASM-IR (SBU-64) incorrect modeling // Gaijin.net // Issues

Hopefully soon we will have a report done on Magic 2 Mk2 which should offer 40% more range over the current Magic 2 for developers to introduce into the game. This missile was equipped on several French aircrafts available in-game. Perhaps they’ll introduce it alongside R-73M/Python 4.

10 Likes
8168

It’s interesting that Magic 2 Mk2 is real.

Magie 2 Mk2 is expected to fill the gap between MICA IR and Magic 2.

2 Likes
8169

Because they haven’t been arguing in good faith at all

2 Likes
8170

image
How does it feels like to say anything positive about Rafale

17 Likes
8171

Wow what a detailed representation of the Rafael, are you part of the actual design bureau ?

1 Like
8172

@MythicPi i don’t want to start clogging the report thread so I’ll answer here :

image
image1668×1938 527 KB

  • For your first point, « for instance » makes it pretty clear that this was not the sole use of the AASM IR in the conflict. Since you are so keen on refusing that the « mobile, time sensitive target » argument is not receivable, I would want to point out that this is also not a good point to say that the AASM IR is lackin such an ability
  • Same in this one. This could be attributed to the fact that France just did not have much IR variants and used them sporadically on sensitive targets. In general, air forces don’t wage war like we play war thunder. They don’t « just spawn » with 6 AASM IR and switch from base bombing to pantsir hunting on a whime. They take off with specific loadout with specific missions in mind. From open source information, it has been pretty clear that a majority of the AASM were fired at infrastructures (buildings, airstrips…), so it would make sense that the GLS variant was more than sufficient in most cases.
  • as you said, the laser AASM is meant for fast moving targets. This does not equate to the IR AASM being unable to hit slow moving targets. As for the enchanted tactical ability, the use of the GBU may very well be attributed to the Laser variants being better against fast moving targets, or that the AASM IR was expensive and/or available in low numbers, as suggested by your second point, while France did have extensive stock of American made GBUs.
1 Like
8173

Well dude f-22 is 5th gen way too fast, the growler is missing the 15XE silent eagle f16 block 72. There are quite a few planes to go before we hit the f-22.

8174

Not necesarily.
Remember we skipped a lot of the F/A 18 stuff and wasnt added while it was relevant

8175

well we went from early 4th gen to late 4.5 in one year. late 4.5 to early 5th could be a year or less then

8176

Sounds like an utter menace of a missile.

I think with PY-4 etc it could be doable, but I also think it wouldn’t be an awful idea to hold back on it for balance, R-73M would be a nice addition on a new SU-30SM1 or 2 or perhaps one of the prototype flankers, though i’m not sure how much Su-30SM1/2 brings to the table as R-77 is already in one of its best iterations irl… (counterpoint though get rid of their fake dual-racks) and PY-4 well I think maybe the current US jets do lag behind a touch particularly for Israel.

Whereas I’d say Rafale and Eurofighter lead the pack here and could therefore perhaps do without armament buffs in the short term, even if those two missiles made it to the game?

1 Like
8177

I am not seeing these “rafale is the most overpowered superplane in the entire game that wins all fights” claims and complaints at all with my experience.

My experience in RB is just constantly defending from long range missile launches; despite all the crying about how easy it is to notch missiles it still means you are defending while the enemy is pushing you and gaining a larger and larger advantage. I doubt it’ll get better with more missiles to throw around. People just don’t get close enough for a MICA launch with decent probability of kill.

Call me a brainlet and look up my stats+replays or whatever, but I don’t see the complaints having a basis in reality when AIM-120 launches even at 40+km still need to be defended and defending properly doesn’t let you do much when the other guy just turns around and speeds off at mach 1.8 in their spam eagle by the time you’ve defeated their triple volley of missiles.

Maybe it’s broken in SB, but SB is a hyper-niche gamemode with a constantly dwindling playerbase.

2 Likes
8178

Can’t use internal FLIR when carrying TGP :

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/fGiynsE5YT7T

8179

What I was told when I tried to report this was that the Harrier GR.7 was bugged when they tried to make two targeting pods work (one internal, one external) this lead to some issues so developers have decided to completely disable the internal pod if an external targeting pod is taken. I haven’t heard any update at all if they intend on making it work in the future, probably not.

8180

With an AIM-120 carrying plane, I don’t mind the rafale. However, I’ve recently started to use the Su-27SM, and its pretty much hopeless against the rafale. It doesn’t have the flight performance or countermeasures to sustain a BVR fight against a rafale, getting close to it is hopeless, and the rafale can lock you on radar a long time before the Su-27SM can. What I find the most annoying with the rafale is the insane flight performance, and then the radar+ missile set. The combination of the AESA+ very good missiles (and up to 8 of them) nullifies planes that carry the R77, Derby and R-Darter, which have similar range and worse maneuverability

8181

You are right lets have ASRAAM and IRIS-T added ;)

8182

In my opinion that would indeed be a way to balance top (top) tier, since one of the main factor making the rafale so good compared to the EFT is the MICA (and the radar). Having the EFT carry said missiles (IRIS-T and ASRAAM depending on the nation) would bridge that gap even with the MICA IR for France. However, countries that do not have equivalent (like the US, let’s not pretend that the AIM9X is in the same category as those missiles) would be significantly impacted. And we would need a significantly higher BR ceiling as well

1 Like
8183

There was barely a BR difference for the F-16C with Aim-9M and Mig-29SMT with R-73 when they were added and most had to fight IRCCM without IRCCM for 3 months?

Id not put it past them for them all to be the same BR,

But with ASRAAM and MICA IR, you have to ask “How are they going to model the seeker”

I can easily see no LOAL and a max lock range of maybe 25km? If that (heck the game struggles to visually render aircraft at those kinds of distances , in the FLIR on the Tornado Gr4 aircraft dont appear to even render in until about 30-35km in my experience, at least they didnt when it was relatively new)

At which point, the main advantage both would have would be largely mitigated.

8184

I raised this question before, but Im very curious to see how they handle the mix of options for the next step in IR missiles in-game.

I think the most logical step would be:

  • analogue bus ASRAAM/IRIS-T
  • Magic II mk2
  • R-73M
  • Python 4
  • PL-8B (fixed)
  • AIM-9X blk1 (analogue bus?)

That being said, we really don’t need any new IR missiles yet, particularly not on the maps we currently have access to and with the radar mechanics that currently exist making it so easy to get within range of these IR missiles. Itd just be miserable.

8185

US wont be getting Blk 1 Aim-9X, they’ll complain too much. Will be BLk2 or 3 from the off

and as we have seen with other Aim-9 variants, they tend to just add one variant of each type. Heck they wont even add Britains “dechirped” aim-9Ls

Which also puts a damper on adding a later Magic II variant

8186

I’ve heard that they might implement them with a narrower FOV than current magic 2 and r73 IRCCM

LOAL is an explicit capability of the MICA with its Datalink, I don’t think it would be implemented without it

But I’m not in the devs mind so anything could happen IG ?