It is literally the same image. These ducts have no serration or RAM coatings of any meaningful amount placed on them.
The ducts are quite literally geometrically shaped to benefit radar cross section reduction. See the above images.
Rafales are actually visible in images.
Poor use of the multi-role capabilities of that thing then, I suppose. They could have replaced their Eurofighters with superior F-35’s anyway a long time ago.
Just too late to be particularly ‘good’ in comparison to peers.
Woah it late to the AESA party and uses the best mechanical radar instead while waiting for AESA to be ready
Which is why you have to stand below the EFT to be able to see the engines (still can’t tbh), whereas on the Su-57 you don’t have to?
Comparison, EFT first:
Su-57:
The ducts are quite literally geometrically shaped to benefit radar cross section reduction. See the above images.
Refer to the above images.
They could have replaced their Eurofighters with superior F-35’s anyway a long time ago.
“Just forsake your national industry for US MIC’s sake!” is all I hear.
Rafales are actually visible in images.
Cool, yet both are estimated to be 1m^2, so everything you say is wholey irrelevant.
These are the same angle for both fighters
Rafale is much lower RCS… More than 10x lower.
S-ducts? Hahaha, you’re a great story writer man.
Good thing images like this exist:
Rafale is much lower RCS… More than 10x lower.
Cool, source?
The website makes some good estimations, but didn’t account for certain things. There’s some contentions to be made here overall when comparing the Rafale versus the Eurofighter. When both are clean with no weapons or fuel, the Rafale has quite a bit lower RCS. We have the statement of Dassault’s Vice CEO stating that the Rafale has a frontal RCS of 0.01m^2. Let’s compare the Eurofighter and Rafale in terms of features:
First off, the Rafale has a serrated canard reducing the RCS of the canards while the Eurofighter does not (Evidence 1):
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1015732675115491348/1191136708473929798/Comparisons2.png?ex=661c5001&is=6609db01&hm=3fc43d80d571c25c60c753fbc6ffc61fa4c053421f229388175096ebd642c94c&
The intakes of the Rafale are not visible in frontal heading, is serrated, while also being shaped, Eurofighter’s is not. If the Eurofighter is flying, a target that is off to the nose and slightly below it, could easily see into the intake and see the engines.
(Evidence 2):
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1015732675115491348/1191136683123560479/Comparisons1.jpg?ex=661c4ffb&is=6609dafb&hm=9d3ec0b44ddc8a3f51608001628e1eb1798c24745fe39cecb07f04408bc90c91&
The Eurofighter cannot hide it’s IRST, while the Rafale can hide it’s TV/IRST sensors by moving it similar to the Su-57’s IRST, in order to reduce the RCS.
If you can prove that 1: the EJ200 is inferior to the F119 and 2: the Typhoon is unable to supercruise
I will cut off my leg and eat it.
Everything else you said isn’t important but this, and as such - source.
From the Eurofighter website (wording is a bit strange because it’s been through google translate):
That is Eurofighter DA1 (the very first prototype), so the lack of RAM is pretty meaningless (the early DA aircraft were very bare bones).
Apologies, he said that the Rafale is as small as a Sparrow. Here’s the direct quote: “the radar signature seen from the front of a Rafale is the signature of a sparrow”. We have several independent sources stating that the Sparrow bird is an rcs of 0.01m^2
I don’t feel comfortable sharing the source at this moment in time until the Rafale is added. But, you can compare the stealth features of the Rafale and Eurofighter to observe a difference.
Sorry, but this is (from anyone’s point of view) nothing more than a PR statement that isn’t backed up by anything of essence, pointing out design differences is fine (but as @Flame2512 has already stated, the images posted here come from the DA 1 prototype, and I’m sure he’s gonna make a follow up on that too).
I don’t feel comfortable sharing the source at this moment in time until the Rafale is added.
Sure, in that case i’ll resort to Hitchen’s razor until that time comes (so for around ± 2 years I reckon).
Should eat your own words rn
Production models show no visible ram, serration, etc. only on leading edges is there paint.
While you should be the last person telling me that, seeing as you’ve shown to not know that Su-57s ducts are at best semi-S shaped (barely), right after proudly announcing to all of us that Eurofighter isn’t supercruise capable, lol.
@MBDA_Meteor Thanks for reminding me that this feature exists.
I’m not sure what this image really proves the both images are taken with the camera looking up into the intake so you can see the engine, or where the engines would be if the Eurofighter had them fitted.
Here’s one of the design drawings from towards the end of the EFA programme (so not quite final EFT design, but close) You can see that in level flight or even slightly nose up the engines are hidden.
As I say though Eurofighter RCS is known to be 1.0 - 1.5m2 with air-to-air missiles, so there’s not much point speculating.
didnt boxy intakes help during low speed manouvers?, i mean each plane its build for different needs
Most engagements in BVR would be off the nose, Eurofighter’s intakes can be seen through with the radar at slight altitude differences in BVR, as a lower angle at longer altitudes would be “looking up into the intakes”.
Your own image shows you can also see the Rafale’s engines if looking up into the intake. As I’ve said before the Rafale does do a better job of hiding them engines, but its not like the Eurofighter’s engines are completely visible from the front like you claim.
But isn’t it is still somewhat unclear whether that is the plain RCS of a clean Rafale, or the effective RCS with SPECTRA active?
Afaik it’s clean, no spectra.
Yes, if off to the side, but not off the nose straight ahead.
I took the liberty to paint a picture of how the angle of the Eurofighter’s frontal RCS allows for detection of intake at long ranges just slightly below the Eurofighter in altitude. Of course I should preface that the design picture you sent isn’t necessarily indicative of the production Eurofighter, but it’s just to give an example:
Wouldn’t make much sense to me to give RCS in that frontal format seeing as the SPECTRA is a 360 degree jamming system
Claiming the geometry of the Su-57s intakes aren’t ideal for a stealth fighter is just lying to yourself. It quite clearly has significant effort out forth to reduce RCS. The Eurofighter intake design has a curve by happenstance as does the Gripen.
The Rafale ducts quite clearly incorporated better geometry, ram, serration, etc.
