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.
this one is funny because its literally the opposite
its a mostly straight view at the rafale intake and you can see the engine while the eurofighter view is angled way up to see it😂
It’s off to the side instead of straight from the nose. In frontal aspect, the nose of the rafale should block the view of the intake:
you are delusional
Eurofighter Typhoon - Luftüberlegenheitsrolle (archive.org)
or idk take it from the Luftwaffe:
Ausrüstung und Technik: Der Kampfjet Eurofighter (bundeswehr.de)
hmm
idk man
You sound kinda like Gaijin with this reply.
The Dassault’s Vice CEO at the time of the statement was litterally one of the project leader of the Rafale. When he tells you something about it idk why you wouldn’t believe him.
It’s like when Gaijin says that the Stinger cannot pull 22G and the Mistral 30/35 G because the Soviet cannot do it with their Igla. If we got official statement about capabilities, MBDA Brochure and whatnott, why not believe them?
I could also say that the Eurofigther being able to supercruise/mount X weapons /… is a PR statement.
I get it there’ll be always a fierce battle between Eurofighter and Rafale enjoyers but seriously don’t lie to yourself to reassure you that your plane is better than the other.
Rafale is better on certain point while the Eurofigther is better at other.
and you take this from what source? Your consideration again?
https://www.bmlv.gv.at/truppendienst/ausgaben/artikel.php?id=752
“Vorgabe für das neue Kampfflugzeug war ein Radarquerschnitt von maximal 25 Prozent des Radarquerschnittes des “Tornado”. Einige konstruktive Merkmale des “Typhoon” wurden daher in diese Richtung optimiert, insbesondere die großen, kastenförmigen Lufteinläufe. Darüber hinaus wurden einige radarkritische Flächen (Tragflügelvorderkanten, Lufteinläufe, Klappen) mit radarabsorbierenden Materialien beschichtet.”
"Specification for the new fighter was a rcs of maximum 25% of the tornado. Some construction features of the “Typhoon” were therefore optimized in that direction, in particular the large box shaped inlets. In addition to that some rcs critical areas (wing edges, inlets, flaps) were coated with radar absorband materials.
Even from a frontal above view, the engine cannot be seen. Also, radar absorbent materials have been used in the intake, as well as serration being done to the intake. The intake is also curved. From a Boeing engineer’s presentation:
Obviously the engine cannot be seen from certain angles, but as I said earlier, at longer distances, more angle is possible to view the engine.
This is the best way I know how, to illustrate the concept that at longer ranges, the easier it is to see the engine of the Eurofighter’s intake:
Box shape as opposed to circular, although the latter can be done better such as on Rafale. It is poor attempt at reducing RCS, little effort was there.
Wait a minute, when and why did they suspended FeetPics?
