You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. In addition, registered members also see less advertisements. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!
- range: Rafale, around 20% more, - playload: Rafale, around 20% more, - price: Typhoon, around 20% more, - speed: same, - supercruise capability and speed: same, may be the Typhoon is slightly better, - RCS: unknown but because of its bigger size, its air intake shape and its big mecanical radar, the Typhoon probably have a bigger RCS, - Thrust to Weight ratio: the Typhoon is marginally better, - EW suite: we don't know, debatable, - MMI: debatable, - AA weapon integration: the Typhoon integrate good, cheap and widely available US AMRAAM for BVR as well as AIM9X for WVR. This witch give the Typhoon an edge on the export market. The Rafale so far only integrate the MICA EM and MICA IR missiles for both BVR and WVR combat. The MICA is a missile considered as rather "exotic". It's also pretty expensive. Efficient ? coming in both EM and IR version, the IR version being the only long range IR missile in the west, Some would say it would give a definitive advantage. Other would say that it's inferior to the AMRAAM in BVR combat and inferior to the AIM9X in WVR combat. Debatable, but what's sure is that Rafale customers should have the choice, they have not currently. Mind you the Typhoon customers don' have the choice either since it doesn't integrate the MICA. But it's easier to operate the standard: nobody got fired because he bought the AMRAAM.
for numbers some are more qualified (and less lazy) than me.
Actually, I'm not so sure that real confrontation could be more "realistic" than "paper confrontations".
I know that it's easy to be subjective while comparing uncompleted public datas. One will argue that Typhoon is "faster" and has "better MMI", while others will argue that Rafale has "better radar" and "better payload", with no consideration of the context and no real proof.
For a real confrontation, that's practically the same! Official reports will ba as biased as usual official reports; reports from anonymous sources will be countered by other anonymous sources telling the exact opposite. And I'm not talking about the fact that "real" exercises are made to train PILOTS, and not to select a dick contest winner between two or more aircraft models.
The context is essential: if a Rafale pilot specialized in air-to-ground succeed in virtually killing a pair of Typhoon's pilots specialized in air-to-air, it's not the same that if a air-air trained Typhoon pilots claim a kill over a heavy loaded Rafale B !!
We have to remember that F-16 and Mirage 2000 were the subjects of such "X vs Y" contests for decades now!! And we still don't have a single answer that isn't contested by someone! Even when many countries use both the aircraft in their airforce (Greece, UAE, Taiwan, Egypt...)
Rafale demonstrated a sustain mach 2 max speed not dash . Typhoon ? -
Quote:
RCS: unknown but because of its bigger size, its air intake shape and its big mecanical radar, the Typhoon probably have a bigger RCS
Rafale has a much lower RCS than typhoon . typhoon= 1-2m2 rafale = 0.1 m2
Quote:
Thrust to Weight ratio: the Typhoon is marginally better
rafale has also a marginally better wing loading -
Quote:
MMI: debatable
No , the rafale MMI is much better than typhoon , that's a fact . Even the chief of the RAF agreed with that
Quote:
AA weapon integration: the Typhoon integrate good, cheap and widely available US AMRAAM for BVR as well as AIM9X for WVR. This witch give the Typhoon an edge on the export market. The Rafale so far only integrate the MICA EM and MICA IR missiles for both BVR and WVR combat. The MICA is a missile considered as rather "exotic". It's also pretty expensive. Efficient ? coming in both EM and IR version, the IR version being the only long range IR missile in the west, Some would say it would give a definitive advantage. Other would say that it's inferior to the AMRAAM in BVR combat and inferior to the AIM9X in WVR combat.
The price of the amram is three time inferior to the MICA but the MICA is much better than amram because it can be use in dogfight and BVR , it have the same range but it is much more manouevrable than amram . The MICA IR give also a decisive egde to the rafale in BVR because it is totaly stealtly and much more difficult to counter then a EM missile because it is immune agains't flare witch is the only possible countermesure vs this type of threat .
TMor to StormShadow : I'm sorry to tell you this for your first message here, but i have to. This part of the forum is called "What HAPPENED versus XYZ".
For instance, when you write : "Rafale has a much lower RCS than typhoon .", this is far from being a proved point, and may result in flame wars...
Also, if you really want to start a discussion about beliefs, then, open a new thread in "General discussion->Other".
On some area like RCS, MMI, or EW suite, it is impossible to demonstrate anything even with sources, so "Rafale has a much lower RCS than typhoon", "the rafale MMI is much better than typhoon, "but the MICA is much better than amram because it can be use in dogfight and BVR , it have the same range", etc.. is just your deep feeling, witch is uninteresting imo when one speak of weapon carateristics you can't known, else you wouldn't speak on a forum.
As for their respective flight envelops, their aerodynamic layout and TWR make the Mirage 2000 vs F-16 story the best way to compare them, Rafale was optimised for speed below M 1.8, Typhoon for speed above this Mach.
A Rafale flying within the best part of its flight envelop have every chances to out fly a Typhoon in close combat, above it, Typhoon will be equal to superior because Rafale fortes aren't compensating as much for its lower TWR.
We're talking Instantaneous and Sustained turn rates but more to it; roll rate, roll and pitch authority, FCS high incidence and g limits (soft limitation), mechanical and structural limitation (Time from pilot input to response and Maximum structural load), High AoA aerodynamics, level of static and dynamic instability, in brief, something a lot more complex than rough figures alone...
To compute a turn rate (both inst and sust) accurately, one needs a structural load limit as a figure for example, so debating about Rafale vs Typhoon turn rate is better brought back to their respective turning point which according to a Typhoon pilot known as Tarnish are... EQUAL...
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 12:49 pm Posts: 416 Location: Near Paris (France)
Wingman, i'm sorry.
I know how confident you are toward your conclusions, but this part of the forum is intended to relate only to actual events, confirmed and reported by authoritative sources.
Anything else may give a lot of work to moderators !
This where a good understanding of the laws of aerodynamics are necessary.
I can give the short version if you wish.
Maximum Turn rate occurs when the Lift Coefiscient (Cl) and the Maximum load factor are at their maximum.
To know which aircraft have the most lift, compare their respective STOL performances.
Rafale wins hand down with a slightly weaker engine.
A higt turn rate requiers:
High Cl.
High Air density.
High Load Factor.
Low wing loading.
In every situation where the combat load and Air density are equal Rafale wins.
To sustain a turn you need thrust:
This is the only thing sliglty in favour of Tyhnoon, if you whant to do the maths yourself even giving them an equal Cl you'll end up with my conclusion simply because one have more thrust (sustained) the other a lower wing load (turn rate) (Mirage 2000 vs F-16).
BTW these are etablished and proven equations, valid for every single aircraft, before getting into the integrated vs long moment-harm canard story they DO apply and the results are visible (Low speed performances and Maximum AoA).
Be careful, Roland !!! This is another thread started here without article about confrontation...
I think Rafale has met Typhoon 2 times : -Rafale M F1 vs italian Typhoon (block 2x ?) ; -Rafale F2 vs german Typhoon (block ?).
We have to report about who won. It's very hard to draw any conclusion
Block 2 in the first case and supposley block 5 in the later one, but definitely not below block 2B standard.
@Roland, the AIM-9X isn't integrated into the Typhoon, the sole Sidewinder version integrated is the AIM-9L. Other short range missiles are of european origin (ASRAAM & IRIS-T)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
(rules)
