Jump to content

Rafale HUD dogfights


Spyros

Recommended Posts

Both wing loadings are appear to be so low to begin with that it doesn't matter so much. As for doing a cobra (this is what you are describing), who the heck cares other than air-show fans? :D It was doable by pretty old planes, some of them american, and it doesn't mean much.

 

No, we can't - at least anyone who has a critical view of things can't. The missile isn't part of anything, it doesn't count - they could have just as well shot each other in the face pre-merge. What's the point?

The fight is called off without a guns kill being claimed, there's no indication of the trigger being pressed, and the pipper is never on the 22 long enough to claim a valid shot.

 

The fight went on for too long, so there is no clear superiority to be seen anywhere.

Excuses excuses excuses. We know what we saw. F-22 was outclassed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Who is 'we'? :megalol:

 

If what you saw has you concluding that the 22 was outclassed, then I can comfortably say that you don't know the first thing about BFM :D

 

Excuses excuses excuses. We know what we saw. F-22 was outclassed.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is 'we'? :megalol:

 

If what you saw has you concluding that the 22 was outclassed, then I can comfortably say that you don't know the first thing about BFM :D

But you are comfortably wrong. Given that the F-22 couldn't out-manoeuvre a Rafale, its chances of out-manoeuvring a MICA IR with thrust-vectoring is exactly nil.

 

The aim of BFM is to be behind your opponent. Do you not understand this? Maybe the F-22 thought he couldn't be seen.:megalol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, ok. Well, the MICA doesn't matter, that Rafale was shot down with a 120 in the face before it ever saw the Raptor.

 

Is that the argument you want to have? :D

 

The aim of BFM in the real world is to achieve a kill (in this case a guns kill, since it was a guns exercise) within a certain turn limit. The Rafale may have got close, but failed, and that is why he never called guns or claimed a kill. I know that you don't understand this and don't want to, but see, militaries are more about practicality than theoretical blah blah, that's why they make up all these rules :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The aim of BFM is to be behind your opponent.

 

No, it isn't. The aim of BFM is to either, obtain a position from which you can kill the enemy, or deny the enemy from gaining position on you. In WWII or Vietnam that meant being behind the other guy, not anymore.

 

Do you not understand this?

 

GG does, you don't.

 

As has been pointed out, with modern fighters in a real fight there would be no more than a few short seconds of "BFM" it any at all. And that is not because one would kill each other BVR (although they probably would), it's because with modern IIR All Aspect missiles, you can quite happily shoot the other guy in the face without ever needing to turn.

 

For this reason ACM/BFM training is all highly scripted, with specific pre-determined RoE designed to meet a specific training requirement. Very, very rarely do NATO fighters meet each other in a "free" fight, because doing so would be pointless. This allows pilots to learn the skills needed if the BVR kill doesn't happen and/or the all aspect shot isn't available.

 

Ever flown a guns only mission, or heaters only mission in FC3 or another sim? Well guess what, real pilots do it in real fighters as well.

 

All of you suggesting the Rafale outclassed the Raptor, what would you say if I told you that when we took the Typhoon's out to Corsica a few years ago they did the same to the Rafales. Of course, the fact that they were meant to as the Rafales were playing OPFOR for trainee Typhoon drivers if one that would probably be overlooked.

 

What about the Hawks "shooting down" Typhoons daily over the North sea? Well they do, so I guess the Hawk outclasses the Typhoon then yes? So by extension the Hawk is the best fighter in the world as it beats the Typhoon, which beats the Rafale, which beat the Raptor. And that is internet, armchair warrior logic 101. :D


Edited by Eddie

 

Spoiler

Intel 13900K (5Ghz), 64Gb 6400Mhz, MSi RTX 3090, Schiit Modi/Magi DAC/AMP, ASUS PG43UQ, Hotas Warthog, RealSimulator FSSB3, 2x TM MFDs + DCS MFDs, MFG Crosswinds, Elgato Steamdeck XL

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it isn't. The aim of BFM is to either, obtain a position from which you can kill the enemy, or deny the enemy from gaining position on you. In WWII or Vietnam that meant being behind the other guy, not anymore.

 

 

 

GG does, you don't.

I think you're grasping at semantics now. Let me put it another way. The aim of BFM isn't to be in a little box on your opponent's HUD.

 

Any further semantic issues with that?

 

And that is not because one would kill each other BVR (although they probably would), it's because with modern IIR All Aspect missiles, you can quite happily shoot the other guy in the face without ever needing to turn.

Correct me if I'm wrong but actually the F-22 can't yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, ok. Well, the MICA doesn't matter, that Rafale was shot down with a 120 in the face before it ever saw the Raptor.

Would that be the same 120 that has never gotten a combat kill beyond 35km and has a Pk of 0.46 against opponents with the same skill level as flying clowns with no ECM between 5 and 20nm? And that was also against opponents that don't have AAMs capable of downing 120s or the means to detect their launch.

 

Is that the argument you want to have? :D

Happily.

 

The aim of BFM in the real world is to achieve a kill (in this case a guns kill, since it was a guns exercise) within a certain turn limit. The Rafale may have got close, but failed, and that is why he never called guns or claimed a kill. I know that you don't understand this and don't want to, but see, militaries are more about practicality than theoretical blah blah, that's why they make up all these rules :)

Looked like a gun kill to me. Big ass 30x150B with 48g PBXN-5 each. One hit and bye-bye.

 

I know you love the Raptor and you won't be able to sleep at night knowing that it got its shit so badly pushed in but there comes a time in life when one must realise certain realities. Santa Claus does not exist and the F-22 is not invincible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're grasping at semantics now. Let me put it another way. The aim of BFM isn't to be in a little box on your opponent's HUD.

 

Any further semantic issues with that?

 

There are no semantic issues. You don't understand BFM, instead throwing out ridiculous arguments like 'The Rafale can fly at 110AoA without TVC'.

You can easily end up in a bandit's HuD in many situations for valid reasons, such as drag and bag, forced high-aspect passes due to the other plane turning better, etc. For the most part though, it's the pilot, not the plane.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but actually the F-22 can't yet.

 

You're wrong.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The USAF should just give up on F-22's, those T-38's would murder Rafales! :D

Ah, so let's chart the progress of the F-22 kill deniers:

 

1. No engagement ever took place.

 

2. No kill occurred.

 

3. The F-22s were not trying.

 

:megalol::megalol::megalol::doh:

 

4. The F-22 never existed?

 

5. It was the terrorists that done it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're grasping at semantics now. Let me put it another way. The aim of BFM isn't to be in a little box on your opponent's HUD.

 

No, it's to deny him a shot. You don't need to be in his HUD FoV for him to kill you, not anymore. But likewise simply being in the HUD FoV does not mean he can kill you. You can be constantly passing through the other guy's HUD, but if he can't get a valid shot off due to your manoeuvring then you've done your job. These things depend very much on who you're fighting.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but actually the F-22 can't yet.

 

No, it can't carry the AIM-9X. But it does carry the 9M, which is still all aspect.

 

But ultimately, as has been said, in the context of this discussion and these videos, it is all meaningless. It's a HUD tape from a DACT training sortie, which shows no valid gun shot, so the Rafale did not "kill" the Raptor.

 

And as GG pointed out the fight went on for a long time, far too long in fact. Outside of canned training, either the Raptor's wingman would have killed the Rafale, or the Rafale's wingman would have killed the Raptor well within the first minute.

 

Videos like this are cool, and give a great look at real HUD symbology but that is it. Any "X is better than Y because this video says so" discussion is just daft.


Edited by Eddie

 

Spoiler

Intel 13900K (5Ghz), 64Gb 6400Mhz, MSi RTX 3090, Schiit Modi/Magi DAC/AMP, ASUS PG43UQ, Hotas Warthog, RealSimulator FSSB3, 2x TM MFDs + DCS MFDs, MFG Crosswinds, Elgato Steamdeck XL

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are no semantic issues. You don't understand BFM, instead throwing out ridiculous arguments like 'The Rafale can fly at 110AoA without TVC'.

The Rafale did manage 100+deg in testing without TVC.

 

You can easily end up in a bandit's HuD in many situations for valid reasons, such as drag and bag, forced high-aspect passes due to the other plane turning better, etc. For the most part though, it's the pilot, not the plane.

:megalol:

 

 

You're wrong.

:megalol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would that be the same 120 that has never gotten a combat kill beyond 35km and has a Pk of 0.46 against opponents with the same skill level as flying clowns with no ECM between 5 and 20nm? And that was also against opponents that don't have AAMs capable of downing 120s or the means to detect their launch.

 

There you go, throwing out silly arguments again. The Pk of AMRAAM against targets within 15nm is ~0.8.

The Pk of all AMRAAM shots, including those taken in poor parameters is ~0.6.

Rafale has no useful means of downing AIM-120's. Pilots are trained to maneuver and shoot back at the opponent, not the missile - there's a reason for that.

 

Happily.

 

Cool, Rafale dead, discussion over.

 

Looked like a gun kill to me. Big ass 30x150B with 48g PBXN-5 each. One hit and bye-bye.

 

That's because you don't know what a gun kill looks like.

 

I know you love the Raptor and you won't be able to sleep at night knowing that it got its shit so badly pushed in but there comes a time in life when one must realise certain realities. Santa Claus does not exist and the F-22 is not invincible.

 

:doh:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Real exercise.

 

Was this from an Air Show? Or actual military exercises?

 

 

Note:

 

Air Forces Monthly

April 2010

Page 40, "Justifiably Proud!"

 

The magazine interview Lt. Col. Fabrice Grandclaudon, the Commander of EC 1/7, the Rafale squadron that participated in the Advanced Tactical Leadership Course (ATLC) at the UAE's Air Warfare Centre where this encounter took place.

 

 

AFM: You apparently said 'the Rafale rubbed F-22 - the most modern fighter of the USAF. During six encounters the F-22 hit its goal only once'. The 27th FS doesn't remember the engagements that way and say the F-22 scored several victories against Rafale. Did you offer DACT to the Raptors and did they decline?

 

LCL G: I did not say we 'rubbed them', I said that there was only one shot claimed (ie a simulated kill) for the six that were set-up. I read in a recent issue of Air et Cosmos that it was two. As far as I am concerned, one or two shots of six Basic Fighter Manoeuvres (BFM) encounters is a victory for the F-22 but not an overwhelming one. Not like the one we claimed against the Typhoons after combat in Solenzara, Corsica during September (9 set-up: 8 to 1 for the Rafale*). The other set-ups versus F-22s were terminated for combat deck, an un-decisive situation or lack of fuel. We never shot them down, but we hope to do so soon since we are quite good opposition for them, and it is in the pilot's spirit not to give up!

 

Like almost every nation, we offered Beyond Visual Range DACT, of course, but the F-22 was only authorized to do BFM 1v1 Within Visual Range (WVR) versus foreign countries (except the UK, with whom they did not fight even in the BFMs). I wish we could have done so, but we didn't - which bring me back to Air et Cosmos, where its information about BVR engagement with AMRAAM in stealth mode is wrong: besides the fact that we did not even fly BVR vs F-22s! F-22 was fitted with some specific device to increase their radar signature. It enabled us to have contact with them during work ups for example. But that's not the point here."

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would that be the same 120 that has never gotten a combat kill beyond 35km and has a Pk of 0.46 against opponents with the same skill level as flying clowns with no ECM between 5 and 20nm? And that was also against opponents that don't have AAMs capable of downing 120s or the means to detect their launch.

 

- Since I don't know this stuff. what air to air missiles does the Rafale carry?

- How long have they been in service?

I ask because the AIM-120 has been in service for a while now, allowing it to mature, giving time for manufacturer of the weapons system to improve it and test it.

- How many times have the Rafale missiles been used in combat?

- How successful where they?

- How do they compare to other air to air missiles?

- Where can I find a reliable source of this information?

To whom it may concern,

I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that.

Thank you for you patience.

 

 

Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's to deny him a shot. You don't need to be in his HUD FoV for him to kill you, not anymore. But likewise simply being in the HUD FoV does not mean he can kill you. You can be constantly passing through the other guy's HUD, but if he can't get a valid shot off due to your manoeuvring then you've done your job. These things depend very much on who you're fighting.

I'm fully aware of LOAL but the object of BFM isn't to serve 360 degree rape out to opposing fighters. I realise what you're saying but I think that the unbiased opinion of the video is that the Rafale got the better of him (or her).

 

 

No it can't. At least not operationally.

 

But ultimately, as has been said, in the context of this discussion and these videos, it is all meaningless. It's a HUD tape from a DACT training sortie, which shows no valid gun shot, so the Rafale did not "kill" the Raptor.

How do we know this? 2:30 looked like a gun kill. He was definitely there long enough for a missile shot at 0:50 too.

 

 

And as GG pointed out the fight went on for a long time, far too long in fact. Outside of canned training, either the Raptor's wingman would have killed the Rafale, or the Rafale's wingman would have killed the Raptor well within the first minute.

 

Videos like this are cool, and give a great look at real HUD symbology but that is it. Any "X is better than Y because this video says so" discussion is just daft.

Well we've all had to listen to the "F-22 is better than X and Y at everything" discussion for years without any evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would that be the same 120 that has never gotten a combat kill beyond 35km and has a Pk of 0.46 against opponents with the same skill level as flying clowns with no ECM between 5 and 20nm? And that was also against opponents that don't have AAMs capable of downing 120s or the means to detect their launch.

 

No, that was the early AIM-120A/B. We now use C-5 and beyond. Although those figures are pulled by people with little knowlegde of air combat in the real world, and are utter rubbish.

 

Looked like a gun kill to me. Big ass 30x150B with 48g PBXN-5 each. One hit and bye-bye.

 

Indeed, it might be a "big ass" gun. But if you don't actually pull the trigger to fire it, it doesn't do you much good now does it. And guess what the Rafale pilot never did.........

 

Oh and for the record, I'm not a Raptor fanboy (neither in GG) I actully think the thing is an overpriced cold war relic that arrived 10 years too late and is far too specialised to have real value in the modern world. But that doesn't change the fact that it wasn't outclassed in the videos in this thread.

 

Spoiler

Intel 13900K (5Ghz), 64Gb 6400Mhz, MSi RTX 3090, Schiit Modi/Magi DAC/AMP, ASUS PG43UQ, Hotas Warthog, RealSimulator FSSB3, 2x TM MFDs + DCS MFDs, MFG Crosswinds, Elgato Steamdeck XL

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do we know this? 2:30 looked like a gun kill. He was definitely there long enough for a missile shot at 0:50 too.

 

2:30 isn't a gun kill. It's not there long enough, the trigger isn't pressed, and the kill isn't claimed. The pipper isn't settled, the Raptor pilot is actively jinking, so there's no tracking kill there. I would venture a guess that the Rafale pilot comes off so as not to break the bubble - in other words, it's a safety limit for the pilots first - and he could have fired in real combat, but he'd have been close enough to FOD out his own plane.

 

Well we've all had to listen to the "F-22 is better than X and Y at everything" discussion for years without any evidence.
Not really, more like we've all had to listen to 'T-38 kills F-22's!' 'F-18 kills F-22's!' ... etc.
Edited by GGTharos

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a luneburg lens, colloquially known in the USAF as a 'nutsack'. :)

 

Yes, it's that little sphere under the fuselage, and it gives the plane a huge RCS.

 

That's an interesting point as well...

 

 

raptor_enhancer.jpg

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Well we've all had to listen to the "F-22 is better than X and Y at everything" discussion for years without any evidence.

 

You probably never see the full power of any of these fighters unless they go toe to toe for real... I would think that most countries, not just the US, are not willing to show all their cards during these maneuvers... but I dont know... its just an opinion.

 

I am not sure what this discussion is about anymore anyways... a kill on a Raptor? And? I never saw anyone say it was invincible... more so discussing the realism of the fight... how often would this situation arise in real combat or would this fight been decided before they saw the whites of each others eyes :)

 

I still get confused over the dogging of the F-22s dog fighting abilities when more seems to have been put into the fighters ability to take care of business without having to get into a knife fight... WW2 you had planes that could turn better, or were faster, etc... they play to their strengths and try and use the others weakness to their advantage... isnt that what its all about?

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's an interesting point as well...

 

Like the F-117, most stealth aircraft do not fly without their radar enhancers. Only take them off during combat mission. Working 4 year on the F-117, we never took them off.

To whom it may concern,

I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that.

Thank you for you patience.

 

 

Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Cool, I would think that would take away a rather large part of what the plane was designed to do... and that is not be seen before you are chewing on missile... Is this placed purely for the ability to these maneuvers or is it to simulate some event that would change the RCS? I guess maybe its more so that the foreign powers to get to spend alot of time seeing the F-22's real RCS? Anyways... interesting...

 

It's a luneburg lens, colloquially known in the USAF as a 'nutsack'. :)

 

Yes, it's that little sphere under the fuselage, and it gives the plane a huge RCS.

 

 

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Since I don't know this stuff. what air to air missiles does the Rafale carry?

- How long have they been in service?

I ask because the AIM-120 has been in service for a while now, allowing it to mature, giving time for manufacturer of the weapons system to improve it and test it.

- How many times have the Rafale missiles been used in combat?

- How successful where they?

- How do they compare to other air to air missiles?

- Where can I find a reliable source of this information?

The Rafale carries the MICA IR. It's probably the most advanced AAM in the world right now. And this is coming from a British person about a French missile. Datalinked INS guidance, with DIRCM-resistant IR terminal, TVC, 50+g manoeuvrability, dual use (air-to-air and air-to-surface), 80km range and anti-AAM/SAM capability. Teh Rafale can comfortably carry 10 of them in an air-to-air role due to their lightweight. They don't have the theoretical range of an AIM-120 but then you're not particularly likely to be successful outside 80km or even 50km with a radar missile.

 

IR missiles have statistically proven to have Pks twice that of radar AAMs through Vietnam, Yom Kippur, Falklands, Bekaa Valley, Desert Storm, Yugoslavia and Iraq NFZ.

 

You'll find all the information you need simply by typing pertinent searches. I don't want to provide you with the links because then you'll say I'm leading you but if you type things like "missile kill probability", "air college" and "pdf" into google, you will find your answers.


Edited by UCAS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...