Short description for our Turkish friends:

The HAF pilots of the F-16 block52+ and F-4E AUP had the chance to train with the Rafales M of the CHARLES DE GAULLE which visited Greece twice in the last months.

Ok,I fixed the problem.I could swear that the links were working yesterday.Stupid imageshack was giving me a hard time when I was trying to upload the scans

If someone has the time,please translate the most important points of the article. :)

:applause: Great job Cam, thanks!

I'll see if I can translate some today...

EDIT: Cam, a couple of those scans do not link properly and don't open...

OK, quick summary:

4 Rafale M(marine) F1(T1) from the CDG aircraft carrier square-off against 4 F-16 blk 52+. A Greek Erieye was feeding info to the French ACC, and monitoring the simulated battle for the Greeks. The BVR tactics of the Frech were not impressive, and after some succesful and unsuccesful launches, the Greeks were in the "no-escape" zone of their AIM 120's. The Greeks had a high percentage of launches to downings, while the French percentage was lower, but with a higher range. The Rafales can also fire on 4 targets simultaniously, while the F-16 can fire only on 2. The Rafale can track 40 targets, with prioritizing. All in all, any advantages that the Rafale's have were deemed as marginal in this AA batle with the blk 52+.

Also said the French had a fairly serious problem with the mission computer, but that was the only problem. The capabilities of the radar to locate targets, and the ECM and ECCM suites are very impressive, capable of giving a complete view of the operational combat environment without AWACS. It can locate enemy radar signals to their precise location from over 200 miles away. F2 and F3 will have many vast improuvements from experience gained from the F1.

the Rafale has also had a chance to train against US ACC, with F-14's and F-18's, as well as the F-16's. The F-14 and F-18's were easy prey. Afgainst the F-18's, the Rafale's easily out-maneuvred the F-18. The US did not want to engage the French at BVR, not wanting to compare AIM-120's to Mica's.


So if the Rafale isn't clearly better than the F-16, why should we buy them? Or do the Frenchies have some more tricks we don't know about?

We should clarify that the problem eith the mission computer was somtyhing happening during the first rafale operations in afganistan and not during the training excercises here in Greece.It is a problem occuring every 1 milion hours they say so the French equipped the rafale with a second computer and thus problem solved.
Why buy them? Well thermopyles how long will f16s last?..And by the way a friend of mine(ikaros) told me that delta winged planes such as the m2k and the rafale are more manouverable during closed dogfights.

True about the mission computer, thanks for adding that. I know little from AF situations, all I know is what I read here. My point is that if there is only a negligable difference between them and the F-16 is 20mio less, we should not be in a hurry to get them untill the TuAF gets their new plane, or untill F2 and F3 come out.

If anyone has more expertise on this, I would like to read thier opinion. ChrisCRTS? Digenis? Alepou? Chris450?

Arme de l'air declared her first fighter unit ready to service in Juli! With F-2! ;)

true the F2 is entering service also in the French Navy..the first Rafale M F2 was delivered in April,and by the end of the year the second will follow..

the aircraft our boys faced were M version F1standard

the major points....

1)our lack of RWR..the French "aborted" most of the times we got a lock on them...we didnt ,coz we didnt know it due to the absence of such a RWR system..

2)the great performance of the AGP-68(V)9 we use...gave us the oportunity to spot the French from quite a long distance and coordinate our reactions...through the link system between our 52s..which lead to confirmed shots on 2-3 Rafales..
and receive an unconfirmed numbers of shots too ofcource...

3)due to the passive mode of the RBE2 its range is inferior to the active AESA,and HAF estimates that in terms of range it must not be superior to the AGP-(V)9

4)after the first co-training the French requested a second one ...to test their new gem...which is obviously flaterring to the crews and the performance of the 115CW

5)the ECCM of the 52s worked smoothely when the Spectra of the Rafale entered in ECM mode..

6)while the French pilots reported all the shots as a shoot-down, Greek side improved its performance placing the majority of its shots in the "noescape" zone of the Ammram,unlike the previous encounter..

7)in all,the Rafale showed a marginal superiority but with a large numbr of PK (low probability of success) shots,unlike the 52s...fewer shots but in the no escape zone..

8)one of our EMB-145H worked closely with the CDG carrier,testing its Link16 and Link11...After its take-off from its base,established a connection within 10 mins with the French carrier ...thus certifying its capabilities in netcentric ops ,something usefull other co-trainings with the French in the future

Delta winged fighters like high altitude & speed with few turns.
All fighters have strengths and weaknesses, It’s the pilots job to use his planes strengths to his advantage.

Delta winged fighters have better Instantaneous turn rates, but bleed energy more quickly.
A Mirage 2000s ITR is something like 23°/sec and then drops to STR 12-13°/sec, with the F-16 falcon having a STR at about 15°/sec.

(STR= Sustained Turn Rate)
(ITR= Instantaneous Turn Rate)

F-16 Falcon accelerates faster than the Mirage 2000 until about mach 1.4 then the Mirage 2000 is better due to its engines which were designed for high mach speeds and high altitude.

Many factors effect turn rates like altitude, speed, what the fighter has under its wings ie, weapons, external fuel tanks which create drag.

Here are some observed rates I found on the net, for the Mirage 2000.

Cheers,
Alepou 340MB :hathello:

Thank you both for the very informative posts :bow:

is there a big difference between the F1 and F2? Have we accepted the invitation for additional training with the French? Will the F2 hold significant advantages over the 52+?

Well,after their -not so impressing- performance,I guess that the French will ask for another training session with our Block52+ as soon as they will have some F2s operational....

the latest unoficial "trials" onlyprove that whats more important is the sub-systems of the aircraft and its weapons and not the platform....the 52s are the most advanced version of an outdated platform....the Rafale F1 is a 4rth gen fighter,but in its early stages of its maturing process...the F2 and the F3 will be very very capable war machines..we shouldnt let the results of the unofficial co-training fool us...

Thanks to all for the good infos...and especially Cam for scanning the articel..

Discussing who is best or worsts doesnt have sense. There are many items to discuss here. Pilot capability,ability-weather-weapon and loaded-unloaded....etc.


On the other hand,

Beside, a fighter plane is components sometimes is more important than itself.
Such as, Turkish f16s, with AIM-9X (5th phase),JHMCS (5th phase),JDAM(3rd phase),WCMD(3rd phase),JSOW(3rd phase),Link 16 (2nd phase),AGM-88B/84H/84L/88B integration (2nd phase),Litening-III (4th phase),SPEWS-II (4th phase),AIM-120C5 (1st phase),AVS-9(1st phase).
What is comparison with Greek F16s? can anyone here to tell whole phases of Greece? Having b52+ cannot bring us last word.

and I hope Turkey will have JASSM, and take R7 position soon.



best wishes,
CDTRF

after turkish f 4 s best plane in the world is this f 18 and f5 mixture iranese plane :rofl:



http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i156/kok...220385_orig.jpg




they say it is totaly made in iran and iraniese design.

i think they alittle copied from big devil usa !!!! :P

kaan

Why redisign a plane? Especially when it's 6454765276523765363547632543276 years old...

:roflmao: Sure looks like it! by the looks of that plane, I would not advertize that I made/designed it :damn:

Comparing the Hellenic Bl52+ with the Turkish CCIP:

* New airframes have longer life.
* Conformal fuel tanks.
* Increased internal space for electronics (allowing 2-seater to be missionized)

* APG-68 V(9) Radar
* ASPIS II ECM Suite
* 600 US gal external tanks

I am assuming that Turkey will indeed acquire JHMCS, MIDS/Link16, replace and update MMC's, acquire AIM-9X, etc. The first three points listed however cannot be addressed. The last three will most likely not be addressed.

Additionally, you would need to compare weapon systems and instruments used. For example, IRIS-T vs AIM-9X; AIM-120C vs AIM-120 A/B; HTS, recon pods, etc. etc.

plus they are available now,and HAF pilots are training on them as we speak...
this comparison will make any sense after 2011 if everything goes as planned...

according to the Lockheed Martin statement of July 20th 2005 the process of fitting the new components in the test platform will start in 2007 and will last for 2 years...from the beggining of 2009 TAF will start flight tests that according to the statement will last also 2 years...so THK will declare her first upgraded F-16s operational in 2011 in five years from now...

337Sq will be declared operational again in the near future as all of its 52s are in place....which means that the F-16Bl52/JHMCS kombo will start operating in the readiness of the northern sector(besides the southern sector/Souda) in the respective FOB of 110CW...

Hello to all. I am new in this forum and would like to add some (foreign) insight tothe informations which have been provided by diverse posters on this topic.

To start with: I would like to point out that the BVR culture in Marine Nationale was basically quasy ZERO up to 2000.

There have been NO possibility of training in BVR untill the arrival of the first Rafale Ms because of course the F-8FN didn't have BVR capabilties.

The only way this "culture" could have been present at this time was with exchange AdA pilots qualifying on CdG or MN pilots having been flying Mirage 2000 Cs (Less likely the 5-Fs as this spot is rather hard to get due to the limited amount of airframes available)...

At the time of the exercise, the 12F pilots were still evaluating their (new) tactics and the Rafale M F-1 had only very basic softwares for all A2a weapons.

The results should be very different by now that both pilots and aircraft (even the F1s) are sorte.

About the teething problems encountered with the MDPU.

It is a Mirage 5-F unit, fitted (3 X serial) to the F1.

It was never designed as a definitive fit but as an alternative to the F-2 standard MDPU still in developement at the time.

The F-2 MDPU is 50 time more powerfull and instead of 3 of them there are 18 so the performances of the aircraft systems should be greatly enhanced too.
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r279/sa...AESA-OSF-IP.jpg
One of the developement taking place NOW: RBE2 AESA + OSF (ng)
There are some details which i will come up with now that i can log on but to finish this first post, i wish to say that i really believe that the Rafale is the best aircraft the Greek A-F could purchase now and even after the service entry of F-35. Good forum! Regards, Stardust. B)

First of all welcome on board Stardust...
Qualitative Infos like your statement above are welcomed allways...

so I suppose we open a Raphale vs Eurofighter thread...(i hate this VS ,,,stuff..but it might be possible to get some conclusions as well)

Hello Lord. Thanks for your sympathetic welcome.

I thought that what i knew about the aircraft, in particular during the early days of its service life with MN was relevant to the subject of this topic.

I have to say i always have been a great fan of the F-16, having seen it flown vs the Vigen and Mirage F-1 at the Paris A-S in 1975 for the LWF comperition where i though of it as a stroke of aerodynamic genius...

A more modern and inovative design that the Mirage F-1 which is my favorite "conventional" aircraft.

But now there is a new kid on the block and even the mighty 2000 have a very hard time with it. To be followed!!!

PS i would rather not get into one of these vs, they are plaging the web and generally leads nowhere... But i'm ready. ;)

Having read more atentively the translation from Thermopyles, i picked up a few details which are on line with what is was saying earlier:

The decision to rush the aircraft for service with Marine Nationale was taken on the ground that the F-8F Crusaders were increasingly difficult and costly to maintain in Operatioal conditions.

Initialy, the standard F1 (LF1) was the very first software release of the M A2A capabilities package and was lacking advanced A2A radar modes, A2A gun mode etc.

The First production Rafale M F-1 (M-1) was flown from Bordeaux to 12F Landivisiau and traped onbord CdG on mid-July 99 but the official ceremony for the "first" two Rafales (2 and 3) was held in December 2000 At Landivisiau Naval Air Station.
M1.jpg

There were SIX pilots among wich TWO AdA exchange pilots involved in the initial OPEVAL and tactic elaboration campaign.

After acceptance flight they started OPEVAL with 4 12F pilots and 4 AdA exchange pilots.

All six were tasked with the evaluation and tactics elaboration campaign while M1 had been loaned to Dassault for developement of the standard F1 and F2.

Untill 2002 all Rafale M F1 were delivered at LF1 intermediate standard and later put to full F1 standard onboard the Carrier during the Operation Herakles as developement progressed, in Marsh there were 7 Rafale Ms onboard CdG.

The gun (GIAT 30M791) wasn't mounted and the software for it was still been developed.

There were TWO different version of the SNECMAS M88, the basic M88-E1 and the newly developed M88-E4 which offers increased TBO and reduced SFC (3/4%) replacing it.

Standard F1 is A2A only, with MICA RF and Magic IIs.

SPECTRA defense suite is limited to its bare minimum too and the difference between the two standards are even noticeable visually (Advanced multi-threat dispenser).
http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/5125/m106micaia9.jpg
Here M1 with 6 MICA RF.
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/8263/m11f2vv4.jpg
And M11 the first M F2.

When CdG departed for its Afgan mission, M2 and M3 were already onboard but were later joined by M4, M5 and M6 in January, weither M7 and M8 flew 5,500km non-stop from Istres on Marsh 10th to trap on CdG after four in-flight refuellings.

All 7 Rafale M onboard CdG were retrofited to F1 standard during the Carrier operational tour, this took about a month per aircraft.

This is when the MDPU issues had been most noticed:

They were promply tackled, but the fact that the aircrafts were deployed 6.000 km from base (and the manufacturer workshop) was making things more difficult for ther Dassault and MN technicians.

I dont know where D.E.A got his informations about it but it is inacurate infortunatly:

Quote: "so the French equipped the rafale with a second computer and thus problem solved."

If only it had been so simple:

There are THREE 2084 XRI MDPUs on the F1; these are computing units as fited to the early version of the Mirage 5F.

They were found not to offer the percentage of redundency they should have when one failed and the problem was way more complex than simply adding another one which BTW wouldn't have helped in case of failure.

The FACT is: They were probabily not designed to work in serial and were only used as an interim measure pending upgrade to F2 standard which developement had started.

http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/5256/m1exocetdk9.jpg
It is sometime difficult to figure wich aircraft is with the 12F as they seems to be loaned to Dassault for standard developements, but here is M1 in Exocet Carrier Trial, which means that the aircraft is if full F2 standard (or F2 developement standard).

That's it for the time being, i hope this have been informative.

Coming from someone with the apperant proficiancy as you, this means something. From your mouth to Gods ear!

:horror: :bow: :horror: :bow:

Warm welcome, stardust :friendship: :drink:

It have to be said that MICA performances are way better than AIM-120, its range is officially more than 80 km and it can pull more than 50Gs.

In fire and forget mode its exprected KP is about 75% so the French calling a kill at longer range had certainly done so for a good reason.

French 2000-5Fs fired the first MICA IR on 23June 2005 (BVR).
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/dga/votre_espac...mica_infrarouge

-----

MICA was fired BAKWARD during a DGA test-campaign on 19/06/07 from a Rafale F2.

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/air/base/breves...evient_la_cible

-----MICA datas.

Characteristics:
Length: 3.1 m

Diameter: 160 mm

Weight: 112 kg

Warhead: 12 kg blast and fragmentation explosive

All-weather missile

Hardened against electronic and IR counter measures

Solid fuel propulsion

High manoeuvrability using 4 jet deflectors in the nozzle.

Guidance modes:

Fully autonomous after launch

Throughout flight, uses inertial guidance with intermediate target update from the Aircraft/Missile link (LAM) to the aircraft’s navigation/attack system.

On final trajectory: active radar or IR imaging seekers

Performance:
Multi target / multiple launch

Rail or ejector mount launch

Range:< 500 m to > 80 km

Speed: mach 4

Manoeuvring load factor: greater than 50 g
http://www.ixarm.com/Technical-card,11177