Bu sitede bulunan yazılar memnuniyetsizliğiniz halınde olursa bizimle iletişime geçiniz ve o yazıyı biz siliriz. saygılarımızla

    eurofighter typhoon vs rafale

    1 ziyaretçi

    eurofighter typhoon vs rafale bilgi90'dan bulabilirsiniz

    Rafale vs Eurofighter

    Rafale vs Eurofighter

    Dassault Rafale vs Eurofighter Typhoon

    1. With the advent of BVR and AAM……the dogfights have lost significance in air warfare. Eurofighter seems to have a bigger RCS (radar cross section)…..which is a disadvantage in era of missile warfare apart from early detection by radars

    2. After considering all these facts, I do wonder that did India did take a wise decision by choosing Rafale over the Eurofighter Typhoon.

    Also the deal between India and France has gone to another level of expense, which comes out to be more than the double of the initial amount. And when all this is going on, no one seems to be worried that the time is just getting wasted in finalizing the deal, when the India badly needs another air-superiority fighter to complement it’s Sukhoi 30 MKI fleets, in today’s scenario , when it is getting regular threats from it’s neighbors like Pakistan and China. Lets hope for the best.

    3. The Eurofighter is primarly an air superiority fighter (with the option to fit for multirole purposes), while the Raphale in the original concept has a major focus in tactical support for ground forces (with the option to fit for dogfighting just in case).
    This is due to the strategic situation of NATO countries during the cold war: Germany and Italy were directly exposed to a Soviet invasion thus requiring to struggle in the air against Russian fighters (particulary considering that without air superiority you can’t support your ground forces neither defend them against enemy strikes), while France was more covered and had a primary goal in supporting its forces deployed in Germany.
    Besides, the Raphale is also designed for being embarked over carriers, while the Eurofighter is solely a ground based airplane.

    4. Eurofighter is over… production will be stop before 2020 and now there are a lot of technicals problems…

    5. The Rafale is a better bomber AND and a better dogfighter.
    Even F-16 of F/A-18 have good chances to defeat typhoons in a moke fight.
    Lies about the superiority of the Typhoon vanished when they had to face reality.
    Typhoon stays a good interceptor and there is no surprise with that, it was designed for a such role.

    6. I don’t know much (if anything) about the technical side of aeronautics, but from what I can see is that the only reason the Rafale was predicted the winner of a guns only WVR dogfight is because it has the bigger gun.
    the EF has maneuverability and thrust-to-weight ratio advantage. meaning that it can get into position better than the Rafale, it is no good having the better gun if you don’t get a chance to shoot it.

    7. The decision from the French to pull out of the EF project so as to build the Rafale may not be all that bad a move. Yes, the EF is a better jet, but the Rafale is cheaper to build and possibly maintain. Not to mention the significant industrial advantage the French get from going it alone.

    8. As of 2014 everyone knows that Rafale is much more efficient than Typhoon which was humiliated in ATLC and Lybia by Rafale. Not even talking about upcoming Rafale F3R standard. Rafale weapons payload is 9.5 tons and its manoeuvrability and avionics are superior. Actually the only area where Typhoon is better is interception, cause it is a faster aircraft. But once dogfight begins, you better be in the Rafale.

    9. When comparing these two European fighters, Eurofighter is a bit better, apparently thanks to a little more advanced avionics and technology, such as Euroradar CAPTOR Radar.

    Although the Rafale can carry more weapons that are connected to the 14 points of connection (and even nuclear weapons), Eurofighter carries something better weapons, especially in the case of air-to-air missiles.

    Rafale is armed with air-to-surface MBDA AM-39 Exocet anti-ship missile and MBDA CVS401-Perseus (in the future), while Eurofighter carries AGM-65 Maverick, AGM-88 HARM, Taurus KEPD 350, Storm Shadow / Scalp EG and Brimstone…

    10. Rafale is better than typhoon in all areas and all confrontations year were fatal for the typhoon (atlp, solenzara etc … ) Dassault fighters are considered among the most efficient in the world in terms of combat even if they are not bigger. Rafale is a omnirole fighter from his conception, not the typhoon and the argument is to give more engine thrust or longer range radar is bogus because you must take into consideration all the other parameters, weight, radar syrface, weapon system, aerodynamics etc …Rafale is a must of fighter jet combat. He is more agile with only 15t of thrust, totaly omnirôle and combat proven, not the typhoon…

    11. The lenghthy rebuttal ended with Eurofighter asserting that “throughout the exercise Typhoon was always carrying a greater payload than Rafale, Typhoon always came into the fight above Rafale and Typhoon take off performance was always more stunning than Rafale – all fully as expected.”Typhoon is more manoeuvrable, more technologically advance and faster. Therefore will be a better dogfighter. Rafale is however a better bomber.

    12. Peter Collins stated Rafale as a “war-fighter par excellence”. He added that he deemed the Rafale to be the best and most complete combat aircraft that he had ever flown. He concluded in saying that if he had to go into combat, on any mission, against anyone, he would, without question, choose the Rafale.”
    And it mentions also how rafale is superior in dogfighting (far superior actually)….

    13. a) Energy: Additional kinetik and potential energy is an important advantage in a dog fight. The Typhoon can fly higher and faster than the Rafale.

    b). In order to gain the energy advantage one must climb as high and as fast as possible at the beginning of a dogfight. The Typhoon climbs faster than the Rafale.

    c). In order to outmaneuver the opponent one must accelerate and turn faster. The typhoon has a higher thrust/weight ratio, meaning it can accelerate faster. The Typhoon has a lower wing load 310 kg/m² vs. 322 kg/m². Additionally, the Typhoon is aeronautically more unstable than the Rafale. This means that the point of lift is further in front than the centre of mass. The plane is going to turn (pitch) faster than the Rafale. In order to counter this tendency, the canards are much further away from the centre of mass, in order to have a larger lever for pushing down the nose of the Typhoon in straight flight. The effect is that the Typhoon can permanently pull 9G turns supersonically, whereas the Rafale cannot. The only advantage of the Rafales canard configuration is that it can fly slower before stalling. But, this has little relevance in a dogfight, where you don’t want to be a sitting duck. This Rafale’s canard configuration was implemented, since a slow landing speed facilitates adapting the airplane to an aircraft carrier. But, it compromises the agility of the plane at high speeds.


    Rafale vs Eurofighter Flight Cost Per Hour



    Overall and BVR ratings

    BVR (Beyond Visual Range) Ratings

    Dogfight (close to medium range) Ratings

    Size Comparison


    Yazı kaynağı : aviatia.net



    In 2015, Research Fellow at the RUSI Think-tank Justin Bronk, compared Europe’s two middle-weight fighter aircraft, the Typhoon and Rafale,  The relatively subtle differences between these two superbly capable aircraft have inspired a great deal of heated debate, often poisoned by pride and nationalism. His article provoked a huge response from readers around the world. We went back to Justin Bronk and asked him to revisit this analysis to include half a decade’s worth of development and weapons integration which has now placed these two aircraft at the top of their game.

     Justin Bronk is a Research Fellow of Military Sciences at the Royal United Services Institute and Editor of RUSI Defence Systems.

    What is the biggest difference in the philosophy of the designs?

    “With common DNA in terms of initial development and requirements setting work before France spilt away from what became the Eurofighter consortium to develop the Rafale, it is unsurprising that both aircraft have relatively similar design philosophies compared to their competitors globally. The biggest source of differences comes from the French requirement that the basic airframe design be suitable for CATOBAR carrier operations, which carries particular requirements in terms of relatively high-alpha, low speed handling especially with external stores still attached. The Rafale was also designed from the outset as a nuclear delivery system, which was not a major consideration for the Eurofighter nations.

    In terms of the design philosophy effects on the final aircraft, the Rafale has a greater emphasis on load carrying and exceptional handling even at very low speeds whilst the Typhoon as a design is more focused on maximum performance at altitude, and agility at transonic and supersonic speeds. This is all relative, however, as both aircraft perform very similarly in most scenarios compared to other types.


    At time of writing the following comparisons would be for the latest F3R Standard Rafale with the RBE2 AESA radar vs a Typhoon FGR.4 in UK service with the CAPTOR-M. I will add an estimate in brackets for the Kuwaiti/Qatari standard Typhoon with the ‘Radar 0’ version of the CAPTOR-E AESA which is flying and enters service this year in Kuwait. For reference the German/Spanish ‘Radar 1’ standard will add further capabilities and the UK’s ECRS2 version will be a different beast entirely with advanced ground mapping, GMTI and EW capabilities in addition to traditional AESA functions. However, those will not be in service for several years so are not included here.

    Air-to-air engagements at long ranges
    The RBE2 (has the advantage) against targets with a low radar cross section due to the greater performance of AESA types against these threats. CAPTOR-M (has the advantage) against larger targets such as bombers or MiG-31 ‘Foxhound’s due to a much larger aperture and generally higher altitude perch during air-to-air engagements. (Radar 0 will out-range both against airborne targets)

    Air-to-air engagements at short ranges and why?
    RBE2 due to much faster AESA scan, acquisition and classification of target capabilities, greater resistance to dropping contacts during manoeuvres, as well as excellent information display for pilots in F3R cockpit. (RBE2 likely to still beat Radar 0 upon IOC due to more mature system and HMI).

    RBE2 as a multifunction AESA radar gives far more air-to-ground functionality than CAPTOR-M. (Radar 0 is optimised for air-to-air and is unlikely to challenge RBE2 in this arena).

    Maritime attack
    RBE2 again due to advantages of AESA array plus a more mature maritime attack mode with Exocet integrated. Typhoon has anti-ship munition options but no current operators use them.

    Which aircraft has a superior infra-red search and track system and why? Typhoon with the PIRATE system is significantly ahead of the legacy Rafale IRST. The latter was deleted from the latest F3R standard aircraft pending an updated capability in the F4 standard jets, leaving a laser rangefinder/EO ball only. PIRATE is a genuinely exceptional IRST, although for years shortages of spare parts limited its use by various frontline squadrons.

    Cockpit layout/man-machine interface
    Both aircraft have similar cockpit layouts in most respects, with three large main multifunction colour displays capable of significant customisation to suit individual pilot preferences in the latest versions. Both are significantly cleaner in terms of switches and clutter than previous generations of aircraft and slightly cleaner than current generation F-15s and F-16s in USAF service. A pilot from either of those two fighters would find little out of place or unfamiliar in terms of cockpit layout, although the internal menus and system logic may be different from what they are used to. By dint of being complex multi role single seat (in most cases) fighters, the HOTAS controls are fairly intimidating to someone used to a US teen series (or my DCS A-10C/F-16 HOTAS), but once mastered are extremely comprehensive. Having ‘flown’ full fidelity Typhoon simulators in Italy and the UK, including the latest Project Centurion multi-role standard now used by the RAF, I was impressed by the intuitive ‘feel’ of the human-machine interface (HMI) across various multi role tasks. Unfortunately I haven’t had the opportunity to do the same with the French Air Force (hint hint mes amis!). According to all the Rafale pilots I have spoken to, the Rafale’s F3R standard HMI is superb from an operator’s point of view in multirole scenarios, especially in terms of displaying threat information.

    The central display protruding out towards the pilot in the Rafale would be a matter of personal taste over the more traditional Typhoon display layout, with an easier view of the main radar/situational awareness display coming at the cost of slightly reduced cockpit working area in a cockpit already slightly more snug than Typhoon’s. The Typhoon has an advantage in terms of a mature helmet mounted display (HMD) system in the form of the Striker helmet, and an extremely advanced follow on (the Striker II) is well into testing with integral night vision, multi role visual/voice target designation capabilities and other advancements. Meanwhile the new Qatari standard Rafales are being delivered with the type’s first HMD, but the French Air Force still lacks this capability, and the system is still to be matured.

    Top 10 multi-role fighters 2020 here

    Maintenance/sortie rates/operating costs/cost

    Both fighters are fairly expensive to operate compared to solutions such as Gripen or F-16 on a one-for-one basis, being large, complex, twin engined beasts. The exact cost per flight hour (a hugely contentious topic anyway) will depend greatly on which operator and which version you are looking at. For example, Spanish Typhoons cost a great deal more to fly than British ones since the RAF flies its fleet a lot more and has more streamlined maintenance support arrangements. However, even within the RAF, the older Tranche 1s are much more costly to fly and difficult to maintain than the new Tranche 3s. Rafale operating costs and availability likewise varies across standards and operators. In extremely broad brush terms, French Rafales sit somewhere in the middle in terms of operating costs compared to Typhoon, being slightly more expensive than the UK’s Tranche 2 and 3 Typhoons under the TyTan support arrangements but cheaper than Spain or Germany’s Typhoons. For export operators, things are much more dependent on fleet size and support contract structures than the differences between each aircraft type.

    This site needs a small donation from you to continue. If you’ve enjoyed an article please donate here. It only takes a moment. Recommended donation £15.

    Both types are highly tolerant of bad weather conditions although Rafale-M has an edge in terms of landing conditions tolerances due to the carrier-suitability adaptions.

    In terms of unit cost, Rafale is marketed as cheaper than the latest standards of Typhoon, although the Indian experience would suggest that in practice export customer requirements on industrial offsets and liability can dramatically alter costs compared to the up-front offer, so I’d be wary of comparing public cost claims from either manufacturer. The actual cost will depend on the govt-govt relationship and how many of the bells and whistles each customer wants to pay for. However, as a rule Rafale is probably slightly cheaper in real terms to acquire than Typhoon.

    Our interviews with Typhoon pilot here , here and here.

    The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Pre-order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes hereSave the Hush-Kit blog. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. Your donations keep this going. Thank you. Our shop is hereand our Twitter account here @Hush_Kit. Sign up for our newsletter here:


    Both Rafale and Typhoon have low observable features but quite frankly neither is a low observable type. Completely slicked off with no external stores or targeting pods, a Rafale would likely have a lower frontal RCS compared to a Typhoon, but in practice neither would be combat effective in this configuration. With external pylons, tanks, weapons and pods, both have a sufficient RCS to be detected at long ranges by modern sensors such as the Irbis-E on the Su-35 and Chinese AESAs on J-10C, J-16 or J-20, as well as ground based air defence radars.

    Aerodynamics and performance

    It is said that the Rafale would have an advantage in a dogfight below 10K feet and a Typhoon above, would you agree with this?
    In within-visual range combat, both Typhoon and Rafale would likely destroy each other in the merge in a 1v1 or 2v2. However, if talking about a ‘guns’ fight, then Rafale has better agility, instantaneous turn and sustained turn capabilities below around 15,000ft. Between 15,000 and around 30,000ft the relative merits will depend on speed range, as if the Typhoon might start with an advantage in a supersonic merge but Rafale would improve relatively as speeds drop during a long engagement. In practice it would depend on pilot experience and skill to fly their aircraft at best corner speed and manage their energy and position to best effect. At higher altitudes, Typhoon’s greater specific excess power and decoupled canards give it a slight advantage, which increases as altitude increases above 45,000ft.

    What is Typhoon’s configuration designed to excel at, and the same for Rafale? Typhoon is designed to excel in acceleration, climb rate and supersonic performance and agility at high altitudes for maximum beyond visual range capability. Rafale is designed to excel at subsonic speeds and at lower altitudes. It is still a brutal performer compared to most other fighters, but cannot match Typhoon’s climb rate and brute thrust especially at higher altitudes. With heavy loads, however, Rafale performs significantly better than Typhoon across the almost the entire performance envelope, having been designed from the outset to incorporate heavy multirole loads. Typhoon’s flight control software starts to progressively restrict the jet with heavier (or particularly asymmetric) loads. The Aerodynamic Modification Kit (AMK) developed by Eurofighter would address these limitations and greatly improve the instantaneous turn rate and agility at all speeds with heavy loads, but so far no operator has bought it – suggesting they are broadly satisfied with the aircraft as is.

    High alpha performance

    Neither aircraft sparkles in the high-alpha regime compared to the Hornet family or anything with thrust vectoring, but the Rafale’s aerodynamically coupled canards give it slightly better high-alpha authority at slow speeds than Typhoon.

    Abilities at different altitudes

    The lower the altitude, the greater Rafale’s margin of advantage; the higher one goes, the better Typhoon performs relatively. Typhoon is happiest at 50,000ft and above.

    Sustained/Instantaneous turn rates

    Depends on altitude and speed. As above, the higher the speed and altitude of an engagement, the better Typhoon performs relative to Rafale and vice versa. In terms of instantaneous turn rate, Rafale has a slight advantage in air combat configuration and that increases with heavier multirole or strike loads.

    Energy management/ ability to regenerate energy

    Both fighters will pull 9G all day long in air combat configuration at most altitudes. At low altitudes Rafale’s energy retention is slightly better at best corner speed, whilst at higher altitudes Typhoon has better energy retention. In terms of energy regeneration, Typhoon has the edge by dint of a higher specific excess power.

    Range and endurance

    Both types have a similar ferry range with a ‘heavy’ three tank fit. However, Typhoon also uses a lot more fuel in afterburner so for mission profiles that involve a lot of AB use, Rafale will likely have the edge. In practice, both types depend to a large degree on tanker support for most operational missions.

    Support Hush-Kit with our high quality aviation themed merchandise here


    AMRAAM versus MICA

    The AIM-120C7 and AIM-120D variants of AMRAAM used by RAF Typhoons significantly outrange MICA, although they do no boast an IR variant for passive BVR engagement capabilities. The flip side is that both AMRAAM variants have advanced off-board guidance capabilities to allow passive engagements in cooperation with another aircraft in active mode. US development efforts have emphasised these cooperative engagement capabilities (CEC) far more than French ones over the past two decades, and Typhoon benefits from that weapon heritage.


    MICA has slightly superior range to ASRAAM and significantly superior range to IRIS-T. All are highly agile and lethal missiles in a WVR engagement, with IRIS-T boasting the greatest knife fight agility, ASRAAM the best performance off the rail, and MICA the best reach. The lack of a helmet mounted sight for Rafale until the Qatari standard has meant that in practice Typhoon users may be able to get more out of IRIS-T or ASRAAM in a dynamic WVR engagement.

    BK27 versus GIAT cannon

    Both are devastating revolver cannons with selectable rates of fire. The GIAT has the advantage in maximum possible firing rate (of 2500rpm vs 1700rpm) although in practice both would likely fire at comparable rates for both air-to-air or air-to-ground use to make best use of very limited ammunition (125 rounds for Rafale, 150 for Typhoon). As revolver cannons, both reach their maximum fire rate almost immediately. The BK27 has slightly better muzzle velocity and ballistic properties whilst the GIAT has slightly better destructive effect due to its larger shell. In practice, there is little to choose between them, I pity the enemy shot at by either.

    Air-to-ground munitions

    Typhoon (Tranche 2 and 3)’s main strike armament of Paveway IV, Brimstone and Storm Shadow give it world-leading high-precision, low-collateral damage tools for most ground targets. It can also carry other munitions including the US Paveway II and III series of laser-guided bombs, and has been cleared for the AGM-88 HARM and British ALARM anti-radiation missiles although these are not in operational service. The ongoing flight trials of the SPEAR 3 multirole light standoff munition (which includes an EW variant for stand-in jamming) on UK Typhoons give the type access to another highly potent option, although at present the UK is only paying to actually use SPEAR 3 on F-35B. France’s AASM ‘Hammer’ series of glide and boosted bomb guidance kits gives Rafale a comparable capability to Paveway IV with a greater amount of warhead and range flexibility. The drawback is extremely high munitions cost. At the lower end, the Rafale can also carry and deliver the US made Paveway II and III series and like Typhoon is cleared to carry but does not currently use a range of other US munitions.

    Recce equipment

    Typhoon has to make do with a less than fully optimised TAC-R pod as the RAPTOR pod fitted to Tornado GR.4 was not integrated when the latter was retired – in part because of centreline store size limitations on Typhoon due to the front landing gear leg placement. Rafale uses the Damocles targeting pod for light recce duties whilst RAF Typhoons use the Lightning III which also has limited FOV recon capabilities. However, Rafale can also use the RECO-NG wide area/standoff TAC-R pod to provide a modern, fully digital equivalent to RAPTOR. This is a significant advantage over Typhoon in the TAC-R role. Typhoon export users employ the Damocles pod (Saudi Arabia) and the Sniper pod (Kuwait). The Damocles pod has an advantage over Sniper and Lightning III in that it features an integral datalink capability to transfer reconnaissance and target data directly to other stations such as those found on French Air Force tankers. In practice, however, Typhoon users with Sniper or Lightning III can off-board data using the jet’s own datalinks.

    (Also Damocles is replaced by TALIOS as part of F3R.)

    Brimstone versus Hammer

    Brimstone is more accurate with a much smaller ultra-low collateral warhead. AASM is dependent on either IR or laser-guidance to hit moving targets, rendering it more sensitive to adverse conditions than Brimstone’s millimetric wave radar seeker/laser dual mode guidance option. Brimstone’s smaller size also allows more weapons to be carried per aircraft, with three per hardpoint on adaptors. However, Brimstone is not designed to produce area effects or destroy structures, so for such targets the AASM family provides far more capability, especially with the larger ‘bomb’ body variants. For such targets, Typhoon users would employ Paveway II/III/IV series weapons.

    Top WVR fighter aircraft 2019 here

    Cruise missile capability

    Rafale’s SCALP and Typhoon’s Storm Shadow are essentially the same (extremely capable but very expensive) missile from MBDA. Germany has cleared its Taurus KEPD 350 cruise missile but since German politicians do not believe that Air Forces should be used to kill people, its capabilities remain untested in combat. The French Rafales can also carry the ASMP-A nuclear standoff missile which is a unique capability.

    Defence suppression/anti shipping

    Both Typhoon and Rafale lack a commonly carried anti-radiation missile, although modern AAM such as AMRAAM and Meteor can be assumed to have a certain degree of ARM capability in extremis. Rafale has a superior ECM (electronic attack) capability in the shape of the SPECTRA suite allowing it more options to degrade the performance of hostile SAM radars if it needs to penetrate defended airspace. Typhoon users will have to wait for the UK-developed ECRS2 radar and DAS upgrade for a competitive or even (potentially) superior option. Both Typhoon and Rafale can launch capable standoff cruise missiles in the shape of the Storm Shadow/SCALP and Taurus KEPD 350. However, to have a decent probability of kill against modern long range air defence radars, these missiles require accurate real time target location data. This is because modern SAM systems such as the S-400 and HQ-9 are highly mobile and have such long range that a subsonic cruise missile launched from a safe distance would take tens of minutes to arrive. As such, both Typhoon and Rafale could make a very valuable contribution to a SEAD/DEAD operation in support of more stealthy penetrating ISTAR/strike assets such as F-35 or advanced UAVs, but if hypothetically forced to fight alone neither is particularly well suited at present – Rafale having a slight edge due to the SPECTRA suite.


    I’m not 100% sure if Rafale can now use the full two-way datalink functionality on Meteor. I think that is now enabled. Typhoon’s habit of fighting at very high speeds and altitude for BVR engagements will result in a longer effective range on Meteor shots, but in practice there are almost no scenarios short of a full scale war with Russia where the rules of engagement would allow shots at such a range where that difference would tell. Both can use third party target data to launch Meteor without active radar scanning by the launch aircraft, and both can hand off guidance in flight to other friendly assets. The UK’s Typhoons in particular are more closely integrated with the USAF air dominance community than (any) other fighter arm so have more practice in getting the most out of cooperative engagements with F-22s in realistic training scenarios.

    How frequently is Meteor actually carried in 2020?
    Tranche 2 and 3 Typhoons regularly carry Meteor on live operational sorties with European users, although the Tranche 1s do not use the missile which is why the RAF purchased the latest AIM-120D for its remaining Tranche 1s. For Rafale, Meteor is regularly carried by the F3R standard aircraft on live operational sorties by both the Armee de l’Air and Aeronavale.

    How many Meteors are carried on a single-aircraft in everyday service?
    RAF Typhoons and French Air Force Rafales typically carry two Meteors when flying with the missile.


    If you wish to see more articles like this in the future please donate here.We are extremely grateful to all those who choose to donate. Hushkit.net depends on donations to carry on. The more you donate, the more you will get.

    How many Meteor could be carried in a wartime emergency?

    The wartime load-out for Typhoon would by four Meteor in semi-recessed fuselage mounts plus four ASRAAM/IRIS-T although in practice a mix of Meteor and AMRAAM might be chosen for additional tactical flexibility and stockpile management. As far as I’m aware the Rafale has so far only been cleared for Meteor carriage on the two side-fuselage hardpoints although I could be wrong on that. If it was a priority to up the Meteor carriage on Rafale to four, I expect that could be done at the cost of MICA numbers on the centre underwing station.

    Sensor fusion

    Both Rafale F3R and P3E standard (Centurion upgraded) Typhoons present pilots with an intuitive combined situational awareness display which integrates data from multiple sensors. In that sense, both feature sensor fusion and represent a significant upgrade compared to legacy aircraft and previous Rafale and Typhoon standards. However, neither truly does the F-35’s signature trick of feeding the raw sensor inputs into a complex analytical process which cross references data from and cross cues not only each sensor on the jet but also those across a formation of F-35s, before presenting a processed single SA picture to the pilot. There’s a reason (beyond the undoubted inefficiencies and concurrency) why the US have had to put nearly half a trillion dollars into the F-35 programme to date, mostly aimed at getting the nightmarishly ambitious and complex software architecture to work. They’re trying to do something much more ambitious; although in many scenarios the output is functionally similar.

    Defensive aids
    SPECTRA has a better reputation primarily because of Libya in 2011 (a result of French political ambition and risk tolerance, alongside technical capability). However, it is a highly capable defensive aids suite, with greater strength on the ECM area of the ESM/ECM/ECCM EW triad compared to Typhoon’s DAS which is notable in the quality of its ESM (passive detection, ID and tracking of threats). The Indian standard Rafales come with a Towed Radar Decoy (TRD) but the French aircraft currently lack this feature. Typhoon comes with one or two TRDs mounted in a wingtip pod as standard, with specific version dependent on operator choices. The UK’s new Britecloud active radar ‘chaff’ countermeasures are another area where Typhoon is potentially somewhat in the lead on DAS features.

    The leaked Swiss evaluation rated Rafale superior in almost every category- would this still be the case?
    The Swiss competition was horrendously mismanaged by the Eurofighter consortium with a buggy Tranche 1 jet sent to compete with the best that Saab and Dassault could bring to the table. However, in terms of radar, the Rafale would still come out ahead due to its mature RBE2. In terms of load carrying capacity, ECM, subsonic agility, low and medium altitude WVR performance and cost Rafale F3R would also likely still come out ahead of a Tranche 2 or 3 P3E standard Typhoon. However, an RAF standard Tranche 3 Typhoon would likely come out ahead on BVR performance, interceptor missions (due to extreme rate of climb and performance), ESM, terminal countermeasures and low-collateral strike capabilities. Frankly, Switzerland should be flying Gripen C/D or possibly E/F given their national budget, neutrality and mission requirements and I’d wager anyone who looks at it from an operational requirements point of view would come to a similar conclusion. Shame about the whole referendum thing for the Swiss Air Force.

    How has Typhoon improved since your 2015 assessment?
    The multirole capabilities of the jet have matured drastically since 2015, especially as a result of the RAF’s Project Centurion programme which integrated Brimstone, full Paveway IV functionality and Storm Shadow, in addition to full Striker HMD exploitation and a number of other multirole enabling capabilities. The integration of full Meteor capability and upgrades to the UK’s ESM capabilities within the DAS are also a big boost. The fact that Kuwaiti Typhoons are already flying with the export AESA is a welcome but long overdue improvement but Typhoon really continues to lag in terms of exploitation of its huge potential (given the massive nose aperture and power available) in the AESA department.

    Top 10 BVR fighters of 2019

    The German/Spanish Radar 1 order will, however, mean that there are a large number of AESA equipped Typhoons in service by the mid-2020s with all the Quadriga and Tornado replacement Typhoons to feature the capability. The UK’s much more ambitious (and now funded) ECRS2 promises a massive leap in AESA capability with areas of advantage even over the latest US AESAs, but is so far only likely to be integrated onto the 40 Tranche 3s, with the fate of the 67 Tranche 2s less certain in that regard.

    Rafale improved since your 2015 assessment?

    The integration of the Meteor missile for the F3R standard Rafales has plugged a major weakness of the type in my 2015 assessments – the lack of a serious BVR stick. The RBE2 radarhas continued to mature and is now a standout feature of the jet, whilst the French government has committed to a major upgrade of the jet’s internal systems and sensors in the upcoming F4 standard programme. This means that the Rafale will continue to improve, especially in the EW and sensor fusion department throughout the 2020s.

    Interview with a Rafale pilothere

    What is the best Typhoon variant today and why?

    The RAF’s Tranche 3 jets. With the Centurion upgrades, Meteor integration and an extremely experienced user community both in terms of strike/multirole missions and air superiority, the RAF’s Tranche 3 Typhoons would edge out the Kuwaiti and Qatari aircraft in terms of operational capability, even though the latter feature the export version of the CAPTOR-E radar series.

    What is the best Rafale variant today and why?
    That’s tricky to say. The Indian standard does feature some impressive additions including additional podded electronic warfare capabilities and TRD, whilst the Qatari standard features the new HMD. Both include the RBE2 although it is likely to be an export standard that is slightly de-tuned compared to French aircraft. The French Air Force’s latest F3R aircraft with the RBE2 and Meteor are, on balance, likely to be the most capable Rafales around for much the same reasons as the RAF’s Tranche 3 Typhoons are. Highly experienced crews, full DAS and radar capabilities without export restrictions (and a nuclear missile capability).

    Which is doing better on the export market and why?

    Rafale has had some impressive success on the export market since 2015, with the combination of RBE2 radar, combat record in Libya and aggressive French state support for marketing efforts contributing to success in Egypt, Qatar and Greece (as well as India). Typhoon has had successes in Qatar and Kuwait, and a signature of intent from Saudi Arabia for another 48 aircraft soon. However, the biggest win in recent years is for Typhoon from Germany for both the Quadriga-standard replacement order for the Tranche 1s and also 90 aircraft to replace Germany’s Tornado fleet in the conventional strike role. This doesn’t really count as an export success though. Finland will be an interesting result to watch, but I’m not sure either aircraft could be considered a favourite.

    TOPGUN instructor (and former F-14/F/A-18 crew) assesses Tomcat versus Meteor-armed Typhoon fight & list top 5 BVR fighters 2020 here

    What should I have asked you?

    Which aircraft would fare better against the Flanker family and other aircraft likely to be flown by near-peer competitors such as the Chinese J-10 family? After all, Typhoon and Rafale were not built to fight each other, and will not do so. Their job is to deter and if necessary provide overmatch against the latest hostile fighter types. In this role, the Typhoon is probably the standout with its superior BVR capabilities in a large scale, open ROE engagement, but up close in a flashpoint around a QRA interception Rafale might have the edge. In a complex battlespace with dense ground based as well as aerial threats, both Typhoon and Rafale are formidable assets but would rely on support from dedicated penetrating and stand-off assets to minimise risk and truly perform at their best.

    Typhoon versus Su-35 here.

    “If you have any interest in aviation, you’ll be surprised, entertained and fascinated by Hush-Kit – the world’s best aviation blog”. Rowland White, author of the best-selling ‘Vulcan 607’

    I’ve selected the richest juiciest cuts of Hush-Kit, added a huge slab of new unpublished material, and with Unbound, I want to create a beautiful coffee-table book. Pre-order your copy now right here


    From the cocaine, blood and flying scarves of World War One dogfighting to the dark arts of modern air combat, here is an enthralling ode to these brutally exciting killing machines.

    The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes is a beautifully designed, highly visual, collection of the best articles from the fascinating world of military aviation –hand-picked from the highly acclaimed Hush-kit online magazine (and mixed with a heavy punch of new exclusive material). It is packed with a feast of material, ranging from interviews with fighter pilots (including the English Electric Lightning, stealthy F-35B and Mach 3 MiG-25 ‘Foxbat’), to wicked satire, expert historical analysis, top 10s and all manner of things aeronautical, from the site described as:

    “the thinking-man’s Top Gear… but for planes”.

    The solid well-researched information about aeroplanes is brilliantly combined with an irreverent attitude and real insight into the dangerous romantic world of combat aircraft.


    The book will be a stunning object: an essential addition to the library of anyone with even a passing interest in the high-flying world of warplanes, and featuring first-rate photography and a wealth of new world-class illustrations.

    Rewards levels include these packs of specially produced trump cards.

    Pre-order your copy now right here

    Yazı kaynağı : hushkit.net

    Fighter Aircraft: How does Dassault Rafale compare to Eurofighter Typhoon? - Quora

    dassault rafale vs eurofighter typhoon

    Eurofighter Typhoon vs Dassault Rafale

    Eurofighter Typhoon vs Dassault Rafale

    Eurofighter Typhoon is one of the worlds most advanced new generation multi-role/swing-role combat aircraft available on the market. With 707 aircraft ordered by six nations (Germany, Italy, Spain, United Kingdom, Austria and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia), and in service with all nations, the aircraft is Europe’s largest military collaborative program. Eurofighter Typhoon is the only fighter to offer wide-ranging operational capabilities whilst at the same time delivering unparalleled fleet effectiveness.

    When the RAFALE program was launched, the Armée de l’Air and the Marine Nationale (the French Air Force and the French Navy) published a joint requirement for a balanced multirole aircraft that would be able to replace seven types of combat aircraft then in use. Versatile and best in all categories of missions, the RAFALE is a true “force multiplier” This is what Dassault Aviation says about their pride and joy and it’s really interesting since they put too much emphasis on words like “omni role” & “multi role”.

    The reason for comparing the capabilities of these aircraft’s is because they have both been shortlisted by the Indian Air Force for the MMRCA (Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft) deal which is a tender for 126 (could go upto 200) multi role fighters to replenish and replace the IAF’s dwindling squadrons.

    The Typhoon and the Rafale were the ones the IAF shortlisted because they offer more in long term commitment in the form of technology and service this decision supersedes more over than petty technical details although IAF is looking for a platform which has true Multi-Role capabilities which include air to air missions, air to ground and air to sea as well. So the platform must be able to perform in the most adverse of conditions which includes searing heat and humidity to the frost bitten cold of the Ladakh.

    Dassault Aviation is under pressure since they haven’t been able to make a single sale of their aircraft outside their own country so this deal is a game changer to them and we shouldn’t be surprised if we see them tossing everything from full Transfer of Technology (ToT) for everything including their RBE-2AA AESA radars to promising the fitment of the indigenous Kaveri-GTX 35VS into the aircraft as well into the batter and denying the opportunity to block future sales of the same platform to the PAF (Pakistani Air Force) only further sweetens things up.

    Eurofighter on the other hand has had a lot of sales with over 707 aircraft ordered by six countries. But this doesn’t mean that they have no interest in India especially since the amount of money involved is no laughing matter US$ 12 billion is hard to come by every day. The Eurofighter Typhoon variant on offer is the Tranche-3.It’s equipped with the latest avionics and ECM’s (Electronic Counter Measures) and also the CAESAR AESA radar.

    EADS (European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company) has agreed to make India partner of the Eurofighter program allowing India to take part in design and development of the future tranches of the Typhoon.

    IAF already operates the Mirage-2000 and Rafale is operationally and logistically very similar to their previous cousin. The IAF pilots also love the Mirage’s .They have seen action during the Kargil war (Operation Safed Sagar) and the Rafale has had a share of its own action over the skies in Afghanistan and Libya.

    The Euro Fighter Typhoon too has been in action over Libya and was cleared for deployment in Afghanistan. Both the aircraft boasts about sensor fusion technologies however they excel in capabilities in some aspects over the other. Typhoon holds significantly more air to air capabilities than the Rafale  since it currently has a higher performance engine with the future development and integration of the TVC (Thrust Vector Control) nozzles this is only going to get better. The Typhoon also is more maneuverable than the Rafale thanks to its aerodynamically unstable design and delta-canards.

    Rafale on the other hand is like they say a true “omni-role” fighter it has better air to ground attack capabilities than the Typhoon and is capable of holding on its own against an other fighter. Both these fighters are equipped with AESA (active electronically scanned array) radar’s. The Rafale is already in active duty with the French Navy while the Typhoon on the other hand is yet to do so although a plan for the development of a naval Typhoon is underway.

    Both these fighter are state of the art and are more than capable of dealing with what the adversaries might throw against the Indian Air Force in the future although it’s pretty difficult to say even now which air craft the IAF might go for and comparatively both these aircraft are so alike in operational aspects so the selling point might come in the form of additional package on offer with these fighters.

    Dassault Rafale wins Indian Air Force Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft Competition

    French aircraft manufacturer Dassault Aviation wins Indian Air Force MMRCA deal worth $10.4 Billion on January 31st 2012. India plans to buy 126 aircraft from the company for the coming ten years. Sources say that the process of lowest bidder has been completed, Rafale emerged winner against the European Eurofighter Typhoon. According to the deal 18 aircraft will be directly bought from Dassault Aviation and the rest 108 aircraft will be manufactured in India with partnership with Indian companies.

    Read More>>

    Eurofighter Typhoon vs Dassault Rafale Eurofighter Typhoon vs Dassault Rafale

    Yazı kaynağı : www.defenceaviation.com

    Yorumların yanıtı sitenin aşağı kısmında

    Ali : bilmiyorum, keşke arkadaşlar yorumlarda yanıt versinler.

    Yazının devamını okumak istermisiniz?
    Yorum yap