Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,474
2,897
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
EJ200 still beats the M88 hands down.
But if we tried to put EJ200s in a Rafale that we adapted, we would end up with a less efficient aircraft.

Because not only does the EJ200 weigh 100 kg more than the M 88, but it would also require the aircraft to be lengthened by 50 cm, which would increase its weight by 1/30, i.e. 300 kg.

In addition, the air intakes would have to be widened to adapt them to a bypass ratio of 0.4 instead of 0.3, which would increase the drag and the RCS.
 

Lolwa

Well-Known member
Feb 6, 2020
1,135
794
Delhi
The F-35 is said to be more stealthy than the F-22, so the difference between -30dBsm and -40dBsm is 10 times, assuming the F-22 is -35dBsm. If the J-20's RCS is indeed -30dBsm, then the F-22 and F-35 won't have any significant advantage in terms of stealth over the J-20. Even more so as the J-20 is improving at a faster clip with each new version.
This simulation was done on the prototype model of the j20. So maybe even further reduction in RCS with the better production processes and newer engines with stealth shaping.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,474
2,897
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
The french plane is not under the eyes of many like the F-35 because it is insignificant also dussault is not opened about problems with their plane unlike LM is with F-35 which is why Euro nations select the F-35. They don't trust the french and a good recent example of this mistrust was the ozzie sub deal. Safran was being honest when it says the plane is using the same engines it had 20 years ago and the plane has gotten much heavier, ergo, underpowered. When F-16, F-15, F-18, F-14 etc etc... enter service they get engine upgrades a few years later because they know as they upgrade their fighters they get heavier. I get the french can't afford it which is the obvious reason for using the same tired engine for this long.
MTOW in 2006 when it was declared operational in the air force: 24500 Kg
MTOW in 2021: 24500 Kg
Maximum power is needed when MTOW is reached and therefore the requirement has not changed. In addition, the Rafale weighs 1 tonne less than the Typhoon and has an MTOW 1 tonne higher than the Typhoon, which means it can carry 2 tonnes more, so if any aircraft has a need to increase its power it is the Typhoon.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,670
8,917
India
This simulation was done on the prototype model of the j20. So maybe even further reduction in RCS with the better production processes and newer engines with stealth shaping.

It's just a software simulation using physical optics. It's not even an actual simulation.

But all these jets, F-22, F-35, J-20 and Su-57, have similar levels of stealth.
 

Lolwa

Well-Known member
Feb 6, 2020
1,135
794
Delhi
It's just a software simulation using physical optics. It's not even an actual simulation.

But all these jets, F-22, F-35, J-20 and Su-57, have similar levels of stealth.
I highly doubt that considering typhoon wasn't able to get lock-on in wvr against f-22's. J20 and su57 will be far easier.
 

WHOHE

Active member
Jun 23, 2021
307
155
California
Once again, false.
1st gen : M88-2 (that means there was a M88-1...)
2nd gen in 2010 : M88-2 E4 (for fuel efficience)
3rd gen in 2014 : M88-4E (to increase life OR TO INCREASE THRUST. A choice not made by french air force)

Some R&D efforts are on course to increase core temperature.

For a rustic guy like you only a thrust increase is an evolution.... Rafale don't need more thrust today. It is able to supercruise with AAM and tank when your old turkey can't.
Your french plane has gotten heavier and it hasn't gotten a thrust increase so yeah it's underpowered for its current weight which is why Safran is saying the french plane needs an engine upgrade. It's that simple.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Bon Plan

WHOHE

Active member
Jun 23, 2021
307
155
California
It is a customer decision, not a Dassault CEO one. French air force don't need more thrust today.
A 9tons thrust M88 (M88-X) was studied for UAE and one sample flew some years ago.
So a closed file.
No it's a governments/Le ministry of defense decision to spend the money on an engine upgrade not customers and increasing the thrust means new engine. Listen Safran (engine maker) said your plane is still flying around with the same engine it had 20+ years ago and that is due to lack of funding. Lack of funding is what keeping your french planes at a 60+% mission capable rate way below F-35 standards.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,031
1,726
But if we tried to put EJ200s in a Rafale that we adapted, we would end up with a less efficient aircraft.

Because not only does the EJ200 weigh 100 kg more than the M 88, but it would also require the aircraft to be lengthened by 50 cm, which would increase its weight by 1/30, i.e. 300 kg.

In addition, the air intakes would have to be widened to adapt them to a bypass ratio of 0.4 instead of 0.3, which would increase the drag and the RCS.
Only 45cm and it would result in a better aircraft with 20% more thrust. Only 3.7cm wider. The difference in drag/RCS would be less than that imposed by the ridiculous IFR probe that permanently protrudes.
It's unclear when you compare Rafale and EF2000 range....
The specific fuel consumption of the EJ200 is better too, that's why the French were annoyed when the Eurofighter consortium picked it over the M88 and they left.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Bon Plan

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,031
1,726
Which is why they are planning an engine modernisation for the Typhoon.

No they aren't. The XG40-2 was around in the mid-80s producing 24,300lbf had they needed more power.
MTOW in 2006 when it was declared operational in the air force: 24500 Kg
MTOW in 2021: 24500 Kg
Maximum power is needed when MTOW is reached and therefore the requirement has not changed. In addition, the Rafale weighs 1 tonne less than the Typhoon and has an MTOW 1 tonne higher than the Typhoon, which means it can carry 2 tonnes more, so if any aircraft has a need to increase its power it is the Typhoon.
MTOW is restricted by pylons and layout not the engine. We all know that in terms of climb rate and acceleration, the Typhoon kills the Rafale, hence why it got 9 vs your 7 in the Swiss eval. This is typical French behaviour, even when you are obviously beaten you continue BSing. It's a shame you're not as resilient when it comes to homeland defence.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,670
8,917
India
No they aren't. The XG40-2 was around in the mid-80s producing 24,300lbf had they needed more power.

MTOW is restricted by pylons and layout not the engine. We all know that in terms of climb rate and acceleration, the Typhoon kills the Rafale, hence why it got 9 vs your 7 in the Swiss eval. This is typical French behaviour, even when you are obviously beaten you continue BSing. It's a shame you're not as resilient when it comes to homeland defence.

Doesn't matter what the past had. This is current news, from an official website.

“We are closely integrated with Eurofighter,” says Gerhard. “For example, if the aircraft capability enhancements bring new systems and heavier weapons loads it would need more thrust in order to keep the same thrust-to-weight ratio and restore the aircraft’s performance and agility.

So there's more modernisation in the offing for the Typhoon and the thrust increase is only to compensate for the weight gain.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,474
2,897
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
No they aren't. The XG40-2 was around in the mid-80s producing 24,300lbf had they needed more power.

MTOW is restricted by pylons and layout not the engine. We all know that in terms of climb rate and acceleration, the Typhoon kills the Rafale, hence why it got 9 vs your 7 in the Swiss eval. This is typical French behaviour, even when you are obviously beaten you continue BSing. It's a shame you're not as resilient when it comes to homeland defence.
Oh yes, the typhoon has a better rate of climb, but do you know by how much?
Rafale: Rate of climb: 304.8 m/s (60,000 ft/min)
Eurofighter: Rate of climb: 315 m/s (62,000 ft/min)

That's 3.23%, which is really something worth repeating over and over again every time we talk about the Typhoon's performance. :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,670
8,917
India
Oh yes, the typhoon has a better rate of climb, but do you know by how much?
Rafale: Rate of climb: 304.8 m/s (60,000 ft/min)
Eurofighter: Rate of climb: 315 m/s (62,000 ft/min)

That's 3.23%, which is really something worth repeating over and over again every time we talk about the Typhoon's performance. :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:

To be fair, that's sea level performance. What's more important is the performance you get from medium to high altitude, since that's the most important for BVR. So a 3% difference at sea level will widen as the altitude increases. At higher altitudes, the Typhoon should show significantly higher climb and G performance than the Rafale. So that justifies its higher performance score.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,031
1,726
To be fair, that's sea level performance. What's more important is the performance you get from medium to high altitude, since that's the most important for BVR. So a 3% difference at sea level will widen as the altitude increases. At higher altitudes, the Typhoon should show significantly higher climb and G performance than the Rafale. So that justifies its higher performance score.
Oh yes, the typhoon has a better rate of climb, but do you know by how much?
Rafale: Rate of climb: 304.8 m/s (60,000 ft/min)
Eurofighter: Rate of climb: 315 m/s (62,000 ft/min)

That's 3.23%, which is really something worth repeating over and over again every time we talk about the Typhoon's performance. :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
Typhoon was stated at 25% better than an F-16, which has a climb rate of 60kft/min. Hence 9 vs 7 in the Swiss eval. The 62kft/min was an estimate based on adding 25% to the incorrect F-16 figure of 50kft/min - F-16 data manuals show 60kft/min. 3% would not give 9 vs 7.
Doesn't matter what the past had. This is current news, from an official website.

“We are closely integrated with Eurofighter,” says Gerhard. “For example, if the aircraft capability enhancements bring new systems and heavier weapons loads it would need more thrust in order to keep the same thrust-to-weight ratio and restore the aircraft’s performance and agility.

So there's more modernisation in the offing for the Typhoon and the thrust increase is only to compensate for the weight gain.
There's no money released for doing it yet. More powerful engine options have always been on the table, there's even an EJ270, but so far not needed.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,474
2,897
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
To be fair, that's sea level performance. What's more important is the performance you get from medium to high altitude, since that's the most important for BVR. So a 3% difference at sea level will widen as the altitude increases. At higher altitudes, the Typhoon should show significantly higher climb and G performance than the Rafale. So that justifies its higher performance score.
It is not obvious that the difference will increase with altitude and speed: A bypass ratio of 0.3 is more favourable for altitude and speed than a ratio of 0.4. In general the increase in bypass ratio is a trick used by subsonic liners to increase thrust at take-off.
Similarly, although the Rafale's T/W ratio is slightly lower than that of the Typhoon, it has more lift due to its coupled canards, which explains its performance being almost identical to that of the Typhoon, and its lift advantage has no reason to disappear at high altitude.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,474
2,897
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
Poor thing next month you will be hurting a lot when Finland selects F-35 and says MEH! to the french plane.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,474
2,897
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
Only 45cm and it would result in a better aircraft with 20% more thrust. Only 3.7cm wider. The difference in drag/RCS would be less than that imposed by the ridiculous IFR probe that permanently protrudes.
If we wanted to increase the thrust, it is clear that we would take as a priority the version of the M88 which has 8.3 t of thrust without any modification of the aircraft: neither its length nor the air inlets. Besides, maybe we have already done it for the Qatari and Indian Rafales: the Indians have declared that they have the fastest Rafales in the world....

The second priority would be the 9t thrust version of the M88 which requires a slight modification of the air intakes but no other modification of the aircraft. This version would provide a 20% improvement in T/W ratio compared to 16% for the EJ200 due to the increase in weight it brings.

For the M88-9 the airflow mass is 72 Kg/s instead of 65 Kg/s for the basic version and 76 Kg/s for the EJ200.

The specific fuel consumption of the EJ200 is better too, that's why the French were annoyed when the Eurofighter consortium picked it over the M88 and they left.
Ej200: Specific fuel consumption: 21–23 g/(kN⋅s) (0.74–0.81 lb/(lbf⋅h)) and 47–49 g/(kN⋅s) (1.66–1.73 lb/(lbf⋅h)) (with afterburner)
M 88 : Specific fuel consumption: 22.14 g/(kN⋅s) (0.782 lb/(lbf⋅h)) and 47.11 g/(kN⋅s) (1.663 lb/(lbf⋅h)) (with afterburner)
:ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,670
8,917
India
It is not obvious that the difference will increase with altitude and speed: A bypass ratio of 0.3 is more favourable for altitude and speed than a ratio of 0.4. In general the increase in bypass ratio is a trick used by subsonic liners to increase thrust at take-off.
Similarly, although the Rafale's T/W ratio is slightly lower than that of the Typhoon, it has more lift due to its coupled canards, which explains its performance being almost identical to that of the Typhoon, and its lift advantage has no reason to disappear at high altitude.

Your argument would have been valid if the Swiss scored the Rafale's performance close to the Typhoon's.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,670
8,917
India
There's no money released for doing it yet. More powerful engine options have always been on the table, there's even an EJ270, but so far not needed.


The engine upgrade is for Germany's new Typhoons.