tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post2749637778604332297..comments2023-07-11T09:57:54.828-03:00Comments on BEST FIGHTER FOR CANADA: Fighter Jet Fight Club: Rafale versus Super Hornet!Doug Allenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comBlogger99125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-43276922411933536482014-07-21T18:49:16.994-03:002014-07-21T18:49:16.994-03:00http://in.mobile.reuters.com/article/idINL2N0PT2PJ...http://in.mobile.reuters.com/article/idINL2N0PT2PJ20140718?irpc=932Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-49315963570304343002014-07-15T06:21:19.253-03:002014-07-15T06:21:19.253-03:00It is always hard to see the landing distance if n...It is always hard to see the landing distance if not a full stop is included, a measurement in Google maps indicate 1.6 km to leaving the runway which of course is not the landing distance.<br /><br />A comparison with the Gripen's capacity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoW4OXenm0Y&feature=kp on a road.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-44637237155472908272014-07-14T23:45:53.183-03:002014-07-14T23:45:53.183-03:00Regarding the Stealth Advanced Super Hornet and it...Regarding the Stealth Advanced Super Hornet and its supposed lack of air superiority capacity , in case the Amraams don't were able to destroy their targets at long distance with out being detected, arriving in to a dogfight situation, in this video we can see how the Rafale clearly lock on the Super Hornet four times, but on those same maneuvers we can see how the Super Hornet is in position to easily launch the Aim-9X three times to the Rafale, between seconds 0.06_0.10 / 0.32_ 0.38 / 0.45_0.51<br /><br />http://youtu.be/5bYolM_6SJk<br /><br />To have an idea how it works, here is another video of the Super Hornet showing the station 1 with the 9X activated when the Mig 29 is passing by and the pilot is flying following the targets with the Helmet mounted display<br /><br />http://youtu.be/P_7IajYITmc<br /><br />Here is another video that shows how the missiles can super maneauver to destroy the target from incredible positions.<br /><br />http://youtu.be/1LxhLMiRklQ<br /><br />The arrival of the Helmet Mounted Display and the off boresight missiles of 4 gen like the Aim-9x or the python V have completely changed the rules of the classic dogfights.<br /><br />In this video<br /><br />http://youtu.be/KOswfrc7Xtg<br /><br />we can see how the Raptor is trying to scape from the Rafale. <br />The Raptor pilot doesn't have a HMD and is in clear disadvantage in dogfight.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-49058476231540169962014-07-14T20:52:49.301-03:002014-07-14T20:52:49.301-03:00We cooperate with USA with NORAD (early warning) b...We cooperate with USA with NORAD (early warning) but fighters fall into NATO. We tend to get 100 to 150 do it all aircraft ... American made affordable aircraft. <br />F-35 is out of character but I think we jumped on it because we were permitted "to play" on the same field thinking that all the big issues would be gone and that nobody would worry about / notice the total invoice. If only the Russians kicked the crap out of their neighbours ... the cost of weapons becomes irrelevant. <br />I still think a super cruising NG with a drop tank would be plenty for interception,dog fighting and precision bombing duties. I think Rhino and the SH + Growler will squeak through. The wild card, homemade Rafale taste real good.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-68292318407302846332014-07-14T19:03:26.078-03:002014-07-14T19:03:26.078-03:00The canards all have completely care free handling...The canards all have completely care free handling. That is nothing unique to the Super Hornet.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-22140070122925242142014-07-14T18:56:14.454-03:002014-07-14T18:56:14.454-03:00Mach +1.8 is good enough and with the EPE engines ...Mach +1.8 is good enough and with the EPE engines could be even better, the same for the range.<br /><br />About the air superiority and sovereignty, you make a big mistake thinking the Super Hornet can't defeat any other airplane out there, the combination of Aesa Radar + the Jammers from the Growler demonstrate they can defeat even a pure Stealth fighter like the F-22 and at lower speeds it can manoeuvres like not other, combining the HMD and Aim-9X.<br /><br />Even Carlo Koop noticed <br /><br />2.7 Observations<br /><br />The Super Hornet is a fighter with exceptional handling qualities, even by modern fighter standards, which even a novice can handle comfortably and with confidence at the edge of the low speed manoeuvre envelope. <br /><br />The point which Boeing and the US Navy have made most convincingly, is that the aircraft's flight control software is so robust that even a beginner on the type can fly it without embarrassing himself too badly. Sceptics should note that test pilot comments about fighters with this generation of flight controls being as easy to fly as a Cessna 172 are indeed correct. There is no room for argument here, as I had the opportunity to observe first hand! <br /><br />In the hands of an experienced combat pilot, such flight control software means that the pilot can be wholly focussed on the furball in progress, and need not devote any thought to pushing the aircraft past the edge into a uncontrolled departure and resulting risk of a ground impact or successful enemy missile shot. The importance of a substantially departure resistant aircraft, especially if encumbered with stores, cannot be understated - carefree handling translates directly into combat effectiveness. <br /><br />In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30. The analogue and early generation digital flight controls with hard-wired or hard-coded AoA limiters used in the Russian aircraft are a generation behind the Super Hornet and a much more experienced pilot will be required for the Russian types to match the ease with which the Super Hornet handles high alpha flight regimes. <br /><br />The reports emanating from carrier landing trials performed in the US cannot be disputed, the aircraft is a sheer delight in the circuit and will take much of the anxiety out of night and bad weather traps, especially for nugget fighter-attack pilots. <br /><br />The cockpit ergonomics build upon two decades of Hornet experience, and make for a very comfortable and easy to use cockpit environment. Again, a novice pilot will find the MFD modes easy to navigate and easy to follow. The colour moving map display makes navigational orientation ridiculously easy, against the mental chores of VOR/DME/TACAN, radar mapping and INS/map-on-the-knee navigation. The prospect of MIDS/RWR/radar/IFF tracks being overlayed on the moving map will take much effort out of maintaining wider area situational awareness. <br /><br />The radar is very easy to use in MMTI, GMTI and SAR spot mapping modes, and provides an excellent tool for highly accurate all weather maritime strike, littoral strike and battlefield interdiction operations. In particular, the ability to interleave MTI and surface mapping modes is exceptionally useful for resolving and identifying moving surface targets of opportunity. <br /><br />In conclusion, the reports of the Hornet's exceptional high alpha handling characteristics are provably correct. Established Hornet users should not be disappointed by this aircraft! <br /><br />http://www.ausairpower.net/USN/000-Super-Bug-12269911l.jpgDoug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-9843101376390752872014-07-14T18:35:01.661-03:002014-07-14T18:35:01.661-03:00Maybe it is time for Canada to clearly define what...Maybe it is time for Canada to clearly define what it wants a fighter for then. Define the missions with a budget to buy and a budget to fly. Problem has been they bought into the F-35 and then realized they have to make the mission and budget fit the F-35.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-47175433432075075822014-07-14T18:20:05.380-03:002014-07-14T18:20:05.380-03:00I do not think space sovereignty , in the purest f...I do not think space sovereignty , in the purest form, is what worries the government, in terms of an aircraft.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-16324535298886176692014-07-14T18:09:09.442-03:002014-07-14T18:09:09.442-03:00Speeds and range are important in a country the si...Speeds and range are important in a country the size of Canada. Especially in the very uncertain next 30 years best to have all the bases covered (literally) for the CF-18 replacement. <br /><br /><br /> F-18E is the slowest fighter in service and production in the west. The F-18E is not of interceptor quality. They are selling a multi billion dollar deal fighter and like Lockheed Martin's marketing department, Boeing will spin the conformal tanks and weapons pods as improvements instead of what it really says and that is a validation there are serious engineering design flaws. That is what their marketing is paid to do. And then ask yourself if Canada should be buying a jet for 30 years with such engineering flaws? A jet that every other future fighter around the world (except F35) will be able to run down, run away from or out maneuver. Saab has officially stated a long time ago that the EPE engine is available if the customer wants it. No problem! If the power plant delivers on GE's claims then the Gripen E+ would be a stunning performer with the best thrust to weight around. With an EPE Gripen E the performance improvement would be building on what is the most efficient fighter design available. The EPE engine in Gripen would be building on excellence in fighter design unlike the F-18E which is compensating and pushing a strike jet through the air to be competitive. To use the EPE on the F-18E is like putting a candle on a cow pie. It still does not make it a birthday cake. F-18E is not an air superiority / interceptor fighter. If Canada is serious about air space sovereignty for the uncertain future then it must consider such an aircraft. Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen E are the only 3 options of that caliber offered to Canada.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-5588592979325627802014-07-14T14:08:54.802-03:002014-07-14T14:08:54.802-03:00I always new the Super Hornet can take off in less...I always new the Super Hornet can take off in less than 300 meters fully loaded.<br />At the end of fhis video from this week en the Riat 2014 we can see how little space it needs to landing with 8 missiles. As we can see is bot just the Harrier, Gripen or F-35 that can operate from short runways. <br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wk8rf3p8mEg&feature=youtube_gdata_playerDoug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-60410929234985155732014-07-14T13:36:49.960-03:002014-07-14T13:36:49.960-03:00The 22 gripen ng offered to the swiss is actually ...The 22 gripen ng offered to the swiss is actually for $3.3B, so that's $150M per plane. And that includes mission planning systems, spares and support, training, and certification. <br />Australians had to cough up another $1.7B for that aside from the $2.9B SH buy which only included initial spares, support and traning.<br /> The rest of the $3.5B deal is for the lease of 11 gripen-d for five years including maintenace and traning.<br /><br />The indian $120M rafale(rumored to get more expensive til the finalization of the contract) is similar with the Australian$2.9B SH buy but with the license to build it.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-48002466490155314772014-07-14T11:34:37.223-03:002014-07-14T11:34:37.223-03:00The operational cost of the Super Hornet are not e...The operational cost of the Super Hornet are not expensive, those cost are reasonable for it's size an capabilities as a tween engine and Canada can pay it. The operational cost of the Super Hornet are even cheaper than the CF/A-18 we operate today. <br />To intercept bombers we have bases up to the North, as it was always demonstrated, we have more than enough time to intercept any bomber with our Hornets, with the EPE engines we will have even more time. <br />Even more, we don't must to have the 65 airplanes with those EPE engines, just some ot them dedicated to that specify task if necessary.<br />Two engines in the huge Artic is always a plus, it's worth it, the same applies for the Growles with more electrical power as dedicated electronic attack platforms with a powerful Aesa radar. <br />The Gripen is a good choice for Sweden, the Advanced Super Hornet is a great choice for Canada.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-86282253300746982432014-07-14T11:32:37.500-03:002014-07-14T11:32:37.500-03:00Yes and no, the delta wing design goes way back t...Yes and no, the delta wing design goes way back to the 50's. They have added improvements to the delta wing and the canards add a new dimension (thanks Sweden). But the f18 has great wings too. Again, look at the Russians, they started with the concept of what is the best wing deisgn and went from there. All wing designs have there good and bad and the F35 is bad.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-90687348646771655842014-07-14T11:05:12.905-03:002014-07-14T11:05:12.905-03:00Fitting the 414 EPE engines does increase performa...Fitting the 414 EPE engines does increase performance but reduces durability and hence makes operational costs go up significantly, making the Super Hornet with this configuration even more expensive. Also, as you wear out engines for a twin engine fighter the pressure on the support structure is far higher. <br /><br /><br />You could put the 414 EPE in the Gripen E too. Thrust-to-weight would be insane at circa 1.7.<br /><br /><br />Supersonic cruise speeds are even more important in a large country with longer distances intercept and identify unknown intruders. Radar and alert system does not provide identification - they only tell you if something is there but not what it is.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-17593339466975315132014-07-14T11:04:06.455-03:002014-07-14T11:04:06.455-03:00Sweden has history of independance, we sleep besid...Sweden has history of independance, we sleep beside the elephant.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-6063347869505418732014-07-14T11:02:10.882-03:002014-07-14T11:02:10.882-03:00What about ASH?What about ASH?Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-45195813174421729202014-07-14T10:00:05.462-03:002014-07-14T10:00:05.462-03:00The Super Hornet is not just an interceptor, it...The Super Hornet is not just an interceptor, it's a multirrol that can intercept perfectly exactly as the Hornets are doing over the artic right now. The advanced Super Hornet with conformal fuel tanks, EPE engines with 20% more thrust (giving a positive t/wratio) and a clean configuration, just with the enclosed weapons pod theoretically could give the cqpacity of super cruise but that's not critical for a country with the continental size of Canada so far away from Russia and with powerfull radars and allert systems. <br />For a small country like Sweden super cruise can be a must to have if they want to intercept Russian bombers in minutes before they arrive to their capital but as we saw, that's not always the case in Sweden for different reasons.<br />The more efficient engines will give the Advanced Super Hornet more range, two engines more opportunities to return save not just over the artic but even after being impacted by a missile at war, like in the case of a Hornet in Irak, their big wings and controls give the Super Hornet great maneuverability fully loaded with missiles and bombs for close air support or interdiction close to the ground and mountains and it's bigger size and great electrical generation great power to be a real electronic attack airplane in the case of the growler, with a powerful aesa radar and better refrigeration system that can give more range detection and a very clear image of what's going on, almost as a picture.<br />The Advanced Super Hornet seems to be designed with Canada needs in mind, as the Hornet is doing so efficiently today.<br /><br />http://www.boeing.com/assets/images/Features/2014/05/corp_superhornet_700.jpgDoug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-46092692517437843082014-07-14T07:36:36.769-03:002014-07-14T07:36:36.769-03:002-3 years ago I was at the air show in Québec and ...2-3 years ago I was at the air show in Québec and the CF-18 had an engine problem at take off. The demonstration had to be cancelled.<br />Do the CF-18 have some engine related problem or what? Do they have flight restrictions of any sort right now?Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-24097585433125757292014-07-13T19:09:42.257-03:002014-07-13T19:09:42.257-03:00The point of view of CarlJF is really interesting,...The point of view of CarlJF is really interesting, because he proves that the choice between Rafale and Super Hornet is not only a choice between two aircraft, but between two visions of the future of RCAF. The Super Hornet's choice allows RCAF to keep a complete interoperability with USAF. On the operational plan, the selection of Super Hornet is logic as the recent RCAF's history proves that canadian combat aircrafts intervene systematically into a US/NATO battle plan (operations Friction, Mirador, Echo...) The problem with Super Honet is not operational but commercial : Boeing commercial policy is far less competitive than Dassault's offer. The Super Hornet will be built at Saint-Louis, technology transfer is very limited (Boeing refuses to transfer source codes to canadian firms, like during FX-2 brazil competition) and it shall be also possible to implement backdoors on the canadian Super Hornet by US intelligence service. On the opposite, Rafale Team (Dassault, Thales, Saffran) propose to Canada a complete construction of Rafale on Canada's ground, tranfer of 100% source code and the possibility for canadian firms to 'Canadianized' the Rafale. It seems obvious that the Rafale is a better choice for the development of Canada's aviation industry than the Super Honret. To sum up, if RCAF choosed an "auxiliary american air force" with the sole goal to support USAF during major air combat operations, the selection of Super Hornet would be logical. If the idea was to develop a canadian aviation industry, and to avoid a situation of complete dependency regarding the american aviation corporation like Boeing and Lockeed-Martin (a situation partly generated by the forced abandonment of the CF 105 Arrow Program...^^) , then the Rafale would be the better choice, but a choice that involves the political cost to sacrifice the complete interopability with USAF.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-62607395291839985372014-07-13T15:32:35.748-03:002014-07-13T15:32:35.748-03:00You focus, we are talking about the Super Hornet a...You focus, we are talking about the Super Hornet and Rafale. Take your stupid super expensive little toy and leave.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-83601923307968629392014-07-13T15:29:07.010-03:002014-07-13T15:29:07.010-03:00Dude, learn the difference between Gripen and Swed...Dude, learn the difference between Gripen and Sweden, they're not the same.<br /><br /><br />You can't blame a fighter for not fighting when its the country that forbids it! Incredibly stupid.<br />The Gripen performed extremely well in the Libya mission and got appraised from all directions.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-80580685991919222922014-07-13T15:26:23.492-03:002014-07-13T15:26:23.492-03:00seriously dude. focus on the subject or leave. You...seriously dude. focus on the subject or leave. Your comments are stupid, irrelevant, and non-factual.<br /><br /><br />Building a fighter with 100% domestic parts is really, really stupid, proved again and again throughout history.<br />The Gripen E project would likely go through even without a initial partner, you don't know what you're talking about - also its not relevant!<br /><br /><br />Also, please tell me what's wrong with sourcing parts from partner nations, giving you the absolute best performance per cost-unit possible, miles ahead (in both costs and performance) of a domestic solution (or even JSF solution with a few partner countries).Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-10028696730243340972014-07-13T15:20:27.246-03:002014-07-13T15:20:27.246-03:00wow, that much text and none is relevant to the di...wow, that much text and none is relevant to the discussion. nice job embarrassing yourself.Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-11424227164027486992014-07-13T15:12:17.375-03:002014-07-13T15:12:17.375-03:00Are you serious? Did you think Gripen was the reas...Are you serious? Did you think Gripen was the reason the swedes did not send up fighters? Hilarious.<br /><br /><br />Thats like saying a car is bad because the driver can't afford to drive it, Sweden can afford to fly the Gripen but sometimes chooses not to. With world class radar systems and anti-air systems, why would they send up a fighter for a couple of old unarmed russian planes on a training route?Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4384856123558926763.post-20260016598627961062014-07-13T14:21:26.534-03:002014-07-13T14:21:26.534-03:00As mentioned, something's I like about the Raf...As mentioned, something's I like about the Rafale is that it has super cruise and range<br />Fairy range 3700km +(R) vs 3054km(SH)<br />Combat range 1800 km(R) vs 720km(SH).Doug Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504832466775445050noreply@blogger.com