Author Topic: Rafale  (Read 16690 times)

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Rafale
« Reply #50 on: June 10, 2014, 02:41:38 AM »
Interesting.  I will be interested to see what features you combine.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Rafale
« Reply #51 on: June 11, 2014, 09:12:27 PM »
So will I! ;D

One main point will be the ability to carry standard NATO weapons fits. :)
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Rafale
« Reply #52 on: June 11, 2014, 09:21:56 PM »
How about an Australian Rafale with US Avionics and weapons, basically a SH Block II shoehorned into the superior Rafale airframe as a replacement for the F-111 during the mid 2000s as an alternative to the SH lease / buy.  Say a joint Raytheon, Dassault project to win RAAF business.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Rafale
« Reply #53 on: February 07, 2015, 03:48:33 AM »
I find the mention of the Suez Canal in this story quite bemusing given the British and French attacked Egypt following the nationalisation of the Suez Canal...

Quote
Egypt Close to Order for 24 Rafales

PARIS --- Egypt is close to signing a long-rumored order for 24 Dassault Rafale combat aircraft and one FREMM frigate, a package which according French media reports is worth €5 to €6 billion.

The order looks imminent as the French and Egyptian governments are reported to have reached a tentative agreement this week on the related financing package, during a visit here by an Egyptian government delegation. Rafale maker Dassault Aviation declined to comment on the deal, AFP wire service reported.

The agreement, reported Feb 05 by Paris business daily Les Echos, primarily revolves around the French export credit bank, COFACE, as cash-strapped Egypt does not have the money to pay for the entire package. COFACE will guarantee 50% of the deal’s value, down from the initial 80-90% requested by Egypt, and financing will be provided by a pool of French banks and possibly Saudi Arabia. Egypt has reportedly agreed to make a down payment of €500 million.

Egypt wants to have its first Rafales in service by August, for the inauguration of the expanded Suez Canal, and also wants early delivery of the frigate, which requires agreement of the financing package and contract signature in a matter of weeks.

The French government, whose multiyear defense budget depends on Rafale exports, has agreed to give Egypt an initial batch of Rafales already in service with its own air force, as well as the French navy’s llatest FREMM frigate, which is currently completing sea trials.

Meeting the delivery deadlines requested by Egypt depends, however, on whether and when it will make the down payment.

-ends-
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Rafale
« Reply #54 on: February 07, 2015, 10:48:12 AM »
Very interesting.  this will make for some great notional schemes, but the obvious whiff is Typhoon, Gripen, or SH instead of Rafales once we know what the Egyptian scheme is

Re: Rafale
« Reply #55 on: February 09, 2015, 05:42:57 PM »
Grey with national insignia ?

But before that, contracts need to be signed... Too many deception from contract which are close to be signed and for which we are still waiting (UAE, India, Qatar) or go for USA or another country (Morocco, South Korea, Singapour, Brasil, etc...) :icon_meditation:

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Rafale
« Reply #56 on: February 09, 2015, 11:47:44 PM »
I have 2 x 1/48 Rafales (B & M) which will become either RAN or RAM.

If RAN, will get 2-tone grey/blue-grey wrap-around with low-vis insignia.

If RAM, will get 3-tone grey-green/grey-brown(tan?)/blue-grey wrap-around with low-vis insignia.

Have similar plans for a 1/48 Gripen (when I finally buy it) which will be navalised.

Not sure which aircraft type to use for RAN or RAM. Both have features useful to both services.

The main question is; which would be the best mud-mover & which would be the best interceptor/CAP aircraft? ???
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Rafale
« Reply #57 on: February 12, 2015, 11:55:10 AM »
I have 2 x 1/48 Rafales (B & M) which will become either RAN or RAM.

If RAN, will get 2-tone grey/blue-grey wrap-around with low-vis insignia.

If RAM, will get 3-tone grey-green/grey-brown(tan?)/blue-grey wrap-around with low-vis insignia.

Have similar plans for a 1/48 Gripen (when I finally buy it) which will be navalised.

Not sure which aircraft type to use for RAN or RAM. Both have features useful to both services.

The main question is; which would be the best mud-mover & which would be the best interceptor/CAP aircraft? ???

You have a RAN FAA and a RAM fixed wing air combat capability, does your alt also have a RAAF and army air combat force?

Probably have the Gripen as CAS and battlefield air superiority while the Rafale looks after interdiction, SEAD and long range strike as well as air superiority.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Rafale
« Reply #58 on: February 13, 2015, 08:20:03 AM »
Thanks, mate! Good answer! That generally puts the Gripen in the RAM & Rafale in the RAN FAA.

Well, there is a RAAF & there is an Army but I haven't at this stage given (& probably won't give) much thought to their outfitting as I'm solely focused on the RAM with a touch of RAN on the side - coz they're related services.

I'm also in favour of an Army air wing for CAS, near-battlefield strike & SEAD, recce/observation & helicopter support.

I see the RAAF as air superiority, long range/strategic strike, long range SEAD, logistics support & reconnaissance.


I've probably missed some elements, but you get the general gist.

:)
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Rafale
« Reply #59 on: February 13, 2015, 10:23:28 AM »
if both the Rafale and the Gripen are in Australian service, would it be a Gripen variant sharing an engine with the Rafale in order to reduce logistics costs?  Or would it be the other way around with the Rafale using the Gripen's engine?  The later would have the advantage of more support world-wide as the RM12 is derived from the F404/F412/F414 series of engines.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Rafale
« Reply #60 on: February 13, 2015, 11:50:08 AM »
I hadn't really thought about the engines but, having had a quick study, I'd probably go with the EJ200, with options to upgrade to EJ2x0 Stage 1 & Stage 2 as they became available.

Reason 1: EJ200 is bigger than the Snecma M88 by 17.5" length & 1.5" diam but is smaller than the Volvo RM12 by 2.0" length & 6" diam.
Reason 2: EJ200 is only 92kg heavier (dry) than the M88 but is 66kg lighter than the RM12.
Reason 3: EJ200 puts out more thrust (both wet & dry) than either the M88 or the RM12 while being less thirsty than either of them.
Reason 4: EJ200 has a thrust-to-weight ratio of 9.31:1, as compared to the M88's 8.5:1 & the RM12's 7.8:1

Alterations to the Rafale would be quite considerable, but less than for the RM12, & the EJ200 could be slotted into the Gripen with only minimal modification.

Hmmm, have to think about how to achieve that in plastic.

In my RAM universe I see both types being built under licence by the CAC, which still exists, & the engines being manufactured by the latest incarnation of the GAF, CAST (Commonwealth AeroSpace Technologies).

;)
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Rafale
« Reply #61 on: February 13, 2015, 12:19:30 PM »
Sounds like a good choice.  Modifying the Rafale to take the EJ200 could make for an interesting design exercise but I wouldn't expect it to be an insurmountable problem.  I suppose it depends on the engine bay structure of the Rafale.  Too, in the real world you'd likely need to re-design the engine mounts and that leads to a structural reanalysis and that can get "interesting" (speaking from experience here on something far simpler).

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Rafale
« Reply #62 on: February 13, 2015, 12:43:59 PM »
Chances are I'll just build the models with stock engines, as I get the feeling that modifying the Rafale for different engines would be a considerably bigger task than re-engining the F-86 (which was pretty much a completely new aircraft when fitted with the Avon).

The 1.5" increase in diameter isn't too bad, & the extra mass & thrust can be dealt with by reinforcing the engine bay.

The biggest issue, that I see, is dealing with the considerably greater length, followed by distributing that extra 184kg around the CG.

:-\
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
Re: Rafale
« Reply #63 on: February 13, 2015, 12:53:07 PM »


France confirms sale of Rafale fighter jets to Egypt

Dassault Aviation confirmed today the Arab Republic of Egypt’s decision to equip its air force with the Rafale fighter jet. “This decision is a continuation of our cooperation that dates back to the 1970s, and has seen the Mirage 5, the Alpha Jet and the Mirage 2000 fly in the colors of Egypt.” Dassault commented. The Egyptian decision marks the second international selection of the French fighter, following the Indian selection of Rafale in 2012.

The Egyptian order will cover 24 aircraft, part of which will be delivered this year. The order worth about 3.6-4 billion Euros is expected to be signed on February 16, the Elysee Palace said in a statement.

The Rafale is the first completely omnirole fighter capable of accomplishing all the missions assigned to combat aircraft (air-air, air-ground, air-sea). It first came into active service with the French Navy and the French Air Force in 2004-2006, gradually replacing seven types of aircraft belonging to the preceding generations. It was deployed in Afghanistan (2007-2012), Libya (2011), in the Sahel-Saharan strip(since 2013) and in Iraq (since September 2014). It was chosen for the Indian Army’s request for proposal for 126 aircraft. Negotiations surrounding the Rafale are currently underway with several governments.

Cheers,

Logan

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Rafale
« Reply #64 on: February 14, 2015, 02:49:12 AM »
[The Rafale is the first completely omnirole fighter

And people say Marketing folks have no sense of humour... ;D
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Rafale
« Reply #65 on: February 14, 2015, 02:56:04 AM »
if both the Rafale and the Gripen are in Australian service, would it be a Gripen variant sharing an engine with the Rafale in order to reduce logistics costs?  Or would it be the other way around with the Rafale using the Gripen's engine?  The later would have the advantage of more support world-wide as the RM12 is derived from the F404/F412/F414 series of engines.

I would tend to go with either the F404 or F414. 

That said, prior to Saab's selection of the F414G for the latest Gripen variants, both the SNECMA M88 and the Eurojet EJ200 were under consideration for the Gripen.

From the Rafale's pov, remember that the early versions did fly with the F404.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Rafale
« Reply #66 on: February 14, 2015, 10:18:27 AM »
Cool! 8)

I haven't looked at the internal structure of the Rafale but given what you've said, Greg, there is every chance that the EJ200 could almost slot straight into either with only minor mod's.


Ni-ice! :)



PS: I would have gone the F404/F414 route, except the EJ200 is a newer, lighter engine with better performance figures & a potentially longer development path ahead of it. (Obviously I'm not a government department.)
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Rafale
« Reply #67 on: February 14, 2015, 10:49:54 AM »
if both the Rafale and the Gripen are in Australian service, would it be a Gripen variant sharing an engine with the Rafale in order to reduce logistics costs?  Or would it be the other way around with the Rafale using the Gripen's engine?  The later would have the advantage of more support world-wide as the RM12 is derived from the F404/F412/F414 series of engines.

I would tend to go with either the F404 or F414. 

That said, prior to Saab's selection of the F414G for the latest Gripen variants, both the SNECMA M88 and the Eurojet EJ200 were under consideration for the Gripen.

From the Rafale's pov, remember that the early versions did fly with the F404.

Yes the Rafale A development aircraft used the F-404 but I believe it was a physically larger and heavier aircraft than the production models.  I have the Heller kit of it somewhere.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Rafale
« Reply #68 on: February 14, 2015, 11:07:46 AM »
I like the concept of a heavy strike / light attack fighter combo going back to WWII, i.e. Beaufighter / Kittyhawk, Meteor / Vampire, CA23 / Sabre (FJ-4B) Phantom / Super Tiger etc.  Each service would have their own tailored iteration of this tactical strike wing, maybe with a medium or attack bomber squadron and a specialised support squadron (SEAD, ISR / Rec, ECM, FFAC) as well.  You could have Rafale as your Heavy fighter (single seater) as well as your attack bomber and the basis of your support types, five versions in an expeditionary strike wing.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Rafale
« Reply #69 on: April 11, 2020, 03:51:56 AM »
I was reading yesterday that during the mid 1980's around the same time as France left the original Future European Fighter Aircraft that eventually led to the Eurofighter Typhoon, they were also encouraging Spain to do the same (Spain did leave but then re-joined).  What if they were successful and then co-developed the Rafale?  Imagine a Rafale in this sort of scheme:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline ChernayaAkula

  • Was left standing in front when everyone else took one step back...
  • Global Moderator
  • Putting the "pro" in procrastination since...?
Re: Rafale
« Reply #70 on: April 11, 2020, 07:27:36 AM »
And then Spain is all.....



Cheers,
Moritz

"The appropriate response to reality is to go insane!"

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Rafale
« Reply #71 on: April 11, 2020, 08:25:16 PM »
I was reading yesterday that during the mid 1980's around the same time as France left the original Future European Fighter Aircraft that eventually led to the Eurofighter Typhoon, they were also encouraging Spain to do the same (Spain did leave but then re-joined).  What if they were successful and then co-developed the Rafale?  Imagine a Rafale in this sort of scheme:



I worked with a bloke during my Automotive Industry R&D days that we had head hunted from BAE. He was an expert on composites, structural testing and strain gauging etc. and had strain gauged an entire Nimrod MR4 wing set.  Anyway, back on topic, he told me that losing Spain had placed the entire Eurofighter project at risk as none of the other members at the time had suitable facilities in a suitable climate to cure the composite components the project required.