Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Zurawski

We got a long way to go before actually simulating air-combat...

Recommended Posts


Hello

 

This video is much discussed on french forums.

Its interest is more on the HUD views during a complete dogfight than in the comments.

The comments must be at best "discussed in the context" : the author seemed to have been fed up by other countries fanboys denigrating the Rafale.

As to the Typhoons, it seems that the context was "training novice typhoon pilots" by "experienced french pilots", who "played the red side". 

A good matchup would have been experienced Typhoon vs experienced Rafale pilots.

Wondering why the Typhoon got that ridiculous kill ratio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know If I get drunk,pop on Strike fighters and have a porno on audio only I bet my experience would be similar  :wink:   

Well...  That and you'd have to place a garrett around your neck to simulate the onset of blacking out and...

 

On second thought.... I'm not sure I want to venture any further  into your intoxicated porno-flight simulation fetish.  :scare: 

 

:biggrin: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know If I get drunk,pop on Strike fighters and have a porno on audio only I bet my experience would be similar  :wink:   

 

...you listen to porn with only French guys grunting??  :haha::lol:

 

Hey, no judgements! :tongue:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another exercise vid - this doesn't really give any indication of platform capabilities (other than how much speed a Rafale can lose quickly)- need to know the ROE of the criteria of the exercise.

Edited by MigBuster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically from I understand the USAF said the reason that the Rafale pilot got the cannon kill was that the F22 had external tanks but the HUD cam showed no tanks. IMHO F22 pilot was probably inexperienced.

 

Falcon

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the primary intent of the name, but it happens that in French slang, 'rafaler' is also a verb that means to dominate overwhelmingly, to humiliate in contest. Now it takes sense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another exercise vid - this doesn't really give any indication of platform capabilities (other than how much speed a Rafale can lose quickly)- need to know the ROE of the criteria of the exercise.

Well, in this case, and whatever the reasons : The F-22 was loosing quickly :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

posted on F-16 net

 

Air Forces Monthly 
April 2010 
Page 40, "Justifiably Proud!"
 

The magazine interview Lt. Col. Fabrice Grandclaudon, the Commander of EC 1/7, the Rafale squadron that participated in the Advanced Tactical Leadership Course (ATLC) at the UAE's Air Warfare Centre where this encounter took place. 

 

 

AFM: You apparently said 'the Rafale rubbed F-22 - the most modern fighter of the USAF. During six encounters the F-22 hit its goal only once'. The 27th FS doesn't remember the engagements that way and say the F-22 scored several victories against Rafale. Did you offer DACT to the Raptors and did they decline? 

LCL G: I did not say we 'rubbed them', I said that there was only one shot claimed (ie a simulated kill) for the six that were set-up. I read in a recent issue of Air et Cosmos that it was two. As far as I am concerned, one or two shots of six Basic Fighter Manoeuvres (BFM) encounters is a victory for the F-22 but not an overwhelming one. Not like the one we claimed against the Typhoons after combat in Solenzara, Corsica during September (9 set-up: 8 to 1 for the Rafale*). The other set-ups versus F-22s were terminated for combat deck, an un-decisive situation or lack of fuel. We never shot them down, but we hope to do so soon since we are quite good opposition for them, and it is in the pilot's spirit not to give up! 

Like almost every nation, we offered Beyond Visual Range DACT, of course, but the F-22 was only authorized to do BFM 1v1 Within Visual Range (WVR) versus foreign countries (except the UK, with whom they did not fight even in the BFMs). I wish we could have done so, but we didn't - which bring me back to Air et Cosmos, where its information about BVR engagement with AMRAAM in stealth mode is wrong: besides the fact that we did not even fly BVR vs F-22s! F-22 was fitted with some specific device to increase their radar signature. It enabled us to have contact with them during work ups for example. But that's not the point here."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mig

 

Yes, this is the reference article.

The Rafale had an advantage but did not claim a "sure kill".

Still, the Rafale was not as ridiculous as was often claimed

 

 

posted on F-16 net

 

Air Forces Monthly 
April 2010 
Page 40, "Justifiably Proud!"
 

The magazine interview Lt. Col. Fabrice Grandclaudon, the Commander of EC 1/7, the Rafale squadron that participated in the Advanced Tactical Leadership Course (ATLC) at the UAE's Air Warfare Centre where this encounter took place. 

 

 

AFM: You apparently said 'the Rafale rubbed F-22 - the most modern fighter of the USAF. During six encounters the F-22 hit its goal only once'. The 27th FS doesn't remember the engagements that way and say the F-22 scored several victories against Rafale. Did you offer DACT to the Raptors and did they decline? 

LCL G: I did not say we 'rubbed them', I said that there was only one shot claimed (ie a simulated kill) for the six that were set-up. I read in a recent issue of Air et Cosmos that it was two. As far as I am concerned, one or two shots of six Basic Fighter Manoeuvres (BFM) encounters is a victory for the F-22 but not an overwhelming one. Not like the one we claimed against the Typhoons after combat in Solenzara, Corsica during September (9 set-up: 8 to 1 for the Rafale*). The other set-ups versus F-22s were terminated for combat deck, an un-decisive situation or lack of fuel. We never shot them down, but we hope to do so soon since we are quite good opposition for them, and it is in the pilot's spirit not to give up! 

Like almost every nation, we offered Beyond Visual Range DACT, of course, but the F-22 was only authorized to do BFM 1v1 Within Visual Range (WVR) versus foreign countries (except the UK, with whom they did not fight even in the BFMs). I wish we could have done so, but we didn't - which bring me back to Air et Cosmos, where its information about BVR engagement with AMRAAM in stealth mode is wrong: besides the fact that we did not even fly BVR vs F-22s! F-22 was fitted with some specific device to increase their radar signature. It enabled us to have contact with them during work ups for example. But that's not the point here."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, everyone is concentrating on the combat after the merge and how one jet can out do the other.  I still stick with the old principle that it is not the jet that wins the fight, but the driver.  No doubt there were some fine French drivers in this flick and, probably some of our best pilots as well.  However, the observation that in a real kill-or-be-killed fight this film would have never taken place because the fight would have been resolved BVR as mentioned in a previous entry.  Anybody notice the stealth features of the Rafale?  I don't see a whole bunch and I bet the fight was joined with external vectoring and other external help because the Rafale would not have seen the Raptor until he was hanging in his chute doing a nylon letdown.  Once the fight was joined within visual range, no doubt the Rafale is a competitor.  I am of the opinion he never would have gotten to that point in a real fight.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..