>f-22fags btfo

>>28554821
>shitposting with something ancient

step it up senpai

>>28554834
>still trying to defend this
>still failing

>>28554887

>still baiting

You know this is bullshit but you keep posting it. An F-22 will never enter a friendly exercise without a massive gimp because it wouldn't teach either party anything.

>inb4 254 replies and 54 images

>>28554821
confirmed for never actually seeing F-22s fly.

>>28554921
I have no idea what I am looking at....a dog fight with a missile lock? Why is this bait or why is it important?

>>28554949

He got a 1 second lock on an F-22 with a equipped with a luneberg lense (massive gimp for the F-22) after starting the engagement in an advantageous position (another massive gimp for the F-22) and immediately stalled trying to keep the lock.

It really means nothing, it's just some HUD footage that people like to troll with OMG LE EBIN F-22 SUCKS XDDDDD

>>28554993
so /thread I guess

>>28554949

It's not important, at all. Thats why.

Just Rafalefags being desperate shitposters as per usual.

>>28554949
Essentially, this short film has been used by many people in the past to say that the F-22 is shit, and the Rafale is superior. As it looks like, it's the gun camera footage from a Rafale in a mock dogfight with an F-22. This footage was used for years whenever people complained that the F-22 was shit. However, it's been so thoroughly discredited by this point that anyone who uses this is trolling.

What they failed to realize back then is that the F-22 always starts on the defensive (one Air Force general said that "anything else is a waste of fuel) and STILL generally beats their opponent, at a 30:1 ratio.

>>28554821
Why do foreigners even use this website?

>>28555556
>555556

>>28555675
Yeah not gonna live that down

File: rafale-68-1.jpg (46KB, 990x513px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 990x513px

>>28554993
>He got a 1 second lock on an F-22 with a equipped with a luneberg lense
Lock achieved with an IR missile.

MICA IR = InfraRed.
Luneburg lense : nothing to do with infrared. Everything to do with radar waves.

>after starting the engagement in an advantageous position
Face to face (there is a break at 8.6G in the Rafale HUD, on the right of the screen) is an advantage. Got it.

>and immediately stalled trying to keep the lock.
No. "Release stick" doesn't mean stalling. it means "dude you're pulling too hard".
There is stalling at some point. 86mp/h. The Rafale was still fully controlable and went for the "kill" a few seconds after this.

>It's not important, at all. Thats why. Just Rafalefags being desperate shitposters as per usual.

Only HUD footage of a 22 being killed in a dogfight.
not important.
Gotcha.

What's next ? The usual bullshit about fuel tanks being on ? While you clearly can't see any fuel tank under the 22's wings ?

See you next week for more tears after the Indian contract is finally signed. Though we expect russians and anglos to be even more butthurt.

And as always, if Dassault was a US manufacturer, you would praise the Rafale. You know it. We know it. Everyone does.

Don't be shy senpai. This isn't forbidden love.

>>28554821
Care to explain what I'm looking at here?

>>28555711
confirming that just because the F-22 isn't 100% invincible to other modern aircraft it's not still the best fighter in the world.

lol eurofags are cute.

>>28555711
I see now. You are a fan boy of an aircraft that isn't an F-22.
>The ONLY footage of an F-22 losing in a FAKE dog fight.
It seems to me, were this not out of the ordinary there would be more footage of it occurring.
Its a moot argument anyway. In a few years drones will be replacing them all

File: 2zyiwx1.jpg (76KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 800x533px

>>28555711
right

>>28555711

>Luneburg lense : nothing to do with infrared. Everything to do with radar waves.

Try spotting an F-22 at ALL with out one in a real scenario. The exercise had it start at a massive disadvantage by negating that.

It's like demanding your opponent in the ring have both arms tied then claim that the weight around his right arm is redundant.

>Face to face

Citation needed.

>The Rafale was still fully controlable and went for the "kill" a few seconds after this.

Citation needed.

>Only HUD footage of a 22 being killed in a dogfight.
>Only HUD footage of a 22 coming moderately close to being killed in a dogfight in which it was basically designed to only be a target and denied its full capabilities

Fixed that for you

>What's next ? The usual bullshit about fuel tanks being on ?

If anything, Rafale is the one that relies on them more.

> if Dassault was a US manufacturer, you would praise the Rafale

If it were a US manufacturer, we'd be asking why the fuck it couldn't use any US weapons outside of Paveways.

>See you next week for more tears after the Indian contract is finally signed.

You mean the one that went from 126 aircraft to 36 after India realized France was massively underselling their prices and it fucking skyrocketed in cost at the same time as Brazil told Dassault to get fucked with those costs?

Yeah, sure we'll cry. Not like Rafale is literally the worst selling 4.5th gen Western fighter in the world or anything!

Oh wait.

It is.

>>28555711
>Face to face (there is a break at 8.6G in the Rafale HUD, on the right of the screen) is an advantage. Got it.
I would like to point out that the F-22 always starts on the defensive, as said by an Air Force general. I can source that claim if you'd like.


>Only HUD footage of a 22 being killed in a dogfight.
>not important
It really isn't. An EA-18G managed a kill on an F-22, and you don't see people trumpeting up the EA-18G's praises for its dogfighting ability.

>>28555556
The internet got cheap, so all the garbage can connect. It's like a nice country club that's suddenly become open enrollment.

File: f-4_rafale_eater_3.jpg (102KB, 450x517px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 450x517px

>>28555711
What's your excuse for this?

>>28555855

>An EA-18G managed a kill on an F-22, and you don't see people trumpeting up the EA-18G's praises for its dogfighting ability.

Because it's not a dogfighter. Rafale is. The Rafale has SPECTRA, which allows it to get really close to F-22s without being seen first. Thats why this is important. Itll always be a dogfight because F-22 cant see Rafale to shoot it down first because of SPECTRA.

>>28555825
>>28556206

>Rafalefags btfo

>>28556222
Do you even know what SPECTRA is?

File: 1445544243190.jpg (195KB, 798x770px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 798x770px

>>28556222

File: tumblr_m2vb83he8i1qmqs6fo1_1280.jpg (65KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 1024x768px

>>28556277

New generation active stealth. It hides the Rafale from radar better than old style shape stealth that can already be detected.

Rafale is the only aircraft in the world that has it. Thats why Meteor long range missile was not important because Rafale doesnt need it as much as other planes because SPECTRA hides it from missiles that cant see it up close. Thats why the MICA is better than the AM RAM because its better up close and turns better.

>>28556489
Jesus Christ you're either retarded or delusional.

>inb4 hurt you're just insulting me because you have no argument

Shut the fuck up, you have no idea what you're talking about.

HURR DURR MURICA STRONK

>>28556489
its painful how fucking dumb you are, and Im a ww2 plane fag who dabbles in this shit

>>28556489
Wrong. SPECTRA is first and foremost an EW suite, focused on the detection of things lighting it up. It is claimed that it can be used to cancel out radar returns by emitting some of their own. And I would agree, it is possible in theory. It'd probably even work against older radar sets, or those without enough processing power available to them. But to think that modern US aircraft lack the ability to see through this is poppycock. AESA radars would see through it in a heartbeat, considering they jump frequencies and active jamming relies on destructive interference of the given frequency. And let's not forget that other RWRs would probably see those emissions quite clearly.

>>28556222
Lol you rafael lovers are truly the most autistic even when compared to SU fags

>>28555711

The Rafale is probably the world's best strike fighter AFTER the F-35. But it has no chance against an F-22 in a real combat scenario.

>>28556489
>more French retardation
No "active stealth" does not work with AESA.

>Rafale
>No long range AA for the next 5 years
>Relevant
Rafale is a bomb truck and nothing more.

>>28555711
>See you next week for more tears after the Indian contract is finally signed. Though we expect russians and anglos to be even more butthurt.

IAF bought the Rafales for SEAD/DEAD ground strike missions. They didn't want an A2A fighter and know Rafale would get btfo in actual air combat against their Su-30MKIs.

Hence why Russia offered the MiG-35 and US the F/A-18, instead of Su-35S and F-15.

See: >>28556746

Rafale is just a good bomb truck, and A2G strike fighter.

>Lock achieved with an IR missile.
Nope, lock achieved with radar. You dont "lock" an aircraft up with anything else. But yes, if you are within radar lock range of an F-22, you sure as shit can get good tone on a heater, especially from the rear, looking at those engines.

>>28555711
>"Release stick" doesn't mean stalling
Yes, it does. It means " if you continue to do this we will stall, stop it"
>86mp/h
knots, 86 kts indicated airspeed.

Basically every jet like the F-16, F-18, SUs E2000, etc, can get a rear quarter heater kill on an F-22, if they start from behind.

All aspect IR missiles can kill from 360 degrees anyway, including head on. The modern doctrine is to hit from long range, if that fails hit from close range, and if that all fails gtfo.
There literally will not be dogfighting in any aircraft going in the future, unless things are seriously fubar ( which they wont be).

File: imbatman.webm (3MB, 1092x614px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1092x614px

This thread is now a F-22 thread.

Post sexy F-22s.

>>28558780
>There literally will not be dogfighting in any aircraft going in the future, unless things are seriously fubar ( which they wont be).
lrn2history. in a war, things always go fubar, often in the worst possible way.

>>28558780
>You dont "lock" an aircraft up with anything else
To clarify, the IR sensors will see the heat source, but then the radar is slaved to the IR suite pointing it there, so it can try to lock it up with radar beam.

But you can see a stealth aircraft on IR, and then tell the radar where to look, and the radar still wont be able to lock it up. Without radar information, a range cannot be known, and accurate targeting is impossible. A missile fired would not be able to pull lead pursuit on the target. Thus, its range and PK will be much, much lower.


>>28558856
Just because something was true in the past, doent mean it will always be true. At some point in the past men criticized automobiles as being inferior to horses, and they were right.

Men criticized semiautomatic and automatic firearms. They criticized fuel injection, BVR missiles...

File: FDtLZ.jpg (91KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1280x853px

>>28558780

>The modern doctrine is to hit from long range

Shoot from long range
SPECTRA scrambles radar lock
Missile miss

So much for your american modern "doctrine" you say there.

MICA BVR cant be jammed though like that. Thats why I said it was better than AM RAM. Jamming is all that matters and SPECTRA jams better.

>>28558889
>Shoot from long range
>SPECTRA scrambles radar lock
>Missile miss

...and then both parties fire IR missiles head on well before the merge, immelman 180 degrees away and separate. Rinse and repeat until winchester and then disengage.

If you dont have a very high chance of surviving you dont do it.

File: f-35 porn.png (87KB, 950x783px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 950x783px

F-35s are sexy

>>28558889
>SPECTRA jams better
...and missiles have had home on jam since 30 years ago. Do you think they have not improved in this aspect?

Jamming is for medium range, not long range ( jammer on = Hi! here I am!) and not for close range ( Hi! stick an HOJ amraam in my face pls!)

>>28558889
God you're fucking stupid.

>>28558880
missiles got much better since vietnam era. but so did countermeasures.

bvr missiles were never battle-tested against a modern adversary. their advantages are purely theoretical. military theories often do not work out when confronted with reality

/k/! I'm applying to my local Lockheed-Martin. What do now?

>>28554993
At these ranges, the Rafale should have no trouble getting a lock even without a Luneberg lens.

The real question is how the hell a Rafale is going to get this close in the first place. This exercise was a pitched BFM exercise which simply handwaves that issue; it was essentially a pilot vs. pilot contest at it's purest.

>>28555855
Didn't an A-10 manage a kill? Doesn't that pretty make the whole argument completely pointless.

File: Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 11.10.05 AM.png (148KB, 1107x699px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1107x699px

>>28558889
Barn-door RCS kinda makes it harder for jamming to work effectively, but nice try.
>>28558957
>Jamming is for medium range, not long range
All of my wat
>and not for close range
Agreed, but mainly because jammer burn-through is a thing.

File: EA-18G with simulated BVR Raptor kill.jpg (30KB, 445x333px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 445x333px

>>28555855
>An EA-18G managed a kill on an F-22, and you don't see people trumpeting up the EA-18G's praises for its dogfighting ability.
That's because the EA-18G kill was BVR, not in a dogfight :^)

>>28555835
>Try spotting an F-22 at ALL with out one in a real scenario. The EXERCISE had it start at a massive disadvantage by negating that.

not that guy but thats what IRST is for, its not as long ranged as radar but it does the job at closer distances

File: df_3029_neuburg_18-07-12.jpg (396KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 1024x683px

Eurofags are so eager to prove themselves the Luftwaffe actually paints F-22 'kill' marks from fucking exercises. Exercises where they do things like have the F-22 turn off it's radar and opposing force gets a respawn on a whim.

Autist level 10/10

>>28560389
Was it though? i mean im not sure desu. Any sources giving any detail about the 'kill'

File: Kylo.png (281KB, 387x348px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 387x348px

>>28560453

>Painting fake kills on your aircraft

This should be illegal.

>>28560492
Its beause they know in a reaal battle they never would touch it :^)

>>28560453

>Eurofags

France and Germany are the autists for that. The rest generally don't harp about anything when it happens and just train, but the Frogs and Krauts are legendary for making so much shit up about things that happened.

>>28560456
Okay, I don't actually know with any certainty. All we know is that it was a Slammer shot.

>>28560360
I remember hearing something along those lines.

>>28560447
Really close distances. I wouldn't trust a distance of over 30-40 nmi under ideal conditions. That is, bone dry air. Further, most IRST is described as looking through a straw.

>>28556804
If Rafale is nothing but a bomb truck that means that F/A-18 is nothing but a bomb truck

Rafale is a multirole aircraft and a good one

Not as good at dogfighting as the Rafale too of course

>>28555711
Its been proven that the F-22 was gimped in this scenario, but stay mad Yuropoor

>>28560590
*Rafale is obviously not as good at dogfighting or A2A as the F-22 is of course, because no aircraft is*

made a typo because I'm tired as fuck

Until these planes actually clash in real life with the gloves off/nothing held back then you are all just a bunch of speculating armchair generals.

>>28560590
>>28560605

Rafale is a bomb truck though. Its longest range missile barely touched BVR ranges, to the point you couldn't fire it in BVR against a manouvering target. Thats not really multirole.

>>28560631
France's military is underfunded so they haven't equipped them with MBDA Meteor but it exists and production could be quickly ramped up, Meteor is a fine missile and already in main line service with other European militaries

>>28560656
and the Rafale can mount a one-way datalink gimped version, yes.

>>28560590

>If Rafale is nothing but a bomb truck that means that F/A-18 is nothing but a bomb truck

>Rafale has no BVR at all

It's a bomb truck.

>>28560656

>France's military is underfunded so they haven't equipped them with MBDA Meteor but it exists and production could be quickly ramped up, Meteor is a fine missile and already in main line service with other European militaries

1) Meteor is not in full service with any nation yet
2) Missile exists, but it's not finished yet. Thats why Gripen and Typhoon went for AIM-120 until then, Rafale didn't because it can't use it
3) "Production could be quickly ramped up" is a pointless statement considering France isn't even the lead nation in designing/building the fucking missile, and is also pointless anyway because why WOULD it ramp up? They've got a fucking enormous capability gap of having no fucking BVR in their entire air force at ALL and the production never ramped up. So why would it now?

This is some old as shit bait

How is /k/ still falling for it?

File: IMG_1442.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>28554821
dat altimeter on the HUD is dope af. i am also wondering what is going on here?

The Rafale was never meant to be an outstanding air superiority fighter, and it will never be.

A set up dogfight like this one shows that it has the technical capabilities to do it, but in no way depicts what an actual engagement would look like.

That's why everyone with an ounce of common sense will use the Rafale for blowing shit up on the ground, and other planes for air policing.

>>28561314
Read the thread. It's some old footage of some training exercises where a Rafael managed to get a brief lock on an F-22 Raptor that was gimped. Otherwise, the Rafael wouldn't stand a chance.

>>28554821
>yfw the frog in the rafale never actually called the kill
>mfw the frog flight commander in an interview admitted that it was nothing to brag about seeing that the F-22 was set up to fail
>mfw the F-4 Phantom eats rafales for breakfast
does that mean the Phantom II > F-22?

>>28554949
You're seeing the rafale gain and lose several locks using its boresight ACM mode, then get a fleeting snap gun shot

>>28561314
That is a bit different, isn't it? What else is going on there...
>Radar altimeter(?) below pressure altitude indication
>Itty bitty artificial horizon icon on the left
I like that.
>Typical Western-style pitch ladder and horizon bar
>Compass tape
>G callout
>AOA callout and indexer bracket
Good...
>Plane and bare airspeed callout at top left
Meh, I'd really like to see a tape with limitations and reference speeds marked out.
>Targeting spaghetti
>Funky crucifix thing on the right
No idea what most of that shit means. At least the gun pipper and range to target I understand.

>>28561646
>That's why everyone with an ounce of common sense will use the Rafale for blowing shit up on the ground, and other planes for air policing.
So what do you suggest the French use for air superiority, then? Mirages? Etendards?

>>28561007
Because it's /k/.
I would bet that OP is neither French nor a Rafale fanboy but just a troll.

>>28561007
/k/ is one of the dumbest board on 4chan

>>28554821
This .webm is guaran-fucking-teed to bring the burgers out of the wood work.

High-Tier bait.

>>28555556
if only amerifats would use there would be autism the board 100% of the time. now its mainly that when amerifats are awake in a mass

>>28566136
This thread implies it's the other way around.

>>28564962

France doesn't prioritise air combat. Rafale wasn't designed to do it at a high level, they aren't pursuing two-way datalinks, their AESA program is only aiming for a small radar and they have absolutely no 5th generation plans whatsoever.

It's just not their focus.

>>28555822
>this, t b h
AI 'stealth movie' plane-overlords when?

>>28566254
>>28566136

All countries have their autists. It's just a matter of how many are on at any particular time.

>>28564962
>So what do you suggest the French use for air superiority

NATO. Their airspace is surrounded by Typhoon users, and almost all overseas action with some kind of air to air threat includes US escort.

>>28568532

Pretty much this. France has such low chances of ever needing to do air to air work in their own territory or in their likely deployment zones that they just essentially forgo it from getting the top end funding.

NATO has more than enough F-15s, F-22s and Typhoons to cover for it though on the "top end air to air" zone at high altitude.