PubFather

Oops - just a provocative title to ask a question.

I'm hitting some very contradictory info regards the Typhoons combat radius compared to that the Rafale. I understood it to be superior. Wiki and certain posters on other board now claim Rafale to have a greater range.

The combat radius for Typhoon is set fairly consistently at circa 1400km
That for Rafale ranges from 1000km to 2000km.

Can anyone suggest why the disparate values? I find it hard to believe that Rafale outranges Typhoon on internal fuel (given that it is a smaller a/craft).

__________________
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit - Scottish Motto

"They that approve a private opinion, call it opinion; but they that dislike it, heresy; and yet heresy signifies no more than private opinion” Thomas Hobbes - Leviathan

joey2

I'll choose Typhoon if my enemy are based over another sea.
I'll choose rafale if i'm to undergo missions with neighbours, with mission specific modulation.

Typhoon maintenance cost is high i think.
Also Rafale is a excellent excellent carrier based fighter.

but normally typhoon i think is better than rafale as its a heavier class fighter?

dave angel

i think i've read on Pprune that Rafale should have a shorter range, a) because its smaller, and b) because, being Carrier capable, its 'denser' than Typhoon.

on ther other hand, BAe had a significant hand in Typhoon....

__________________
before criticizing someone, walk a mile in their shoes.................... then when you do criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.

PubFather

Yeah - there is the whole BAe problem to factor in....

What you said was pretty much my thinking on the matter - and certainly concurs with what I'd seen elsewhere as well...

hello

"I'll choose Typhoon if my enemy are based over another sea."

That's strange. The Rafale is carrier capable, and carriers can cross seas(obviously). However, the M is probably slower and shorter ranged because it's been overbuilt(as every carrier aircraft is).

PubFather

Ah - problem solved...

Rafale carries a similar amount of internal fuel to Typhoon (4,500 kg to 5000 kg, depending on which source you look at.)

However, Rafale can carry larger fuel tanks than Typhoon, plus CFTs. This then explains the difference in range.

Obviously, carrying all that external fuel (especially the 2000 liter tanks) restrict speed and AFAIK cannot be carried supersonically...

pdf27

IIRC the really big fuel tanks can't be carried on a catapult takeoff either...

Doug97

Supposedly there are conformal fuel tanks in the works for the Typhoon.

PubFather

GKN (IIRC) did demonstrate them at an air show a couple of years ago, and I believe some wind tunnel work has been done. There's nothing unfealisable about them - the main potential customer at the moment looks like the RAF, so it depends if cash is forthcoming. IIRC, they offered around 3000 extra litres of fuel, approx 25%.

Hats off the Frogs, for designing CFT's in from the start. I assume they did so taking into account the need to extend range as a naval fighter - whereas Typhoon has always suffered from its legacy as a MiG killer in Central Europe.

PubFather

Hadn't heard that but quite possibly true... will see if can find any info...

jeffpayne56

give me rafale anytime, in front of the 35 trillion billion f35 save money and get a good all round plane instead of licking george bushes ass, so we in the uk can have the 2 60k carriers and a decent size fleet

jeffpayne56

give me 70 rafale instead of 30 f35's in the fleet air arm, keep RAF and fleet air arm and dont combine them to save money

JBodnar39

How do the avioinics and radar of each compare?

bfng3569

hard time getting the the taste out this morning?

BenRoethig

They'll eventually be common.

__________________
F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: The Honda Accord of fighters.