MILAVIA Forum - Military Aviation Discussion Forum

Author Topic: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000  (Read 23545 times)

Offline valkyrian

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: gr
  • Goodbye my friend Tigershark, R.I.P.
Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« on: May 14, 2008, 01:16:37 PM »
From May 12 to 16th 5 Rafales ( 2 c's and 3 B's) will be visiting 337 sqdr and do some common exercises.

In other words, this is Rafale vs F-16 blk52, so the results will be more than interesting....

In a parallel event, 2 F/A-18 E from carrier Truman, will pay a visit in Tanagra air base and do some exercises along with Greek M2000 EBG....

Looking forward for results (if they ever surface...)

The Americans chose the easiest part, since the M2000 EBG is quite old....The French chosen the difficult part, since the F-16 is a blk52 machine.


Now lets hope the EF will pay some visit, and not to mention the mighty Flanker......

Offline iluveagles

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
  • Country: us
Re: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« Reply #1 on: May 14, 2008, 02:49:51 PM »
Hard to say with the Rafale and the F-16, the aircraft are fairly equally matched, but I'm going to have to put my money on the F-16s just because of the pilots........sorry but American pilots are the best in the world  ;D

As for the 18 vs the 2000, yeah the 18 will blow them all out of the sky.

Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Re: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2008, 05:14:56 AM »
Rafale and the F-16 - pilot skill but the Rafale is a little newer design one would think it might sometimes in certain situations get into a better firing position.  Still think the Viper has the better radar & missiles some would disagree with that.

F/A-18 VS Mirage 2000 EBG - Hornet has the edge in radar for sure and as long as it stays out of high speed fights should come out on top.  The Mirage was basically design to get up high and get shots at Mig-25 so high and fast is where it needs to be to have a chance.  Any type of a turning flight I think helps the Hornet's chances.  In real life I think the Hornet would have nasty ways of jamming the Mirages missile but I don't know that for sure.  (smile face)  Wonder why the Mirage 2000-5mk3 isn't part of the mock-fight much better radar and it's own nasty little sub systems. 

Offline Globetrotter

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 838
  • Country: ar
  • I'm Thomas (now Globetrotter)
Re: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2008, 05:17:58 AM »
This is something I'd like to see!! or at least hear about ;D
Of the 4 airplane, in equal condition of pilots, I would bet on the Rafale. Let's hope everything is just fine, after all, these 3 Nations' pilots are very well trained, I believe ;)
"Ad Astra Per Aspera"   (5º Grupo de Caza ≈ A-4AR Fightinghawk)

 ~ MALVINAS ARGENTINAS ~


Offline iluveagles

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
  • Country: us
Re: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2008, 06:00:13 AM »
Well, yeah the 2000 is a high altitude, high speed interceptor.......its not meant for dog fighting...........

Offline valkyrian

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: gr
  • Goodbye my friend Tigershark, R.I.P.
Re: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2008, 10:52:11 AM »
Latest unofficial reports (lets say rumors) say that the Hornets had some bad experiences with the M2000, and if this is true it must concern the close in dogfights, were even an F-16 wouldn't like to turn and burn with the M2000. On the other hand, i am sure that the Super Hornets radar would "see" first and shoot first, long before any M2000 pilot see the Hornets (like nonpilot said). But thats not how the situation in Aegean works. Daily dogfights are 100% of the engagements.

Iluveagles, the M2000 is much more maneuvrable than both Hornet and Super Hornet, in terms of maximum instantaneous and sustained turn rate, and has a better rate of climb. If that is displeasing, then you should think that Hornet and Super Hornet are far more capable air to ground fighters than any M2000, for reasons of basic design.

Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Re: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2008, 03:01:35 PM »
It's very close in certain situations from what I've read I know the Viper drivers want to get that second and third turn in to slow down the Mirage 2000.  Vipers can keep better power in this area and this is where Viper must fight.  In modern combat missiles work so well now nothing like any Topgun movie, MIRC IR & 9X are deadly no pilot wants to get in the 10/15 mile zone that's for sure.  I think fuel loads play a bigger part in fighting having an edge on how long you can play and not getting shot in the ass when trying to leave is important.  I'm sure in mock training when pilots know each other strengths and weaknesses a lot of draws and bingo fuel happen. 

Offline iluveagles

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
  • Country: us
Re: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2008, 06:30:10 AM »
nonpilot I would agree........

Valkyrian, truth is I could care less about the hornet, never really liked it, however I still disagree that the 2000 is much more maneuverable, basic design would tell you that it is not meant for dogfighting.............ie delta wings.............high speed, high altitude............

Offline valkyrian

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: gr
  • Goodbye my friend Tigershark, R.I.P.
Re: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2008, 04:34:44 PM »
The delta wing alone is only apropriate for high speed flight ie for interceptors (F-102/F-106/Mirage III).
Delta + canards + fly by wire make up a very good combination for dogfighters EF-2000/Rafale/Grippen/J10.

The M2000 is a hell out of a dogfighter, plus it has all the delta avantages for high speed flight. If that is not enough for you, check some turn rate figures. I'll try to post some for you.

Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Re: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2008, 05:38:42 PM »
valkyrian good example describing the EF2000 and others the delta design doesn't mean it's ineffective in dog fighting.  The Mirage 2000 engine is under powered and plays a part in why it bleeds of energy in turns the EF2000 doesn't have that problem in the same sense.

iluveagles I'm a Viper fan also so valkyrian but his country flies both types and Greece pilots who train and fly against each other say the Mirage 2000-5 is the better dog fighter of the two.  I'm sure they don't beat Vipers every time I'm not saying that but there a good fighter and delta designs work.   The EF-2000, Rafale, Gripen are all good dog fighting aircraft and are all basically newer designs the the Viper.  In modern combat it's very rare that a 1 vs 1 would ever come up in real life AWACS and other assets play a huge part.   Our fighter pilots are trained very well but there part of a package teamed with good maintained equipment that makes them the best.   For example if the USAF had (2) squadrons of Su-30 MKI/MKM Flankers to work up and train with and got time to get good don't you think using our "package system" they could carry out F-15 missions?   

Offline iluveagles

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
  • Country: us
Re: Rafale vs F-16 block 52, F-18 E/F vs M2000
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2008, 11:13:07 PM »
The Typhoon, Rafale, and Gripen don't have delta wings...........they are clipped delta wings, entirely different. Those wings are literally designed for dogfighting. However, I don't wish to argue anymore and I have never been in a dogfight with an M2000 so I admit defeat............

I'm not a viper fan.............


 



AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com click to vote for MILAVIA