WIP: Dassault Rafale
-
Both sensors belong to the OSF, Optronique de Secteur Frontal (Front Sector Optronics). The one on the left is a TV channel sensor, the right one is an IR channel sensor.
The IR channel will be deleted in the next trench (F3R). -
Is there a reason to omit the IR sesor, or has the optical sesor been merged with the IR sensor in the next version? IR tracking is a great passive system to have on a fighter, and I don’t know why it keeps getting the short end of the stick in Western fighters. The only three old US fighters I can think of having IRST were the F-4(B and C), the F-106, and the F-14(and that was only for the last version!).
-
No.
We are not simulating the Rafale for the moment. It is just an additional target ATM.
No planned to make avionics other than F-16. … Maybe later … Far later. (?)
-
No.
We are not simulating the Rafale for the moment. It is just an additional target ATM.
No planned to make avionics other than F-16. … Maybe later … Far later. (?)
My good man,
Mine was a question adressed at the Rafale model and the actual aircraft itself. I understand avionics are a far way off for aircraft which are not the F-16 quite well.
-
having IRST were the F-4(B and C), the F-106, and the F-14(and that was only for the last version!).
I am not 100% sure but the module that fit on F-4’s was called TISEO and it was Electro-Optical, not IR. The module could be installed on other versions too, like we HAF had it available on some birds of the E version. This was the first generation, its next upgrade was installed on the F-14A. The F-14D got the double module, both TV and IR sensors side by side.
Apart these, the F-15K use an IRST coupled on the Sniper TGP pylon, that system is fully operational and available for other F-15 users too under the name “Tiger Eyes”, which sensor was taken directly from the F-14D:
The interesting is this below about the Viper, it seems that LM has fitted a new IRST pod based on that AN/AAS-42 of F-14D / “Tiger Eyes” sensor for use -currently- by the Aggressors. Here as appeared on recent Red Flag 13-3:
LM also fitted this sensor to a fuel tank for specific F-18E/F usage:
It seems that with all these stealth technology rising around the world, the money-to-bet are going towards IRST systems that will be able to track and guide weapons on such stealth platforms.
-
Superbe (Beautiful)
Vivement qu’il soit dispo
Serpentaire
-
I am not 100% sure but the module that fit on F-4’s was called TISEO and it was Electro-Optical, not IR. The module could be installed on other versions too, like we HAF had it available on some birds of the E version.
Yes, TISEO was available on USAF F-4E and equivalent export F-4s. I was not IRST it was electo-optical device. It did not had any seach function as I know its only role was that I can “look” on targets which was locked by radar for VID.
This was the first generation, its next upgrade was installed on the F-14A. The F-14D got the double module, both TV and IR sensors side by side.
F-14s had many configurations.
Apart these, the F-15K use an IRST coupled on the Sniper TGP pylon, that system is fully operational and available for other F-15 users too under the name “Tiger Eyes”, which sensor was taken directly from the F-14D:
F-15K, SG and SA also will have this toy.
-
The F-4B/C had the AN/AAA-4 IR set - that’s the bulge on the bottom of the nose
http://wiki.scramble.nl/index.php/AN/AAA-4
The TISEO was mounted on the left wing - I think first on the Rivet Haste F-4Es in 72
F-101 also defo had IRST on the top of the nose
-
Those things on the F-14D must be huge drag increasing devices.
-
The interesting is this below about the Viper, it seems that LM has fitted a new IRST pod based on that AN/AAS-42 of F-14D / “Tiger Eyes” sensor for use -currently- by the Aggressors. Here as appeared on recent Red Flag 13-3:
Thanks hadn’t noticed that - surprising really considering how big it is!
Pulled this off F-16 net on the F-101 IRST - the potential capability seems impressive:
_The VooDoo had several aspects we see today. Many lessons-learned.
- Mutli-mode, multi-sensor fire control system. So the IRST could work with the radar or by
itself if stealth was a player.
Range was a problem, and usually the IRST by itself was really
only good for the two heaters. No biggie, as you could either see the tgt or briefly switch on
the radar to ensure within range.
A sneaky mode was IR tracking and radar in search mode. The tgt
would assume you weren’t tracking and then BAM! Two Aim-4C heaters on the way.
The IRST was also very good at low altitude in a look-down mode when compared to the radar. Once locked on, you
could then slave the radar to get range/overtake data. Cool. And this was all there in 1965 - 66.
IRST was in the Double Ugly, but then absent for too long, IMHO._
- Mutli-mode, multi-sensor fire control system. So the IRST could work with the radar or by
-
Hehe. Thread derailment inbound!
The F-106 is one of the coolest fighters I can think of from ye olde days. The ugly problem with the IR sensor was dealt with by having a retractible sensor. That was just one of the many cool things that fighter had.
…I wonder if we could ever get to a point where we could simulate the older avionics in some of those planes. In a way, just being able to turn some of the F-16’s things OFF, permanently, would work well for old fighters. The sim already supports steam guages and tapes, so a lot of the instrumentation should work well enough on its own. I know FF was able to disable the radar for some types - has BMS done this as well?
-
Also an Internal weapons bay for low drag stealthy operations
One thing about the F-106 that’s slightly NOT great is the view from the pit (Cage) - even after they removed the bar from the top of the canopy - it was a bomber interceptor really.If there were plans to do an IRST for new fighters like Rafale - then you could adapt that to older aircraft you would think……
-
Hayab,
I really appreciate the work you made, it’s so rare to see a french fighter in BMS, however, I would recommand some aspects to modify in the mesh, to make it look perfect. Moreover, I’d be delighted to make the 3D cockpit for you, if you accept this kind of collaboration.
Thank you for your lovely work,
Radium
-
I would recommand some aspects to modify in the mesh, to make it look perfect.
Huh? … can you explain that, please. I can’t see any mesh errors.
Cheers,
LS -
BTW, those MAU pylons are far more successful than any F-16 or other system in the history of Falcon! lol
-
Huh? … can you explain that, please. I can’t see any mesh errors.
Cheers,http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f82/lazystone/Smileys/hat_3.gif
LSI noticed some little mistakes on the canopy, but also on the refuel drogue and the canards… But I pretty worry to write this publicly, I feel this kind of statements can drive people crazy, so, I am not sure I should send detailed recommendations in PM or mentioned them here…
It’s always difficult to criticize somebody’s work… I don’t like to make this, but Rafale is my national fighter, I saw 2 yesterday, so, like with the F-2, I have something personal with it…
Cheers,
Radium
-
… IMO … Hayab takes all remarks in considerations.
Then … if it i easy and quick to modify, IMO he will do it. If not and if need a total refinement of the main body, I do not think it worth the the effort (or maybe later).
Up to him. Anyway … from my personal POV, the model is much more than “acceptable”.
-
… IMO … Hayab takes all remarks in considerations.
Then … if it i easy and quick to modify, IMO he will do it. If not and if need a total refinement of the main body, I do not think it worth the the effort (or maybe later).
Up to him. Anyway … from my personal POV, the model is much more than “acceptable”.
Sure, but, acceptable and perfect are different!
And,
I trust Hayab is working for perfection!
-
That is by far the best looking model i have seen! Nice work…
-