He is not wrong wrt of speculations and bias, as much as I like your news, or information postings, told you often as well that your comparisions are often too speculative and that you get into conclusions too fast.
Well
like i said that dont go by the presentation of my expression in this thread rather concentrate on the facts that i posted .
Wrt survivability for example you simply concluded that the Su 35 will have the bigger RCS and will "survive in today' s high tech EW age". But that's just a claim and not based on anything!
As I told you just recently in another Su 35/Rafale thread, with the RCS reductions and no external fuel tanks needed, the RCSs of both fighters in the same role, with the same ammount of weapons and fuel could be pretty much the same.
You & I dont need masters of Stealth & Radar physics degree to understand that fact some basic knowledge of stealth would do the job for us & for the readers
A plane with straight air intake like this which exposes the entire engine compressor face to enemy radar is no way going to be stealthier than any
4.5 gen fighters available in the market
SU 35 's design is full of 90 degree corner relector more than rafale that is for sure
Su 35 is built of far less composite materials than Rafale
Su 35 's engine has far more IR signature than rafale's M88 engines as it has 2 cooling channels
Su 35 's EWS suite is far inferior to rafale's Spectra EWS suite is capable of AESA jamming
Su 35's RCS is around 2-3 m2 & on weapons load out it would be even higher as compare to Rafale 's rcs 0.1-0.2 m2 ,even if rafale is on weapons & fuel tank load out it would never be more than 2 m2 for sure.
Also the Su 35 EW is much upgraded with "integrated" ECM pods or RWRs as well, exactly to be more capable against modern threats, the core difference might be, that it is also aimed at defence in first place, while SPECTRA has offensive modes and capabilities as well, but to know that for a fact, you need more infos about the Russian systems too and as ptldM3 said, there are still not too much infos available of them, but they are far more capable than the once in the older version.
But Surviving in Electronic warfare is a relative term
What I mean is exactly what threat it is facing with ,if threat comes from a mediocre threat like J 10A/F16 it is good but compare that with F 35 or Rafale's spectra it is not so good as compare to their EW suite
Khibiny M is a good EW suite i am not saying it is totally useless but it's future adversaries are F22 & F 35 whose EW suite are highly sophiscated
Wrt avionics and sensors you also made your conclusions too easy, the FSO IR channel might theoreticaly have a higher range, but that are specs under optimal climate conditions only, in reality they are often much much shorter and infact the IR channel is considered as one of the weakpoints of Rafale. Possibly one reason why French forces don't buy it anymore and compromise with FSO-IT and MICA seekers, while the IR Channel seems to be available as an option for foreign countries only, until FSO NG comes.
Well u got that info perhaps from Mr scorpion but ideal conditions apply for both Rafale & SU 35
But still Rafale has the advantage in that sector .Well FSO NG/IT is a future deal lets wait but it would improve it's capabilties for sure
Similarly, having the Reco NG pod is not an advantage for Rafale in A2A or A2G roles and makes the fighter itself better. Our MKIs for example uses Israeli recon pods, so the question would be which pod is better, but does it really matter in times of drones?
It's true it has nothing to do with A2A or A2G but for comparitive purpose perhaps
Well in mali It had showed it's operational effectives ,Well drones can be shot yes Rafale can also be shot but it can try to escape What do u say???Even Iranians can do some incredible stunts with US drones
As I said in the other thread, both fighters are highly capable in A2A and A2G, but in their own ways and with their own advantages. I doubt that anybody has an advantage in maneuverability (Su 35 higher TWR & TVC, Rafale lower wingloading and canards).
thats true
i have mentioned in that thread both are even
SU 35 can have incredible AoA meanwhile rafale can show incredible turn rate whether loaded/or unloaded .
Head on and actively the Su 35 might have an advantage with IRBIS-E, in any other direction Rafales passive capabilities and the lower signatures adds advantages.
But in reality that would turn out to be major adavantage for rafale thanks to it's SPECTRA 's passive detection capabilities
BTW dont forget about SPECTRA active cancelling tech though still mystery but u never know
In strikes Rafale has advantages with the generally better weapons, but the Flanker has the higher variety and can carry more of them.
true !!
i support that point
R-27ET (long range IR guided missile)
anti radiation missiles
Better vareity of Anti ship missiles
So it's more than close performance wise and not that easy as you might think.
Well actuallly on performance wise SU 35 is more superior than rafale thanks to it's superior thrust engines with TVC , long range
higher ceiling flight limit ,more speed
Rafale & SU 35 are even matched in within visual range warfare but Rafale in BVR warfare it indeed gets the upperhand
....
