Rafale 2017-2

Please elaborate.

Of course the requirements are written with the F-35 in mind — that only makes sense.

Throughout the history of such competitions the requirements tend always to be written with the “last generation” of equipment in mind.

The problem from a “competition” point of view is that there is only one 5. gen fighter on the market — the F-35. So therefore, one could argue that the requirements are indeed written with the F-35 in mind.

4.5 gen fighter jets will not be able to meet some of the requirements — this is why Boeing, Saab and Dassault dropped out of the competition. They cannot successfully complete some of the missions that the F-35 can do, without extra support.

It remains a mystery why the Typhoon remains in the competition.

reality is that Dassault did not bid as it was a government to government RFP. Then, the french have considered (juste as Boeing and Saab, that belgium procedure was a mascarade destined to make a F-35 buy look legal (basically, describe the F-35 in the requirements and ask competitors to be as close as possible to it). So the french government made a partnership offer to Belgium outside that RFP.

Please elaborate.

But, while the nationalists make lots of noise, the belgian government has sent a team to work out a full proposal with the french and see if it can legally be considered, so, you can be sure that you’ll keep seeing press publications increase, trying to derail and discredit the french offer

A competitive technical assessment of the Rafale vis a vis the F-35 & EF by the BAF should still be on the cards then, right? This is just about accommodating the French industrial offer.

reality is that Dassault did not bid as it was a government to government RFP. Then, the french have considered (juste as Boeing and Saab, that belgium procedure was a mascarade destined to make a F-35 buy look legal (basically, describe the F-35 in the requirements and ask competitors to be as close as possible to it). So the french government made a partnership offer to Belgium outside that RFP.

Now about the “blackmail”.. the fact is that NVA (flamish nationalistic party – basically completely phobic about anything more or less related to french) guys are completely panicked at the idea that the french offer may be considered interesting and they try to do anything they can to disqualify the french offer..

here you can read a slightly different view of the story:

http://www.opex360.com/2017/12/28/ministre-belge-de-defense-proposition-francaise-rafale-belle-etre-vraie/

for example, the economic compensation proposed is 4 billion euros, not 20. 20 billion is projected cumulated benefits for Belgium after 20 years following that 4 billion investment. France also proposed tah their investment goes 55% to flamish part (paaaaaanic!!! at NVA, if ever their electors find the french “nice”) and 45% the french speaking part of Belgium.

But, while the nationalists make lots of noise, the belgian government has sent a team to work out a full proposal with the french and see if it can legally be considered, so, you can be sure that you’ll keep seeing press publications increase, trying to derail and discredit the french offer

Does anyone know the exact breakdown of the €20 billion? This article seems to suggest that it includes run-of-the-mill civilian investments that are effectively being held ‘hostage’ to the deal.

Translated from Dutch –

Geert Noels: “France blackmails Belgium as if it were a colony”

Suppose President Trump would put Belgium under pressure to buy American fighter planes or else all American multinationals would leave the country. Suppose it would go even further, and threaten to destabilize US banks that carry our financial system like Bank of New York, Swift and Euroclear if we do not purchase those jets. How would we interpret this? Would not we doubt whether we are still dealing with a friendly nation?

However, it is exactly what the French government is doing with our country today. France wants our country to buy the French Rafale fighter plane to replace the old F16s. The French do not meet the formal and procedural requirements, but play it differently.

For example, they propose that Belgium would receive 20 billion euros in economic compensation when buying the French jets. However, 16 billion euros of this 20 billion euros are the sum of the current activities of French companies over a period of 20 years.

With this, France says that these activities are uncertain if we do not opt ​​for their jets.

France also uses the weak Belgian position in Dexia to put pressure on our country. Our southern neighbor pushes in the direction of ending the bank license of the fallen bank.

This appears to be a technical matter, but it would make the financing of the bank more expensive and Belgium would have to add 15% debt to its already sizeable public debt of more than 100% of GDP.

This threat is a potential bomb for Belgium, which may have consequences for our creditworthiness, interest charges and economic and financial stability.

This threat is also only possible because Belgium has to guarantee more than 60% of Dexia, compared with only 33% by France, and that despite almost no Belgian credits being secured (26 billion French versus 2 billion euro Belgian credits).

France not only puts Belgium under pressure with the banking file and French companies, but also with disruption of our energy sector. Once again weak strategic insight and weak negotiation lie at the basis of the control of French Engie on the Belgian energy sector.

In 2009 Belgium let itself be ringeloren and stopped asking for a “Golden Share” (a blocking vote) and accepted a vague “consultation committee” to defend its interests. Whether this committee has ever taken place and has teeth is not clear. What is clear is that the Belgian energy market is very vulnerable to French decisions.

Here, too, France does not behave like a friendly nation, but as a colonizer.

Belgium owes this weak position mainly to itself. Poor strategic insight, insufficient prioritization and years of budgetary neglect are present in each of these files.

Belgium spends the least of all NATO countries on defense (less than 1% of GDP, and 0.5% of GDP or 2 billion euros per year less than the average of all other countries). In addition, our country spends the least of this budget on equipment (5% compared with an average of 20%).

In the financial sector, Belgium turned out to be the most vulnerable country in 2008 with failures from virtually all major banks, which meant it had to negotiate chaotic and unprepared.

In the energy dossier, Belgium has postponed decisions for years, signed agreements such as the Paris Climate Agreement, without explaining to the population what the necessary investments would entail and the associated cost price.

Belgium therefore undergoes many important trends instead of being able to lead them. This makes our country a plaything of the great powers, and countries that are better prepared.

But nevertheless the United States or Germany do not treat us like the French today.

France treats Belgium as a colony. The blackmail in the defense file is shocking. You could ask the question if France is still a friendly nation.

If our government bends for the blackmail and chooses the French Rafale, then we know immediately how our country wants to be treated in the future. As an independent nation, or as a blackmailable country.

The sympathetic Emmanuel Macron lets Belgium blackmail as the antipathetic Donald Trump does not do today. What are we waiting for to condemn this sharply?

Not only that.. by claiming the offer was too good to be true he basically admitted the offer was much better than what LM had offered..

In fact it is the opposite. As Dassault were unable to answer the RFT as requested, while LM and Airbus did, it speaks volumes for the level of information provided and calls into question any claims they now make. Dassault didn’t provide a response to any of the scenarios or actually any of the questions at all. They have conducted their tender response by media, hoping the swell of political infighting and undiscerning public will make up for the lack of a valid response.

Not only that.. by claiming the offer was too good to be true he basically admitted the offer was much better than what LM had offered..

funny that the guy wanting clearly to buy american regardless of anything else on the market comes to speak about lobbying… 😀

“Trop belle pour être vraie”*: Belgian MoD skepticalal on Dassault last offer

Le ministre belge de la Défense Steven Vandeput n’a pas fait montre d’ouverture mercredi vis-à-vis de l’offre française pour les avions de chasse Rafale, la jugeant “trop belle pour être vraie”. “Le lobbying tourne à plein régime, c’est clair”, a-t-il commenté.

————-
Belgian Defense Minister Steven Vandeput did not show any enthusiasm on Wednesday with regard to the [Dassault] offer for Rafale fighter jets, saying it was “too good to be true”. “Lobbying is running at full speed, it’s clear,” he said.

The latest offer involves 20b€ compensation spread along 20years with 5000 high paying jobs sustained in (mostly French speaking) Belgium.

Source:
DH.be

*Too good to be true

there were 34000 Bf-109s built and less than 5000 Yak-3 fighters.. which one is better in your opinion? 😉

Madrat says

The Chinese and Russians are their true competition. They easily dominate both.

There has been over 800 flankers built by Russia and India. And 730 J-11 Flankers built by China. And…. 160 Rafales built.

Hurray :eagerness:

Rafale M will be deployed on US carriers during Charles de Gaulle MLU.

https://www.facebook.com/Scramblemagazine/photos/a.216124641747411.66937.145237522169457/2029229813770209/?type=3&theater

For the record regarding rafale in India :

https://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/the-interviews-blog/contract-for-36-rafales-include-weapons-suite-superior-to-the-earlier-case-higher-capability-more-apt-for-iaf/

*******

anti-US cabal

:stupid:

Conspiracy theories now?

And it’s even of a shared interest that they should keep buying Western equipment, no matter what the anti-US cabal might repeatedly say.

I don’t think anyone believes the F-35 has the whole market sown up if only for the fact that when you buy into the F-35 you buy into a primarily US support program and security structure. If you’re not prepared to live with those constraints then there remain other options. If you accept those constraints, then little else compares.

Excellent point, the recent M-E arms splurge solidifies this idea. UAE is lobbying hard for the F-35, but is exploring other options as well. The purchases of Qatar also show this trend. If you aren’t a NATO nation, diversify your arms suppliers. The F-35 will come with strings attached, and so European offerings will have a market In the Gulf states for years.

I don’t buy the idea that the F35 has the Western World sown up. It has European operators of old F16/F18s to count on (who probably bought American in the 80s for the same reason as they want the F35 now), but is not the be all and end all for everyone.

I don’t think anyone believes the F-35 has the whole market sown up if only for the fact that when you buy into the F-35 you buy into a primarily US support program and security structure. If you’re not prepared to live with those constraints then there remain other options. If you accept those constraints, then little else compares.

Without a new engine there is little reason to suspect too many major shifts in Rafale development. More power to anyone that continues down that path. They always could explore undercutting the Gripen NG by exploring Super Etendard and Mirage venues built around single M88 designs.

The Chinese and Russians are their true competition. They easily dominate both.

I don’t buy the idea that the F35 has the Western World sown up. It has European operators of old F16/F18s to count on (who probably bought American in the 80s for the same reason as they want the F35 now), but is not the be all and end all for everyone.

I also think that it is very common for manufacturers to hold the very hi-tech cards of their system close to their chest. We can only guess exactly what each of the advanced sensor,communication and defence systems are actually capable of on any aircraft.

12 or 24 more rafales for Egypt to be very probably signed late January/early February during Macron’s visit.

https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/industrie/aeronautique-defense/armement-l-egypte-se-rapproche-d-une-nouvelle-commande-de-rafale-et-de-corvettes-gowind-761291.html