Hi Bmused55
The Indian Subcontinent is at the bottom of the very long development curve. You seem to be supremely confident that AI will be the premier carrier forever and a day, amen. I find this puzzling given the history of airlines on other continents.
I take your point that the 737NG has sold well. However, I’m sure that the good track record of the legacy 737 certainly didn’t hurt the NG’s sales drive. The A320 initially met with some resistance because of it’s FBW system. I’ve never flown in an A320. I read that passengers certainly do prefer it to the 737.
My 99/2000 edition of Brasseys’ s tells me that the A320 is about 7,5 tons heavier than the 737-400 and about 3,9 tons heavier than the -700. (Am I comparing the right planes?) Assuming that I’ve compared like with like (correct me if I haven’t) why has the A320 sold very well. Is it just because of the better freight flexibility? Someone recently posted something about the A320 vs. 737. I got the impression that the A320 was superior in a number of respects. Maybe I got it wrong.

As regards the 787 being designed to cover several markets- point taken.
However, may I paraphrase your barbed footnote concerning the A380-

” The 787 has not flown!! Now, how can we know if it will perform”

The paragraph referring to the 737/757/767 and 777 puzzles me. I never said that because the 757 sold well the A380 will sell well. Sorry if I have misunderstood the essence of your argument. As regards discounting, Boeing have over the years been selling their smaller planes at slightly discounted prices to compete with Airbus, and recouping that discount on 747 sales where they had no competitor. I’m not talking about launch order discounts.

Certainly the 787 will lead whereas the A350 will follow. It may well be however that the A350 proves to be a real sales-spoiler for Boeing. I would however not underestimate the value of a common fuselage diameter and what that can do for production rates and production costs. Operating costs are important, but so too are purchasing costs.
You are assuming an absolutely problem-free development effort with weight targets not being exceeded and the engines performing as promised ( a premise you seem to deny the engineers at Airbus). Judging by your many posts your connection with the airline industry seems solid and you’ll know that the engine makers don’t always get it right. Is your confidence justified?

May I paraphrase your barbed footnote concerning the A380-

” The 787 has not flown!! Now, how can we know if it will perform”

Hi Aurel.

The Typhoon’s radar has more range and is the only one with a third processing channel to deal with ECM.

I’m not doubting the capability of Captor, but the RBE2 has exceptional ECM capabilities. The ECM protection architechture is quite different to that of Captor. The antennae is cryogenically cooled and very efficient and it’ offers simultaneous A2A and A2G capability that Captor realistically doesn’t. The captor radar plate simply cannot be rotated as quickly as can the RBE2 polariser. It just can’t (at least not reliably). The Captor has a greater range but the range of RBE2 matches that of the RDY which is highly regarded in the AdlA. French pilots regularly fly DACT against European and American adversaries and they’re most satisfied with the RDY- and RBE2 is just at the beginning of it’s long career. It’s 30% lighter than the RDY and occupies half the volume of RDY. BTW the RBE2 has Texas Instruments written all over it.

It’s supersonic performance is better and it got more internal fuel

Yes, the Typhoon is a better supersonic performer than the Rafale- for reasons that I already mentioned and have never disputed. As regards fuel capacity the Typhoon does indeed carry more yet Rafale has the better fuel fraction.

The Towed Decoy is a good idea. Why can’t a TD be mounted on a Rafale?

In close combat the (German) Typhoon pilot got the Libelle flight suit, which improves g-tolerance significantly.

Now this really tickled me. The first solo flight of the Libelle was conducted in a M2k-5 and the first flight in a 4th Gen aircraft was in, you guessed it, a Rafale – ‘nuff said. You can look it up.

In favour of the Rafale is the MICA IR as medium range IR-missile. Unknown factors are the effectiveness of their respective ECM/ECCM systems.

Indeed true. The same goes for the AMRAAM which to date has been used against aircraft piloted by 2nd banana pilots belonging to the 3rd banana airforces of 4th banana countries.. I’m keen to remind you that originally the RAF were fairly underwhelmed by it’s capabilities. Obviously it has been improved over the years. When it is used against a trained opponent we’ll know more.

Is there any realistic configuration where we get into trouble with the maximum loadout of the Typhoon ? It is able to deliver the same ordnance as the Tornado + 3-4 additional BVRAAMS. Seems to be enough for our needs.

I agree. The Typhoon, together with the Tornado will make a good hi/medium mix. You can sleep easy.
As regards the “theoretical” advantage of the Rafale’s loadout it isn’t theoretical. The five hard/wet points of the Rafale give it a real advantage. It can carry 6000 litres externally, two Storm Shadows, four MICA’s and a Damocles pod. Typhoon simply cannot do that.

Phil, the Rafale /Typhoon (together with the F18E) debate has gone on for years here and protagonists on both sides have occasionally gone over the top. Have I done that? I don’t think so. You’ll correct me if I’m wrong- but show me the offending posts first.

BTW, you all underestimate the difficulties that would be encountered if the Typhoon were to be navalised. THAT intake cannot be navalised- it just can’t. 😀

Hi Bmused55
I take your point with regard to the 400 a/c needed to get into the black if the current discounting goes unabated. I doubt that it will.
As regards the position that Airbus find themselves in right now in the A380 product cycle I don’t see a particular problem. Airbus will soon reach the point where they will have spent the most money without reaping a single Euro or Pound in return. Boeing will reach this point in about three or four years. It’s all part of the normal product cycle.
You are of course assuming that the 787 development will not suffer any problems. I’m not suggesting that we’ll see a SuperFan fiasco but even so there may be problems- and then again maybe not.
The 737 has sold well against the far more modern and flexible A320. This doesn’t mean that the A350 will automatically do well against the 787 but I don’t see why it can’t. After all, all twin aisle Airbus planes have the same 222″ diametre fuselage barrel. The A350 could be developed into a A300/767 replacement.
That Airbus have their hands full with the A380 and A400M is beyond doubt, but given that Boeing will soon be investing heavily in 787 development and preproduction I would hardly consider Boeing to be in a more enviable postion. I’m keen to remind you that the days when Boeing was able to discount the 737/757/767 and 777 and get it all back plus plus on the 747 are gone.

“the key operator in a key market wants nothing to do with it”
For the moment.

I see. So Airbus are:
a: planning
b: hoping/expecting
c: trying
d: all of the above
to sell “here and now” 400 A380s. How do you define “here and now”.

A little bit ludicrous, perhaps?

Hi Sens
Point taken. I would point out that both the Jaguar and Etendard were both designed to be able to launch from and recover to unprepared grass strips. I have a video of an RAF Jaguar taking off from a patch of grass next to the runway, then crossing the runway down onto the grass on the other side before taking off but not before launching huge chunks of grass into the air. It’s an unbelievable sight! The pilot must have had nerves of steel.
My point being that both aircraft were designed for a tough environment. The Jaguar never made it (thanks to Dassault) and the Aeronavale were stuck with an underpowered underweaponed Etendard (thanks to Dassault).

I think whats realy peeing them off is AI not ordering A380s. They needed that order with reports that the A380 program needs upwards of 400 orders to break even.”

First it was 250, then 300. Where have you heard that they now need 400 sales to get into the black? That seems a bit steep.
Do you think that the Yanks would not have appealed the decision if the roles had been reversed?

I used this train last year. It is fairly expensive, being a recently built high speed line. It is quite an experience though with speeds in excess of 300 kph (almost 200 mph) shown on a digital readout in the carriage. Makes UK trains seem very slow (probably because they are!).

Are you sure it’s that fast?
I don’t think that the ICE is as fast as the French TGV.

… than the circumsised look on the Pratt&whitney and GE has to offer. 😀

Ahh, now I now why I prefer the PW and GE engines and somehow feel “at one” with them. 😀