Jackoniko,

repeating the same lies again and again will not make them more true…

We have a detailed dutch article that explains that the evaluation was about 700 technical points and that it was closely monitored by the RNLAF. The CBC story is a mere lie and you don’t have a single source to make your point. You say it is only an economical and indusrty evaluation ? Grotesque attempt for your bias…In this case how the F35 with almost no room for industry partnership and almost impossible access to source code could score that high ? How the ranking would be so consistent with the capabilities of each aircraft ? Simple common sense prove you wrong…Add the dutch article and you are a proven liar.

Same story for singapore. Moussez or Dassault’s CEO speaking with their credibility at stake are far more credible than your anonymous bias.

As for the MMI you did not brought anything to make your point. HMS and DVI might be an advantage but without the proper knowledge of the battle space it will not make you win the fight as expalained by Grandclaudon, captain Romain and confirmed by the swiss who placed the rafale ahead. You say that lattest software upgrade enhance significantly the sensor fusion : prove it. You often take your desire for reality and with your tendency of reassuring yourself you often try to find explanation that fit your views with only mere speculation as material.

As for supercruise and rafale and without comparing with the typhoon I also asked very directly a rafale pilot if it was able to sustain such regime operationnaly at latest paris airshow.

His answer was very clear and specific as he did supercruise just a few weeks before en route to Corsica, Solenzara and this without the use of AB to reach supersonic speed with 1 drop tank and 6 micas.

Something like three years ago in Paris for the century of french aeronautic in Paris I was told by another rafale pilot that the rafale and typhoon would more practically use the AB to reach supersonic speeds before supercruising. In his view only the F22 could practically do without AB.

Some typhoon fanboys like Jackoniko are pretending that the other side of the debate can’t accept strength and weaknesses of both aircrafts.

With the exception of dare2 this argument is only a lame attempt to discredit the otherside of the debate. The point is how do you define “performance”? How do you value aircraft worthiness? Is it a way to please your ego in a typical over-simplistic male approach or is it assessing the aircraft as it was meant to: making wars and delivering value over true and not imaginary battlefields.

1)Let’s start with aircraft design leaving aside the “sensors and EW stuff”

Certainly the typhoon offer better kinetics due to a very healthy trust to weight ratio…But on the other hand the rafale offers more range and payload and its own kinetic performance is far from lacking so it is all about design priorities

Starting from this observation and recognizing each design its “strengths and weaknesses” I believe the rafale design is much more relevant and balanced operationally unless you want to replay the battle of England with a high intensity BVR scenario with a symmetric enemy which is very unlikely especially when you belong to NATO.

Who will remember the slightly better kinetic performance of the typhoon when the rafale had a much greater military impact than its competitor? Most certainly only the typhoon fanboys….

In the end beyond the eternal debate of the “strength and weaknesses” of each aircraft, History will remind their operational efficiency in the war of their times. No matter the “potential” excuse or the different priorities argument. History does not care of those little details.

The rafale is currently offering a much better value over real battlefield than the Typhoon and that is unlikely to change for many years. The risk is that if the typhoon will eventually get all the necessary capabilities it will be too late to be regarded as a successful aircraft. The “die-hard” fan boys will remember its own strengths but that makes only sense for them in their own sphere to please their ego.

2) Sensor end EW :

Like it was stated by several posters already many typhoon myths that often had a single origin (Namely Jon Lake) are now failing apart.

The case in point was the rafale sensor suite including its PESA radar that gained Swiss praise unlike its competitor. I don’t buy the simple software issue. This might be a cause but there is no certitude about it despite the fact that some wants to reassure themselves. That’s only speculation.

The better sensor fusion and SA advantage is also consistent with grandclaudon’s claim and that of Captain Romain who both stated that was a winning advantage versus the typhoon.

All in all any Typhoon “strengths” seem too marginal to gain any clear edge even in the AtA arena. Modern aircrafts have to be considered as a system. You can’t only focus on one aspect of its performance. While anyone can understand and accept each aircraft “strengths and weaknesses”, that does not prevent anyone to have an opinion on an aircraft as a whole and there is nothing reprehensible about that.

The argument that the French posters can’t accept each aircraft strengths and weaknesses are simply untrue and hypocrite with the notable exception of Dare2. It is also funny to see Jon Lake pretending having “facts” when most of his myths are more than seriously challenged.

Well he is working hard to collect all rumors and try to make them look more credible with a biased estimate of costs.

He has made a specialty of spreading rumors with him as a single origin.

Like the dead end RBE2 PESA which was recently praised in swiss evaluation unlike typhoon radar, like the fact the singaporean evaluation where he is the only source to tell that the typhoon emerge as the favorite aircraft when it did not even made the shortlist and that several high placed sources stated the rafale was the winner technically, like the dutch evaluation when we have an article explaining that the process was closely monitored by the RNLAF and he assert it is a paperwork exercise…Or like when the poor peter collins was deemed incompetent or grandclaudon etc etc…Business as usual for a lobbyist.

I know I spoke for the UK here (and italy).;)

I refered to avianews from switzerland who was one of the first source to inform about details of the evaluation long before the leak :

combat Aircraft: manufacturers under pressure!
Avia News , Nov 4

Switzerland will choose its new fighter before the end of the year, I propose a final section about the progress of the competition. Prices fell and political-industrial interest resurface! Politicians succeed in Bern to explain the benefits of the aircraft they defend, Swedish followed by the French Defense Minister Gerard Longuet followed next Tuesday by German Thomas de Maizière.

Competition played a role:

The strategy implemented by the DDPS and Armasuisse worked very well and the crisis of the European currency is providing the icing on the cake! Remember, there was talk of a purchase about 5 billion [francs], but last week Ueli Maurer (Head of the DDPS [M.O.D.]) was very proud to announce that the updated offers will not exceed 4 billion for the highest ! The decline of the euro, combined with the competitive strategy have forced the three manufacturers to revise their price.
Saab, Dassault Aviation and Cassidian (EADS) must sell and had to bring on the table a draft budget which corresponds to the finances of Switzerland, lest simply be discarded.
The Gripen is the less expensive plane with an offer around 3 billion, while the Eurofighter is around 4 billion. The Rafale is between the two.

The situation of three competitors:

The French aircraft is undoubtedly the favorite with a price that is perfectly in the line with the imposed budget. Best in tests with 95% success, the Rafale is also available with a full industrial partnership that affects not only the entire plane itself but also the whole range of business jets “Falcon”, the engine manufacturer SNECMA / CFM International and all related manufacturers.
Was the best aircraft overtaken by its competitors? The answer is no, the Rafale is immediately proposed with an electronic scanning antenna (AESA) and some second generation items, that were tested, like the front sector optronic(OSF) and the electronic architecture.
The weak point? The French aircraft found so far no customers abroad, and in some way there is a risk for our country to become entirely dependent on french future choices. Yes, except that the Rafale will probably be sold in the UAE and is also well-positioned in India and Brazil, so the situation could evolve.

The Swedish aircraft remains the cheapest and can play on the effect of the price. But the arguments of Sweden will also play on the fact that the Gripen demonstrator has evolved through the NG (Next Generation Gripen). The proposed version to Switzerland will be remotorizéd (General Electric F414-) and therefore more powerful , the electronic architecture is more recent and by 2016 it will be possible to install the Ericsson RAVEN ES-05 with electronically scanned antenna (AESA) . But beware, the plane is the smallest, experience shows that it is always more complex to modernize an aircraft with little free space.
Saab offers a collaborative effort to update the entire fleet of Gripen in the world and this in full collaboration with the Swedish aviation. The offer is attractive to the condition that all customers of Gripen, want such a modernization. However, there is an unknown : SAAB manufacturer viability in the long run!

The Eurofighter is most expensive but still falls in the numbers. The European consortium offers an improved aircraft with a more powerful CAPTOR-M radar version . This version of the radar is part of the 3A tranche, which prepares the arrival in 2016 of the CAPTOR-E with electronic scanning antenna that can be installed as a retrofit. Cassidian provides a strong partnership with companies such as Airbus, Eurocopter, CASA and the equipment manufacturers of the group.
Yet there is a risk in terms of collaboration because of the complexity of the consortium whose procedures are slowed due to the outsourcing of the assembly lines to the 4 producing countries.
[…]

http://psk.blog.24heures.ch/archive/2011/11/03/avions-de-combat-constructeurs-sous-pression.html

Yet again the rafale was cheaper which is logic as all accounts tell it is cheaper than the typhoon by a good margin. Especially as it offer already more (versatility + naval variant).

Ah I see.

You don’t know exactly what is encompassed in those reports and if the figures quoted are comparable but you draw simple minded conclusion with no serious methodology. You would ask E&Y, PwC, KPMG or Deloitte to check the actual costs I would care but certainly not your beginner accountant work.

You might want to look knowledgeable but you simply have no clues of what you are truly comparing.