then name the missile and tranche that carries it.

None

None of the partners or the two external buyers have asked for the integration of ANY anti ship missile.

But that doesn´t mean anything in the Japapanese context, not one single of the mentioned competitors (Typhoon, next Gen Eagle, Super Hornet, F35, Rafale) can carry the ASM-2s. It´s not integrated in any of them.

The 2006 Eurofighter offer to Norway contemplated the integration of the Konsberg NSM, and if there´s a Japanese requirement for it´s next generation fighter to have the ability to carry four ASM-2s, them the Eurofighter Typhoon his more than capable of carrying them.
It´s a question of weapon´s integration nothing more, nothing less. And it would take has much work and money to integrate the ASM-2 on a Typhoon, has it would take for a Super Hornet or Dassault Rafale, the fact that both of these have already anti-ship missiles on their “weapons list” (Harpoon and Exocet) his completely irrelevant.

Cheers

Better yet, doesn’t that mean the US can veto Sukhoi’s sales because their aircraft use American IP ? 😀

But all sarcasm aside, replacing Power PC processors in the EF with another processor architecture wouldn’t exactly be a trivial exercise in the event (however unlikely) that the US refuses to sell EADS any. The PPC architecture is very popular and easily acquired on the civilian market. To replace it you’d have to redesign the system that uses PPC processors and probably rewrite a whole slew of software. It would be a lot easier for somebody, EADS or some European corp., to produce a processor that implements the PPC instruction set. To do that legally they’d have to become a licensed second-source manufacturer. Not that this is necessary, the Chinese have “copied” western processor designs without asking permission.

The PPC cores are already used by Sukhoi on Flankers variants. And they are COTS.

Cheers 🙂

http://www.meforum.org/article/772

Again?!

His this suposed to prove me wrong?

Do i have to put here a ferking link for every damned crazy dictator/terrorist group that the USA have funded, trained, armed in the last fifty years?

From Sadam Hussein, to Al QAEDA, to Iran, to every maniac in South America (if they were not commies), etc, etc, etc…

The USA, the biggest arms seller in the world by a wide margin doesn´t have the moral ground to point fingers at any of it´s partners, and that includes France and Germany…

The worst part of this strange moral joke that you are playing his that a good portion of the NBC weapon´s that Sadam Hussein used against it´s own people were paid with American loans.

Here you go:

By contrast, Alcolac International, for example, a Maryland company, transported thiodiglycol, a mustard gas precursor, to Iraq. Alcolac was successfully prosecuted for its violations of export control law. The firm pleaded guilty in 1989. A full list of American companies and their involvements in Iraq was provided by The LA Weekly in May 2003.[19]

On 25 May 1994, The U.S. Senate Banking Committee released a report in which it was stated that “pathogenic (meaning ‘disease producing’), toxigenic (meaning ‘poisonous’), and other biological research materials were exported to Iraq pursuant to application and licensing by the U.S. Department of Commerce.” It added: “These exported biological materials were not attenuated or weakened and were capable of reproduction.”[20]

The report then detailed 70 shipments (including Bacillus anthracis) from the United States to Iraqi government agencies over three years, concluding “It was later learned that these microorganisms exported by the United States were identical to those the UN inspectors found and recovered from the Iraqi biological warfare program.”[21]

A report by Berlin’s die tageszeitung in 2002 reported that Iraq’s 11,000-page report to the UN Security Council listed 150 foreign companies that supported Saddam Hussein’s WMD program. Twenty-four U.S. firms were involved in exporting arms and materials to Baghdad.

Don’t forget the other buisness deals and debts that prevented French involvment plus Chiracs well known and fully documented admiration of the cruel and brutal leader Saddam.

No one in the entire Western World can “throw stones” about arms deals with brutal dictatorships…
And THAT includes the United States of America.

I would suggest to you that: “If the work on UAVs keeps up to its present pace” then the manned fighter will never be obsolete. All of the development so far will ensure ONLY that UAVs and UCAVs will replace manned platforms for a relatively narrow spectrum of niche roles.

There is still no realistic chance of any UAV having sufficient high resolution all round sensor coverage to be able to give a remote operator anything like the SA available to a human in the cockpit.

And even if it were possible, the implications for bandwidth would be colossal.

Jack

The problem here his bandwith, bandwith and bandwith.

We are very near to a “revolution”, there are several technologies who are maturing at a very fast pace who can transform the manned fighter into a “niche product”, the exact oposite of what it has been until now. From Laser, to robotics, to satelite based detection, etc, etc.

If you tie enough bandwith around the actual recon/inteligence gathering structure (the US one) any fixed targets are dead and a great majority of mobile ones are also asking for a very short notice “friendly” encounter with a JDAM/SDB/EPW/Maverick/whatever.
We might need a human pilot for the CAS/BAI for the really small targets (humans) but in a few years, anything that has an engine and four wheels…

And for CAS/BAI, and/or recon dont discount the “staying power” that unmaned solutions brings to the table. If it´s true that a pilot´s eye (sometimes) his the best sensor that a “strike/recon platform” can have, after two hours of flying a ten ton, mach 0.95 behemoth on a hostile sky, we get a tired man.

But even if we admit that all CAS/BAI needs a pilot on the cockpit (a concept that the Reaper Community his hacking to shreds), and that in the WVR arena the human factor has a definitive advantage (let´s see how the laser technology will be a decade and a half from now), even so, if you have enough bandwith, every strategic/tactical fixed target can be dealt by missile/UCAV, and in the BVR ATA scenario, the UCAV could very well reign supreme two decades from now. That acounts for (roughly) half of your fleet!

And the dam bandwith, were are we going to get enough of it? That´s the 69 million $ question…
But there´s hope, seven years ago I would be sending this message through a 56 Kbps POTS Modem, now I am sending this message through a 100 Mbps optic fiber TA, installed last week. That´s a 1828,6X increase in seven years!

Bloody inbelivable!

Cheers

So let’s make it informative shall we?

Nice Idea

The latest Rafale deployment to “A`stan” was a bit of a surprise (to me), i was expecting twin seaters equiped with the Scarabée data-link, and the Adla sent “one hollers”. Any news about the integration of “Scarabée” on Rafale?

Cheers

Since everyone seems to want to try and bring the Rafale into this I thought I would start one about Rafale.

Similarities to the Typhoon are they are both twin engine, primitive airframe design (canard/delta), expensive, over hyped, underdeveloped.

Rafale seems to be a bit more optimized for multi role if it where fully developed. Rafale is at least a platform truly independent of the USA. Rafale has a carrier based version. So will it be a commercial success. No it does not look like it will garner many overseas orders. Is it a national success? Yes, it gives France a reasonably modern and useful system independent of the US or any other power. In that sense alone it makes the platform worthwhile.

Utter Tosh… Again…