You’re making kovy and arthuro’s points. The gvt is trying to make it look like the F16 is good enough for now, so they can just buy more of them cheaper than Rafale or EF, and go for more F35s later on, because right now their pockets are quite empty.

Nic

My friend, you have to understand something. The F16 was and is good enough against ANY turkish F16. They 52+ and Adv have even a small quality advantage over any CCIP. But we have the F35 coming in a few years. And from one hand we have :

– The Rafale , that lacks JHMCS (meaning in WVR it has serious problem against F16), but gives AESA.

– The EADS, saying that can’t give AESA unless WE pay for its last stage of integration, but gives helmet mounted display. Also, in the defencenet.gr interview, when asked “how will the EF cope against the F35” the reply was “The Pirate can indentify targets at great distance”. And then somehow engage them.

So, both are expensive, too expensive to have them as F16 killers, and both incomplete for the thing we want them.

Ideally, the aircraft we want would have :

– EF’s fuselage and engines.
– RBE2AESA (because it can be delivered within our time needs without us paying extra).
– OSF and MICA IR.
– IRIS-T and Helmet.

This aircraft doesn’t exist. So since we ‘ve arrived in 2009, economic crisis ahead, dollar weak, Bush out of office, We can take cheap F16s in good numbers and low cost of integration and operation. At least it has JHMCS and IRIS-T and the Block 60 can even have AESA.

Then we will go to F35 and when both europeans will be mature with all the add-ons , we will be able to buy them after direct confrontation with the F35.

The money to buy even the EF, exist. They are earmarked and in the worst case scenario, you can cut from secondary programs that aren’t first in priority. In 2002 buying new planes wasn’t priority. Now it is, because in 2010, the A-7 will be phased out. So we need a gap hole.

The 2 european, for me, with the configuration they are offered currently, simply don’t worth their money for what we are facing. It’s too costly solution for simply hunting F16s and it’s proabably too incertain of a solution to hunt F35s.
You think we REALLY need to buy 2+15 Super Puma? No, we already have SAR helicopters. If we BADLY NEEDED the money for the “perfect, but too costly” EF or Rafale, we would postpone the 17 Super Pumas and with the difference in money we would buy the costly EF or Rafale. But the point is, it’s not THAT simple.

If the Swiss choose Gripen btw, please don’t accuse the Swiss goverment of not having money.

Welcome back Yperiona

Thank you, good to see you again.

Interesting point. But tell me something, if you had a direct contact with AF pilots and get a clear opinion from them, would you call this a rumor or news.

No, don’t get me wrong Greg. This isn’t directed specifically at you. Yesterday i decided to read again some english speaking fora and i saw various things. Greeks saying rumours, Turks saying greek rumours putting them next to news, only to diminish the news, no matter if these rumours come from people in blogs or fora and so on. I am trying to say to people that they must ask what each thing comes from, so to be able to judge the credibility. Nothing more.

If *i* had a direct contact in HAF or in a political office, i wouldn’t say so, for my own reasons. If i wanted to say so, i would say exactly that, that my source is a HAF pilot or a politician.

I am not saying you are lying. I am simply saying that over the years, i have heard people in fora writing what their “inside source” told them and at the end, that didn’t happen. May i remind you for example the case of the new Chief of Staff. There were members in defencenet.gr that wrote down the names of the major chiefs because they had “certain info”. And they were proved wrong. The same people that quote “HAF’s inside sources, the PM’s office etc”.

So, all i say, is, that between rumours from inside sources and final decision, there can be a difference. For example, should i believe a member with inside info saying that HAF detests the Rafale and wants nothing to do with the French or should i believe the other mate in the same forum quoting HAF Chieff that his favourite is the Rafale? Is one of the 2 a liar? Are they both? I can’t say. So i must take that they aren’t liars, but simply , different people may have different opinions.

The same, i try to say to the people here. Because EF fans, won’t EVER say a single good word about the Rafale or “positive” rumours about it. Only the negative ones. Rafale fans won’t say anything positive about the EF and so on.

Actually it is neither. It is a strong point that at the end of the day seamed to made all the difference.

As I already told you, Whenever I spoke to pilots the feeling I was getting was close to this:

http://www.defencenet.gr/forum/index.php?topic=9446.msg145877#msg145877

I don’t doubt you say the truth! Although in that link i don’t know what exactly i should note. I presume you refer to Manos who quotes a new magazine with a pilot saying partecipating in 2vs 2 against German EF and said in close dogfight the EF is extremely agile, he felt like flying A-7 vs F16. Another says it’s excellent (the EF) in air combat, very difficult to counter in dogfight and very good radar. Manos also said that during Arhaggelos he spoke with pilots and he understood there is a will to purchase EF.

Which is fine and i don’t doubt the EF is better in dogfight or in air combat compared to the Rafale. But the EF isn’t the point in this thread.

My position is known, i would have prefered a “Swiss-type” evaluation of all contenders in Greece and specifically against VLO targets to see how they can perform, because we have specific needs. But that would limit the space for political manouvers for the gov. With the current economic data, either the Rafale or EF as “F16 killers” only is a luxury that we can’t afford.

This cannot be a coincidence, can it?

Did you have any doubts that EF would dominate the F16? No, it’s not a coincidense. But our problem isn’t the F16, but the F35 and i would like a more detailed info about BVR (just to be fair, because our conclusions on the Rafale are in BVR, where both EF and F16 would have to use Amraam, so i would be interested to see the domination there). Of course the Rafale in WVR has problem against JHMCS + 52+. But i don’t see any comment about how EF dominated in BVR (while i expect it to).

The problem is. With the same money, and long term cost, give the current EF version that they give us and that most of its life the EF will pass it against F35, is it worth it to buy today EF or with the same money to buy more F16? For me, buy more F16s.

Hello, after a long time i decided to make one post.

Once again, i invite everyone to forget his romantic views about “contests”, as if it was a football game, each country has specific needs and politics involved. For example if EF and Gripen are shortlisted somewhere and Gripen wins, this doesn’t mean that the Gripen is a better aircraft, but for the needs of that country and the politics, it was the best option. I have already written extensively about it in a past Rafale News thread (no. 3?). This is especially to be noted by Kovy, but also to the rest. If i start saying my opinion again, i will be once more accused that i spam the thread presenting the Rafale deal from a “greek POV”. (But if you want to comprehend how arms deals are made, i am afraid that you won’t be able to understand otherwise. Countries aren’t a bunch of enthusiasts that simply go for the “best”).

Also, please understand, that when it comes to arms deals, you must distinguish “NEWS” from “RUMOURS” and journalist rumours from “my uncle who is the PM’s best friend told me” rumours that appear in fora and blogs. Every time you hear something, ask if it is news or rumour and then the source. Only THEN you will have an idea of who is telling what.

Also, since i am tired of seeing awful google translator attempts.

The parts of Greg’s pdfs that are relevant with the greek pilots’ comments are mixed in those articles with the journalists’ own presentation (which can’t be bad, because he is quoting the Dassault’s brochure, as he does with every other aircraft). So, the things that the greek pilots say about the Rafale, is in the following (translated very quickly but as accurate as i could. The syntax isn’t always correct in english, because of the haste i had, but the meaning should be more comprehensible than the one of google and should help differentiate comments of the journalist from those of the pilots and also answer to your question about why there is no clear mention on a “score”).

On the 4vs4 encounter between CdG Rafale and F16 B52+.

This time the french aircrafts also used the trainning function of Spectra, in mild jamming mode, which were immediately detected from the greek aircrafts ECCM, which reply automatically with no pilot input.

The BVR tactics used by the French didn’t impress, while they reported all virtual shots as kills.But without wanting to go into detail, observing the route of the target in relation with the lock on it, keeping time (counting) in relation with the virtual launch, the greek pilots managed to arrive to safe conclusions. This time, the majority of the greek shots were inside the “no escape” envelope of AMRAAM, which gave clear advantage to the greek side. The tactic of using data link, where 2 different radars could lock onto 4 aircrafts, taking advantage of the function that the new aircraft gives, made obvious in practice the advantages of the new F16 version. With special tactics planned by our pilots, in quite some cases, they were approaching unobserved opposite to the french aircrafts, a fact that was shown by their reactions.

The success of the greek aircrafts against the Rafale M was afterwards confirmed by comparing the shot reports of the French with the F16 videos, where it was shown that most shots were of low Pk (kill probability).

As a general conclusion, one may say that any Rafale’s superiority, in the above scenarios, is marginal, with high kill percentage for the greek side. Also it should be noted that in that period of time, the CdG was cooperating with a greek EMB-145H Erieye with the aim to evaluate the interoperability of the 2 sides. More in detail Link 11 and Link 16 were tested. From the time of take-off from Elefsis airfield, within 10 minutes the greek aircraft had established contact with the french carrier, certifying capability of cooperation in network-centered operations for both sides.

Aegean Gust.

4 Rafale F2 B, 1 Rafale F2 C.

The recent excercise wasn’t the first occasion for a HAF squadron to counter the Rafale. In 2006 the Rafale M from CdG partecipated in excercises with F16block52+ and F4E AUP. But the Rafale M of the time, were F1, a version centered in air-to-air role with somewhat limited capabilities. In the Aegean Gust partecipated Rafale F2, with improved air to air capabilities, including the data link between aircrafts of a formation, combined with FSO and data fusion…

… Both greek and french pilots flew as backseaters in each other planes. As for the engagements:

4 sorties occured in the morning and 3 in the evening of Tuesday in 2 vs 2 scenarios, in BVR. The greek aircrafts were B52+. On Wednesday 8 sorties with Rafale B in 2 waves (morning, evening), with the partecipation of 1 french pilot and 4 greek backseaters. This time it was 4 vs 4. The greek aircrafts were B52+, B50D, B30.
Something that appeared strange to the greek pilots, was that while according to the HAF policy the pilots were doing the last pre-takeoff check of their planes (Leak check), the French pilots were taking position on the runway without doing so.

The impressions of the greek pilots were variable, as is natural , and their observations quite interesting. The whole of the greek F16 pilots, found the cockpit particularly functional, although a bit small, as is used in all french aircrafts. Also, the best impressions left the glass cockpit advanced disposition. It is known that the high operational output of the Rafale is result of high performance, excellent behaviour and friendly MMI that adopts to the high workload in multirole missions. The existance of so many displays and the characteristical absense of analog instruments, was natural to make a big impression to the greek pilots, who apart the Falcon’s MFDs, are used to analog instruments. Some in fact, told us that they would feel more comfortable, if some analog instruments have been kept as backups in cases of malfunction or failiure of the electric system. Of course it is certain that safety valves has been thought, while evolution indicates that full glass cockpit will dominate in the future, as will happen in the case of F35 too.

It is also natural to be impressed by the high situation awareness provided by the Rafale thanks to data fusion. The Rafale, as the greek pilots had the chance to see, can receive tracking data from RBE2, Spectra, OSF, IFF, MICA IR sensors and accompanying aircrafts, ground command and control facilities and AWACS, elaborate them and produce system tracking data (system tracks). These are superior to quality compared to the single data of the individual sensors. This data is then used for fire control and is shown in the central tactical display and can be transmitted to fellow aircrafts. So, at a glance at the tactical display, the pilots can see the position of targets that may be inside the radar cone or outside and even in the rear hemisphere, no matter if the radar is on or off!

Also, it was verified that OSF provides advantage in air combat. As the greek pilots observed, once the target is locked from the radar, its image is then displayed in the central display which facilitates very much the target identification even in great distances.A similar function is provided in the F16 by the Lantirn Pod in air to air mode, with the difference that the backseater can make a search independent of the radar. On the contrary on the Rafale, the OSF is primarily slaved on the radar.

The best of impressions left to the greek pilots the performace of the Rafale’s self protection suite, confirming the french reputation in the sector since the time that HAF operated the ICMS2000 in the Mirage2000.

Small reprimands were made to some small but important details, like the fact of the abscense of a countdown timer in the HUD when a BVR missile is flying towards its target. The greek F16 pilots are used to such an indicator on the lower left of the HUD, indicating the “Time On Target” of the Amraam and the time remaining until the Amraam’s autonomous seeker is activated. If the missile fails tracking, then the indication “Loose” appears over the locked target on the HUD and the pilot is aware that the shot has failed. Something like this wasn’t found on the Rafale, leading to a difficulty in the interpretation of the BVR shots during the engagements. And this, because the French were regarding that after a certain range , a MICA shot was always successful. As a result, the arrival to safe conclusions, was problematic.

Beyond that, it was also commented positively the agility of the Rafale. Of course the greek pilots still think of the F16 as a particularly capable aircraft in dogfight.
In the air, the Rafale is very agile, but for the greek pilots the sense of flying was very different from that of the F16. It was commented as perfectly stable, with very good response in all speeds and manouvers. Very good impressions were also left by the automatic pilot as well as the ability of maintaining very low speed during approach, prior to landing.

… The Rafale certainly proved that it is a very capable aircraft in the hands of the excellently trainned french pilots who have battle experience. The encounter with F16s, gave the greek pilots the opportunity to measure the F16 capabilities against a 4th gen aircraft, while it showed yet another time that the level of HAF pilots is one of the best in NATO airforces.

And i will throw another one, as quoted in a forum, in which the authos quote the article of a magazine:

…The greek pilots were called by their french colleagues as quite aggressive (“vicious”) in the air and in no way they were easy targets, neither they reminded F16 pilots of other allied nations with which the Rafale had the chance to partecipate in some other excercises.

According to the french pilots, the Rafale prevailed in the air combat. Initially it was mentioned that in the first missions, the capabilities of the MICA missiles weren’t correctly estimated by the opposite team. However, both sides made successful “shots” on the opponents.

The impressions of the greek pilots from the Rafale, were concentrated on the very good situatnio awareness , thanks to link 16 and the big touch screens. These were proved to provide very good image even in conditions of intensive sunshine, which often reduces visibility. In general, the cockpit layout, particularly impresses the greek pilots. Particularly interest also had the use of the Spectra, on the use of which, the french base some of their air tactics that have developed.

As far as the availability of the Rafale goes, in the duration of 18 sorties, it was proved high (94%), while only one flight was delayed and in one more there was a minor technical problem during flight.

http://www.ellinikos-stratos.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1432

The original article of the above link, is quote from

http://www.diplomatia.gr magazine.

* The pdfs also mention that the greek pilots praise the usefuleness of JHMCS in F16 (not directly comment on the Rafale, but the absense of it is obviously correlated and IMHO a reason on why there was no dogfight and only BVR engagements).

* Please also note that in the matter of the new aircraft, the issue has become something like supporting football teams , with the same bias and often fanatism. So, don’t believe anything you read from individuals, it’s just an opinion.

* Note: OFFICIALLY, the Rafale ISN’T ousted from the competition. This is a journalistic opinion that this is what has happened in practice, after the minister announced that the exchange deal Rafale for Mirage2000-5 was rejected.

To quote the point from defencenet.gr:

http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6296&Itemid=40

“On the contrary, the french proposal for exchange of Mirage2000-5 with new Rafale F3 was rejected, because it involved only the exchange of the Mirage200-5 and not also of the 2000EGM/BGM. Probably , this , is estimated by observers in the Ministry of Defence, and in combination with the 3.5 billion euro package (6 frigates, SAR helicopters) [2+15 Super Pumas, my addition], means an end to the prospect of acquiring the french aircraft”.

The minister didn’t give ANY shortlist. Simply, it is estimated, that the Rafale has low chances and is practically OUT, because we rejected the exchange deal , because the French didn’t want to include the 2000 EGM/BGM, so HAF probably doesn’t want 2 french type of aircrafts, so the Rafale’s chances are gone.

As for rumours, here are some. Forum rumours from members that “know pilots, know the people in MoD, in the PM’s office etc” (Take them as you like, what i know, is that usually that actually know, usually can’t speak in pubblic and specially quoting such high sources).

– The Rafales were very often grounded in Larissa with awful availability as Greg said. This of course is contrary to what diplomacy.gr magazine says. Pick the one you like.

– The Rafales aren’t liked by HAF which is tired of high prices in the Mirage2000 maintainance and use.

– Our PM is bound by the word of the previous PM and also himself has promiced the EF to Merkel , so it’s a done deal.

Another rumour from someone who claims that he dined in a ceremony with the Chief of HAF in a celebration in a military base and asked him his preference and he said that right now the Rafale is for him the most complete solution.

* Note again the “football fans” comment that i made before. One reason that made me support the Rafale in greek fora, was the fact that i was appaled by the bias i saw against the Rafale and the “all rosy” presentation of the EF but some members. For example, for years they were saying that the RBE2 sucks (true) and that the EF would give us AESA surely. Now we arrived to the opposite point where Dassault in defencenet.gr said they will give us the AESA, while EADS stated they will, if we pay the cost of the programs’ final stage. Did this waver the EF fans? No, they insisted in saying that the french are only promices (while the EF T3 isn’t apparently).

* Also note that apart football fans forum members, there are also “journalist fans”, specially in the non specialized press. Also “paid journalist fans”. I know it may seem strange , but 1) journalists are also people, and as such, can also be “football fans”, and 2) there is a lot of money out there and a journalist’s salary can always need a friendly “boost” from a defence company. Meaning, you can’t positively trust on evalutations ANYONE. Two greek defence magazines had diametrically opposite comments on the BMP-3Gr for example. And it wasn’t a coincidence.

P.S: I have disabled PMs, and i apologise to eventually anyone that wants to PM me, but i am a bit tired of continuing discussions there. It is getting frustrating, to the point that i feel like that i am the greek PM and people try to convince me that their product is best. So, all i say, i say it here, it’s just my opinion (i won’t quote my sources in the PM’s office, because even if i had any, i wouldn’t be able to tell so, because they would cause me trouble), i will always try to specify if what i say is “news”, “journalistic opinion”, or “rumours from forum members”. That’s all.

* Personally, given the “surprise” of the economic crisis and the fact that we must also get the F35 in a few years, i am of the opinion that the F16 52+ Advanced or an enhanced 52+ Advanced “+” version (meaning with some enhancements compared to the last 52+ Adv batch we ordered), is the wisest solution. It gives a quality advantage at a very good price and it’s the lowest cost solution as far as integration and maintanance/trainning is concerned. The infrastructure is already available. When the F35 is out the 2 european will be more mature and we will be able to have direct evaluation against the F35 and if we see advantages we can purchase them to replace the Mirage2000 EGM for example. By 2015 the EF will be T3 without expecting for us to pay for the AESA integration, the Rafale will hopefully have the AESA and a Helmet Mounted Display and possibly integration of IRIS-T and more powerful engines and they will be more ready. Also hopefully the economic crisis will be over then, because right now spending for 40 EF/Rafales plus life costs and for 40 F16 must have a considerable difference, all opposition newspapers came out with articles “The entire world is in economic crisis and recession and the Minister of Defense announced multi-billion spending for aircrafts, frigates, helicopters”.

Regards

That is exactly the opposite of the truth. I insist on the currency that the contract is signed in, & no Eurofighter sales have been priced in dollars. Euros or pounds only.

You don’t read the links Swerve, that’s what i m talking about. Apart the fact that Austrian and Saudi orders weren’t so far away to influence so greatly the exchange rates, if you had ONLY BOTHERED to click the link with the Austrian story, you would have seen also the price in euros

“Austria had signed a EUR 2 billion contract to receive 18 EADS Eurofighters plus required support (just over $2.5 billion, or about $140 million per plane), and the aircraft were already under construction in Germany. The situation changed when the leftist SPO party, whose campaign promises included canceling the deal, had to be part of the next government in the wake of the 2006 election results.”

2 bln fly away / 18 = 111.111 mln Euros of inferior aircraft to the Saudi one. Yes another journalistic speculation, correct!? WOW! There must be a contageous disease that hits all foreign journalists when they talk about EF contracts and NONE can get the figures right! There is an international journalistic conspiracy against the poor, cheap as chips, Eurofighter.

Meaning BEFORE it was transformed into a political/pubblicity blunder. (Wouldn’t look nice for the EF to loose its first export customer would it? Specially with Austria being so tight to Germany). For all i know, unless there was a serious cut in the austrian pice tag, this would end up in an arbitration court, that nobody would like. This once more is in line with the Saudi deal.

P.S. : You accuse journalists of various sources (from serious media and dedicated military sites) of BS(speculation), yet, i must believe you, because of the proof you presented, i.e, your nice looking avatar.

P.S.2: In the same topic i read that the eurofighter costed 61 mln pounds for Britain but we could take the EF starting from 60 mln euros. Wow, this sounds credible.

I ‘m over with this. So, as i said, WHATEVER.

WHATEVER…

:diablo:You asked for a THEORETICALL method.:diablo:

I do not pose any link.

PS: I never doubted the willing of French to built a competitive fighter.
I still doubt their ability to do so .:cool:

Ah, ok. Actually i wish you had posted that yesterday. You could have spared me the fatigue of having to answer. Theoretically, the Rafale can do the same with Amraam, MICA EM and IR…

I don’t doubt the ability of the EF to be superior flying machine and superior to the Rafale on a EF vs Rafale either. But i doubt that the EF as we can buy it TODAY (we should order until the end of the year, unless we have premature elections) and for our needs and budget, is worth the difference in €€ compared to a cheaper Rafale and an even cheaper F16.

However, i am aware that your plan is to counter the F35 with EF. So i understand why you would buy EF. It’s a difference of dogma that one prefers and only time can tell which is the best. So, i DO understand why you say it and MAYBE one day the EF will even be able to shoot Amraams through Pirate with triangulation or even software algorithm, who knows.

I would rather pay the French to get the HMD, since today is cheaper and more ready.

The problem of the EF is the classical english proverb “Two cooks spoil the broth”. Err… replace the 2 with 4.

THEORETICALLY?

TRIANGULATION!

You need 3 points for a triangle. Right?
You get one point from the target and 2 points from the couple of EFs.
Fighters fly in pairs. 2 EFs 2 PIRATES 3 points.
The data needed-available is: target bearing from both PIRATES and relative position of the 2 EFs (from GPS)

And you will launch the Amraam through Pirate ,right? (no radar lock, no radar update). Allow me to say the usual “link please”? No, because i have been answering here for one day on the feasibility that OSF with IRST+TV camer+LRF can actually fire a BVR IIR missile at 40 km and it was so simple?! I had to go bring links to prove such LRFs exist ecc and it was so simple to do even with radar guided missiles without LRF and TVcamera?

OK then! With triangulation from 3 Rafales the Rafale can also fire Amraams and MICA at max range at 25 mln euros less. I will still buy Rafale!

At current exchange rates your prices given are:

EF 77 x 1.41 mln = $108.57 mln
Rafale C 51.8 x 1.41 mln = $73.03 mln

Do you think that full support for the Saudi Typhoons is only $13.5 mln per airframe? I don’t. I don’t think the Typhoon price you give is correct.

The prices aren’t given by ME. I tried to bring more from the press. I also said that Wikipedia has the sources next the price.

For instance, British Ministry of Defence 2007 report (mentioned in Wikipedia), gives as “unit production cost” the 68.9 mln POUNDS, which is what Wikipedia also says (1 pound is more than 1 euro, isn’t it)?

This is the part in question:

http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/5707/efqy3.png

This is the complete link:
http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_reports/07-08/070898ii.pdf

I hope the Ministry’s data is accurate enough for you.

Note. The Pdf also says that the price for foreign customers is classified, to allow margin of negotiations to the goverment. But of course i wouldn’t expect them to give it cheaper than the unit cost production! On the contrary!

Then the French friends might want to write what is the cost of Rafale from the French ministry, i don’t speak french unfortunately.

Regards

P.S. It is not necessary to think that the Saudis bought at the same exchange rate as today OR that the Eurofighter consortium makes always the same time over time. When we bought the first F16s, they were 30 mln a pop. They now cost much more, because they are more evolved. Or very simply, the Saudis didn’t pay the “cost production unit” , because the seller also wants a little profit from a foreign customer. SO the Saudi paid 122$ dollars PLUS support, as Al Jazeera claims. Political deals , exchange rates in different moments and earlier versions can also explain the difference with the Austrians. They Saudis should have paid $108,57 as unit production cost? Well, they didn’t! Congrats to the British, shame on the Saudis…