Why not going with the direct prices quoted for the T2 Typhoons fly-away. Austrian deal 1.132 bln for 18 aircraft (fly-away). T2 for the customers 13 bln for 236 aircraft (fly-away only). Do the math and you are far away from the figures. And these are BTW fixed prices. Of course you have to add costs for upgrades, spares etc. but that applies to every aircraft.

I think the Saudi ones are clear enough too and also the most recent. Also, did the Austrians get the SAME T2 as the Saudis? Cause you know, the T2 has blocks too.

P.S. : You wouldn’t by any chance happen to be German? Cause i have a question. When are the German Tornados going to be retired and what was the initial schedule?

First I want to note the following thing:
please read my claims more carefully
Most of your answers have nothing or not much to do with my statements. I guess you misinterpret a lot I say and honestly I hate to repeat myself again and again, because people don’t bother to read and understand.
Don’t take this as offence, just as a friendly reminder for the continued discussion ;).

You will allow me to claim the same. And as such, i see no point in explaining again my greek motives, my interests or why i think the Rafale can shoot first and with more accuracy.

Excuse me if i don’t continue this, but at this point, it is i think for the benefit and joy of everyone.

You obviously don’t speak about the same thing! READ laser range finder… You still don’t understand that I don’t speak about the IRST/TV components. What I speak about is the LRF.

Yes, i don’t speak exactly about the specific component, i care about the range at which the missile can be fired, be the combo of the OSF components, not the single rangefinder. They why Rafale has not the single FLIR component, is clear here:

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/5979/rafaleia6.png

But since you insist about the LRF, i don’t find impossible that the LRF can achieve a distance of 40km range. I don’t have the exact for OSF , but is only logical to think, according with the mentality that was built, that the French put the medium range components so to able to fire the MICA and thus put a similar capability LRF too, otherwise, why not put just the long range FLIR and bother for cameras and LRF?

“Hand-held laser rangefinders are widely used…The MLR 30 is a Nd:YAG type operating at 1.064 microns, while the MLR 40 is an eye-safe version operating at 1.54 microns. Both are powered by eight 1.5V AA size batteries or an external 10 to 30V DC supply, have RS-232 and RS-422A serial interfaces, and can measure distances out to 20 km.”

“Zeiss Optronik developed its CE 658 laser rangefinder specifically for antiaircraft applications. Based on a Nd:YAG laser transmitter which uses Raman shifting to convert its output to an eye-safe 1.54-micron wavelength, the CE 658 is already in service with several unidentified customers. The unit weighs 18 kg, is liquid and air-cooled, and has a maximum range of 40 km and an accuracy of plus or minus 5 m.”

If the Zeiss, sounds too heavy for you for aircraft purposes,

“French Air Force Mirage F1CT ground attack fighters were originally fitted with TMV 630 laser rangefinders and TMV 634 laser spot trackers (LST), but in mid-1997 the service ordered the new Thomson-CSF Optrosys, an 18 kg unit which combines a 1.54-micron eye-safe laser rangefinder with a 1.06-micron laser-spot tracker.”
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Rangefinding+with+Eye-safe+Light-a070367447

So, i can’t say the one of the Rafale, but the tech is available, the French have been using it even on MirageF1, the OSF is supposed to cooperate for medium range tracking, i would bet it can do LRF too at 40 km, since this is your main interest.

See above 40 km is not even special for the current OSF, what I speak about (once again) the range of the laser range finder. Is it so difficult to understand?
BTW the 50 km/90 km ranges for the Flankers OLS is indeed detection range against a non AB target from all the official documents.

I understood. Simply i don’t care if you can see him at 200km. I care at what distance you can actually shoot him.

You put it in the context of your interest as you are a greek, I don’t bother with a greek/turkish scenario at. I don’t even bother with the F-35 VS Rafale/Typhoon that much.

Yes, i understood that too.

Rafale has LOAL MICA+datalink capability right now, it was reported in 2007 or so that such a test has been conducted. Though I’m not 100% sure, but it were operational F2 standard aircraft. At the time the F-35 becomes available both Rafale and Typhoon will have been further developed and feature more advanced EWS, likely or definitely new EO/IR sensors AND AESA. There is no point discussing about Rafale with AESA vs Eurofighter without AESA.

You see, this is the problem. I agree with you. The point is that i came to post in this thread, about the Rafale for the greek needs. So, i don’t disagree with you on any of that. I am simply interested in the Rafale (or EF), compared to F35, if we order either of them NOW.

Technically, the EF is better air dominance aircraft. And EF vs Rafale, i would bet on EF any day. I wouldn’t think twice. But my interest on both is Rafale or EF vs F35, as they can be delivered to us if ordered tomorrow. I think this is why we have the continous misunderstandings.

I am sorry that i have to bother you with our particular interest on the aircrafts against F35, but technically, i am still interested on the Rafale.

No exact range data, no exact RCS data, I have no guess here.

I agree. But based on what Rand expects for the Su by 2020, i wouldn’t be so optimistic for the Captor, today.

One of very view thinks I tend to agree with.

Well, it’s already something. Some others never agree.

More than one time, provide direct data with source…

Is it so necessary?

EF 77 mln euros
Rafale C 51.8 mln euros

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale

The Saudis paid the EF 122 mln $ per plane with full support (you can google the contract if you want).

As long as now powerful enough or new sensors are developed to overcome the stealth advantage EVERY non stealth AC will be in a disadvantaged position, independant if Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen, Su-3X or MiG-29X/35.

Agreed. That’s why i prefer between the 2 european ones, the cheapest (against F35. I know you don’t talk about it, but it’s why i post in this topic, so how can we settle this?).
For non stealth enemies, i would pick EF.

I can’t see any obvious advantage for either aircraft against a potential stealth threat. IIR missiles in combination with passive sensors (IF effective enough against such a threat) might offer better chances yes, but they won’t guarantee a good fighting ability against such a threat anyway.

Agreed. That’s why i prefer the cheaper solution. So i can spare money and buy a stealth threat myself.

And why do you suppose the OSF will be able to detect & track at greater distances than the PIRATE?

Because that’s why the OSF has 2 “blocks” of components, as you can read in the imageshack link. And because the French did that so that it can cooperate with the MICA IR. The Pirate isn’t built with this mentality, but for target ID and detection. It can’t cooperate in a similar way with the Amraam for example.

Yes at a range at which you can easily use ASRAAM or IRIS-T as well.

No. I don’t understand why people think of the MICA IR as a dogfight missile. MICA can be used to both short and medium BVR fights, up to ranges comparable to the first Amraam models and has unique capabilities for such a missile. It can even act itself as a mini IRST in a way, and search for targets autonomously. In our Mirage2000-5 for example, that don’t have their own IRST, MICA IR is used to passively track on its own enemy aicrafts, without radar emission.

http://rapidshare.com/files/149896125/D084.pdf.html

The range also significantly exceeds the one of IRIS-T or Asraam (search on your own or ask our french friends here). Practically it’s the same missile as MICA EM but difference seeker and functions.

As said I don’t bother with your personal concerns about evil turkish clap greek fighters like baby seels :-p

And i said the opposite. So now we know why each one writes about.

Well the missiles won’t lock at 40 km at all its the board sensors and I see no reason why the PIRATE shouldn’t be able to do this. Weapons is then again another story.

Why won’t they lock? The MICA IR range easily exceeds 40km. The OSF is built to do that, the MICA can even lock after launch on its own target search pattern, heck it can even receive the target data with data link after launch.
How exactly is the Pirate going to do that? Please provide link on its capability and with what missile to do that.

And why do you suppose the OSF will be able to detect & track at greater distances than the PIRATE?

Not detect, the Pirate according to most sources has better quality FLIR ability than the OSF by 10-15nm. So, you detected an F35. Then what…

Yes at a range at which you can easily use ASRAAM or IRIS-T as well.

Neither the missile nor the range of MICA IR is the same. Nor the Pirate was built with the mentality of the OSF.

I would pick the aircraft which best suits my requirements AFTER a comprehensive evaluation of the potential contenders.

Me too.

It is an IRST/FLIR device, though in its initial form it was limited to the FLIR function as this is less complex.

Ok. And how is that going to help use the Amraam earlier than the OSF will help the Rafale shoot the MICA IR? The Pirate can of course help launch an Iris-t or Asraam at close range. But the OSF integrates more systems in a 2 range mentality. Long range= detection. Medium range= Targeting for MICA IR, which has as i said particular abilities both in operation and range.

No need to be sarcastic Hyperiona.

As per my proposals you may find it.
@ defencenet.gr of course.
tons of pages for the last 2 years.

At this thread we are both OT.

I am simply tired. And since i can’t find recently your proposal and since you questioned mine here, couldn’t you just repeat it here in 2 words?

I mean, you made me several questions and i tried to answer, can’t you answer just one mine too here?

P.S: Are you “Greg” in defenenet. gr too??? Cause i can’t recall this nickname.

What I speak about is the range of the laser range finder, not the TV or IRST components, these can have even higher ranges, but they won’t provide the required range data.

Nobody will provide range data. I spoke about the same thing too. Toan must know more. Track is different than detect (see the RAND screenshot too where for PIRATE reports detection range, not tracking range). The SU is supposed to track at 27nm. Why is it so weird to have OSF2 track at 40 km?

25 nm isn’t that special especially if you consider the range future AAMs will have.

Let’s put it this way. I don’t consider anymore this purchase as a countermove for the F35, but as the replacement of A-7. YET, it comes out a fighter that can kill easily at least turkish F16s in BVR and have a good fighting chance against F35 to help out our own F35s in BVR. So, leaving alone that i would prefer F16s, because are cheaper. Between the 2 europeans.

– Rafale may be able to fire MICA IR at 40km on its own power in a clear sky. And it’s cheaper. And from 2009 it will have LOAL and data link capability (add the Erieye to this). Also Rafale will come with aesa.
– Now, the Su is supposed to see with its aesa radar of 2020 the F35 at 25nm. What would be your best guess on the capability of the Captor today as far as range is concerned? Also Amraam is radar guided, hence it is logical to expect it to have more troyble locking and maintaining the lock on the F35, unlike IR missiles. Did i mention the EF is much more expensive?

So why buy the EF if it can’t deal with F35 in BVR any better than the Rafale? Unless of course one thinks that the detection and tracking ability of the Captor is today superior of the hypothetical aesa radar of the Su in 2020 that RAND takes as measurment. But it will still be inferior in BVR to the F35, right? So why buy it at this point at such high price?

Oh, if we had infinite money, then by all means, buy the most expensive now and buy 400 F35 in 4 years from now again.

Yes but not necessarily against a stealthy airframe (stealth or to use the correct terms LO/VLO, is not just about RCS). Add weather and other influences and these figures might quite nicely go down. I have no doubt that advanced IRST systems might provide a good range even against those stealth targets, but if it will be sufficient enough is questionable.

Weather influences. Luckily Greece is a sunny country and the option the way i see it is between someone that can lock at 40km (even without external targeting data from Erieye) at good weather and something more expensive that no matter what the weather will always have trouble to lock the F35 at 40km and costs 20% more. Who would you pick? Because let’s even suppose that the EF will detect (not track) the F35 at 50km in PIRATE. Then what. The Amraam needs somewhere to lock, even if only initially right? Even if we suppose that somehow the PIRATE can collect targeting data and pass them to the Amraam, the missile will still have to fly “blind” until the point that can use the internal seeker and against a stealth target, that if it’s still there (and not changed course warned after the Amraam launch), will be flying between chaffs and jamming. The MICA IR on the other hand, can lock before launch or after launch and receive data from the datalink and use its own IIR sensor even from the beginning and seek the 40000 lb exhaust of the F35 that will be using flares.

Who would you pick?

As said above, its about LRF range not that one of the IRST. If the MICA can kill the target as soon as the IRST can track it just means the range is not necessarily that impressive. 50-60 km maybe at best, probably even lower.

Yes, but can the EF fire the Amraam at such range with comparable probability of not loosing its target? Pirate is FLIR and nothing more. Rafale is cheaper so why pay for the EF?

But I think it is mainly a thumb rule for the french. Without LRF and any form of other ranging you will have to fire the weapon at luck. Maybe you can estimate the range your self from the “zoom” of the optical devices, who knows, but that will still not tell you how fast the target is. Theoretically with the right software it should be possible to gather all required data for an accurate firing solution. So far no aircraft has such a software, at least not officially.

Luck, but the MICA IR has its own sensor working independently right after the launch. It’s more luck to launch “blindly” an AMRAAM and pray that when the Amraam will enter final stage and turn on its seeker, it will still have the enemy in its radar cone.

Anyway, i m through with this discussion. Thank you all.

I still read what you write on defencenet.gr, so you dont need to double it here.

The problem is that neither F-16B60 nor F-35H can cope with F-35Ts
Just look at the map.

Then you didn’t understand what i wrote in defencenet.gr.
I never said that the F16s will have to deal with the F-35 in BVR. I said the opposite. That our F-35 will deal in BVR with the turkish ones. If you mean that the turkish will be superior versions than ours, i don’t know why you think that.

Briefly my opinion now is:

– Buy now F16 (even if Block 52+ Adv which we already have). It’s the cheapest solution. It closes numbers gap with a superior version of F16 even compared to the turkish CCIPs in some aspects. So this can deal with their turkish counterpart.
– RAND also presents the F16s capable in dogfight with F35.
– If we MUST buy European, i prefer Rafale, for the sole reason, that will be able to lend a hand to our in BVR also against F35 (inferior that may be, it is an assymetric threat), while our main BVR response will be the F35H. It’s also cheaper than EF and also more multirole, so it can take other tasks too. Plus, gives political gains and prolly Dassault will treat HAI like a queen in case of purchase in offsets.
– In WVR according to RAND, we don’t have trouble against the F35, with fighters that have IRIS-T and HMD. EF will dominate the F35 in WVR, but WVR isn’t our problem, so why buy it at that price?

We save money, compared now, with a cheap F16 solution, to buy more F35s in a few years and new radars (VHF?) for surveillance and upgrade our remaining older F16s batches and Mirage.

BTW, if you read defencenet.gr why don’t you post there instead of having me explain what i wrote there in here? :confused:

40 km sounds indeed not bad, if the laser range finder can indeed go that far.

Ι read about the 40 km in a post in F16. net, which i *think* was written by “Toan”.

Anyway, in the recent Rand report on F35, as the biggest dangers for the F35 in A2A were mentioned that.

1)The Chinese Su are expected that by 2020 will have aesa radars good enough to see any stealth aircraft at 25+nm.

2) That the SU family has already the ability to track via IRST an aircraft at 27nm head on and 50nm if seen from the tail.

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/1453/98899854fp3.png

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/7360/50697621ij7.png

And mind you, uses the word track. If the IRST can track it, MICA IR can kill it. I don’t think it is insane to expect for OSF2 a capability of 40km in tracking.

To me, this seems the best antidote than a non stealth aircraft can have against F35, considering that the Su’s are expecting to reach such range at 2020 according to the same study.

Rafale!!! Rafale!!! lol!

@TOAN

Some feedback from the greek forum on the EF.

– It does have air refuelling (RAF).
– It does have a HMD (RAF).