HyperionP.S. : Well, i guess i can still hope that the newspaper is writing BS and cross my fingers until i hear the official KYSEA decision. :p
HyperionHyperion,
Do you really think that only Dassault want to profit from export sales? Don’t you think EADS is going to milk the cow too for after sales support of the EF? As has been shown, the Rafale program has been made so that it is profitable even with just teh AdlA and MN orders, so they don’t NEED to milk the cow any more than any other company does.
My friend, of course Dassault isn’t the only one to seek profit. I haven’t heard of any merchant selling without making profit. 😀 The thing is, the more you sell, the easier you make profit and higher is the margin you have of giving low prices. It’s why big malls /supermarkets have won the battle against little shops.
I agree with you about the price of the Mica, that said the Rafale could be equipped with IRIS-T and Meteor. Meteor is already going to be integrated, and I suppose that if the price fo the Mica is THAT high, then surely integrating the IRIS-T isn’t going to be all that expensive in comparison. How much does an IRIS-T cost btw? On the other hand, you said yourself that you saw the Mica IR/OSF combination as the most likely to threaten the JSF, so it would be silly not to get Mica IR since it’s already integrated. And that’s surely one thing the greeks could have in their sleeves that the turks would be wary about.
I don’t know the cost of the IRIS-T. I know we are in the program and so we will use it. IMHO the MICA IR/OSF *is* an unorthodox threat for the F35 indeed. But i am not a HAF expert… Maybe the exported F35 isn’t that stealth after all and even a more “orthodox” approach is possible… I don’t know. We already have MICA ER and IR btw, bought for the 2000-5, so we will certainly use them on Rafale too.
Last point, if Dassault takes back all the Mirages, to supply Rafales instead, what is the point of purchasing 40 EF and 30 Rafales ? Surely it would be more economical to use 70 planes of one sort than half that number of two types.
The thing is, that every article says that EF is “done deal”. Then the use of the Rafale? Exactly for the reasons i mentioned before. We have french weapons that we need a french platform to launch them and also, the Mirage2000-5 is less capable than the Rafale in every aspect. So, if we do need a french platform, better have 1 french aircraft, than 2. It is more economical to use one plain, but on the other hand, if we were to use that way, we shouldn’t have bought Mirage at all, but only F16. We bought Mirage, to have a plane that Turks don’t know. We can’t have the same number of armaments Turkey has in any sector, if not for anything else, for lack of personnel. It makes no sense having 160 F16 against 211 turkish F16 for example. Turks know the F16. So we go for complicating the nature of the threat or beat the Turks in quality for some time (like the Block 52+ purchase). Also, however strange that may seem, HAF has been using 6 types of combat aircrafts for years and has learnt to live with it and has now both american and french support structures. So, since it appears that we will still be flying french too, i would prefer 40 Rafales and no Mirage2000, instead of 20 Rafales and 25 Mirage2000-5.
Performance of the EF in the AtoA arena would be marginal at best.
I don’t know my friend. I just know that HAF pilots have flown with it. But as i explained in detail in this topic, the factors that come into play are too much to limit them down so easily. Do you know the performance of the french AESA compared to the Caesar? All we know is what companies have officially in their brochures. Usually, brochures lie… That’s why you have to see the plane with your own eyes.
Economies from operating one type would probably more than compensate the payment to integrate the IRIS-T or even the AMRAAM to the Rafale. Plus with the promise of purchasing 70 Rafales, I’m sure Dassault would make an effort to integrate those. IMO getting Rafale + Eurofighter would be a good way to get rid of your older planes (M2k) for cheap, but a poisoned gift to France which would have to find a customer for those Mirages, for the sale of only 30 Rafales?
My friend, HAF will NEVER operate just one type of aircraft. It’s a matter of dogma. Also, if you ask me, having more aircraft types, gives more available tactics, using each plane in the place where its advantages will most shine. Plus, you have 365 days of year, DACT exercises in your own country. This makes the pilots of one type, become more “quick thinking” on what to do. While when you train only against your own type of aircraft, more or less you know what to expect.
That’s why i was hoping in replacing all the Mirage2000-5 with Rafale. It would have been better than nothing. So, assuming the article is true, we will go for the:
EF + 20 Rafale + 25 Mirage2000-5 + F35 + F16 scenario.
Wouldn’t it be nicer to have EF + Rafale + F35 + F16 instead? That’s what i say.
Hyperionhttp://img56.imageshack.us/img56/2890/20gm8.jpg
http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/6664/21np0.jpg
^ According to this newspaper (28/6/2008), the deal is done and we will accept Sarkozy’s offer.
But since we read such “certain predictions” everyday, don’t take all as granted. My self, i have extreme difficulty in believing the production line. This has been written before, but it was if we were to choose Rafale for the 40 aicrafts. I can’t believe for a second that for 20 Rafales we will have production line in Greece, in an exchange for M2000. This is the usual journalistic mixture, where they don’t know well the defence sector and start throwing in everything they hear.
Here are most significant parts of the article:
“Slaughter between Europeans and Americans on who will get the big pie”.
Sarkozy came to Greece, while the “strong man” of German Christian Democrats, Edmund Stoiber is calling continuously Karamanlis on the phone. The Americans are trying they own tricks and declare they want Greece as partner, while the Swedish accompany the greek Presidential aircraft, carryin the President Papoylias with a Gripen squadron.
Why? Greece is about to decide the purchase of 40+20 aircrafts. But there is an additional reason. The decision of KYSEA, will also “photograph” the future of the next armaments program, that will start in 2015. In that period Greece will take at least 80 aircrafts as a reply to the turkish purchase of F-35.
The competitors offer “soil and water” in order to win.
– The Germans insist that Greece must choose a european product (read Eurofighter) and they leave to be intended, that if Greece doesn’t, it will put in jeopardy the partecipation of the greek aircraft industry in the future european programs. The Germans underline that the best thing for Greece, is to choose only european and thus show its support to the European Union and they also remind the announcement made by the ex MoD in favour of Eurofighter.
– The French, after the Moroccan marketing blunder, came more organized. This time Sarkozy, before throwing on the table the “Greece- France- alliance”, took the precaution to transform France into the most open supporter of Greece in every sector. Apart this, the French propose to install full production line in Greece and make Greece 50% partner for any future Rafale export.
– The Swedish, used their Royal Family to try to convince President Papulias on visit in Sweden, to apply his influence in favour of the Gripen.
– The Russians would like to sell the Su-35 saying that is superior to all competitors.
– The Americans, who were expecting Greece to bend to Bush’s will for the FYROM issue, so they hadn’t thought of having to do any particular concessions, now release us the F16 version which was exclusively made for UAE and propose partecipation in the F35 industrial program.
* The favourites and the outsiders.
Greece is close to “double selection”. Meaning at least 20 Rafale and all the rest EF. The Germans are already informed and sources say that they think it “fair enough”, with the French part already celebrating. According to people who know well the subject, the Russians although that have a better and cheaper solution, “hit a wall” in the KYSEA that has pro-western stance on the matter. As for Gripen, it may have by far the lowest cost of life cycle and the most reliable, but lack the operational capabilities of their competitors. The US fighters offer very attractive solutions, but the europeans offer more attractive offsets. Of course the final word is for KYSEA to say.
HyperionCalm down! I was giving the price, because the difference seemed rather large, not trying to claim they’re equivalent to an M2K-5, or suggest that Greece should have followed the same route.
The radar is the RC400, which is essentially a cut-down RDY. I would expect such an upgrade to be cheaper than the Greek Mirage 2000 upgrade – but half the price including weapons? Seems a large margin. The Moroccan aircraft also had a life-extension, I think.
My friend, the “upgrades”, no matter how they cost, is an economic way of keeping old aircraft flying, because no matter how much an upgrade costs, it is always LESS than buying a new and more modern aircraft.
The difference between us and the Moroccans, is exactly that Morocco has the luxury to still fly such aircrafts. I wish we could do the same. For us, we needed MirageF1 with a BVR missile capability in the mid 90s, when the Turks received the first AMRAAM and the aircraft type was still servicable. I mean, even the “normal” F4E in HAF, could still go out in A2A combat with Sparrow – Sidewinder combo and at least take on turkish F4E and have a slim chance against F-16 with Sparrow before getting in dogfight.
Also, our F1, could use only the oldest types of Sidewinder in our inventory.
This is exactly part of HAF’s problem. We don’t have “normal” needs. Heck, Italy was using F104 in CAP until recently and was waiting for EF with F16A in lease from USA. I envy Italy that can do that and the Italian tax payer that doesn’t have to pay per capita the amount that we have to pay, but our needs go beyond what most airforces face as far as equipment, battle readyness and A2A trainning is concerned. It would be nice for Greece to buy 60 3rd gen aircrafts in 1988 and stay with them untill 2005, then buy 60 new and stay with them until 2020 and so on. For now, this is only a DREAM.
HyperionWhen would you expect to get the F-35?
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2008/July/F-35fact.htm
Presumably the partners will get their F-35 first…on the other hand, with such a large scale production you probably would not have to wait for too many years after 2016…
L
In fact, i said to order between 2012-2014. Not that we will receive them. I think that LM, is eager for a greek order, because it won’t be the only one, so she will find a “quick way” to accelerate our order before the Turks get too many F-35 to make our position too precarious (assuming that in the meantime our “euroaircraft” will be totally incapable of taking care of the first turkish F35 of course, which is yet to be proved).
When a salesman REALLY want to serve a “good customer”, he oftens miraculously find “shortcuts” to the normal order. Since we aren’t partners in the F-35, one would expect that the partners will be served first, right?
Yet, before Sarkozy’s visit to Greece, miracles happened in LM!
http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4525&Itemid=49
Denis Plessas, the LM representative for South Europe (and Greek-American) in press conference stated that the F-35 can be available for Greece in 2014 , although as he said, for now LM “proposes” yet another Block 52+ sale.
Most interesting is what LM said AFTER Sarkozy’s visit to Greece.:
http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4746&Itemid=49
Bill McHenry (vice president for F16 development) at the Fort Worh factory , speaking to greek journalists, said that now the F-16s that were developed for UAE, now (miracle) are available for Greece (a month ago, Plessas was saying that that only Block 52+ was available for us).
Also interesting, George Standridge (Vice President for F35 development) and John Smith “There will be significant industrial partecipation in the F35 program for a new customer, beyond the already 9 partecipating countries”.
Of course in order to have F-35 in 2014, we must order before that. But still, shows that the Americans are ready to give us a “fast lane” to the F35 , fearing that they will loose the sales to european competitors.
HyperionThe Moroccans got an upgrade deal for their Mirage F.1s to enable them to fire Mica, AASM, & other new weapons, plus supplies of weapons, for half that price per aircraft.
With all respect for the Moroccans, it’s like upgrading a 1960 car in order to appear “modern”. The luck of Moroccans, is that they don’t have to use their Mirage F1 against anything like the turkish airforce. Plus, what’s the availability of their Mirage F1 today? How many can they fly and how much they pay for the spare parts? What new radar did they fit in to take full advantage of the MICA?
Often in greek fora, someone comes and says “Why don’t we do like the Belgians did” (where instead of “Belgian” you can put any country you like that simply doesn’t need an airforce). The reply is “who are they going to have dogfight with tomorrow morning?”.
For us, even the Mirage2000-5 starts looking bad in WVR. Imagine what we use we could have to pay for upgrade of the Mirage F1, which we had to cannibalize at the end, because of the spare parts costs.
HyperionNow that i think about it, i think the best solution for us now, is to possibly exchange ALL the Mirage for 30-40 Rafale and keep this Rafale fleet for using the french weapons we have until they are still battleworthy.
The “new aircraft” project IMHO, should be examined for 40 EF or Gripen NG for the same money and in 2012-2014 make the F-35 order.
In the long run the M2000 will become less battleworthy against the CCIP turkish F16, so for us it’s better to get Rafale. But if Sarko insists on taking only the 20 non upgraded Mirage2000, i don’t think logistically we have any gain to maintain 20 Rafale and 25 Mirage2000-5 and wait until the 2000-5 becomes obsolete.
HyperionTrue in a way, but keep in mind that while France used a symbolic number of Mirage 2000-5 for instance (the 2000-5f being more a dedicated air to air fighter), the AdlA plans to use the Rafale F3 NG, and has it developped). While in the case of the Mirage 2000-5 and 2000-5 Mk2, it was more a dedicated export platform, because the AdlA was already committed to the Rafale.
True, but yet, both the Mirage F1 and 2000 variants, made a good number of sales. So one would expect that Dassault would try to maintain this “foreign” users as happy as possible. And however you look at it, in HAF, the same people that had to live with the french planes for decades, are the same called now to judge the Rafale compared to the competition. And although there are “french fans” in HAF, it is humanly impossible not to think that we paid everything french quite a lot, to maintain it at the limits of being acceptable against THK. In greek fora, even the most die-hard Mirage fans, that support Rafale, don’t say a word when the EF fan club brings on the table the money issue. It’s not that Dassault didn’t WANT to support cheaper and better. But simply, Dassault, needed to increase her profits too from the exports and finance her future R&D.
Even if today we accept that Dassault has a 10% profit margin from each Rafale that gets out of production line, will this profit be enough to finance future Rafale R&D? Or they are waiting for the Greeks to squeeze them like lemon for every spare part in order to both increase profit and finance R&D. Because, 10% profit is nice. But 11 is better than 10 and 12 better than 11. 😀
If the HAF choses a standard quite similar to the Rafale NG with AESA, the new engines, the new OSF and so on, then it will benefit from pretty much the same support structure than the AdlA and MN. On the other hand the Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 wasn’t even used by the AdlA.
This is logical. But exactly here will come i guess the comparison with EF. Which will come cheaper for us in the long run? Having to rely to the French support structure or the EF support structure? This is the billion dollar question. Logically, the more one sells, the more he can keep support costs low.
I don’t think you can compare an evolution of the Mirage 2000 that wasn’t even used by the AdlA, and the mainhorse of the AdlA for the next decades.
Yes, but a greek proverb says “Whoever gets burnt trying to taste a hot soup, then is afraid to try even the – cold- yogurt”. Meaning, that HAF has by now a certain “opinion” that “french hits you hard in the aftersale”. Call it just a “stereotype” which doesn’t apply for the Rafale case, for the reasons that you very well explained, but this is something that i think the french must try to “break” in the mind of HAF officials.
And I think the Rafale NG that the AdlA is ordering would be more than enough for the needs of the HAF, esp’ if you equip it with conformals and a HMS (I think both have been developped? Not sure about the conformal fuel tanks, but I’m quite positive about a HMS and maybe DVI even though AdlA didn’t select it), and fit it with IRIS-T which shouldn’t be all that difficult would it? So there would be no need for a specific upgraded Rafale Mk2 version, which would sure bring the cost of ownership down compared to the Mirage 2000-5 Mk2
The F3 will be enough compared to the competition for 2010-2012. My concern is what will happen later. Yes, CFT has been tested for Rafale and a helmet called Gerfaut or something has been designed but it’s quite heavy (about 2 kg i think) and does AdA really want a helmet? And does AdA want IRIS-T? Because my understanding is, AdA wants to use MICA IR as close range IR missile too.
Nic[/QUOTE]
HyperionTo bring more examples. Dassault also supported the Mirage F1 and 2000/2000-5 through their operational life, since also were AdA aircrafts, right? But,
– We retired the F1 quicker than AdA, because of the incapability of the F1 to use anything else than Sidewinder or MagicII in A2A.
– We never acquired a single french bomb, because compared to US bombs, it was too costly.
– Our Mirage2000 today can’t use MICA. Because it isn’t certified, since apparently it wasn’t a necessity for AdA. Instead they have to use Super 530D.
– The Mirage2000-5 Mk2 can’t use the Exocet which the M2000 can. Because it isn’t certified, probably because it wasn’t a necessity for AdA.
– To upgrade the 2000 to 2000-5 one has to pay half the price of a new Block 52+ and STILL, in the “package”, he gets the same engine of the 2000. Of course one can say that we can be the first users of the experimental engine that Dassault tested once and nobody else took. But then probably from 28 mln euros per plane, the cost will rise even more. At that point why not take a Block52+ instead, that comes with new engine anyway?
– In greek fora, there have been tons of discussions and comparisons, as you can see here (http://www.defencenet.gr/forum/index.php?topic=9.1200) The New gen aircraft threads are 5 in archive already, each with 50 pages and yet another with 50 pages for EF vs Rafale.
Nobody seems to contraddict, that:
– We never got anything french A2G other than SCALP because the french missiles cost too much.
– The SCALP is costly as hell, but only the french would give us such a weapon, so we paid it.
According to a member, which nobody contraddicted, 1 MICA costs like 3 AMRAAM, we paid one MagiC II the price the Americans ask for 1 AMRAAM and the due to costly spare parts, the cost to operate the Mirage today is 30% higher than the F16.
So, it’s not that they aircrafts weren’t supported, it’s HOW they were supported and at what price. Personally, i find it almost ridiculous, to have a 3rd gen aircraft like the M2000 and not being able to use the *ONLY* real french equivalent to the AMRAAM, that is the MICA. Oh yes, with the modest price of 28 mln euros, we transform the 2000 to 2000-5 and then it can also use MICA. But unfortunately no missile equivalent to IRIS-T or Helmet Mounted Display. We bought the F16 at the same time with the M2000. Today, we bought 2000-5Mk2 and the production line is closed right after we took our planes. The F16 is still selling and our Block 30 can carry probably any missile the Block 52+ can. Yes, the RDY radar of the 2000-5 is VERY capable, rumours say that it is better in many aspects than our american ones, but, when the Turks get C-7 or D Amraams, the MICA, no matter how good the RDY radar, will fall short in range and of i doubt that the Mirage will ever use Meteor. So, the best chance of our Mirage will be to use passive tracking and MICA IR, hoping to catch the Turks on their sleep. As for WVR, a Mirage2000-5 without HMD, will have one chance to get the F16’s tail. If it looses it, the turkish F16 with HMD will kill the Mirage.
If you put down all this money together since the beginning, you will see that we paid “very much” the will for a plane that “can make a difference because the Turks don’t know it”.
The question gentlemen isn’t if there will be an improved Rafale that will cover our initial needs. Yes, there will be. The question is, what will happen 10-15 years after the purchase. What capabilities will have then and at WHAT PRICE. I guess that’s why the HAF committee was put to study the long term cost of the 2 french solutions. We HAVE to maintain a French aircraft fot the years to come, if not for any other reason, because exactly we paid dearly the french missiles, so what are we going to do with them? The EF or US planes can’t use french missiles!
But, i would guess that HAF has also made yet another long term economical study, that compares EF and Rafale and in that study, the past experience with french aircrafts, will surely be considered.
It’s not that French planes are worse or something. They just have limited sales and AdA isn’t going to any demanding air war so “upgrades” come at limited pace and high prices. On the other hand, we will have the Turks with F35, for which the Americans will be proposing new blocks every now and then.
As i said, the EF consoritum maybe fragmented, but has more sales , more possible future sales and some big countries inside, one of which may be involved in real war, following USA and another that has bet everything on EF, just like France did on Rafale. I find the British future A2A upgrade demands much more likely to be similar to the greek ones, because the British are much more likely to have to be ready for real battle than the French. Yes, France is in Afghanistan, but that’s a UN mission after all. I am talking about something more demanding than that. In Afghanistan even Mirage F1 has no trouble surviving.
Hyperion@ Arthuro,
Thank you for the article, if Dassault has achieved such profit levels without counting the exports, this is very good.
The Rafale is already funded and soon to be ordered in a standard close to what a demanding export customer would require (AESA etc etc), while at the same time the EF consortium haven’t even decided what the Tranche 3 improvement will consist of, not to mention the fact that seems like it is nowhere close to being funded and ordered.
So I don’t understand either those talks about the Rafale not being supported through its operational life. Do you think France’s AdlA and Mn are going to keep their aircraft and systems ageing through the life of the Rafale without upgrades?
I tried to make an exhausting analysis to avoid misunderstandings. Nobody doubts that an optimized Rafale version will come out around 2010 or that Rafale won’t be supported through the operational life, since it will be the aircraft or AdA. Or that will get eventually upgraded.
The main concern, isn’t that, but whether AdA’s requirements for upgrades, will cover HAF’s requirements and in the long run, what the costs will be. That’s why i wrote our past experience with MirageF1, Mirage2000 and Mirage2000-5 as a “track record” of what we saw happening for HAF’s fleet. Note that both Mirage F1 and 2000 have done much more exports than the Rafale.
Regards
HyperionIMHO, leaving aside possible future non-european countries, to which a T3 may look much more attractive than current T2, which is still with incomplete A2G abilities, there is also a potential political advantage for future EF sales towards EU countries that still haven’t done the “big step” towards 4th gen. aircrafts. The EF can be campaigned by the consortium as “political project, which will help european integration” and put pressure on other countries to buy.
Think of how many countries have entered the EU and don’t have too many modern aircrafts. Even some countries that today buy F16, can’t fly forever in F16. Of course USA will pop in with F35. But, if Europe manages in the meantime to increase political cohesion, some countries that don’t face real threats, may choose, for political reasons fewer EF than more F35 for example. It’s not just the price. As i wrote in the Rafale thread, i would imagine, that for Greece, the EF is favourite also because we DO want to buy european as much as possible, for reasons that have to do with our long term foreign policy (less dependant on USA, help the european defence industry as a means to help european common defence and policy that will on its side help Greece’s defence against Turkey).
Also something that may attract many would be as offset, a partecipation of their local defence industries in a wider pan-european defence industry network. I can imagine that Greece would like the greek defence companies under a common european umbrella. And i presume Greece wouldn’t be the only one. The consortium could use an argument of “buy EF, help us unite the european industry, so that we can encompass YOUR local industry too and make us all stronger and with less headaches”. I think many countries would think twice before buying american then. Or “only” american.
Consider also that the current EF export deals, are for an aircraft that isn’t multirole yet. Still, the consortium managed to export some in non Eu countries. A fully multirole T3 would probably be easier to sell.
The big disadvantage of EF, is the euro-dollar exchange ratio. Dear American friends, please do something to strengthen the dollar! :diablo:
HyperionP.S. : IMHO, without knowing what HAF “saw” in the latest Rafale trainning, strictly speaking about the impression that one gets from the press all the previous years, i would say, that if the Rafale does make it to Greece, it will be thanks to Sarkozy. And i don’t intend simply Sarkozy’s appearance in greek parliament, but also this “new breeze” in Rafale’s marketing that by coincidence (?) started when Sarkozy became President. I mean, look, in the last few months, more Rafale spent days in Greece than in all the years since the Rafale first flew in the skies!
If we do get Rafale, Dassault should give a big, big, gift to Sarkozy. I could even suspect, that if Sarkozy was the President when we ordered the M2000-5, he would have grabbed the opportunity to make the “total exchange” back then. I suspect that HAF would even settle for “give 45 Mirage2000” and pay a difference for 30 Rafale, if wanted to contain costs. But now, even the french greek fans are divided.
HyperionI like the Rafale more, but you make some strong points about the Typhoon’s growth potential.
However, I heard that in the long run, the Rafale and the Typhoon will be using the same AESA radars. If true, wouldn’t this reduce the difficulties of implementing more weapons to the Rafale?
My friend, i myself, like the Mirage more than the F16 and i actually see the MICA IR/ IRST as maybe a better way to shoot down an F35 than any radar guided missile the EF can carry. Not to speak that the price of EF is hefty. But, there are so many variables in this purchase , so many “IF”, that i don’t know what to say anymore.
I don’t think the radar itself is critical in weapons implementation. It is more a hardware/software issue. IRIS-T for example is infrared guided, not radar guided. Gripen is “ready for use”, Rafale isn’t.
Also, note that i think a HMD is on the works for the EF with recent good tests, while i am not sure if AdA has any hurry using HMD on the Rafale. Some french HMD that have seen the light of the press, weigh something like 1.8-2.0 Kg! Considering that even our current Block 52+ have HMD/IRIS-T combo, i would expect that HAF will want a “new” aircraft that can use such combo too.
This is the problem that we have seen with the past french planes too. As has been seen in the forum too, Dassault has always “something in the tests”. But, most probably, you need to pay to “unfreeze” the tests and complete their project or become the only user, because AdA doesn’t have the needs for such systems. This though, increases the costs for the user.
Also the “say what you want, pay and we will make it for you”, goes against every country’s insecurity. Meaning, it is most common that countries seek products that “are already in use by at least one foreign army”. This is exactly to ensure, that you won’t be alone to deal with possible problems, that you are not going to be the only user asking for spare parts for the X product etc. To put it simply, the EF consortium, doesn’t wait for us to ask to use IRIS-T, it has done it on its own. AdA most probably doesn’t care about IRIS-T. EF is continuing the development of the new engine. We don’t have to ask them to do it for us. Will Dassault unfreeze the development of M88-3 without us paying for it? And even if it does, will we be the only users anyway?
For me, as i said, without knowing how Rafale really compares to EF in A2A, the EF seems to give more warranties and less after-sales costs/ headaches. Maybe history will prove this wrong, but, one must make a choice. To tell the truth, i am quite fond of the “buy 2 Gripens NG for the price of 1 EF” scenario too.
It’s just that the Rafale is struggling so much to make exports, that you have to question yourself, how is Dassault going to take her money and profit back, without “cutting down” future development / upgrades. One thing that i would do if i were Dassault, is try to make some exports cheaply and then try to suck every last cent i can from support costs/spare parts. (example. Do you know the “wonderful” jet-ink PC Printer that costs 25 euros, but then you go to buy the ink and costs 50euros a pop? While laser printers cost more to purchase, but then ink costs a lot less). Considering that this will also be probably the last “Dassault” only product, they won’t care if the client is “unhappy” in the after sale, because there won’t be a next product that they will want to sell us. This is a prevailing concern in greek fora too.
HyperionAs you keep trying to compare Rafale and EF for the Greek contest, let me just have a say : why are you so sure the future of the Rafale is worse than of the EF ? …
…On the other hand, this consortium sees its members looking for others aircrafts (mainly the F35), which means quite an overlap in their inventory and two sources of spendings. Will they need to have their EF to be always top notch ? I’m not so sure !
I am not sure about any! I can only go according to what i think as probable. My faith on the EF’s future, lays more on the fact, that EF is also a common european POLITICAL project, made to enhance european common industry ventures. Also, Germany is taking only EF, which for me, is significant. Agreed, the consortium has many voices, it has always been like that, but at least Germany will have interest in improving it. Also, GB, despite the fact that takes F35 too, wants EF for A2A. Given the GB is often involved in wars following US trail, i think the British will also want to keep up. The fact that EF will be produced in higher numbers, makes me think, that also long term support will be good, at good prices. What i don’t understand in EF, is “does EF really worth the extra money compared to Rafale”? This is a big question.
For me, the French have always produced aircrafts with superior aerodynamic design, which then became penalised, by costly support, weak engines and few-costly upgrades and probably unfortunate marketing choices. Except for the last one, the others are cause of sales in low numbers.
Examples.
– We bought the F1 for air superiority. Excellent design for its era. It could deal with F4s very easily. Now we have retired it for some years now, because despite we were using it even against F16s (you may have seen a foto with gun lock on turkish F16) , it was only certified for Sidewinder in our inventory. And when AMRAAM came into the game, it was sitting duck in BVR. Also spare parts were becoming more and more costly, once production line closed. On the other hand, the F4, being sold in large numbers, was cheaper to maintain even after the production line ended and we still fly it upgraded, with AMRAAM capability.
– Mirage2000. Another superb design. The instantaneous turn rate, thanks to the delta wing – acting airbrake- is a killer at the first pass. It could very well justify the superior cost compared to the F16 Block30 that we bought at the same time. Today, the Mirage2000, is certified only for Super530D as BVR missile, while the Block30 carries AMRAAMs.
– Mirage2000-5 Mk2. The best A2A Mirage version available. It suffers the same weak engine of the 2000 bought in the late 80s. It costs more than F16 Block 52+. Its best BVR missile is the MICA, who soon will be falling a lot behind the latest AMRAAM models available for Block 52+. Has no HMD. In WVR must rely on Magic II or MICA. The Block52+ has increased endurance, HMD, IRIS-T for WVR. In short, in WVR, the 2000-5 must work miracles, against the HMD-IRIS-T combo. Then why we got them? Because of the BVR capability/ICMS (and in particular the MICA IR) and because they can use SCALP (which by the way aren’t certified for the “simple” M2000, while the Exocet are certified for the M2000, but not for the M2000-5). The cost to upgrade M2000 to 2000-5, 28 mln euros. I don’t know how much would cost to bring an F16 Block30 to a 52+ level, but i would think it will cost less. Also, we ordered M2000-5Mk2. Ours were the last to be produced. I have the bad feeling that spare parts prices will start hitting the ceiling soon.
What do you get from all this? That French aircrafts start with many advantages, and end with few. For every problem, the solution is “pay and we will fix it for you”. While the F16, that was produced in large numbers, simply works, because the company doesn’t wait for YOU, to certify a particular weapon, or make an upgrade in good price. Guess why we never acquired a SINGLE french A2G weapon for the Mirage…
Still… we have bought 96 SCALP and we need SOMETHING in the future to launch them. Oddly enough, in greek fora, it is written that the EF is certified to launch Storm Shadow, but not SCALP, because they use different wirings, software and similar stuff. So, we need something french to launch them, OR … pay for its certification on EF…
All this also happens, because AdA wasn’t facing any “advanced” enemy so to have pressure on development. We did, because we couldn’t send Mirage F1 against F16s with AMRAAM. This explains why French MirageF1 were sent to Aghanistan, while ours were already retired.
So,
-given that France, seems that will produce less aircrafts than the european consortium,
-given that France is unlikely to be sent against some serious air threat, while GB for example is more probable.
– given that Germany is betting all its chips on EF
I would think, that in the long run, EF MAY be a better choice. Although, as i said, i am not sure if it’s worth the price difference.
From the Rafale, 3 things mostly attract me. 1)The SPECTRA (of which we know nothing though), 2) the price, 3) The MICA IR and SCALP capability.
To tell the truth, suppose we say that you are right and France has at least the same interest in keeping its aircraft competitive or even better compared to a EF choice. With the same arguments you used, why not take a Gripen NG? Of course leaving aside the traditional Dassault-HAI cooperation or Sarkozy’s policy towards Greece.
Honestly, i wouldn’t want to be the one who makes the choices in HAF, because every contender is presenting a valid case for himself… I can’t tell you that EF *IS* better choice.
What does seem though true, is that EF is favourite as the press say. Because, this is enforced exactly from Sarkozy’s deal. Why would Sarkozy ask for exchange, if he believed that he can take the “40 new aircrafts” program?
I also don’t understand the french marketing. To me this is a marketing blunder. IF France had made us an exchange offer BEFORE we decided to buy and upgrade 2000-5Mk2, i think that now the Rafale would have secured 40 aircrafts in HAF. Because given the cost of the 2000-5, getting a brand new Rafale, would worth the difference in money. While now, we just have brand new 2000-5 and we are asked to give away the 20 non upgraded 2000 and pay 1,75 bln to get 20 Rafales! So we will have 20 Rafales and 25 M2000-5, which doesn’t sound so good. Having 2 aircrafts types with just one squadron each? I hope not!
By 2015, the upgraded F4 will begin to be retired. HAF has the opportunity to have then 4 aircraft types:
– 1)EF + F35 + 45 Mirage2000-5 + F16
or if we suppose that we won’t get any EF but Rafale,
– 2)Rafale + F35 + ??? Mirage 2000-5 (25 or 45?) + F16
or
– 3)EF + F35 + 20 Rafale + 25 Mirage2000-5 + F16
or in the unlikely case that Sarko would like to exchange our 2000-5 too,
– 4)EF + F35 + 40 Rafale + F16
My preference is for 1 or 4. With 1 having the advantage, that in the long run, will leave us with EF + F35, while 4 in the long run will leave us with EF + F35 + Rafale (3 types).
Option 2 would be the french equivalent of option 1, but i don’t see it how it will happen, from the monent that Sarko proposes M2000 exchange. To make option 2 real, he should go for the 40 “new aircraft” and then would we upgrade the Mirage too? Or can he make the exchage of all the Mirage and take the 40 Rafale directly too?
It becomes too complicated to even think about it. :p
IMHO, France should have stopped us right away when we wanted to buy 2000-5 and make us the complete deal: “Hey, Greeks, instead of paying so much for 2000-5 and upgrade the rest, i will make an exchange for your Mirage and you pay the difference of money and buy 40 Rafale, in batches of 20 + 20 for not burdening too much neither your budget nor HAF’s programming”. I think that it would be a deal that one could difficultly turn down. Instead, now we have this mess.
HyperionSurprisingly, Sarkozy has been sounding off in favour of stronger integration of the French military into European organizations and projects. Wouldn’t have expected that from him.
My friend, the world is evolving. Evolution won’t wait for the european countries to get their act together for ever. USA is the superpower right now. China is the rising giant and unless EU starts acting like a “union”, even India will surpass the EU eventually. The EU can’t go on simply with “enlargements” fooling ourselves, that only because we are more, we are stronger. We are not. We simply add more voices. Where is the union when the French is armwrestling with the German to who will get the money from the “feta-Greeks-who-are-paranoid-about-Turkey-but fine-with-us-as-long-as-we-get-their-defence-budget-money?”
And then people wonder why Ireland said “no” to the Lisbon Treaty… Because they don’t trust the “union”. They only see the “big” guys, trying to prevail and on their way they are ready to step on the bodies of the “small” guys. What kind of union is that? If this was really the EU of the “people and values” that were advertizing in the 80s, Sarkozy wouldn’t need to say “France has chosen Greece, is solidary and will remain such”. It would be superfluous. While he said it, because unfortunately, we see very often EU “partners” siding against Greece and supporting non-EU countries.
Now, this “EU”, must either start acting as a union, or sooner or later we will have to learn to speak chinese. At best EU will remain as a club of merchants, each one holding a knife behind his back, ready to backstab the “partner” next to him.
While I don’t see France suddenly buying the Typhoon, another French solo performance does look rather unlikely.
I don’t see for France the NEED to buy Typhoon either, as long as Rafale is in production. Rafale is omnirole, gives income to the local industry, France will support it for its life cycle and this is natural. It’s not that France is going to engage in a war against F22 tomorrow anyway, so why worry?
Sign In
