lol jackjack I think you mix up something:D wa are talking about the swiss evaluation

Korean evaluation :

“Dassault’s combat aircraft Rafale was rated as “excellent” in all five categories, while its strongest rival, Boeing’s F-15 fighter, reached the standard in only two categories.

The Boeing fighter received “excellent” in reliability and supportive combat capability, while Eurofighter, produced by a European consortium, won the top grades in the general function and reliability categories.

In the categories of weapons and electronic warfare capability, only Rafale earned the “excellent” grade, according to the officials.

Russia’s Su-35 took fourth place with “ordinary” rates in all five categories.

N°2

Korea to Buy 20 Foreign Fighter Jets Next Year

(Source: Korea Overseas Information Service; dated Jan. 18, web-posted Jan. 17, 2007)

Having ordered 40 Boeing F-15Ks, South Korea has now confirmed plans to order 20 new multi-rôle fighters in 2008. Korea has decided to choose a foreign contractor through open bidding to supply 20 “next-generation” fighter jets in the coming years, a project to cost around 2.3 trillion won ($2.4 billion), defense officials said Wednesday (Jan. 17).

The project follows Seoul’s contract with the U.S. company Boeing Co. in 2002 to buy 40 F-15K jets for $4.6 billion. Eighteen jets have been delivered so far, with the remainder to be introduced by next year.

“We plan to draw up a detailed plan for the procurement project next month and distribute the proposal in March, with the aim of signing a contract by February next year,” said Major General Kim Deuk-hwan, director-general for aircraft programs at the Defense Acquisition Program Administration.

The decision was made at a defense procurement project committee meeting presided over by Defense Minister Kim Jang-soo at the Defense Ministry building in central Seoul.

Korea has pushed for the purchase of 120 next-generation fighter jets as part of its blueprint for overhauling the military’s structure and drastically increasing combat capability by 2020.

“It is a plan to secure 20 highly efficient multipurpose fighter jets to actively counter threats by neighboring countries under the National Defense Reform 2020 project,” Kim said. “We will introduce the aircraft between 2010 and 2012.”

He indicated that Lockheed Martin’s F-35 model will be ruled out, saying the Air Force needs double-engine fighters.

“There are a lot of differences between the single-engine F-35 and what our military needs, including weapons capacity and flight scope,” Kim said.

Korean officials expect the introduction of a foreign model to help the country learn the core technology needed for the designing and manufacturing of advanced aircraft, as well as contributing to the development of the domestic aerospace industry and the creation of jobs.

In 2002, Seoul chose Boeing’s F-15K, probably in consideration of the long-standing military alliance with the United States, giving a new lifeline to Boeing’s then-sputtering F-15 production line in Missouri. The French-built fighter Rafale reportedly beat the F-15K by a narrow margin in the technical phase of evaluation. Two other fighters, the Russian Sukhoi Su-35 and the Typhoon from European consortium Eurofighter, also joined in the competition.

Netherlands :

[QUOTE]a source from a blog from bruxelles…(Nice chart)

http://bruxelles2.over-blog.com/article-22711204.html

From a dutch news paper

http://www.nrc.nl/nieuwsthema/jsf/ar…en_vliegtuigen

some extarcts :

Quote:

The multi-criteria analysis, in cooperation with TNO and Dutch Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space (NLR) was performed, was a time consuming exercise. First were 700 criteria that the new fighter had to comply. Then experts gave a figure for each criterion. The weighted average of the scores was an indication of the system effectiveness of any device – in plain English: how well the aircraft was. Quote:

In the Court Brief on the JSF decision of February 11, 2002 was the multi-criteria analysis in detail. The government stressed in the letter detailed the purity of the process. The operation of the Air Force was rated by an independent working group of the Ministry of Defense, wrote the government. It had ruled that “the candidates thoroughly and carefully review”was conducted.

Quote:
The evaluation itself was not the House. The same was true for the so-called B / C paper, the results were described. Both documents contain confidential commercial information from aircraft manufacturers and are therefore confidential.

Quote:
According to the Air Force, the uncertainties involved. In the multi-criteria analysis, as wrote the Air Force in the B / C paper, the uncertainties “adequately addressed”.

In this analysis, some criteria are not one, but three scores out. The median score, the “expected performance” again. In addition, experts also had a top and a given value. After all values were added together, the multi-criteria analysis yielded three final scores on the system effectiveness.

The median score gave the Air Force how well the aircraft would be in 2010. The top score was the most optimistic expectations of the performance, the score was the worst case scenario. “This leads to more complete picture of system effectiveness with uncertainties, risks but also potential”, wrote the Air Force.

from dassault CEO himself :

Regarding European defense, we dreamed about it and Americans have done it … Today the equivalent of 75% of the costs of development and industrialization of the Rafale, almost eight billion dollars are paid by the office of Europeans to American studies to develop the JSF. It is more than surprising that the Netherlands has chosen this device after a thorough study of 700 criteria. The Rafale won 695 points, came in second place, the JSF have obtained 697 points. It should be noted that despite this result, no indication of price was given for the JSF! The thing is that the Defense Minister, Mr. de Vries, asked me two months ago to return to the competition. He wanted that I may be used for hare, ultimately, help to lower the U.S. price, without jeopardizing the contract signed with the industrial overseas.

another source

http://www.dedefensa.org/article.php?art_id=84

Quote:
A surprising and important detail had been made public: the technological and operational evaluation by the RNAF of the three candidates. According to the RNAF criteria, the JSF had been graded 6.97; the Rafale, 6.95; and the Eurofighter Typhoon, 5.85

Singapore :

Rafale, the French fighter, scrambles for export orders
By Christina Mackenzie
International Herald Tribune

Published: July 16, 2006 Paris

Riddle: Which combat aircraft outperforms its competitors in dogfights, is frequently classed first on technical merit in international tenders, is capable of covering a broad spectrum of air missions and is competitively priced, but has yet to win a single export order from a foreign air force? Answer: the Rafale, the French fighter developed and manufactured by Dassault Aviation.

In development since the mid-1980s and in French naval carrier-based service since 2004, Rafale is a so-called fourth-generation fighter, a sophisticated multirole jet with advanced avionics and weapons systems, but less able to avoid radar detection than “fifth generation” stealth fighters like the Lockheed-Martin F-22 Raptor or the U.S.-European F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

Competitors include the U.S.-made F- 15 Eagle, in service in various versions since the 1970s, the F-16 Fighting Falcon and F-18E/F Super Hornet, the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Swedish-built JAS-39 Gripen, marketed in collaboration with BAE Systems of Britain.

Dassault and the French Ministry of Defense hope that exports may now take off after Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin declared operational a first French air force squadron of 20 Rafales on June 27.

“It’s almost impossible to sell a combat aircraft not operational in its own air force,” Gérard David, head of communications for Dassault said during an interview by telephone. “The doors are now open to Rafale’s export career.”
Within the French military, the Rafale eventually would replace existing air force and naval fighters and fighter- bombers, including the Mirage IV, F1 and 2000; the Jaguar; Crusader; Etendard IV and Super-Etendard.

“This is going to reduce our operating costs tremendously through rationalization of maintenance,” said General Patrick Dufour, director of the Rafale program at the Délégation Générale de l’Armement, France’s defense procurement agency.

Colonel François Moussez, a pilot who has flown 150 hours on the Rafale, said that two could do the work of six existing air superiority/defense and air-to-surface attack jets. “With the Rafale,” he said, “we can do simultaneous multimission management: air-to-air, air-to- ground, reconnaissance at the same time.”

Moussez said that in dogfight exercises, the Rafale had outflown F-15, F-16 and F-18 opponents, and in technical and performance evaluations “we have systematically won against the F-15 and the Eurofighter Typhoon.”
Yet it lost to the F-15 in competitions to sell to South Korea and Singapore. Moussez said it was outflanked in the former case on political grounds and in the latter case on costs, noting that the dollar had depreciated 30 percent over the period of the Singapore competition.

In competitions to sell combat aircraft, “the principal criterion is political. It has little to do with aircraft performance,” Moussez said.

Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst with Teal Group in Fairfax, Virginia, also says that politics play a major role in fighter procurement. “Aggressive U.S. foreign policy” was a primary cause of export wins by U.S. military jets, he said during an interview by telephone.

Bob Kemp, director of sales for the Gripen, was not so sure. “There is no doubt a political factor,” he said during an interview. But “the first thing is, the aircraft must be able to do the job, and the second is financial.”
The Gripen, in operation with the Swedish Air Force since 1997, has been sold or leased to three countries and is quietly adding more orders, partly because it is “half the price of our competitors,” Kemp said.

Pricing combat aircraft is notoriously complex, with deals often involving industrial offsets and seldom reflecting full aircraft development costs. While Dufour put the average cost of a Rafale at €50 million, or $64 million, and the Typhoon – a collaboration grouping Italy, Germany, Spain and Britain – at about £65 million, or $120 million, Kemp said both aircraft had been offered to Singapore and South Korea at about $95 million each, compared with a basic price tag of $45 million to $50 million for the Gripen.

Combat aircraft technology “costs what it weighs,” Kemp said. “The Typhoon is basically twice the weight of the Gripen – and costs twice as much.”
The Typhoon, although lacking air-to- ground capacity in its current version, already has one export customer. Austria signed for 18 aircraft in August 2003 and Britain has signed a preliminary agreement with Saudi Arabia to supply at least 24 Typhoons from the British production run of 89 aircraft, although no final deal has been sealed.

Meanwhile Gripen has sold 28 aircraft to South Africa, the first of which left Sweden by ship in early July for the Overburg test flight center near Cape Town. Hungary has signed a lease and purchase agreement with Sweden for 14 aircraft, of which the first five were handed over in March. And the Czech Republic has leased 14 aircraft, all of which have been delivered. Norway and Denmark have also requested information on the Gripen from Saab, its manufacturer.

French procurement officials, comparing the sales prospects of the Gripen and Rafale, said the Gripen was designed for a different type of mission. The Rafale, a twin-engine aircraft with a maximum takeoff weight of 24.5 tons, can carry 9.5 tons of weapons slung under its wings, while the single-engine Gripen, with a maximum takeoff weight of 14 tons, carries only 5 tons of weapons.

Kemp agrees. Buyers of the heavier fighters “pay for longer range and heavier weapons loads,” he said, fitting them for a strategic defense role that some air forces may find less relevant than it was at the height of the cold war.

Still, by 2030, many countries will need to renew their combat aircraft fleets including some, like India and Japan, that may face significant strategic challenges. Saudi Arabia may finalize its Typhoon deal at the Farnborough Airshow, and analysts say other likely customers in the near future include Morocco and Brazil.

Excluding the United States, Russia and China, the open export market is estimated by analysts at around 3,000 aircraft. France traditionally holds between 10 percent to 15 percent of this market. Based on political preferences and past performance, France could hope to export about 300 Rafales, analysts say.

every competition Dassault CEO :

The Typhoon, whose development also started in 1998, was fielded as an air defence aircraft in December 2005. This fighter will not have a true omnirole version (enabling, for instance, to lift and fire a cruise-missile) before the next decade.
Ever since the beginning of the decade, the Rafale has always been deemed superior to the Eurofighter« Typhoon » by the countries concerned (i.e. the Netherlands, South Korea and Singapore), whenever it has been in competition (or has been submitted to comparative evaluations) with this rival. In the Netherlands, for instance, the Rafale’s score differed by a scarce 2% from that of a « paper JSF ». A number of elements enables us to tackle the future with confidence, such as the imminent fielding, in the Air Force, of Rafale upgraded to F2 omnirole standard, the fact that a number of foreign experts recognize that the Rafale offer is superior to the Typhoon offer, and the doubts remaining about the F-35/JSF programme.

I would like sources which say otherwise if you disagree…I have never seen susbtansial information on the other side.

After Korea, Singapore and the Neederlands technical evaluations I am curiously waiting to see J*******o arguments this time to countradict, as usual, official or tangible sources.:D

Here are some infos about the DDMG coming with the F3+ standard in 2012.

http://www.mbda-systems.com/mbda/site/docs_wsw/fichiers_communs/docs/pdf07_ddmng.pdf

State-of-the-art staring array technology
• Long detection range
• Very large field of view
• High angular accuracy compliant with
DIRCM needs

Perhaps we will be able to see some kind of equivalent to the F35 DAS if the DDM-NG is developped with all possibilities linked to its technology ?

A technical reason which also might have prevent the typhoon from competing is the lack of mutirole capabilities and the lack of range : small external fuel carrying capabilities, especially in AtG configuration (max 2000L with LGB or 1000L with cruise missiles which still have to be integrated…).

I’ve sat on a various type of fighters’ cockpit like the mirage 2000, F16, F15E or the Typhoon and on thing that struck me is rafale very good visibility downward in the axis of the nose.

That is due to the fact that the rafale needed this visibility for carrier landing and as deltas have usually a higher AoA approach they needed to be careful during the design phase.

So when horizontal, the downward visisbility in the axis is quite surprising. The nose is really lower compared to the cockpit and the slope of the nose is quite steep.

Also from my point of view it is the most comfortable cockpit because of the inclined position but also due to the side sticks and the two “things” before the sticks to rest your arms.

Great report Scorpion 82 !

One correction : the rafale B326 wasn’t lost due to g-lock but spatial disorientation officially. The mission was a night deep strike (relatively) Low altitude AtG mission.

Here are some personnal pictures from the last Paris Airshow around rafale’s cokpit !

I am a bit late today but I was working…

The fact that one or another aircraft was favored is fine for me… Just that I need reliable sources preferably different from Jackoniko/JL.

two points : I found amazing that jackonicko quote a PR guy when for years he debunked any dassault PR or confidences about other competitions. And these PR report from dassault were at least in the open press with people names and talking directly like Moussez, Edelstennes or Ravellin Falcoz to name a few. They had their credibility at stake and took the risk to be attacked by another competitor. And I don’t mention independent reports from korea or the Neederlands. Where is the logic ? I don’t know..

Then he quotes someone who hasn’t made declarations in the press about a mysterious 26000p reports that obviously no one has read completely considering the volume of that “alleged” stuff and would be certainly prone to various interpretations. The common sens recomends to be skeptical and that has nothing to do with supporting the rafale or another aircraft. But he tries to discredit anyone who doesn’t think like him.

I am perfectly able to admit another aircraft won the FAB evaluation, but I prefer to wait reliable sources. I am sure that if SAAB or Boeing won the FAB evaluation they will jump on it to attack any political choice…If they remain silent there are perhaps some reasons ? Just remember the Norvegian choice…When a competitor disagree they usually make quite some noise in the press !

You are perfectly right as this would (if really happened) the first confrontation between this two type of aircrafts.

I’ve just posted this links hopping that one of these two journalist would speek about this event (or others…). That would be indeed preferable to start to cross check this info with reliable sources with their credibility as journalist at stake as they don’t speak under anonymat.

I am confident that this will appear somehow in the press if really happened. But for the moment the word “forum rumor” is quite appropriate if you take some distance. I understand everyones curiosity (including myself) but that would be wiser to wait for more precisions.