arthuroBut being an Rafale enthusiast certainly makes your constant reminder of the unbeatable Rafale annoying. Would you stop if we all concede once and for all the superiority of the Rafale?
you didn’t read that I think that the rafale isn’t superior to many aircrafts ?? quite selective opinion from you…If you think it is annoying feel free to ignore my posts.;)
arthuroI refer to my previous post, it has been disputed and it only causes bitter flame wars when people bring it up as it supports their own preconcieved ideas.
I would not regard either the french national assembly or officials from dassault’s or colonel moussez as unbiased sources, they clearly have a vested interest in selling the Rafale.
As for the Korea times or International Herald Tribune all very well but in the end they are non specialist press who will assign a journo who has NO knowledge about the subject to glean some information and write a report.
Rafale fans get just as angry when Typhoon fanboys point out that the Eurofighter has the export sales or the DERA exercise (also very much missunderstood and disputed) or MMI Yahda Yahda Yahda. It just gets boring in the end, what we are talking about is two state of the art European built fighters that are as good and in many areas better then anything the Americans can make (I know that will set the F22/F35 fanboys off) I would rather celebrate that then participate in a pissing contest.
What I’m saying is if it ends up the same way everytime in a flame war why cite it in the first place?
Feydaikin,
I also refer to my previous post, you are dismissing the sources without real soures or arguments. It is just too hard for some people to admit it…It is too easy to label someone as xxx “fan” to dismiss the nature of the arguments.
Why would official be liars here ? the weakness of your arguments is that fighter jets are not mass product goods, in the end the airforces which have tested the rafale know the truth. So what the point lying ? Do you think they care about forumers ? (lol) Do you really think Dassault ‘CEO which speaks publicly is a plain liar ? Do you think that the Boss of a firm which is quoted on euronext (with all it implies in terms of information transparency) can lie everytime ?
The national Assembly is a very reliable source because it is where the democratic debate takes place and you have several parties which are participating in the debate and which are composing the defence comitee. Usually they can be very harsh on military expenditures.
As for generalist journos your argument is a joke ! So when they speak about the economic crisis they are all wrong because they are not specialists, when they speak about global warming they are all wrong whenever they do an invetgation report al wrong etc…To dismiss a newspaper with the notoriety of the Herald tribune is extraordinary…! If you have an objection bring evidences ! To dismiss the international herald tribune you need to do some work…
It is funny to note that according to you, you can’t beleive anyone : you can’t believe official statement from the firm, you can’t believe the expression of the french democracy, you can’t believe independent journos like the international herald tribune…In fact you are only ready to believe what you are ready to hear. I don’t think I am the most bias here in terms of intelectual honesty.
Funny how you see one side of the story! You perfectly know that selling a fighter jet is also about politics and economics… I am sincerly ready to be proven wrong (I am not like lordassap) but again bring evidences such a denial or a statement with someone quote ! A few things :
-Being a rafale enthousiast doesn’t make me a liar and I am perfectly able to hear disturbing truth.
-Being a rafale enthousiast doesn’t mean that I rate the rafale better than every thing (I rate the F35 or the SH higher for instance !)
-Being a rafale enthousiast doesn’t prevent you to take the sources that I provided seriously they are perfectely legitimate.
(As far as MMI is concerned I have a source which worth its weight in gold, I have a “specialist” newspaper (air actualité) where foreign pilots which have flown on the gripen, typhoon and the rafale back seat during various international exercises are very directly saying that rafale’s MMI is one class above. I’ll will probably scan this article in the next days)
Besides if you cross check these sources (from dassault, french national assembly, or independent journos) you will see that there is a coherence…
To go back to the debate, I say to Lmraptor that EW counts more than he thinks. If you have exellent kinetics but your missile has a very low probability of geting a hit then you are in trouble. I insist that kinetics altough still important are overhyped. EW, stealth, HMS + HOBS missiles will mitigate (when not anihilate) the benefits of these performances.
I have no doubt that a F35 will be Better in BVR than any 4th gen aircrafts although its not the fastest aircraft. So saying that an aircraft is more optimized for AtA or AtG is becoming less relevant than before.
If you really want more kinetics why don’t you designing a missile that will do that for you ? You could avoid making painful design compromises..
The APG79 with the huge numbers of AESA modules and the power supply and power processing associated to it makes very probably an exellent EW tool. I bet that Raytheon which also produce the amram, perfectly knows how to fool its own missile to give the United States an edge over any other nations (a bit like the degraded version of the F35). So I am pretty confident that the SH blk2 will be more deadly in the BVR arena.
WVR : mutual kill (HMS+ HOBS)
ATG : often overlooked when it represents almost 100% actual war missions.
Winner : the SH blk 2 (better package)
arthuroKKM57P,
even the F22 ? (lol) No seriously the typhoon has benefited from RCS reduction measures like the rafale or the SH did. These are classified datas so it is hard to tell especially knowing that I have sources claiming that the SH has the lowest RCS of the 4th gen or that the rafale has the lowest RCS of the 4th gen…So I won’t go in that debate which will be highly speculative and prone to flamming…The typhoon as a low frontal RCS this is true, I had in my mind the F35 when you quote me : less kinetics but much more stealth and thus certainly a better BVR platform although it is mainly a strike aircraft at the origin.
I think here they are talking here about legacy fighters, because it would be hard to believe that the typhoon is stealthier than the F22…But ok ok the typhoon has a low frontal RCS.
arthuroWhich has been disputed time and again here and many other places, the Typhoon Fanboy crowd can wheel out just as many reports which state the Typhoon has won every technico-operational evaluation.
Can people stop bringing these (DISPUTED) reports up it only starts a flame war (EVERY TIME!).
Fedaykin,
These are sources from official journos or statements and with people having their credibility at stake and as such they are perfectely relevant…
I have yet to find a single reliable source claiming the opposite…Not just rumors, I was told so etc tec…
I think it is a bit too easy to dismiss such sources like that, when they come from independent media (korea times, international Herald tribune) or the french national assembly or from officials like dassault’s CEO or colonel moussez which have their credibility at stake…I would be genuinely glad to hear a denial if this is wrong…
Besides the variety of the sources (independent and officials) strengthen their credibility when you cross check them.
I think these sources are polemic because people want only to hear what they are ready to listen…I am perfectly inclined to be proven wrong, it is not a question of ego but bring me evidences ! Its is not a question of rafale fan or not..It is a bit easy to dismiss these sources by labelling someone as “rafale fan” , a nice way to dodge the truth…
The number, the variety and the fact that there are pretty straight forward of these sources gives them a very good credibility…But I can understand that it must be to hard to hear for somepeople…So better dismissing a forumer than talking about “the core message”.
arthuroThis is perhaps a little bit too harsh the Typhoon is a good aircraft unfortunately it suffers from two things :
-a design which has been too oriented towars air superiority. It offers exellent kinematics but the advent of stealth, EW, HMS+HOBS missile mitigate these performances…Better having stealth, EW, HMS+HOBS and more performant missiles rather than making painful design compromises…
-A partneship governance which is not very good. (driven by political aspects rather than industry efficients one) >>slow development process
But it reamins that the Typhoon is europe biggest military programme and I hope it will help building a european defense industry in the future.
arthuroSo the Rafale did beat the Typhoon in all competitions with ease.
Yes, that was indeed exactely the case in technico-operational evaluations! Many official sources about that…
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
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.
http://www.dedefensa.org/article.php?art_id=84
“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. This grading is surprising because it compares aircraft which seem only marginally comparable….”
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.
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.”
Over the course of time Typhoon will get more A2G capability. Is Rafale ever going to be able to offer more than Mica and Meteor for A2A?
There are some fundamental features that can’t be retrofied…A SH, a F15E or a rafale will always be a more approptiate AtG platforms. They can carry much, much, more fuel and ordonances offering a better “play time” over a combat zone or better long range missions possibilities…Persistence is often a quality which is overlookked.
There are 9t M88 available for export if a customer needs more power for the rafale plus now the RBE2 is AESA for any futur customer.
arthuroBVR : the SH will certainly be a much superior platform in BVR. The probability that an Amram or a meteor get a hit on the SH will be much lower than on the typhoon.
The SH EW capability is much higher. Again even if we don’t know all the details of respective EW suits, the type of technology and the power associated to it in terms of power supply and the numbers of AESA modules used on The SH will outclass the DASS by a good margin. (this is a safe bet)
There is a gap in technology AND power beteween the two platforms in favor of the SH.
Power, speed, agility although still important are overhyped especially among forumers. EW, stealth, HMS+HOBS missiles or situational awarness much reduce these types of performance nowadays.
The captor, although it is a good mecanichal radar, is still limited by the type of technology it is using. And mechanical radars have reach their limits now… There will be no miracles…This type of radar technology is more proned to jamming than AESA or PESA and doesn’t offer the same beam agility and possibilities (LPI, Jamming, datalink, simultaneous mode working capabilities… ). How much new worlclass new fighter programmes are still investing in that technology ?
WVR : mutual kill since both are equipped with HOBS missiles and HMS*
AtG : no need to make a long speech (99,999999999% of actual war missions)
winner : SH hands down, especially knowing the fact that the SH is already operational with all the goodies.
*
Nowadays close range fight is too lethal to get sucked into. Even a MiG-21 can kill a Typhoon if it is armed with high-off-boresight missiles AND if – a BIG if – it survives the Typhoon’s BVR attack in the first place. Missiles such as Python 4/5, ASRAAM, R-73 and AIM-9X are an equalizer in close range fight.
http://www.janes.com/defence/air_fo…10529_1_n.shtml
“There are lessons to be learned from this engagement and other tests which have shown similar results. One is that modern HMDs and SRAAMs are essential. A second lesson is that WVR combat is extremely dangerous and will become more so. “We’ll see less dogfighting once we get the ability to engage targets 90º off the nose,” says Shaw. “Somebody’s going to get a shot, and if the missile is lethal you’re going to get hit.” Even the recent history of engagements suggests that the ‘furball’ of fighter combat, with multiple engagements spread across miles of sky, is on its way out. “We don’t see a history of high-g maneuvering in recent engagements,” says one industry analyst. “It’s fun to practice but unwise to pursue.”
A third lesson is that WVR is an equalizer. “An F-5 or a MiG-21 with a high-off-boresight missile and HMD is as capable in a 1-v-1 as an F-22,” comments a former navy fighter pilot, now a civilian program manager. “In visual combat, everybody dies at the same rate,” says RAND’s Lambeth. Indeed, he says that a larger fighter like the F-22 may be at a disadvantage. In the early 1980s force-on-force exercises at the navy’s Top Gun fighter school, F-14s were routinely seen and shot down by smaller F-5s flown by the navy’s Aggressor units. An F-22 which slows down to enter a WVR combat also gives up the advantage of supersonic maneuverability
arthuroSo for the moment SH wins in BVR and EF has an edge in WVR
Well in WVR I would say roughly 55% vs 45% for the typhoon with the use of HOBS missiles (all aspects engagement) and HMS…
In fact the highest probability in WVR will be a mutual kill…
And HMS+HOBS is operational right now on the SH in quantities with pilots, staffed trained to use it and the Block II variant is now gaining momentum…
arthuroThe question here is, is the EA function already available and if yes how effective does it work. In the end EA looks very much like another jamming technology, which might or might not bring a decisive edge.
The sheer size of the APG79 radar (number of AESA modules available for EW), when turned into EA mode will “probably” (its is a resonable bet) outclass everything available on tactical fighters in terms of EW.
The Power supply associated to the APG79 and the agility of beam inherent to AESA technology should provide a much superior Electronic protection than the DASS. Even if we don’t know the details of those classified items, the core technology used on the SH for EW (AESA) is one step ahead. That is why I say it is reasonable to believe (although it can’t be proven formally) that the SH has a far better EW suit and thus is certainly a better BVR asset in the end.
Haven’t french MN said they found tactics to counter the HMS+HOBS combo of the Super Hornet and if so is it to far stretched to assume that the Typhoon could do that too, plus adding the HMS+HOBS combo in addition?
True but I am still quite sceptic…I would still prefer having a HMS (which the rafale lack) +HOBS missiles. In a real war pilots without HMS will learn these tactics in a painful way…
Besides if those tactics exists it should be for “experienced pilots” and an air force can’t have “experienced” pilots only…
So relying on tactics to counter HMS+HOBS is a bit risky in my opinion….I would be a general I would have cold sweets relying on those tactics. Not the most comfortable situation:D
arthuroFor the AtA role it might be a close call in a real war with all options running…
The APG 79 radar with its powerfull EW capability will probably give the SH a decisive edge over the Typhoon. I see a much higher probability of a hit by the SH in BVR.
In WVR the typhoon is more maneuvrable and powerful but as both have HOBS missiles+HMS it should be the lottery to know who is going to win… Here is an interesting report about it. HOBS missiles + HMS is an equalizer;
Nowadays close range fight is too lethal to get sucked into. Even a MiG-21 can kill a Typhoon if it is armed with high-off-boresight missiles AND if – a BIG if – it survives the Typhoon’s BVR attack in the first place. Missiles such as Python 4/5, ASRAAM, R-73 and AIM-9X are an equalizer in close range fight.
http://www.janes.com/defence/air_fo…10529_1_n.shtml
“There are lessons to be learned from this engagement and other tests which have shown similar results. One is that modern HMDs and SRAAMs are essential. A second lesson is that WVR combat is extremely dangerous and will become more so. “We’ll see less dogfighting once we get the ability to engage targets 90º off the nose,” says Shaw. “Somebody’s going to get a shot, and if the missile is lethal you’re going to get hit.” Even the recent history of engagements suggests that the ‘furball’ of fighter combat, with multiple engagements spread across miles of sky, is on its way out. “We don’t see a history of high-g maneuvering in recent engagements,” says one industry analyst. “It’s fun to practice but unwise to pursue.“
A third lesson is that WVR is an equalizer. “An F-5 or a MiG-21 with a high-off-boresight missile and HMD is as capable in a 1-v-1 as an F-22,” comments a former navy fighter pilot, now a civilian program manager. “In visual combat, everybody dies at the same rate,” says RAND’s Lambeth. Indeed, he says that a larger fighter like the F-22 may be at a disadvantage. In the early 1980s force-on-force exercises at the navy’s Top Gun fighter school, F-14s were routinely seen and shot down by smaller F-5s flown by the navy’s Aggressor units. An F-22 which slows down to enter a WVR combat also gives up the advantage of supersonic maneuverability
As far as the AtG rôle is involved the SH is far ahead…
So even if the SH isn’t as powerful, fast etc… it is still a better more useful asset if used at its full potential.
WVR exercises practising are not representative of a true war…These are mostly gun dogfights….That is why I don’t take them so seriously…
I think that people usually focus to much on power etc..It is still important but it becomes much less decisive nowadays…
arthurohttp://www.defpro.com/daily/details/207/
Dassault going after Thales stake (
09:50 GMT, December 19, 2008 Dassault Aviation today announced that the company agreed to buy Alcatel-Lucent’s 20.78 percent stake in Thales for about €1.57 billion ($2.24 billion). This transaction includes 41,262,481 shares, at a price of €38 ($53,27) per share. Dassault, which already owns 5.2 percent of Thales, thus joins the French government as a major shareholder in the defence electronics company. Dassault’s shareholding in Thales has been carefully tailored to remain below the State’s at 27.1 percent.
Alcatel-Lucent urgently needed a positive outcome of its negotiations with Dassault, since it has accumulated losses of €4.8 billion ($6.73 billion) since fiscal year 2006. On the other hand, Dassault Aviation has an enormous multi-billion cash-flow from sales of its highly successful Falcon corporate jets.
At the completion of the transaction, and following the transfer to Dassault Aviation of the 5.1 percent stake in Thales currently held by Groupe Industriel Marcel Dassault, the public sector and Dassault Aviation will together control 53 percent of the capital and 61 percent of the voting rights in Thales. This will give Thales a stable shareholding base, anchored in a long-term vision.
For Dassault Aviation, the purchase allows the company to increase its own control over its main programmes, including most particularly the Rafale fighter through an important shareholding in the provider of key electronis systems. Also, the move places Dassault in a much stronger position for the development of the future generation of European combat aircraft, be these manned or unmanned.
These perceived synergic effects were the main rationale for EADS also showing a serious interest towards buying a stake in Thales, though it never came to the formulation of a binding offer for the shares.
Meanwhile, the Board of Directors of Dassault noted the resignation of Louis Gallois as director. The Chief Executive of EADS told in a current interview with the German FAZ that this decision is due to a conflict of interest caused on Dassault’s intention to buy Thales shares. “I regret that we could not be a candidate for the purchase of the 20 percent at Thales. The French state preferred Dassault,” he said.
The move also underlines the confidence of the French government and Dassault Aviation in Thales strategy, which is based on a strong international industrial presence and the development of both civil and military products, guaranteeing its international development, a company spokesman said. The French government and Dassault Aviation will also continue to support Thales plan to increase its stake in DCNS to 35 percent, the Dassault spokesman said.
The transaction, planned to be completed by spring 2009, is subject to authorizations from government authorities, including competition oversight agencies. Just after the announcement, the French government and Dassault Aviation signed an agreement following authorization by the French Ministry of the Economy, Industry and Employment and a ruling by French stock market authority AMF that the operation does not require Dassault Aviation to launch a mandatory takeover bid.
See also: http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/207/
arthuroIn the moroccan deal, we saw how the Rafale was 50 millions per unit….3.300 million dollars for 18 right?
that was a package deal and prices differed depending of the DGA and Dassault since there was two entities negociating with morroco. This organisation was indeed a big failure in terms of export management.
arthuroHmm I knew that they asked Dassault to return at the time when the opposition issued the alternatives. Dassault and Eurofighter refused to enter the competition and I think that is the best what they could have done. Just Saab did it.
Hello scorpion !
Aren’t you mixing with the Norway competition ? Here it is about the Netherlands.
Just asking.
arthuroI think it is important to note that this is Mr. Edelstenne, CEO of Dassault Aviation, just to clarify the objectivity of the source regarding the criticism of the European input into F35 and the Eurofighter cost.
It is true…Although I will always prefer an official statement from Dassault or BAE or any other firms which can be contested because transparent (and the people have their credibility at stake) than unconfirmed sources or rumors.
He is speaking in front of the french parliament which will check the precision of the speech thanks of the defense committe composed of MP from differents political parties. So it would be unwise for him to lie…Especially knowing that a certain political press would love to dig up such things…And this is simply democratic regulation…
So we should be able do discriminate the “tune” of the speech and the datas provided. If there is a protestation with a reliable source (a direct quote from an official, manager pilot…) I am perfectly inclined to believe it, it’s not a question of little ego…
arthuroFrom Dassault’s CEO in the french parliament. Quite corrosive…But informative…
http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/cr-cdef/08-09/c0809021.asp#P10_317
Mr. Charles Edelstenne, chairman of the grouping of French aeronautical industries and space.
Regarding cost control, we are often hastily presented as less competitive than our competitors. The example warplanes seems illuminating in this regard. The real price of U.S. fighter aircraft F 22, ie the air superiority aircraft is three times higher than the initial price as it appears in publications of Congress. In France, as the opinion set the budget for the Air Force by Jean-Louis Bernard, skidding financial Rafale program, in the second tranch, a mere 4% of the total cost which includes the development, industrialization and production costs until the 294th unit. With the transition to the third installment, we returned within the initial budget, the company Dassault has fallen its price by 9.6%, which helped to treat the obsolescances and save 3.2%.
Similarly, the comparison between the Eurofighter and the Rafale shows that the relationship between their budgetary costs, ie costs overall budget divided by the quantities, is 1.6. Finally, I note that in the UK than-Nimrod and Astute program is measured in billions of euros. We have no lesson to receive.
Regarding the LSO, it is necessary to determine precisely the perimeter, current studies comparing different elements. In the past, the term excludes such costs to update the documentation or treatment of minor problems on materials that are now incorporated into the envelope LSO. Furthermore, I heard two years criticize the LSO of our combat aircraft and that the LSO Rafale cost three to four times more expensive than the Mirage 2000. Today, the LSO’s contract is signed Rafale and is not higher than 12% to 13% to the Mirage. This discrepancy is that it is a twin-engine instead of a single. The price of LSO Rafale also seems to me reasonable compared to what the competition.
As competitors materials cheaper, monetary parity disadvantage us, with one euro to 1.4 or 1.5 U.S. dollar, our prices are increased by one third compared to U.S. competition and, in a purely artificial.
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.
I also want to return to the idea of making connections industrial cure all our ills. Recent examples show that industrial linkages and major European cooperation are also the source of many of our problems. It must return to facts and out of a speech agreed on this subject. I remember, for example, that the Eurofighter is 60% more expensive than the Rafale, which nobody denies. There is no question of banning European cooperation, but should be on another level than where they currently are, because the Europe we are building exacerbates the problems instead of solving them. Rather than take the skills where they are, are being duplicate to infinity. We artificially developed industrial capabilities. Then feed these industries programs, ie distribute more funds yet insufficient research and development or R & T. In the end, we will not make any economy, we will even spend twice as much. We must reverse this, stop the politically correct and understand how the industry work.
Amazing that the Nederlands wanted the rafale back in the competion two monthes ago !
Sign In
