MildaveThe UAE spent years complaining about insufficient capabilities then suddenly after Libya and after India selected Rafale, they drop every single upgrade requirement and start b***ing about price. How serious can they really be? I don’t know but what I do know is that so far they are the only one to have complained about anything other than price, and not even convincibly either.
No other countries have voiced any form of concern about Rafale’s radar capabilities, or non-retractable probe, or even about a supposedly “lack” of engine power. Eurofighter Typhoon publications are the only one claiming engine superiority, radar’s superiority and so on. In India and other competitions the Rafale was against other aircraft with bigger nose, bigger engines etc. Yet it was selected each time among the top 2 or 3. So I am not an aircraft engineer, and surely compromises have been done, but to claim out of our hat that there is something wrong with the probe or that the radar isn’t canted etc. as major issues is simply no sense as far as I am concerned. Maybe they found other engineering solution to compensate or nullify those problems (If there is really a problem there).
I recently read an article (UK sourced) stating that one of the lessons from the Libya war was the EM threat the coalition faced and the continued trend to build system to defeat radar homing threat. Which means the EM situation wasn’t has outdated as some here want to think. So I believe Rafale’s engineering solutions aren’t as stupid as some here want to think as well. To think that they were humble enough to ask Italy to design a very clever and innovative solution for the landing gear of the marine version but weren’t capable to realise that a non-retractable probe would compromise the aircraft survivability is a fun but now outdated joke.
The same is true for the radar and so on. You’ll find quite a few old documentaries on YouTube describing the Typhoon program were engineer admit their company asked for job they were not capable to perform at the time, but that national pride and money drove many inexperienced companies and sub-contractors to bid with the result we see today. The Rafale coming out just as the last copies of M2ks were produced is another story at all level of expertise.
Anyway at the end of the day everybody will believe whatever they want to believe so I guess what I take in all this is that the RBE 2 AA is sufficient to operate Meteor in its full envelop so that alone should make any talk about a lack of range moot.
MildaveI doubt it. If the Euro is no more French exportation is going to have a real edge with the Rafale, since the Typhoon consortium will have to debate on how to remain sane with their different currencies and interest.
Holland has already commited to keeping the same trend in defence procurement, and scrapping thing is simply not a French mentality. So they either sell in order to help the industry with new order, or they keep old thing… very old! A bit like Germany in fact (still retiring their F4s).
So I don’t see anything beyond a few reduction in numbers or programs been delayed and spread further. Most heavy investment have been made (new submarines, new ballistic missiles, new planes, new helicopters, new frigates etc.)
The only major programs left that could be affected are Male UAV, tankers, MPA… not much more.
Other minors programs might be delayed but hardly cancelled : the new light antiship missile, new heavy torpedo, communications sytems etc.
Cutting a few millions is hardly comparable to the 1 trillion black hole of the British MoD.
Mildaveanother article
4 way does make it more difficult to work, but also spreads the costs and guarantees a bigger offset. when the Typhoon wins in India, that’ll give France a serious motivation to avoid another situation like that
I figure the Typhoon and Rafale can take over most tasks of the Tornado/Mirage 2000, and there won’t be money for much more. but a UCAV adds a number of interesting advantages, like stealth, endurance, low cost… still making it an interesting option
especially if Europe, in the light of serious budget cuts and a resurgent Russia, finally decides to fuse its defence, skywise at least, greatly reducing the number of combat aircraft needed. then the combination of Typhoon/Rafale/Gripen and UCAVs + UAVs will suffice
The primary purpose of the actual UCAV development in Europe is to create bombers in order to avoid risking political S***storm when you decide to put in place an interventionist policy and s*** happen like a pilot been shot down. That and the fact that it saves the pilot live (not the target obviously), and have a better chance to defeat modern and future airdefence…
Anyway UCAV or not I beleive the future lies with the capabilities and effectiveness of stand off weapons.
France still has a strong defense industry, they still possess a need for their navy, so we can only assume that now that the UK as gone the way of CATOBAR their need will be more similar to France in the future in term of aircraft platfom.
MildaveThat might be the case, I have never denied the JSF program is in trouble, but with defence cuts in the US, the lack of airframes for the F22, and the line now being closed, it will not happen. They will not shut down the JSF, they have no choice with too much money sunk into it, they have to make it work, and I believe it will deliver, eventually 🙂
Or they will just get a fraction of what were intended in order to keep face, then they’re going to replace the rest with UAS. In a few years after JSF induction we’ll get a new buzz about the extraordinary capabilities offered by whiny new and expansive UAS platform and how the JSF is already meat for threat like J20 and such and how the USA “NEED” UAS as the only way to keep peace, freedom and justice around the world… :rolleyes:
Anyway, 20 years from now we’ll all agree the JSF was a disaster, and that the USAF failed to evolve and adapt with the end of the cold war. JSF is following in the footstep of big brother F22 . Huge amount of money at the beginning, then progressively nothing. Well we know that this story didn’t have an happy ending.
MildaveHi everyone I hope the year is going well for you.
Concerning the present topic:
– The lack of appropriate size for the Rafale’s radar is a myth no more and no less. It would not have been selected in this competition while bigger aircraft with “bigger” noses were cut short. Beside a front line aircraft actively using its radar on a modern battlefield is a dead aircraft.
Why is it that the Rafale seems to be the only aircraft with a nose problem (maybe a cold?) while F16, Gripen, Tejas, M2k etc. seem to be doing just fine?
– They would not have spent so much money in reducing the Rafale’s RCS just to put a probe that would compromise such an expansive system. Again, given the rude competition that is the MMRCA if it was a real problem other than aesthetic, the Rafale would not have been so well rated in India and other countries. I would like to see someone tell me concretely how the probe affects the RCS. A retractable probe with all the mechanical and movable part is going to affect the aircraft far more. BTW F 22 and F 35 aren’t using retractable probe either I believe (and while I find their solution way nicer to look at they seems the only one down that road at the moment)…
– The higher you fly, and the more the only thing that matter is your aircraft weight versus thrust. So how effective is the Typhoon high up when the full power of its engine is to keep it from stalling and how long and how economical is it in actual combat? The higher you fly the finer the air, the finer the air the more you stop being an aircraft and the more you’re a missile. Is the Typhoon an efficient missile?
Anyway we know the story. France wanted an aircraft capable to effectively replace all types of combat aircraft, and they got what they wanted. UK wanted an air-superiority aircraft a la F22, and they got the Typhoon. Aerodynamics designs have been set, choices made, and the only remaining question is which aircraft will benefit from sufficient political support and commitment, export money and need in order to keep it relevant as long as possible as a modern and deterrent platform. Rafale might get some trouble and not always be top notch but because France decided not to have another choice, they will have to keep it relevant as long as France is one of the first military in Europe. Typhoon customer will have to talk and do more talk to decide what they are going to do with it. In any case should they decide not to fund many upgrades but if they manage to sell to enough countries to have a large enough parks of aircraft, you’ll always find Israeli and US kits to upgrade it for nation like SA, Oman etc. who have the money.
In fact since not so many other countries are going for single aircraft multipurpose missions, the well balanced system Rafale might not be as relevant for other countries as it is for France. Only a few nations can really make use of the ELINT function of SPECTRA, and I am sure the US isn’t too happy about Rafales flying around with capabilities so far they had control over.
MildaveI think the Saudis are preparing for the day that they and the US no longer see eye to eye. They don’t want to be caught out like Iran was with its F-14s.
I believe they’ve just renewed they bilateral defense treaty for 50 more years, where the US will have to defend SA monarchy no matter what in exchange for petrol…
Osama ben laden didn’t went berserk in the 90’s for nothing :).
MildaveRussian fighters to use Thales Damocles targeting pods
Thales’ Key Role in Russia’s Defense Industry
Different countries have different GDP calculation methods. by Russian calculation France will have either zero or negative GDP as each year it is destroying more wealth than it is creating. and this thing is reflected in banking system. wealth is much more evenly distributed.
Lol, right… :rolleyes: right…
Technically Russia is part of Europe. Way more so than Turkey is.
And Russia hasn’t bought French jet firstly because France would not have sold them (I think the US would rather see France nuked first), then because Soviet aerodynamics are very good, and for export customers have choice between Russian, Israeli and/or French electronics system.
i believe French Industry itself like quick execution and fast delivery of cash. so there prefer choice will always be Russia not some Arab country or India with endless negotiations.
That’s why France and Russia are selling submarines to India, choppers, planes etc… As well as pretty much of all Asia and middle east !
New resolution for this new year, take a break man.
And while I’m at it, Happy New year everyone, may your wish come true (well…):D
Mildaveits obviously biased because it wasn’t any other aircraft?
You’re entitled to your opinion
seriously? where have france or the eu consortium been for Japan over the last 40 years? who does Japan train with 3 times a year? which country is the only one that the Japanese SDF have a direct comms link with in wargames (as opposed to a redirected link?) Which country is likely to be there when the japanese get into an argument with china?
Japan isn’t a defenceless child that need the protection of big daddy USA. Japan is selling high tech to the US and the rest of the world, and the only limiting factor in their self defence is the US pressure to keep them dependant. Tawain trusted the US for their defence and look at what that got them.
its not “just” politics, its about the political reality of who the japanese regard as their most likely ally – and that does count in all procurement exercises.
Yeah right, time changes, and any sensible country try to balance its allies in order not to rely on the good will of a single power. This is no longer 1945.
the most reliable engine set of all time has been the F-16, 14 customers + and its a single engine.
Yeah which is why Japan hasn’t rely on it for its self defence so far…
you do realise that the last armoured production asset was the A-10, and that the last heavy armoured asset post production in the west were the Swiss Hornets with titanium tubs? Physical armour was replaced some time ago, As in ships, the armour is about defeating and anticipating electronically rather than taking hits to the body. Hence why the swiss don’t seem to have seen a need for ti tubbed gripens.
What do you think composite fibres exist for ? I was talking about the F35 lacks of protection against even small arm fire.
US, Canada, Australia all have land masses and territorial coverage that tfar outstrip the fighting envelope around japan, and yet they’re all moving to single engined fighters for the next force de main and next gen force developments.
That’s plan B. US wanted more F 22, Australia wanted to buy it as well, and Canada chose not to have a choice. To this day the F 35 buy is contested, and no competition occured.
As for AAR, as raise train and sustain is usually greater than 5o% of the cost of the capability over the nominal 30 year in service cost estimates, on what planet does it make remote sense to incur a cost integrating separate AAR systems when the logistics is already in place? On any evaluation team the platform that used the in service AAR system would score above any asset with a different system that required integration and which would most likely double the logistical costs to sustain and maintain those disparate systems.
You keep the same assets and with minor modifications you’re good to go. During Lybia US refuelling assets were able to provide support for both types no problem.
humour me, this is based on what? because if you’re talking about the future changes to the COP then europe is travelling down the same path as the US. They might be 5 years late, but they’re now onto it
Of course they are, one leads and the others follow
it seems to be common sport to either blame the americans or then suddenly assign ineptitude to the host country assessment teams.
Well actually I’m blaming LM and those supporting them. US senators and congressmen are the first to ask for more result which LM seems to have a hard time answering.
btw the tactical criteria are assessed by airforce and joint capability uniforms (ie purple staff) that usually includes people from the respective advanced combat training cadres. ie they’re 5000+ hr pilots and usually across multiple types. ie they’re not amateurs.
Yes, and of course they “always” provide their results based on impartial performances only, and if, it’s such a case, politicians “always” listen to their wisdom… and we all live happily never after !:rolleyes:
MildaveUAVs don’t have to be slow. A Predator is very slow, but Taranis & Neuron will have a high subsonic speed (as does Barracuda), & there’s nothing to stop supersonic UAVs being built.
Speed is a function of the design decisions made, & the intended role, not a feature of UAVs as such.
Avenger C uses a jet engine and is already operational (or close to be). However I still think they have a long way to go before been able to compete against manned fighter aircraft.
MildaveThat report is obviously biased. Since when an a/c using a cheaper AAR system get penalized so much in a selection process ?
They are using every excuses not matter how flat in order to justify their political choice.
Soon they will also say that one engine is better when you operate over wide distances on open water in a aircraft so lighly armored that any bird hiting hit may make a hole in that engine…
Anyway, since the new politics of the US is to transform every soldier in arm chair general figthing from the back…
MildaveI always wondered why they couldn’t sell the F 22 to a few like Japan, whith degraded steatlh and reduced electronics performance. It’s not like they are going to sell the F35 to export with full functionality isn’t it ?
I tend to agree with the faulty engineering theory.
But of course it’s always easier to be the best when you’re the only one to say so…
MildaveYeh, that about sounds right. It seems to be a ‘cultural’ attitude in the Gulf states, where most people seem to be allergic to manual labour. Most of the menial and physical work is performed by foreign workers. I think the Al-Yamama deal from the 80’s with BAE for the Tornados also included all the maintenance work to be performed by BAE personnel. Even to this day I think it’s still in effect.
Well when you’re one of the richest country on the planet, that’s understandable. In Europe too, you see foreign workers doing all the dirty jobs.
MildaveRafale win is an open secret.
Please you’re making me feel too tingly insinde :diablo:
Mildavehttp://www.thalesgroup.com/News_and_…t100/?pid=1569
One of the most significant developments took place in February 2006 with the inauguration of the joint Thales /Sukhoi Civil Aviation Company Software Development Center in Moscow. The center’s 60-strong team of engineers is dedicated to designing software for the Superjet’s avionics package.
Joint development or cooperation is just the new way to do buissness. However there is a difference between civil cooperation (which exist for decades) and military cooperation. But when you look at the amount of French tech Russia is buying right now, it seems to show that they are more than happy with it (IR systems for tanks, Damocles pod, BPC, communication systems…).
MildaveYou do realize those are computer models and not physical planes, right?
Well the first and last pictures looked real to me, my bad.
Sign In
