I think omnirole is a marketing term that stems from the fact that the Rafale replaced EVERY warplane in the french inventory. Crusader for navy air defense, Super Etendard for navy strike, Jaguar and Mirage 2000D for ground attack, Mirage F1CR for recon, Mirage 2000C/-5f for air superiority and Mirage 2000N for nuclear strike.

Also ANY Rafale can perform any of those missions depending only on loadouts. (and yes loadouts include designation, recon and buddy-buddy refueling pods), without the need to be reconfigured (except for the nuclear role but this is all too natural).

Nic

Agreed, and that’s the point I was making about the term ‘omni-role’ being a marketing ploy. Given the significant segregation of role-specific aircrat in the French inventory over history, and the general trend to few platform types anyway, it isn’t really surprising to see a single platform taking over these roles, but only with the required mission specific equipment and loadouts, i.e. not really that different to the current crop of multirole aircraft then.

I think you guys need to clearly define what ‘omni-role’ means before getting carried away with such a heated debate.

Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t there at least 3 distinct versions of the Rafale, in addition to the various F premix ‘standards’ (another alternative to Blocks, Tranches, MK versions, etc..). For example, the Marine (Navy) version has strengthened landing gear, ommission of a hardpoint, in addition to other numerous equipment and structural changes which allows it to SPECIFICALLY operate from a carrier. So a French Airforce Rafale C could in no way operate from a carrier. And how is this so different to other multi-role aircraft, adapted for specific role and mission profiles, such as the F-4, Mig-29, SU-27/33 etc etc…so much for the ‘omnipotent’ Rafale then? I’m pretty sure the nuclear strike version will also have mission specific equipment levels and changes, otherwise, why the need for -D, -B, -C, -M, -N?

Isn’t ‘omni-role’ just marketing speil for ‘multi-role’ or ‘swing-role’, which has sometimes been used by the Typhoon I think? It’s just a way of making a product stand out amongst the crowd I think.

Looks like a DWS39 to me.

Great, thanks very much 🙂

Didn’t know this was integrated with the F16.

I hope some of you chaps could help me with the following pic.

It shows a HAF Block-52 F16, with a demo of weapons, but I can’t seem to make out that stand-off weapon/missile. The rear tail section looks to be that off the Taurus KEPD 350, but I can’t see the side intakes, and I don’t think the HAF uses the Taurus? Is it some training round? It can’t be the Storm Shadow, which the HAF does use, as the tail section is all wrong.

Can anyone identify that stand-off missile in the picture?

I’ve always thought a Mirage III/V/50 and RR Spey combo would have been worth looking into. I’m sure the rear fuselage section would have needed some re-working, but I think the end result would have been worthwhile.

Reminds me of the famous Russian quote about the Mig-29; ‘The pilot will break before the aircraft does’.

Perhaps instantaneous roll rates are more appropriate as a measure for aircraft performance in combat scenarios?