I don’t think any of the French pilots can be accused of making something up. if you compare all the tidbits I think it gives a clearer picure then just to state aircraft x is better then aircraft y.

Some claim Typhoon has lower frontal RCS, Rafale supporters say their bird has lower overal RCS. Both claims don’t contradict themselves, and could even be supported by conventinal wisdom. Higher wingsweep on Tiffy vs. better wing blendig etc. on Rafale.

Rafale came out on top of some guns only fights vs. the RAF, while Luftwaffe report “gratifying results vs. Rafale” and hinted at the better TWR.

Not exactly mutually exclusive comments. Seems more to boil down to used tactics. Fight in the vertical, Tiffy wins, fight in the horizontal plane, Rafale wins. Close coupled canards vs long coupled. Close coupled should be better at low speed and high alpha.

Then this a2g vs a2a. I think it isn’t as simple as that. What do we mean with a2g ? CAS, BAI or strike ? Same in the a2a realm.

Only thing that seems clear to me is that Typhoon is crap at deep strike and Rafale not exactly a great choice for intercepting low rcs targets like low flying cruise missiles.

For BAI I would rather have a Tiffy with Brimstone, for offensive counter air a Rafale with MICA IR.

Now in the Indian context I think Rafale is the better fit. There is this nuke delivery mission, and a capability overlap of Tiffy vs. MKI’s for missions where radar performance matters. And even tough the IAC 2 may be some years down the road, an available carrier variant doesn’t hurt.

If it’s all about L1, the Eurofighter consortium may well sell at a discount price. Pretty much like civilian aircraft deals are made. Profit is in after sales support.

BAe and EADS alone have way deeper pockets then Dassault + Safran.

If this is true (and I have my doubts) then Rafale is pretty close to scoring it’s first export order.
Carrier capable, AESA ready, full multirole capability, independet weapon choices and cheaper then the other European aircraft.

Within all this discussion I miss the the strategic aspect. Japan is more or less a protectorate of the US. If you-know-what hits the fan who would support Japan ? Some Europeans with ever shrinking forces and zero strategic reach ? Or the US with troops and bases already in theatre ?
Better use the same weapons as your overlord. Keeps interoperability and logistics way simpler.

After this and some expected future earthquakes I don’t see Japan in a position to pay for the development of anything. They need something off the shelf.
That means Shornet if fast induction is priority, otherwise JSF.

T3 at risk is a fact. The British, German and Italian governments already stated they have no interest in T3B. Obviously, the respective airforces have a different opinion on that matter. (Not that any politician would care about what the military thinks is necessary, soldiers just have to shut up and fight stupid wars with crappy equipment).

The point is if the Typhoon was capable of doing the job the Tornado is doing, there would be no need to use the Tornado. It will be less expensive to use a single type of fighter :).

You don’t see Rafales in multirole configuration either. So it seems just logical to use up the Tornado for a2g. With the coming cuts the remaining airframes have plenty of life left, spares are already paid for and crews are trained.

Just shows that this whole multirole/swingrole/omnirole marketing talk hasn’t anything to do with reality.
The given circumstances seem to be just perfect to showcase exactly this kind of mission planning. Drop some bombs and shoot some rusty old Floggers on the go.
Instead we see aircraft configured for a2a or a2g.

Well, both Russians and Americans came up with pimped AIM-120’s and R77’s by now. And AFAIK no eurofighter nation has placed a firm order for Meteors. Hope I’m wrong on this, but so far I’ve only read about orders from France and integration work on Gripen.

Since there is no “buck” in Europe, I guess fighters from that very region will continue to lack some serious “bang” in the future.
Given that posture by Mr. Anthony, I bet Boeing is the winner. And they really deserve it.
The block II SHornet is a wonderful example of what can be done to reduce production costs of modern aircraft.
At least the Eurofighter manufacture in Manching looks quite datet compared to the modern factory in St. Louis.