I don’t know what your problem is, but I know one thing for sure Fonk YOU are the fanboy here not me. Unlike you I’m not obsessed that I have to bash anything I don’t like! When it comes to the Rafale I’m indeed mainly limited to public sources, but in contrast to you I don’t make countless claims without providing any back up.
I think it’s just a matter of time until you’re gonne again.

oh well, we all knows where your backup datas comes from, the same side, hun!

Scorpion, i got a question for you dude, your europouding is 20% overweigh, and you still provide the same range for this plane as in 1995 , as a specialist you claim to be, do you think that they stretched the eurotifie tanks?

xxxxx

Not necessarily. The main problem is the lack of AG munitions, which will be added over time however. T2 examples will benefit from the phase 1 enhancements which should enable the use of PW IV and EGBU-16. GBU-54 is very likely for that timeframe (2011) as well. Other weapons like Storm Shadow, Taurus, Brimstone etc. will follow for these T2 aircraft. The weapons apart I can’t see any advantages for the F3 Rafale.

they added somes”wet points” on the eurofighter? with weight to 11.5t, they could.

remember, eurofighter 3 wet point and almost half Rafale range, rafale 5 wet points…

A mix between price range and lack of political ties, something that the Dassault Rafale has a lot in Lula´s entourage.

It was a derivation of the F-16 Block 60, almost identical to the “Indian” Viper.

A mix between capabilities and talent, something that the Dassault Rafale has a lot in aeronautic’s entourage.

The Greek government will have the information they need. The danger is that the people (who are important because they vote) may be misled by the kind of propaganda that inflates the price of Typhoon, and that you have clearly swallowed.

Your links (to the BBC, Al Jazeera and DID) are not what I’d view as reliable sources when it comes to the detail of UK defence procurement, nor to the details of a still largely secret government-to-government deal between Britain and Saudi Arabia. Swerve and I are more than familiar with the inaccuracy and financial illiteracy to be found there, which is why we’ve both taken time out to explain how you are mistaken.

The fact is that the Typhoon’s flyaway or UPC is around £37-45 m (€60-68 m).

I fully expect that Rafale will beat that, but not by much of a margin.

That’s not propaganda, it’s fact, and I’ve explained exactly where the reliable figures come from, and exactly why the figures that are out of kilter with the true UPC are higher.

I’m aware that you were linking to the 2007 MPR. My reference to the 2005 MPR was because this was the first with a changed basis of calculation – resulting in a jump of nearly £20 m (50%!) to £64 m. The subsequent MPR figures have gone up in small increments to £68.9 m but they ARE NOT VALID UPC OR FLYAWAY COSTS.

Typhoon’s UPC simply isn’t anywhere close to the level that you suggest.

Your take on Austria is interesting, but I’d venture to suggest that it is wrong. I was regularly talking to board level people from both Gripen International and EF GmbH throughout the Austrian competition, and far from being a ‘must win’ on which German national pride was being staked, the Austrians were expected to go with a neutral Swedish product again, and Typhoon won largely because Saab and Gripen were complacent, and did not offer a compelling enough package.

as the brazilians choice?

http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN0150765320081001

why they would stays of the tech transfert that saudies got, if typhoon is cheaper and so “second world best” as fanboys claims over here .?

You obviously don’t speak about the same thing! READ laser range finder… You still don’t understand that I don’t speak about the IRST/TV components. What I speak about is the LRF.

See above 40 km is not even special for the current OSF, what I speak about (once again) the range of the laser range finder. Is it so difficult to understand?
BTW the 50 km/90 km ranges for the Flankers OLS is indeed detection range against a non AB target from all the official documents.

You put it in the context of your interest as you are a greek, I don’t bother with a greek/turkish scenario at. I don’t even bother with the F-35 VS Rafale/Typhoon that much.

Rafale has LOAL MICA+datalink capability right now, it was reported in 2007 or so that such a test has been conducted. Though I’m not 100% sure, but it were operational F2 standard aircraft. At the time the F-35 becomes available both Rafale and Typhoon will have been further developed and feature more advanced EWS, likely or definitely new EO/IR sensors AND AESA. There is no point discussing about Rafale with AESA vs Eurofighter without AESA.

No exact range data, no exact RCS data, I have no guess here.

One of very view thinks I tend to agree with.

More than one time, provide direct data with source…

As long as now powerful enough or new sensors are developed to overcome the stealth advantage EVERY non stealth AC will be in a disadvantaged position, independant if Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen, Su-3X or MiG-29X/35. I can’t see any obvious advantage for either aircraft against a potential stealth threat. IIR missiles in combination with passive sensors (IF effective enough against such a threat) might offer better chances yes, but they won’t guarantee a good fighting ability against such a threat anyway.

As said I don’t bother with your personal concerns about evil turkish clap greek fighters like baby seels :-p

Well the missiles won’t lock at 40 km at all its the board sensors and I see no reason why the PIRATE shouldn’t be able to do this. Weapons is then again another story.

And why do you suppose the OSF will be able to detect & track at greater distances than the PIRATE?

Yes at a range at which you can easily use ASRAAM or IRIS-T as well.

I would pick the aircraft which best suits my requirements AFTER a comprehensive evaluation of the potential contenders.

It is an IRST/FLIR device, though in its initial form it was limited to the FLIR function as this is less complex.

Well, explan me how they can get a AESA radar system in changing only the antenna due to cost of changing the whole system and processors?

dixit:

“Paul Holbourn, capabilities director at Selex’s Edinburgh plant, said the Captor processor could be retained during an upgrade to an AESA format.
The Eurofighter partner firm source said CAESAR, which could be test flown on a Eurofighter this year, would require “only a few hours” of work for retrofitting, swapping out the antenna and the power supply.”

To make what i said more clear.

– EF currently has the Captor radar (meccanically scanned array)
– Captor-E (AESA version), doesn’t exist at the moment.

– What exists is that The Euroradar consortium on its own initiative and expense, has tested in flight, the Caesar (AESA), which is a prototype of technology demonstration of what Captor-E SHOULD be.

– Since then the Euroradar consortium has offered the 4 EF countries to develop the Captor-E (after financing) in time for the T3.

– The 4 countries haven’t to this day agreed to finance it.

* I am not sure on what you mean exactly, since i never mentioned ASRAAM or TVC… I said, that that OSF can be used to track and fire MICA IR on its own, while the Pirate, while superior in detection range, can’t use a similar weapon or track a ΒVR target because lacks laser rangefinder. ASRAAM is in the league of IRIS-T, not in the one of MICA as far as range is concerned.

i answered to Jack,

Captor E isn’t a Radar system, its the antenna for upgrade, they still use the ERC90 recalled Captor who is in the same league as the RDY2 technolgy speaking!

Pirate isn’t superior in detection range, would like to see any datas!

as mica is around the same seize of the asraam, it gets Short and medium range use and can be reprogramed in real time, the Mica is far more agile with tilt TVC that asraam or iris T haven’t!

FSO is in a highter league than Pirate aswell, 2 tv cam chanels, better electronics integration…

RED FLAG
How did the Rafale go????
does anyone know?

it wasn’t shot down, and performed verywell, enough to impress our US friends in or outside the cokpit…

Swiss News

While the single-engine Gripen is generally considered to be somewhat less expensive than its two twin-engined rivals, the Swiss air force has stated that it would not only look at basic per-unit costs, but also calculate the value of kick-back deals, off-set programs and overall life-cycle costs – which levels the playing field level for all three competitors, even though the Typhoon is considered to have the highest per-unit costs of all three aircraft.

The Gripen also carries the rather distinct, but for the parameters of Swiss defense doctrine important operational advantage of requiring the shortest landing stretch of all evaluated aircraft – namely 400 meters, compared to 490 for the Rafale and 700 for the Typhoon. This plays into the Swiss system of using Alpine highways or countryside roads as improvised landing stretches, especially in conflict scenarios. As an additional direct result of Swedish defense doctrine requirements, the Gripen also features the ability to be remotely refueled and re-armed within 10 minutes by a mobile team of five men operating out of a single truck.

http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Current-Affairs/Security-Watch/Detail/?lng=en&id=91394

It seems that the swiss got an idea about what they want..

Honestly I can’t see where other existing fighters have so much more to offer than the Typhoon in the electronics field. Beside AESA radars on some US fighters, there is nothing special in the F/A-18E/F blk 2 or any other US fighter currently in service. Of course the Typhoon has to be upgraded to maintain its operational relevance, but that is true for any fighter. The Gripen NG is far away from being an operational reality and won’t be fielded before 2015 at all, that is at least 7 years away from now on. Though a lot has delayed in terms of technologies for the Typhoon. The AESA exists a demonstrator and the Luftwaffe has included it in the 2009 budget plan. I have no doubt that AESA will come in there from 2012 onwards and I’m pretty confident that T3 examples will be delivered with AESA systems from the beginning. TVC is an option, but it’s less important than other things. When the weight penalties are low and the cost is not to high, something which the new TVN in the work promises I could imagine that aircraft might be retrofitted in the future, though I don’t think it will be part of the customers T3 configuration. Note that most of the current fighters have no TVC including Gripen, Rafale, F-15/16 & 18. Not even the F-35 will get TVC. Hence I don’t see the lack of TVC a significant disadvantage, of course it is better to have it than not to have it, but one has to weight the operational advantages which are limited, to the tradeoffs in terms of weight, maintainance and cost.

well most have better than tvc, bette sweep delta angle, LERX , and close coupled canard… and the most important , didn’t grow weight by 20% from the original airframe.