GlobalPressYou don’t save lives on a PR exercise.
France left EFA on the grounds it wanted to be the leader of the whole thing controlling design and exports…. because otherwise the project would fail in the hands of the incapable xenos… now Rafale is a failure and the xenos have managed to clock up 87 exports to two nations and orders of another 72 likely at worst. Rafale, in other words, has completely failed in the industrial targets of France.
rafale a failure?
Dassault needs noone to make a fighter, they sells it well because they makes great ones for decenies!
a failure? an aircraft that who won all competitions against the briberies bird?
lets come on the dassault clients, and Rafale will sell more than the euro******, because is it superior in all ways, competitions shown that, and its facts , not fantasies!
😮
now ppl comeback to the rafale tread, would be better to get datas and news rather than “rumours” or spins!
jack makes me laff each time i read him, looklike my lil nefew behaviours!
😀
GlobalPressmtyhs and realities….
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.
and now brazil…
abou the M88-eco
In order to further reduce specific fuel consumption and increase the service life of the engine’s critical parts (high-pressure core and afterburner), Snecma has developed a new version of the M88-2, called the M88-2E4. This new version offers improved fuel consumption (2 to 4 % lower than the M88-2E1). All M-88 engines deployed in France complied with
this new standard.The M88-2E4 was designed from the outset for high dispatch reliability, along with easy maintainability
and lower operating costs, to reduce the overall cost of ownership. In keeping with its assignment, the DGA prepares for the future in several fields. For instance, the technological improvements of the M88 engine arethe subject of a demonstrator called M88 ECO, which was already tested last year on the testing bench. These technologies may be used either to increase the engine’s performances, or to increase the life of the parts and thus reduce maintenance costs.
about empty weigh
The 3 versions
of the Rafale The Rafale C is a single-seater aircraft ordered by the Air Force. Its empty weight is 9.5 tonnes and its maximum takeoff weight is 24.5 tonnes. It has 2 Snecma M88-2 reactors with a 75 kN afterburner thrust. Its flight range is Mach 1,8/9G.With a 4.5 t inside tank fuel capacity and a 6.8 t outside tank fuel capacity, the Rafale C has over 3 hours’ autonomy. On a penetration mission, its range exceeds 1,800 km. It has a 9.5 tonne outside load stowage capacity (bombs, missiles, ).
Source Direction generale pour l’armement, ministere de la defense
June 2006
Jack jack jack, spin spin spin…
GlobalPressgreat vid, likes the mirage close coupled canards vortexxxxx…….
thx for sharing
GlobalPressDon’t be so silly.
The point is that nine unplanned extra sorties is not significant. It’s not a black mark against Rafale. Nor is one delayed sortie for Typhoon.
We don’t know the reason for the delay (in detail) nor do we know the reason for the extra Rafale flights.
You might want to assume that it was because the Swiss were so impressed that they just had to see more, and that the allocated sorties weren’t enough to demonstrate Rafale’s superiority!
But it’s just as likely that they had concerns, or that the Rafale (with its development radar set and other demo kit) went unserviceable in some small way.
We do know that the sorties were UNPLANNED.
Just because someone isn’t a completely biased Rafale fanboy and presents both possible explanations (instead of sticking only to those explanations that show Rafale in the best possible light) does not mean that they are ‘twisting and spinning’.
Talking of twist and spin, that was what I thought when I read someone saying: “Maybe the swiss have realised that you won’t win a war with just fighters. You need to be able to strike ground forces, enemy airbases, C&C and so on. And of course you need good recon assets.”
Because of course we know exactly what weighting the Swiss are giving to these different roles.
how could they knows the difference, the euro stuff weren’t even yet tested!
punk!
GlobalPressSimply looking at it; To replace the F-5E, only the gripen can do this in terms of cost/performance/noise/simplicity etc…
But if the Swiss were asking to replace the F-18, I think the EF/Rafale case would be much, much stronger. If you look at a Hi-Low mix situation, the EF/Rafale would certainly be the new High, and the F-18 refined to the low. With the gripen however the difference would be less stark.
The main point for me is that they do want a interceptor, and which is the best at that? EF of course. But whether they want that capability that badly, when they already have a brilliant force of modified F-18c’s which can tackle most, is uncertain.
Could anyone provide the prices of each package roughly, e.g gripen vs EF etc…
rafale is AESa proved, your captor and ew suite looklike a 4th generation pack!
even with an AEsa antenna “like” captor will never be a reel AESA radar system, less modes , no lpi, etc…. still a cheap mech one!
GlobalPressDude, the guy is a fanboy, he will not let the truth get in the way of his fantasies.;)
i talk about reliability, not the fact that they had to bought more hawker to replace the old unreliable mamy!
this experience the swiss don’t wish…
GlobalPress“Lose” I suppose. Where do you get this idea? It’s rather Rafale’s to lose. The Swiss has never flown Swedish jets, there’s Eurofighters all around them including German industry contacts, there’s various forms of attempts to rebate Eurofighters to make room for T3 deliveries, the requested fleet is not big enough to make a large impact on life cycle costs, France is next door quite eager for a sale to get that important first customer. They have flown French jets before and could get more training space over the border.
You’re right to talk about a package because that’s what decides things like this not individual good results in specific tests, because all jets will be better at something compared to the other ones (shocking piece of news there).
In the end there’s 3 strong contenders and one major enemy, namely Swiss politics.
the swiss use the mirage for decenies, they knows they can trust french products more than anyone else, they tried the hunter once, it even not reached ten years of use!
as about the DACT that somes point to tell spin, it was a unformal meeting, i doubt the french rafale pilots even knew they were engaged into a combat fight, the FW4 isn’t even complete to be fully operational!
the real article, is close to a EADS adds with spins to attract german pilitics for a “tranche3”, rather than a solid source of experience!
The new Block 8 standard Eurofighters are initially required to bring the first operational unit in Neuburg up to strength, as Fighter Wing 74 is currently having to make do with only ten aircraft. This is due partly to the fact that several Tranche 1 aircraft were relinquished by the Luftwaffe to Austria and partly to ongoing upgrade measures to the Block 5 standard. With 16 trained pilots, FW74 is just able to fulfil the Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) role of protecting the airspace over the south of Germany, which it officially took on in June.
When one considers that the average aircraft availability rate is only 50 percent (this is claimed to be better than other Luftwaffe types), this means that no more than half a dozen Eurofighters are available for flying operations on a daily basis. According to wing commodore Wing Commander Andreas Pfeiffer, four of these are required for the QRA service (two plus two reserves), so that only two are available for other duties. This rules out intensive training in aerial combat, as Pfeiffer lamented during a visit by FLUG REVUE at the beginning of October. Despite this, the QRA aircraft take off twice a day on exercise flights even without being alerted.
It will therefore take some time before FW 74 is able to exploit the full potential of the Eurofighter. Despite the overstretched situation, it is planned that FW 74 will participate in international exercises for the first time in 2009. Informally, the pilots from Neuburg recently pitted their skills against their French Rafale colleagues in aerial combat. The results were extremely gratifying, the main difference being the much greater thrust of the EJ200 engine. As far as the pilots are concerned, moreover, the Block 5 standard has brought clear improvements compared with earlier versions of the software. Areas which were previously problematic, such as voice input of commands, now function a lot more reliably.
A DACT? Scorpion? are you a serious dude?
GlobalPressYep, the fact that the Rafale made more flights could be a good sign as well as a bad sign. Hard to conclude either way unless you know why those flights were required.
N
there were more stuffs to tests on the rafale than on the others!
and my view is that the swiss asked to watch it closely!
GlobalPressIt actually delayed one flight from the end of one day (it was getting dark) to the beginning of the next…..
By contrast….
Which aircraft needed nine extra sorties to complete its evaluation?
it show that the swiss did focus more on the omnirole rafale than the unreliable and limited typhoon!!
😮
GlobalPressBe careful between the Rafale F2 and F3, there is many pure software modification, specially around SPECTRA.
If range is very important, the ECO 75Kn is the engine to have.
I fear it’s a 100% win for the gripen here.
ECO is a 9t engine, the E24 is a 7.5t engine!
lading distance and noise+ range ? gripen?
if Dassault was to beat the gripen they would push somes mirage 2000-9
La machine parfaitement huilée qu’EADS a présentée hier ne s’est grippée qu’un bref instant, quand un représentant du Groupe pour une Suisse sans armée (GSsA) a demandé que ses représentants prennent position sur les soupçons de corruption qui pèsent sur la vente d’Eurofighter à l’Autriche. «L’enquête parlementaire autrichienne n’a pas porté sur des soupçons de corruption, mais sur la régularité des procédures d’acquisition», a rétorqué aussi fermement que sèchement Bernhard Gewert, patron du domaine défense et sécurité d’EADS. Dont acte.
http://www.lenouvelliste.ch/fr/news/suisse/eurofighter-cest-du-solide_10-120263
GlobalPressYour Typhoon weights are now, as they have always been, pure fiction. The Development Aircraft (laden down with about a tonne of permanently installed test instrumentation as they were) weighed considerably more than production aircraft.
:D:D jack the hack?
I’m also interested that you prefer an AdlA PR source for Rafale’s weight (of unknown provenance and unknown date of origin) than Dassault’s own estimate provided to the Swiss.
trys to read in french, about specifications, dassault never provided this datas, they wouldn’t put any “reservations about specifications”
I have no doubt at all that Rafale is lighter than Typhoon, as you’d expect, but the desparate, biased and over-selective nonsense that you come out with is risible.
no way, french MoD telling bull****s about thier planes?
There’s no need to post more of your over-long rehashing of ancient sales leaflets, but please do continue with your hilarious intentional mangling of the English language (I congratulate you on ‘Long Moment Harm’ which betrays either a Pythonesque sense of the absurd, or a complete lack of any understanding of basic physics).
NASA, Boeing, LM, are hilarious?
The Swiss evaluation will be interesting. In the end, the capabilities and qualities of the aircraft will be just one factor in the decision, but if low cost, short landing capability, and low noise are decisive, then Gripen has to be in with a good shout.
Gripen staying in the sky longer than rafale? swiss pilots going to operate from sweden?
This competition is not a ‘shoo in’ for Rafale, and if the French aircraft wins, it will be an achievement that is really worth celebrating. Treating it as an expected and inevitable victory now will make you look silly if it doesn’t happen, and will reduce the impressive nature of the victory if it does.
do you prefert briberies rather than copetitions you did lose each time against the rafale?
I just wish that Rafale had scored a success in Morocco, as I fear that the aircraft’s chances will be compromised in some competitions where the customer may not wish to be the first export operator. One would also hope that lessons have been learned from previous export campaigns, and that Dassault will be left to offer their most competitive price, without confusion from other agencies giving different prices and imposing irrelevant conditions.
hahaha, BS , what the F… being the first or the last change ?
Despite Switzerland’s obvious wealth, I don’t see the Typhoon’s chances as being particularly good – cost has been stressed again and again in this competition, and Eurofighter cannot get close to 33 aircraft at the ceiling figure outlined by the Swiss. But with other requirements ‘bubbling under’, Eurofighter can perhaps afford to lose this one.
other requierement? what are you talking about, when in this world selling mean better?
I hope that the Swiss reveal the fullest possible details of their evaluation, and that they do so without favour or spin (unlike the Norwegians!). If they do, I expect different aircraft to lead when it comes to cost, cost effectiveness, capability, performance, and suitability for different roles. Which would all make for better informed debate here……..
Norvegian never as the greeks expected to buy the fuel guzzler bird, with a mech radar and that look like closer to a mirage 2000 than a 21th century fighter all around!
And if Rafale wins, perhaps it will help ensure Dassault’s survival as an alternative centre of combat aircraft excellence in Europe, alongside EADS, BAE and Saab, which would be good for the EU, I think.
hahahaha, wow EADS BAE combat exscellent center in europe?
they never was and never will be, A400M or Tornado fiasco as the eurofighter briberies in austria and saudies will not hide the fact that Dassault and at deferent level Saab are the sole for the post war period center of combat fighter excellent powerhouse in europe!
Jack ack the oh, remember one thing , military revenue to Dassault are about 25%, that most of fighters around the world was designed by a Dassault CAD/DAM eurofighter included, and that your eurofighter gets more french parts than any rafale will with british ones!
no regards,
GlobalPressRafale should win in swiss, they look for capacities rather than max perfs, as the chief of armasuise tells’
– Les besoins de l’armée sont évalués à 33 avions. Mais les tests des trois candidats doivent nous permettre de juger lequel peut rester le plus longtemps en mission dans le ciel par exemple. Ces données auront clairement une influence http://www.letemps.ch/template/suisse.asp?page=5&article=244693
he says that the big influence will come from the fighter that will stay longer in the sky, and the country that gets air bases closer to swiss!
they look for a short landing aircraft and a noise friendly fighter, for the cheaper price!
all this designate the Rafale F3, with aesa osf2 and Eco 90kN engines produced in 2012!
GlobalPressYou do demonstrate for all to see, that you are not intrest in real facts, do you?
There is no Rafale C in general as there is no Typhoon in general.
All that aircraft are built in blocks or related lots. Adding capabilities does mean adding weight in general. All that is common knowledge and has to be kept in mind, when someone will stay serious.
Most data from such former advertisement claims are related to earlier examples. So non is to be blamed about that, except the careless use of that time limited data.
Contrary to several people here, I did live through the discussions and negotiations in the 80s for a common fighter, before France did decide to do it alone. Both were designed to similar specifications in mind. One of that was wing-load. Wing area for the Rafale was 45,7 m² and 50 m² for the EF now Typhoon. The difference is ~10%, whatever basic value is claimed.
The lighter a basic design is, the more it did suffer from weight, when adding new items. 1 ton to a 9 ton basic is +11%, when 1 ton to a 10 ton basic is +10 %.
That will not be an issue in Switzerland, where the fuel-consumption can be an issue and the semi stealth of each design. So the findings of the Swiss about the three contenders will be of great interest.That are the data claimed for the Typhoon so far.
Basic Mass (Empty) 11,000kg (24,250lb)
Maximum (Take-off) 23,500kg (51,809lb)The Swiss will not care about the national feelings, but stick to hard data to justify the choose for the own public. The one not doing so can loose the competition.
well, you are claiming that there is no rafale C in general, well, and i’m the poor interested guy?
the GIE dassault in swiss must be composed of 3 comercial ppl, the guy that released this specifications did only took the Mtow of the rafale with datas there, and removed 4.6t of fuel!
so in swiss there are only Bi place F3 rbe2 aesa rafales! on the pdf there is a sentence “dassault se reserve de changer les specifications dans ses publications qui ne sont pas contractuelles” something..
its the words you put when you don’t know about datas, removing all responsabilities from the writter! who gets speculations on whats he have..
official datas from the F3 rafale C with details are on the sole customer web site, the ada web site!
the Rafale C F3 equiped is 9.8t… Rafale B F3 “the heavier” equiped is 10.2t
as about the total weigh, uhmm let’s talk about the rafale C as demonstrator was 9.2t on the F1, Dassault use balasts to simulate the final bird F3 config!
10 years after the rafale C F3 is 9.5t, 300 kgs growth! 2%!
in 1998 the typhoon demonstrator was rated at 9.7t, today the final T3 will reach 11.5t, 1.8t growth, 15%…
i bet that the typhoon designers didn’t use balasts, or mismanaged something meanwhile..
cheers…:rolleyes:
GlobalPresshttp://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/166091651_1.html
Radar revolution: the arrival of gallium nitride components opens up new applications for radars, including jamming and telecommunications.
The emergence of GaN from the laboratory has been delayed by epitaxy issues–growth of the semi-conductor layer on the silicon (Si) substrate, or silicon carbide (SIC) in the case of cutting-edge military applications. GaN and the substrate are made of crystals with different interatomic distances, hence the difficulty in assembling the two materials at a microscopic scale. The largest slices of high-performance GaN that have been obtained to date have a diameter of three inches, compared with six inches for GaAs and up to twelve inches for silicon. The size of the slice determines the number of chips that the machine can produce in a single pass.
GaN is clearly destined to remain expensive and its utilisation unlikely to expand beyond a limited number of applications, particularly since suppliers of SiC substrates are themselves limited. This situation could change, however, as GaN slices are expected to increase to four inches in the near future, and the arrival of new players should help to drive prices down, predicts Dominique Pons who heads the Alcatel Lucent/Thales III-V Lab. (The name reflects the columns of the periodic table mentioned above.) In any case, the intrinsic qualities of GaN have convinced the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) to invest heavily–tens of millions of dollars per year–in the technology.
In this way the military potential of GaAs has opened up an industrial capability that has found market openings in Europe … the same openings that GaN will be able to exploit in its turn. Agreements are already in place with NXP (ex-Philips Semiconductors), explains Thierry Laboureau, UMS sales and marketing director, to develop power components for base stations for third- and fourth-generation cell phone networks and for WiMax base stations for mobile internet users. Ultimately, once prices have come down far enough, GaN could conceivably make its way into the kitchen, replacing the magnetron in the micro-wave oven.
However, these longer-term commercial perspectives will not be enough to cover the investment required to launch foundry operations. Nor is there any prospect of procuring components for military applications from the US or Japan–both countries have already placed an embargo on GaAs circuits, and there is no reason for them to be any more flexible concerning GaN. This explains why the defence procurement authorities in France and Germany are both helping to support industrial research efforts.
According to Dominique Pons, the III-V Lab should produce its first X-band or wide-band GaN MMICs this year. Following validation and industrialisation by UMS, series production should get under way by 2009.
EDA funding
GaN is also one of the very first research areas to receive funding from the European Defence Agency (EDA) under a 40 million [euro] programme called Korrigan that brings together 23 companies and laboratories in seven countries to accelerate the development of one or more European GaN foundries with associated supply chain by 2009. The programme leader is Thales Airborne Systems. Other participants include EADS, Selex Sistemi Integrati, Saab Ericsson and BAE Insyte. Their role initially is to define requirements for the foundries, before becoming directly involved, from 2008 onwards, in integrating the microchips into a variety of specialised modules covering a range of land-based and airborne radar applications, as well as self-protection or offensive jammers.
In this way, explains Thales Airborne Systems technical director Pierre Fossier, it should be possible to launch the first system applications in 2010. In France, one of the leading candidates for the new technology is the offensive jammer, a capacity that the French Air Force has had its eyes on for several years, and which has already given rise to the Carbone airborne demonstrator. The performance of the system attracted a lot of attention at NATO’s Mace X electronic warfare exercise in the year 2000.
The DGA procurement branch of the French MoD is continuing to provide limited funding for exploratory work by Thales while awaiting for national budgets to kick in to complete development. GaN would allow for a reduction in the size of the jammer, potentially clearing the way for integration into a combat aircraft. One of the first European acquisition programmes to integrate GaN technology could well be the Maritime Airborne Surveillance and Control (MASC) programme to replace Royal Navy Sea King Mk7 airborne surveillance helicopters, as required for the future CVF aircraft carriers. The three candidates for this mission are the Hawkeye aircraft, the EH-101 helicopter and the tiltwing V-22, though the Hawkeye would appear to be ruled out by the absence of a catapult in the current CVF definition. Both the other candidates would require a compact and powerful radar to meet missions requirements. The potential advantages of a GaN radar in this context have prompted the British MoD to finance some upstream development work in preparation for a programme launch in the 2009 timeframe–the same year that the first European GaN modules are scheduled to come off the production line.
but not for eurofighter, that will use Gaas of UMS with thier Ceasar..
The goal is to have the resulting AA version of the RBE2 ready for series production to equip Rafales delivered from 2012 under the next multi-year order, which is expected to be signed in early 2009.
According to Thales, the RBE2 AA will offer 50% greater range than the current RBE2 and a huge increase in reliability–major overhaul every 7-10 years, compared with a current TWT service life of around 100 hours. It will also be possible to generate SAR images in air-to-ground mode with 1 m resolution or better, and to detect at long range low-reflection airborne targets, including stealthy UAVs and UCAVs.
No state funding has yet been made available to fund the active-array transition for Typhoon and Gripen. Euroradar (Selex SAS/EADS/Galileo Avionica/Indra) launched its own Caesar demonstrator programme for Typhoon in 2003. The demonstrator made its first flight on a BAC 1-11 testbed in February 2006. Caesar combines the back end from the existing Captor with an antenna partially featuring active GaAs modules from UMS (Germany) and Filtronic (UK). Captor air-to-air modes have been partially adapted to the new antenna. Caesar was flight tested on a Typhoon development aircraft (DA5) in May.
The intrinsic properties of gallium nitride (GaN) make it the designated successor to gallium arsenide (GaAs) for radar applications. The three major properties are: substrate thermal conductivity and breakdown electric field 10 times greater than GaAs, and a very high output impedance, allowing GaN transistors to operate across very large bandwidths.
On the other hand, if the power of GaN is used to trim the number of modules, this means that the size of the antenna–and the nose section of the aircraft–can be significantly reduced, with an obvious payoff in terms of aerodynamics and stealth.
😀
GlobalPressThere will no real surprise about that.
The main difference between the Rafale and the Typhoon is in ~10% range of size/weight in general, when the same technology in mind. France did choose the lower values to have a similar advantage in export prices by similar performances. In the 80s there was a thumb-rule about “price per kg of aircraft”, which did made those comparable and the lighter one will come out as the cheaper one to buy and to operate. So much about thumb-rules, when the F-16 was adding weight already. The British had the multi-role capability of the Typhoon in mind and were pushing it in the direction of the F-15E. 😉
no at all, the C version is 9.5t or about 9.7t equiped!
the eurofighter bi place is 11.7t empty and about 12.1t equiped,
the rafale bi place equiped is 9.8t empty and 10.2t , 2t tons differences, its closer to 20%…
and weigh = drag, especially for a close coupled canard with wider sweep wing angle, and no lex!
Sign In
