Not at all.
I can only see the building of 16 M88 ECO at 7,5t.

Of course it’s possible, but longer, more expensive and less reliable.

Nope, the 9t has seen “feasability studies” and would required some devellopement before being available on the market.
But I’m not worried about that.
Posters on forums would LOVE to see 9t M88 while most AF would love to have a 7,5t M88 with a very low MCO

i though it was clear!

but you dont this:

objectifs initiaux, que ce soit pour l’augmentation
des durées de vie des pièces du moteur, un gain en coût de possession, des performances accrues (4 000
cycles (TAC – Total Accumulated Cycles)) et une baisse du coût d’exploitation.

in doing this:

Les modifications prévues porteront sur le compresseur
haute pression et la turbine haute pression. Ces dernières sont dérivées des améliorations et technologies
testées sur le programme de développement exploratoire ECO.

long range producting spares, mean its 2 years long, so the 9t version…

The problem with comparing the Typhoon to the Rafale is that you are comparing an aircraft with over 700 orders, with ~150 aircraft delivered to an aircraft with a possible order of 294 (but only ~120 contracted so far) and ~60 delivered.

Its also comparing an aircraft that will be in service with at least 7 countries to an aircraft that as of yet has only been ordered for one airforce. The Typhoon is therefore most likely to receive the most comprehensive upgrades as the costs would be funded across multiple countries and over a much larger number of airframes.

If it was my choice, i’d probably take the Typhoon over the Rafale simply for that reason alone.

its the same rate orders between the ford focus and the Bugatti Veyron!

all is a question of choice, a old unreliable car under briberies or a diamon!

Looks like Singaporeans were really blown away by this climb.. 😎 Maybe that is why an F-15SG rolled out fresh from a factory few days ago.. 😎

hahahaha,

i saw lots of airshow with raf F15 and more doing the same, don’t see what they need to prove there, especially with a 14s run , maybe that the ir signature of the fat mamy is as big as his ass!

“”The Omanis are looking at what capabilities are available in the market but may decide this is not the right time for them,” one source said.”

well the brits medias are storming a tea cup, as usual!

Bgnewf,

It’s a good aircraft,

no, its the best aircraft, Austria and saudia was over bribed for years, anyway that’s not interesting to loss money on a deal especially in Saudies only to “sell” as desesperatly as the eurofighter did in recent years being unable to reach final days in overseas challenges, at least Dassault refused to be compared to cheap F16 in Morocco, Brazilians aren’t crazy too, the datas are avaible, and i bet Dassault can get it to every futur client to show hows the european bird’s peform.

All work (except the off the shelf Adour which has some French parts in it but that’s hardly an issue :rolleyes:) on Taranis will be conducted in the UK afaik. At 8000kgs Taranis is closest to full scale of all European UCAVs. And BAE is HQed in Farnborough (only registered as a company in London). All western defence companies are international these days. But why am I even replying to a troll?

Sky-X and Sky-Y are no UCAVs. Italy has a 20% share in Neuron.

Taranis is a cheap finenced UAV demonstrator, not an UCAV

as about the Adour and Jaguar!

“L’histoire commence en 1964 quand
l’armée de l’Air française demande un avion
d’entraînement avancé. La fiche programme
prévoit une série de 150 avions d’une valeur
unitaire d’environ 5 millions de francs. Le 15
janvier 1965, Breguet Aviation remporte le
marché avec le projet Breguet 121.
Simultanément, la R.F.A., l’Italie et la
Grande-Bretagne ont les mêmes

Le réacteur double-flux « Adour » qui
propulse le « Jaguar » résulte aussi d’une
coopération industrielle internationale. La
commande initiale étant très importante (800
turboréacteurs), les autorités françaises
obligent Turboméca à une association. Rolls-
Royce ayant étudié un moteur proche (RB
172), les deux industriels s’associent à la
fabrication du réacteur « Adour ». Turboméca
est responsable de la partie compresseurs
basse pression (deux étages) et haute pression
(cinq étages) et Rolls-Royce de la fabrication
des parties chaudes, chambre de combustion,
turbines haute et basse pression.
Entre temps, la SNECMA qui a pris le
contrôle de Turboméca participe au moteur en
réalisant les canaux de réchauffe et en
réalisant les essais d’homologation, puis à
l’étude de versions plus puissantes du moteur
destinées à l’exportation, car l’état-major
britannique qui a changé d’avis une fois de
plus a commandé un biplace d’entraînement à
réaction, le Hawker-Siddeley HS 1182
« Hawk », propulsé par le réacteur « Adour »,
tandis que la Marine nationale préfère le
« Super Etendard » au « Jaguar » navalisé.

http://www.hydroretro.net/etudegh/SNECMA_debuts_cooperation.pdf

so the french did the studies of the nobles parts of the adour, who was named at a french region

Rob rob, still spining around

Mr Lord,
to be honest I’m sick of that way of discussion. I was called by name, accused for saying things I never said and offended by Mr. Global even before I was involved into any discussion, you quickly jumped on it and I had to react, though there would have been better ways (at least for me) to deal with that kind of behaviour. I don’t mind to reply to your posts anymore . In the case you continue to call my name and accuse me for things I don’t even said or direct offenses at me, I’ll just report it to a mod.

still waiting strong sources from the Nasa, the USAf, or any aerophysics research universities about the long harm coupled canard with a larger sweep delta angle being the best to provide lift under M1.6!

so Scorp and Jack, we are fed up about you “i met the guy that met the guy that met the bear” args…

typhoon lost all balanced chalenges at export against the rafie, and won only when they bribed in austria and pressures to shut up the UK democratic justice from the saudies!

😎

I don’t care whether you’re Marc Sampaix, posting from the comfort of Ealing library, or some fellow traveller. You’ve registered this identity specifically to attack me and you do so on grounds that are demonstrably false.

You accuse me of being a Typhoon fanboy, and worse, as a paid shill for the Typhoon programme.

Time and again I have pointed out that each aircraft enjoys advantages and disadvantages, and have been quick to point out areas where I see Rafale advantages over Typhoon.

I’ve written negative articles about BAE and about Typhoon.

That’s hardly ‘slagging’ off Rafale, and nor does it support your contention that I view Rafale as a ‘hated French aircraft’. (In point of fact, I quite admire it, as I admire Gripen, and as I admire the F-16). I see good and bad points in the aircraft, the programme and the company that built the aircraft.

And I would say EXACTLY the same about Typhoon, the programme and the company that built the aircraft.

It’s what most people would view as being neutral, or at least balanced.

It certainly doesn’t support your cowardly accusations of shilling (cowardly because you make them from the comfort of your anonymous username), which you will never be able to substantiate, since I’ve never taken a payment from any aircraft manufacturer.

Unfortunately, however, people like you view anyone with a balanced and neutral view as being a ‘Typhoon fanboy’ because they don’t share your unlimited and unbridled enthusiasm for Rafale. People like you view anything less than shouted claims of total superiority of the Rafale as being hostile propaganda.

And if someone brings anecdotal evidence that contradicts your pro Rafale prejudices, you accuse them of lying, you infer that they haven’t spoken to the people they claim to have spoken to, and you drag in irrelevant personal attack in a desparate attempt to discredit them.

Let’s get this straight.

Rafale is a good aircraft, and a great success for Dassault and the French customer and taxpayer. The Rafale enjoys some advantages over Typhoon, in some areas. It has superior low level ride and low level handling characteristics, better payload/range and may enjoy an edge at very low speeds. It currently enjoys superior A-G capabilities, and has some more useful A-G weapons and a radar that is better suited to A-G/Swing role ops. Dassault’s programme management has been exemplary.

I don’t dispute any of those advantages.

Any reasonable, balanced, neutral observer would acknowledge that Typhoon enjoys its own advantages. I would maintain that these are principally superior performance for the BVR A-A role (including rate of climb, acceleration, supersonic acceleration, supersonic agility and Supercruise), a significantly better MMI (and I have a lot of largely anecdotal evidence to support this) and better A-A radar performance, as well as a good HMS and HOBS missile capability. I’d be the first to stress that the programme is way behind where it should be, and that particular capabilities are lagging disgracefully, and I’d acknowledge that the aircraft has characteristics that make it much less suitable for some roles.

Balance, as I say. (And balance isn’t a matter of grudgingly acknowledging that one aircraft has some very marginal advantage in one relatively unimportant area). Balance is about recognising that in some areas, the jury’s still out.

I look forward to learning more about Rafale’s low speed agility, and about the degree of ‘nose pointing’ and carefree handling suggested by Typhoon’s HAVV roll. Does the ability to go to the very edge of the envelope (and briefly beyond) trump carefree handling at very marginally higher speeds?

Grace and courtesy are earned. Regular insult, accusations of lying, deliberate misrepresentation and the like tend to come from people when they are displaying Xenophobic and/or fanboy tendencies. I should, perhaps, pay more attention to the fact that some of those who I accuse of fanboyism are just extremely proud of their country’s best fighter for decades (and I can’t really blame them for that), whose enthusiasm occasionally tips over and tips them into anger and lashing out.

People on this board make different contributions. Some trawl the internet to dredge up the smallest fact or figure. Others bring us reports from their national magazines (TMor and his little precis of Air and Cosmos, for instance). I’m sorry that good access, leading to anecdotal evidence and real insight isn’t always appreciated or believed, but that’s the modest contribution that I offer. Believe it or ignore it, but it would be nice if there could be just a little less abuse, and a few less accusations of lying.

Generally, I have a great deal of respect for the French posters on this site, but not for those who bluster and bully, making unsubstantiated claims about Rafale based on incomplete or partial facts, and certainly not to those who make a habit of attacking me personally, rather than the facts or opinions that I present. I’m sure that folk like TMor, Kovy and Arthuro (and Nic and Glitter, most of the time, despite our cross words) will already know that I view them with a mixture of respect, fondness and occasional exasperation. There are a handful of exceptions.

a perfect jack articles, “sounds” and blah blah,

gets somes arguments, solid sources and details to proove your views!

you might get some rates from here, rather being seen as a Je.k

:p

cheers