JackonickoThe second, 2009 order for F3s consists of 60 aircraft. Nine of these are Ms (M39-47) and 51 are for the air force, but what is the breakdown going to be between Bs and Cs?
Are these the Rafale F3-O4T aircraft, or F3-OT?
Due to enter service with AESA (probbaly with NCTR mode), and DDM NG MAWS (provision for DIRCM).
Jackonicko“A nice Dassault test pilot interview at Dubai by Flightglobal.”
It’s hardly a very searching interview, is it?
Mary’s a smashing gal and all, but her beat is business aircraft (she blogs as Runway Girl), and she didn’t really know what she was asking about.
And her interview with Scott Loughran was no more elucidating.
As she’d be the first to admit:
“The Flightglobal journalists have expertise in different subjects, but we also need to be able to step out of our beats and into another one at a moment’s notice, especially at an air show.
Case in point. I’ve largely covered commercial air transport for nearly 11 years. Yesterday, the Flight Show Daily urgently needed someone to interview Eurofighter. I said: “Sure, I’ll go interview Eurocopter.” And they said: “Thanks, and it’s not Eurocopter, it’s Eurofighter.”
Ah yes, right.
So I ran to the Eurofighter chalet, asked the PR rep to give me a quick “Typhoon 101 course” before I interviewed a former RAF test pilot about that bad-ass bird (yep, it’s bad-ass, I saw US fighter pilots loving the Typhoon simulator). I got a great story from Eurofighter and it’s now running at the following link: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/11/16/334952/dubai-09-eurofighter-making-its-mark-in-the-middle.htm
Here in Dubai, Flightglobal has got all angles covered, and we’re writing about it for print and online, plus tweeting and engaging in other social media, plus doing lots of video and images.
It’s a huge team effort and the only way we can do it is by loving aviation, loving what we do, loving working with each other AND drinking lots of lovely coffee. Yep, that’s a lot of love.”
JackonickoDassault had a VERY high level delegation at Dubai this week. I found myself sitting next to Serge himself on one day, which was a bit of a treat, despite his poor English and my VERY poor French.
It made me wonder whether they were expecting an announcement from the UAE, though he and Charles Edelstenne were surprisingly coy about the UAE deal, and there was some evidence that the Emirates may be having second thoughts.
Fonk et al usually have a go at me for not naming sources, so rather than saying ‘senior Dassault sources’ I’m giving names this time……
…… eat your heart out, Fonky!
JackonickoThis is, of course, great news for women pilots in the RAF, and especially for Kirsty herself, whose reputation precedes her! (She was reportedly rated extremely highly at Valley, and on XIII).
However, before we get too excited, the Thunderbirds have had lady pilots for some time, and the PdeF have beaten the Arrrows to it with Cdt Virginie Guyot (apologies if I’ve mis-spelt her – I’m too lazy to look it up), who I think is due to take over as team leader, or may have just done so.
I salute Dare2 for his restraint on this. This is an area where the French have shown the Brits the way forward.
JackonickoThat’s all irrelevant bluster, designed to distract people from the fact that another of your pseudonym’s has been discovered – this time ‘Test engineer’. (What a joke…. an ex AdlA spanner monkey on Mirage IIIEs pretending to be a test engineer. Do you do much test engineering in Ealing library, then, Fonky?)
1) You should not be so hard on yourself, nor so complimentary to Fonk, who was a rude, boorish, ignorant plank, and whose rare ‘nuggets’ were largely ignored because he was quite so silly and objectionable. The GlobalPress persona has been marginally better than that, and that’s how he’s escaped a ban. The Dare 2 persona is better than GlobalPress, in that he presents much the same nonsense but rather more politely.
2) And let me get this straight – you’re accusing me of being a journo who won the defence aviation journo of the year award in 2007 and 2008? I should be flattered.
JackonickoDare 2 (alias Globalpress, alias Fonk):
How do you know he isn’t French? I’d assumed that it was you, posting under yet another of your pseudonyms. He certainly doesn’t speak English as his first language, and most of the mistakes are EXACTLY those which you make, and which you’d expect from a native French speaker.
EG: “The basic point of the Rafale is not well understood even P Collins (who participated to JSF) almost mentionned it.
In the nineties after the Rafale A aerodynamic demonstrator, Dassault had to made a choice:
-Either go to passive stealth level of USA which imply having internal bay (and to accept price)…….”
No-one is saying that Mirage 2000-5/-9 is not just as much a modern and agile fighter as is the F-16 MLU.
The point is that Collins has only the most brief experience of any modern agile fighter, and that that experience was a very long time ago. He probably flew M2K (and not one of the more modern variants) a couple of times (perhaps just once) some 20 years ago on his ETPS course. He does not have much experience of ‘Rafale-Class’ aircraft, and as such the value of his assessment is limited.
There is the secondary point that a non-Dassault type would give a more useful point of comparison than the Mirage 2000 – just as you’d be more interested in what someone who had done an operational tour on the Mirage 2000 thought of the F-16E than you would in someone whose operational flying was on the Super Mystere, and who’d flown an F-16A once, 20 years ago.
Globalpress (alias Dare 2, alias Fonk):
“no one misinterpreted your “meaningless” says!”
I never used the term ‘meaningless’ nor did I imply or infer it. You are ‘twisting and spinning’ and ‘making up stories from nothing’ – as usual.
JackonickoVery diplomatic, Nic!
I must say that I thought he meant for any mission, including A-A.
JackonickoKovy,
As long as people misrepresent what I say, accuse me of saying what I haven’t, or argue the point, then I’m likely to respond.
If you don’t like that, then the answer is easy.
Jackonicko“He says the Mirage 2000 is his prefered FBW fighter, among the 71 planes he flew.”
Which is meaningless, unless you know what other FBW fighters he flew as well.
Zedro: Yes he’s qualified, but others (NOT me) could easily be better qualified. Is that really so hard to grasp?
I haven’t commented on his conclusion. How can anyone argue with someone’s opinion? He says: “If I had to go into combat, on any mission, against anyone, I would, without question, choose the Rafale.” That’s his opinion, and I find it fascinating.
I do say that any such conclusion would be much more credible and even more impressive if it came from someone with more relevant experience.
If I write that the Pilatus B4 is the best handling glider I’ve ever flown, you want to know what else I’ve flown (Have I flown its contemporaries? ASW17? Janus? ASW19? How about the Ka-18?). It is less impressive than if someone who has flown a dozen more modern gliders says the same thing.
JackonickoArthuro,
It’s not about comparing PC’s knowledge with mine, or yours.
It’s not that he’s “less knowledgeable than me on 4th or 5th gen aircraft”.
I am irrelevant. Why do you keep comparing him to me?
He’s clearly a better choice than me to do a Flight flight test.
No argument from me on that..
But a more recently current TP, with more recent and more relevant operational experience would have been a better choice than him.
You have two choices to write a Rafale flight test.
1) Pilot A. A military test pilot until 1993. Used to fly Lightnings and Harriers. Flew a Mirage 2000 once or twice.
2) Pilot B. A military test pilot until 2008. Used to fly Typhoon and Jaguar. Exchange tour on F-16MLU. Has flown Gripen, F/A-18 and F-15.
Who do you choose, and why?
JackonickoArthuro, you put your finger on the nub of the issue – that of authority.
The problem is that while PC has considerable authority (he is a respected test pilot) a more current TP, with more recent, more relevant experience would have even greater authority.
Pete’s operational experience is on Harrier, Sea Harrier, and Lightning – and as a Red Arrow. He stopped military test flying long before Typhoon had even flown, and his last test flying job was as OC the Aerospace Research Test Squadron at DRA Bedford – where his JSF knowledge would have been confined to aerodynamic concepts for it – since it was three years before the first development contract was placed.
I’m glad that he liked Rafale, it’s an impressive aeroplane. But he simply doesn’t have the degree of experience of modern fighters to make his opinion of much more than vague interest. If he had been test flying similar types during the last five years, and if he had a Strike Eagle, Super Hornet, F-16MLU, Mirage 2000, or Gripen tour under his belt, then his assessment would really mean something.
But put a 1970s/80s Harrier/Lightning/Sea Harrier pilot in a Rafale/Gripen/Typhoon and he’s bound to be completely blown away. As I said before, it would be like putting a French Mirage III pilot in a Typhoon. It would knock his socks off. (So what?) But wouldn’t you be more interested in what a Rafale pilot with recent test flying experience thought? I know I would. He’d be a much tougher customer, and would be much less easy to impress, and you’d be really interested in what he liked and what he didn’t.
It should have been within Flight’s competence to find such a pilot, and I don’t think Dassault would have had anything to fear. Perhaps Fonky et al fear that such a comparison would have been unfavourable, and that Rafale would have come off badly. I don’t. It’s an impressive aircraft, and I’m sure the conclusion would have reflected well on the jet.
Sintra,
TPs are taught to communicate, and most of them write very well. Just read John Farley’s stuff, or Craig Penrice’s. I think that Flight took the easy option on this, and hasn’t served its readers as well as it could have done.
JackonickoZedro,
Yes, of course he can be taken seriously. I’ve already said that it’s much better to have an out-of-date test pilot writing a flight test than a fully current non-pilot journo.
And I stressed that PC was a good choice. Good is always “good enough”. And saying that someone else might have been better does not take away from that.
It’s not that PC isn’t qualified to comment. He obviously is. But it’s not hard to see that Flight could (and in my view should) have found someone even better qualified.
The problem is that the over-sensitive Rafale fan boys are getting their panties in a twist about what they see as some kind of deadly insult against their beloved aeroplane, and it’s not anything of the kind.
If you look back to the MiG-29’s appearance at Farnborough – Flight got John Farley to do a flight test. He made some very, very interesting points – not least about the MiG-29’s aerodynamic strengths. Aviation Week used Bob Wade – a current Canadian Hornet pilot – who brought something different to his flight test. In fact, it’s not entirely comparable with the present argument, since Wade’s frontline credentials were not really used, because both men flew a simple MiG-29UB, and were not able to fly an operational sortie profile. Both men therefore looked only at pure performance and handling. Also John Farley remains extremely current in the very areas that he was writing about, and as well as being a very distinguished TP he is an extremely talented writer and communicator.
Arthuro,
Go back and re-read my posts. Like Zedro, you’re normally more sensible than some of your countrymen (eg Fonk) so I’m sure that you’ll get the fundamental point. NO-ONE has said, or believes, that PC is “a total beginner” and certainly he isn’t being compared to “so called specialist here on this very forum” except by your deluded and trouble-making friend Fonky.
I have certainly NEVER made that comparison.
The comparison made was between PC (retired from military test flying 15 years ago, having never flown a modern fighter operationally) and a pilot who might have actually flown Rafale’s competitors operationally, and who might have current experience of modern agile fighters and modern glass cockpits.
JackonickoGame over my eye.
You have proved my point.
What you’ve highlighted is not what you accused me of saying.
You accused me of saying that the article was “meaningless”.
I didn’t.
You accused me of saying that the article “didn’t deserve to be published”.
I didn’t.
You accused me of calling PC a “rookie”.
Again: I didn’t.
Yes, I’m happy to admit that I said that it would have been better to use a pilot with more recent and more relevant operational experience. That’s the whole point.
As I said before:
“While he was a good choice to write the flight test, someone with more recent military flight test experience, and with more and more recent experience of more comparable and more relevant aircraft would clearly have been a BETTER choice.”
I guess that an apology is too much to hope for after such an inaccurate, graceless and boorish interjection?
If anyone is laughable, it’s you and your mate Fonky.
JackonickoOpit,
As so often with the Rafale fanboy lunatic fringe it’s “All aboard the Outrage bus, first stop Knee Jerk street, followed by Hysterical Whingeing Square……..”
I said nothing of the sort.
I did not say that the article was meaningless. Quote the post where I did so, or apologise (in other words, put up or shut up).
I did not say that this story doesn’t deserve to be published. Quote the post where I did so, or apologise (in other words, put up or shut up).
I did not call Pete Collins a rookie. Again, quote the post where I did so, or apologise (in other words, put up or shut up).
I did suggest that the article would have been MORE interesting and MORE useful if Collins had had more recent and more relevant experience. Presumably you think that a better qualified author would have been a bad thing, like your friend Fonky? :rolleyes:
What I actually wrote was:
“Loke,
I would not for one moment want to take anything away from this rave review of a great aeroplane, which is clearly a joy to fly, and I’m glad that Dare/Global has given us the chance to see the unexpurgated version.
Pete Collins was the ASTOR test pilot at Broughton. He left the RAF in the early 1990s (1993). Though an ex-leader of the Reds, and a qualified and experienced Harrier GR and SHar pilot, he does not have much recent fast jet experience.
Apart from Hawk, Harrier, Sea Harrier, Mirage 2000 and Rafale, we simply don’t know what other types he has flown.
As a 1989 ETPS graduate, and later OC flying at RAE Bedford you can add Jaguar, Hunter and Canberra to the tally, as a definite, and would expect some or all of Phantom/Tornado/Buccaneer/Teen series during his ETPS course. That’s probably when he flew the Mirage 2000.
Since leaving the RAF, he was a TP for Fokker and later for KLM, and subsequently for RSL (Bombardier).
You may be surprised at the lack of any mention of Typhoon – I am not. There is no suggestion (nor even much likelihood) that he has flown Gripen, Super Hornet, Typhoon, nor even the Typhoon active cockpit. What a pity that Flight did not nominate someone with more experience of Rafale’s direct contemporaries and competitors (and preferably someone with operational flying experience of one of them), rather than someone whose FJ experience is 15 years out of date.
One hopes that Saab will now give him a ride in the Gripen NG, and that EF GmbH will fly him in Typhoon, so that we can get the perspective of someone who has flown all three. He may, of course, still rate Rafale highest, but it would be interesting to know.
Or perhaps a French magazine will have the wit to get an experienced Rafale pilot to do a Typhoon flight test. This is like getting a Mirage IIIE pilot to do one. It’s still interesting, he’s still a trained FJ TP, and he still makes interesting points, but it is a bit of a missed opportunity.“
JackonickoStill looks as though the UAE will be the de facto launch customer (with so few going to the AMI). I wonder if they’ll actually sign, or whether the UAE M246 will go the same way as the UAE Persuaders?
Sign In
