Ah so, its all secret squirrel stuff.

How surprising. Funnily enough, everything about the JSF is…”unproven” because LM is unreliable, and the aircraft is in development and its all PR anyways..

Dassault/Thales….it exists, it exists, its just secret and only Dare 2 knows. :p

Brilliant. :rolleyes:

PS: Secret Squirrel, in case you didnt get the ref.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DXqwAeak1GA/R45XxbMtb_I/AAAAAAAAAn4/0rwAiikIJK4/s320/Secret_Squirrel.gif

Why don’t you ask Thales what modes they develop for it instead of strating a flame war making assumptions?

You need to take a chill pill Dare; also, stop throwing a fit when somebody asks for evidence.

So, to summarize you dont have any proof so far that the Thale RBE2 AESA has dedicated LPI modes.

As far as I know & I am glad to be corrected, nowhere has Thales mentioned any dedicated LPI modes in the RBE2 AESA. They only talk of the standard AESA derived increases in ranges, search volume etc.

It’s so EASY to brag about US equipement considering that US firms spend 500% more in PR than any their European counterpart bar BAE, but when one look at the specs of the material once fielded, surprise, surprise, eyebrows rises.

Spare me the flaming tricks on “not in the same class” these european radars will be just as capable as what you got at home sooner than later.

“Flaming tricks” – my posterior. You are the one losing his temper throughout and making a complete spectacle out of yourself.

I asked for evidence for your claims of JSF equivalent technology being funded and consequently, available. I am not even American to bother about “what you got at home sooner than later”.

But since you dont have any evidence & it offends you (shudder) an American product may indeed be ahead, out comes all the abuse.

Typical.

But its still not evidence.

And one more thing – probably will throw you into another apocalyptic fit of rage, but nevertheless, its likely that the RBE2 AESA is actually less powerful than both the AN/APG-79 and the proposed Captor-E, given the aperture size limitations of the Rafale.

^^^^
Oh man, here we go again…

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/whiner

Apparently, its far too much effort to realize that this frees the private sector to participate on their own in defence & is in fact, a well considered step, with vital significance especially for land systems such as tube artillery in which India is lagging behind.

And is being done in conjunction with keeping strategic & core programs within the hands of the DRDO & other agencies, programs such as the BMD & various other tactical EW & weapons programs.

“There is no such ideal in the MoD or anywhere really we usually end up getting some of the worst equipment that is ever drempt up and the people in power call it the best or ‘world beating’.”

I agree that programs like the Bowman, SA-80 (till it was fixed), Nimrod back
n’forth hardly inspire confidence, but then again, look at the requirements set out.

The solution chosen, as you said – may have been subpar in some cases, thanks to politics, but the requirements are invariably very high.

The UK frequently chooses the “best” or so it seems, with complex, system of systems projects such as the EF or the Type45 destroyers with their state of the art radars, and the new Astute class submarines.

I mean, the UK could have procured something like the Abrams – but it chose to develop the Challenger series, it could have taken its purpose developed Viper derivative (and saved tons of cash) but it went for the EF program. These are simplifications to be sure, but the UK does always appear to aim for the best kit uniquely customized for its use or developed at great cost and pain inhouse, and wont just choose items off the shelf.

[QUOTE=JP Vieira;1481309][QUOTE=matt;1481228]This is the type of technology which wont be transfered during any TOT with any governments.

What kind of technology transfer is known in the PAK-FA’s india segment?

We dont know yet, but it will be significant given the amount India is investing. It will probably be done the same way the MKI program was conducted, as it offers a successful template to follow.

So who is funding it?

Jane’s:

India I can understand & it might well be true but Brazil? Thats Rafales to lose.

This have nothing to do with technology developments, actual generation of in-service systems and (fully funded) upgrade roadmap.

For your information an aircraft such as the Mirage 2000 mk2/9 already uses a 5th generation IT core system architecture, so does the Rafale F2/F3 and they also uses interferometric ECMs, their CPUs are also upgraded due to obsolescence the very same way that of F-22 were, we’re talking DualCore and UltraWide buses.

Only F-22 and F-35 are equiped with similar IT Core system architectures and have similar upgrade potentials today.

AESA of the AN/APG-81 generation are going to be fielded before 2012, new generation of IR sensors are in developement schedules for the same time, new engines are being developed for <> 2015, new IR 360X360* detection and defense systems are being developed (even for the A400M) etc.

Europe doesn’t stay still waiting for the big bad F-35 to eat the cake and reap granny.

Problem is there are far too many if’s and buts in your statements & a fair bit of “hope” as well (eg AESA – there is no firm production commitment for any full LPI specced FCR being developed for the Rafale or EF yet, what we are seeing are capabilities which “one day” might offer capabilities offered by the likes of the AN/APG-80 for several years now).

At the end its all about money.

Its not a question of whether Europe can develop the technology, but a question of whether the purchasing nations will fund anywhere near the kind of continuous upgrades the US usually does, and which then find their way to exports at a lower price and get a full logistics package as well.

LM can walk up to any prospective customer when the JSF is available & offer both first class avionics and also the chance to tie into the USAF/USN/USMC upgrade path. Added to this is the statement that the JSF is a full 5G aircraft with internal carriage & it becomes a winning proposition.

You’re more than welcome to compare your analysis to that of our Defense Ministrers, you will see how wrong you are about Europe…

Lets hope so, I have no interest in proving that Europe is inferior to the US or vice versa. But its just plain economics.

The US is by far the biggest market for defence in the world, and even EADS is attempting to increase its US footprint as it is the one major economy which continues to spend massively on defence (ie even despite its contractions it remains immense) while major European powers continue to look at ways to slash costs & defence spending.

This very year we have had multiple reports of how the UK has reduced or is reducing its original EF fleet for the RAF by trading it for the Saudi purchase & now there are reports that Germany will follow suit.

What this basically translates to is that there is a limited market for fighter platforms, the US market is locked out for Europe, whereas the rest of the world will see intense competition from the likes of the JSF and the PAK-FA both of which will offer the marketing “5G” designation and a variety of advantages. Its a very hard combination (right-left combo) for (the rest of) Europe to face.

There’s a chance if Dassault does a SAAB and offers a “stealthy” derivative of its Rafale with internal carriage and what not, but in all likelihood, it will be so expensive that it’ll be non competitive versus the likes of the JSF etc which will see huge production runs. Even the EF program continues to face accusations of being overpriced despite the fact that many OEMs collaborated on the project.