Snow MonkeyRight, Superjet should really step in with a lease deal until they can be replaced by E-Jet NEO.
Snow MonkeyFrance doesn’t need any additional leverage in India.
Not to mention that it can’t really fly adequately with the French engine, which is why a higher performing engine is in the actual flying Sitara.
Which has already been brought up in this thread by people who deigned to seriously respond to Ananda’s nationalist cheerleading, to be ignored as he repeats the same line.
Snow MonkeyIt can’t be so hard to develop a trainer. So ask dassault to make one & then buy it.
France can’t/doesn’t want to buy even Rafales according to the planned schedule, as soon as India signs on the dotted line it wants to let them displace French orders.
NOT “buying” this trainer, but paying for flight hours is explicitly being discussed. And Dassault is supposed to develop a trainer and training system infrastructure from scratch?
Besides the issue of displacing normal Rafale flight hours, the renovation of training fleet offers the prime opportunity to integrate training with other EU partners, which itself is an important step to reduce costs.
Off the shelf state of the art trainers enable doing that quickly and with little hassle, unfunded development programs don’t.
Snow MonkeyYou know too well that the RN Carriers are designed for STOVL aircraft, were always going to go the F-35B route, and that the UK and France will be working together, militarily and politically, for the next 50 years.
All the more reason why it’s short sighted to go STOVL even if there are marginal gains in the short term. Automated landing should eventually negate need for additional CATOBAR training. Countries like India and Brasil are going in for CATOBAR (not to mention USN), so the UK is shutting itself out from synergies with all those allies and customers in terms of exports, joint projects, or even importing top kit. The replacement platform for F-35/Rafale, other carrier-based assets like UCAVs and AEW&C, and indeed exporting EMCAT to IN/BR. FR continuing with a carrier program is a desirable thing for the UK, and doing what’s possible to increase the bang for the buck for both sides furthers that goal. PoW may be refitted, but costs will always argue against that, as well as the inertia from having all support platforms designed around STOVL (or RL).
But I agree Nic’s tit-for-tat comment was ridiculous. Hawk T2 can be assessed on it’s merits.
Snow MonkeySo please can we refrain from walls of text discussing F-22 RWR/etc on a Rafale thread? Thanks.
Snow MonkeySAAB’s concept of un-manned Gripen E makes alot more sense in this context… Since Rafale procurement doesn’t seem set to change,
it seems like it would be highly useful for the few highly trained cadre of Rafale pilots to be able to direct a few other unmanned Rafale for strike missions.
other question: besides the exact number of pilots retained at the high training level, and what that training level will be, how does this interact with routine air policing?
will that be done by the highly trained pilots, and thus for short notice operations, a number of them will be retained for that task in all but the most dire of situations?
or will that be done by the lesser trained cadre, possibly not even using Rafale or Mirage 2000 for the air policing mission?
Snow Monkeylink:
““Saab is looking globally for customers, and it has a realistic chance of securing orders in countries like India [and] Brazil. It is investing a lot more resources in marketing its wares in South America and Asia. This could lead to a payoff,” Peeters said.”
what is saab smoking? can company shareholders really think they are managing the company properly when they consider they have a ‘realistic’ chance of selling to INDIA?
i mean, sure, they can believe there is a remote possibility of that happening…
but when Dassault, IAF, Indian MoD, and HAL are all affirming the progress of negotiations and prospects for completing the contract, how is it ‘realistic’ for that to happen?
Snow MonkeyPossibly, but I doubt the UK and France will be involved in another manned joint-ventured aircraft.
I believe the people in industry and government who forsee exactly that.
Snow MonkeySouth Africa should get C-2s instead. at least that’s being purchased by some one.
??? Do you really want to compare Japanese C-2 orders vs. all A400M orders? (even after being reduced)
A400M offers capabilities C-2 does not pretend to, superior rough field capability, low-level flight, built for air-drops, etc. Some of those seem relevant to operating in Africa.
An-70 would also fulfill many of these, but there is the issue of Denel participation, and reliability in partnership agreements, that South Africa couldn’t pony up to fund increased development costs is excusable, but ‘defecting’ to a competitor, not so much, if they are to be credible in the future.
Snow MonkeyThe missiles (ASMP A) are already paid and Gascogne Sq also take parts to conventional wars (they were in Mali for ex).
I would assume that some component is always kept available for the dedicated role, and whatever portion may be detachable for other purposes probably cannot do so indefinitely without impacting the nuclear mission. (indefinitely in the main meaning up to 3 months to adequately train the tier 2 pilots, although beyond that would be preferrable) With the main force so stripped of fully trained crew, that seems significant. As for the missiles, that is sunk cost, if it was no longer considered worthwhile they could be scrapped completely or repurposed with conventional war-heads, or retained but without the goal of continual nuclear strike capability, i.e. the full squadron could be deployable for any and all other missions. (I don’t believe that’s the case now, but I may be wrong) The last is probably the least efficient considering the costs of ASMP A and specific training, but given the rest of the force’s lack of adequaely trained pilots, seems a better compromise and given the submarine deterrent IS always available having ASMP-A not be is not as critical an issue.
Snow MonkeyEADS, Dassault and Finmeccanica bury MALE hatchet
Just hours before the Paris Air Show officially opens its doors for business tomorrow, EADS Cassidian, Dassault Aviation and Finmeccanica have finally buried the hatchet and announced that they are ready to cooperate on a European Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) unmanned air vehicle (UAV) program.
…In a joint statement issued on June 16 the three European companies say: “Such a joint program would support the capability needs of European armed forces while optimizing the difficult budgetary situation through pooling of research and development funding.”
Who could imagine, the rationale solution standing right in front of everyone’s eyes…
My question would be are Alenia (and Saab) pushing to also institute cooperation on sub-Reaper class UAVs, as well as VTOL ones?
Snow MonkeyIf anybody has more solid numbers on how many pilots will be in the first tier, and how many in the secondary tier, that would be helpful.
Honestly, I think the need for and value of the dedicated nuclear strike squadrons and support structure should be addressed,
and if France needs nuclear ‘deterrant’ whether solely submarine based shouldn’t be enough…
If much of the airforce is reduced to a training regime like this, the strategic squadrons (certain to remain highly trained) are just doubly costly.
Snow MonkeyInteresting comments from Italian Defence Minister – basically he states Syria could become like Spanish Civil War.
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130616/DEFREG01/306160004/Italian-DM-Will-Syria-Boil-Over-Into-Regional-Conflict-
Interesting… Of course, that’s pre-US-statement on ‘chem weapon redline has been passed’ (…AHEM, don’t mind the evidence or who it’s pointing to… it’s really because of Hezbollah’), but I think this statement is a bit dubious:
Turkey because it is worried that a break up of Syria would lead to a Kurdish state,� he said.
Turkey has been happily cooperating with the northern Iraqi Kurds and subverting Baghdad’s sovereignty, so although that sort of view is the traditional one, I just don’t think it holds anymore. I don’t think Turkey cares if Kurds achieve some sort of independent state in Iraq or Syria, that is distinct from challenging Turkey’s own cohesion. In any case, the Kurdish position in Syria is pretty marginal, a separate state carved out from it wouldn’t likely be viable. If Kurds remained loyal to Syria they would be opposing the Turkish backed rebels, the other realistic option is carving out their own territories in the civil war, so Turkey itself has made the traditional viewpoint on Kurdish policy untenable.
Snow MonkeyThe second-tier pilots would be used only to sustain operations after air superiority had been achieved by front-line units and only after they had received two or three months of intense training to hone their skills, Mercier said.
So dog fighting and air combat is not really going to be the focus of training for this second tier any ways.
The second-tier pilots would be used only to sustain operations… after they had received two or three months of intense training to hone their skills, Mercier said.
I wonder how many hours that would be, over the two or three months. I suppose it can be tailored to give more focus to the exact forseen needs mix.
Normally, French fast jet pilots get 180 flying hours a year but budget demands are reducing that to 150 hours.
So will the first tier stay at 150, return to 180, or now have even more training hours?
Somebody mentioned Pilatus helping Rafale’s chances in Switzerland… I am certain that boat has now sailed, but the same concept does apply to Brazil and Embraer’s Super Tucano. With Super Tucano also offering interesting operational capabilities besides training, although that application does seem a bit more dubious, especially since it looks like they are looking at leasing flight hours and not doing an outright purchase.
My question is also what are the implications of this for joint European training, especially if they go with a split fleet of PC-21/M-346 it may very well make lots of sense to do so within a cooperative structure. That is another area where any intention to retain use of the platforms for operations (e.g. Super Tucano) would complicate things, if the planes are meant to be within a joint training unit.
To the trash talk about this reducing Dassault’s export chances, I see the opposite: UAE will be using and training the exact mix of PC-21/M-346 and also sharing Rafale would make cooperation even smoother. I see zero sign of pedalling back on developments to Rafale, saving money here is exactly to enable those to continue, and clearly any export customer will be properly informed of that subject itself and not need to rely on vague inferences on how France’s training structure for some Rafale pilots impacts Thales and Safran’s development activities. For customers looking to save money (like Brazil), they may very well be directly interested in using this model of training (perhaps with their own choice of platforms, e.g. Super Tucano, but informed by France’s experience), which would certainly be cheaper than maintaining a larger fleet of Gripen NG (with high training level) to do the same job as a Rafale fleet.
Snow MonkeyWhy should the West enforce the no-fly zone? Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Morocco, the Emirates, Kuwait, Oman, Algeria, Jordan, Turkey combined should be well able to establish one.
Algeria belongs on that list about as much as Russia does. If anything, the question is to what extent Algeria will aid Damascus. Algerian government has no love for Islamist rebels, having their own experience with such. Besides being independent from GCC axis, it does not depend on legitimizing it’s regime by promoting sectarian conflict. They don’t want to see Taliban regimes in the Arab world, and Libya is hardly re-assuring to them. Finally, although not enmeshed in the historical pan-Arab movement, they most resemble and sympathize with the secular Arab republics which have historically been in conflict with GCC axis, and which the US and West has consistently fought, e.g. Nasser, while happy to promote islamist tendencies as a counter, so will not just turn on Syria even if they don’t back it to the hilt.
Kuwait and Oman have no real prospects of such participation, neither Morocco (next door to Algeria), and Egypt is highly doubtful as well, given Turkey’s example of unrest and their existing problems and obligations they really aren’t a good prospect for such an operation. Turkey would be eager, but their domestic unrest is certainly related to opposition to their stance on Syria, and out and out war would raise that further when things are close to boiling over as is. Jordan won’t do anything untill it’s a fait accompli anyways, and besides both Saudi Arabia and UAE being more comfortable with funding mujahedeen and playing to the islamist crowd with money and words rather than direct war, they both tend to not get along much as seen by their differing opinions on backing different factions (and the shifting editorial policies of al-Jazeera vs. Saudi Arabia, etc) so are hardly a solid military alliance.
Sign In
