Better EW system… Thanks for the laughter, you made my day

I am as big a fan of blind nationalism as anyone, but you are really taking things to extremes.

The Falcon Edge system was designed and built to the UAE’s exceptionally demanding requirements and is second to none, and ahead of Spectra… and you don’t have to take my word for it. Just ask the UAE:

This is surprising in some respects as, although the Rafale performed extremely impressively during recent operations over Libya, the UAE has made no secret of the fact that it requires an aircraft significantly more advanced than the current Rafale versions in service with the Armée de l’Air.

It specifies a longer-range active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar with ground moving target detection and tracking (GMTI/GMTT), ‘interlaced’ air-to-air and air-to-ground modes, a more capable version of the Spectra electronic warfare suite, integration with MBDA’s Meteor long-range missile and, crucially, with more powerful versions of the Snecma M88 engines, producing more than nine tonnes of thrust (about 1.5 tonnes more than the current engine).

Over time, Meteor integration and some AESA and Spectra improvements have become a funded part of the core Rafale programme, but the Armée de l’Air has no stated or funded requirement for a more powerful engine, which the UAE reportedly still wants and which many analysts believe would be essential for long range air-to-ground operations with heavy weapons in the region (and certainly to allow carriage of a three-missile heavy strike loadout using the Black Shaheen). Nor are planned French radar and Spectra improvements believed to be sufficient to meet UAE requirements.

http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/uae-s-rafale-deal-is-no-mirage.html

While on the subject of upgrades necessary to bring the Rafale up to the standard the UAE is currently accustomed to in their F-16 Block 60s… the UAE also believes the Rafale to be under powered.

French air force pilots interviewed at Solenzara say that the current engine power allows them to fly all of their missions without limitations, and that on a seven-hour mission to Libya they can cruise at Mach 0.9 on a 50% power setting with a full ordnance load. They also say that operations in the United Arab Emirates, Afghanistan or other high-temperature areas have not shown a real need for more power, although they all agree that it would be nice to have.

One Rafale pilot at Solenzara who has flown in the UAE remarked that one reason they want a more powerful engine is that its pilots are now used to the latest F-16 Block 60, which is essentially a small airframe built around a very big engine, and so find the Rafale underpowered by comparison.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/feature/126031/**france-readies-rafale-upgrade-for-2012.html

Now don’t take this the wrong way. The Rafale is unquestionably an excellent aircraft, but you are being delusional if you think its poor track record against the F-16 is a product of politics or budget buyers.

The Rafale lost the UAE deal on quality, and has failed to secure the deal to replace the Mirage 2000-9s on quality.

The UAE are demanding buyers and as much as they would like to maintain two suppliers for their air force, they aren’t willing to accept anything less than they are currently accustomed to do so.

The video where the eagle grabbed the kid was a far better fake, they should try to hire the people who made that one next time.

Rafale and F-16 are not really comparable, in the sense that they belong in different classes. If you want to compare Rafale to other planes I think F-15, Typhoon and SH are more relevant, however the F-15 is of an older generation, thus really Typhoon and SH compare to the Rafale, in terms of similar capabilities and growth potential.

The point is simply this; most countries don’t need the capabilities of an F-15, Rafale or Typhoon. Thus they go for the cheaper F-16 instead.

Not really comparable? Lets be serious for a moment. Not only are counties comparing the Rafale and the F-16, they usually pick the F-16.

…and don’t go thinking that it is some kind of a budget vs capability kind of trade-off. Something like an F-16 block 60 is hardly a buget aircraft and the UAE is hardly a budget buyer.

The UAE picked the F-16 over the Rafale for some pretty simple reasons, it was more capable. It had a better radar, a better EW system, and a far better selection of armaments.

In Morocco the F-16 was cheaper, but again that doesn’t mean it required compromises in capability. Sometimes cheaper just means a better deal.

Much of the reason the F-16 has been able to offer so much more capability for less is because of the scale of the program. The Rafale is currently being produced at a rate of 11 aircraft a year… that means 11 radars, ~22ish engines, etc. It drives up the price of everything. (One of the big reasons the Rafale win in India was so suspicious to the EF program… )

“Generation” is a marketing term it is meanngless.
Anybody basing their “argument” on such doesn’t have an argument.

To quote Morrocco is laughable, it is well documented what happened there.

As for the UAE, well isn’t it strange they bought Mirage 2000 and then bought F16’s, i wonder if they are keeping all political channels open… :rolleyes:
(PS got anything to say about the F35, non marketing comment and facts prefered)

😀

Right, so when bluewings says you can’t compare an F-16 to a Rafale because the Rafale is a “half generation” ahead… you say nothing. When I point out that the two are of the same generation by any reasonable standard suddenly it is a “marketing term.”

As for what happened in Morocco, you are right it is no secret. The F-16 won by offering a better plane at a better price to the actual operators while the French tried to push an over-priced political deal with the leadership.

The Moroccan Air Force got their plane.

The same thing happened in the UAE. After a long and careful evaluation the UAE Air Force selected the F-16 OVER the Rafale.

The Mirage 2000-9 was a non-competitive upgrade deal with a few extra airframes tacked on to fill out the force structure.

ouch!

1/ india:

long and exhaustive evaluation process: the result is not about what they believed but about what they measured, big difference

2/ switzerland

evaluation process that required off the shelf finished aircraft, switched by politicians to a future project of evolution of an aircraft that was measured below reference point in several areas (and finished dead last in pretty much any domain in which the swiss tested it)

for the rest, the “rumors” are usually quite well documented be it becaus ethe choice was made on political pressure like in korea or because a european country $crewed up big time (morocco) for example…

Yep, pretty much like I said. You want to dismiss the occasions where the US wins and accept the case where a plane you like wins…

Well documented rumors? :rolleyes:

The fact is that the US’s 4th generation planes have won more than they have lost against their European competitors and that says an awful lot about how they perform. The idea that one force after another is selecting jets they believe to be inferior because of outside factors is just wishful thinking on your part.

Possible Rafale MLU , with new stealthy air intakes , CFTs , comformal arrays , conformal weapon pods :

Cheers .

:rolleyes:

You can graft as much stuff as you want to a 4th generation plane, you still have a 4th generation plane.

Look at the UAE’s F-16s. They are incredible planes, but there is just only so much that can be done with a 4th generation airframe.

hopsalot, your nick reflects your way of thinking (believing?)

LM has been saying that for years now… and still, the new problems keep arising, goals are lowered to be able to pretend that the aircraft reach them (it’s rather that goals reach the poor performance of the aircraft, in fact), but you guys still maintain your claims regardless anything that may happen

It is development, finding problems is the name of the game. The F-35 has experienced a level of scrutiny few other programs have.

Every little crack, every comment in a developmental report, etc is blown out of proportion by hysterical critics. In most other programs half of the issues the F-35 has suffered would never have even become public, or if they do it is in the form of rumors.

The overall trajectory of the program is quite good right now. More work remains to be done but progress is now rapid.

Consiering your rude and rather unpleasant attitude toward posters who you do not agree with i’m inclined to think that wouldn’t be such a bad thing.

It is what you are left with when you don’t have facts on your side.

The simple -fact- is that numerous previous programs have suffered developmental problems only to go on to stellar operational service.

The F-35 has has issues no doubt, it is a incredibly large and complex program, but it is finally over the hump and well on its way to becoming a system that will be indispensable to commanders and warfighters in the coming years.