No doubt Rafale is very maneuvrable at lower speeds, but how is the Rafale at higher speeds? I think I have read that Typhoon is very strong there.

Isn’t it rather overkill to use 1000 lb bombs against ground vehicles?

To answer some of my own questions I qoute a qoute from Arthuro:

However, he heavily emphasized the performance of the french system in the field of arms data fusion, from his point of view, the main reason of the superiority obtained. Instead of each sensor to display its studs (aircraft detected) on a specific screen, forcing the Typhoon pilot to operate an intellectual gymnastics , annoying in combat stress, to check if the plot of its corresponding screen of electronic warfare was or was not the one visible on the radar screen or IRST, the Rafale’s systems present to the pilot a single plot on a screen, the system automatically compared the plots provided by the various sensors on board and decided if it was or not the same plane. The french pilots have also appreciated the agility of the antenna of the electronics RBE2 radar – The Typhoon has for now only a mechanical antenna – allowing to refresh the situation in the whole volume monitored. But they insist, for close combat, on the perfect controllability of their Rafale, thanks to the excellence of FBW, to the extreme limits of the flight envelope.. To point the nose toward the target and to design it to the weapons system in the absence of a viewfinder-HMD while operating at very low speed. What are not necessarily capable of the main opponents of the Rafale …
Well obviously, one should not rejoice in excess. The extremely positive results of these meetings have been obtained in special circumstances. The pilots had been set specific roles by the commander of the COMAO device and were therefore not free to exploit in depth all the potentials of their weapons system. The results have been different perhaps in other circumstances (nevertheless, some time ago, another meeting between Typhoon and Rafale, in Corsica, was also turned into “massacre” at the expense of the first 8 losses to 0 ). But, simply put, the EC 1 / 7 pilots are particularly satisfied with their stay in UAE. Their demonstration has , aptly, made a strong buzz [noise] among the aviators of the region and troubled the Anglo-Saxons until now convinced of the utter superiority of their planes. A disturbance also compounded by the loss – virtual of course – of an F-22 gun shot by an UAE Mirage 2000-9 flown, this time, by a French experimented pilot. Really, when everything goes wrong … P

Oh don’t get me wrong I’m not trying to be biased, i just thought that article and the subsequent on provided by Colibri shouldn’t be used as proof as they are written from a very pro rafale point of view. and was just suggesting that export sales may be a better indicator of aircraft ability because, no doubt the buying county will have access to all of the information we would love to possess and will make their judgements based on these facts.

I think it’s quite well known that the export sales by themselves are a quite poor indicator of technical capabilities… As already mentioned costs is also very important. Then there are offsets, and also hugely important, politics.

Interoperability is also important for many countries.

Rafale scores low on many of these points, and this is enough to offset the technical capabilities. Also keep in mind that it’s just now that the Rafale is actually maturing, getting all the capabilities it needs…

oh french Mod site isn’t easy? there are numerous serious sources..

12t as the french name it empty fuel (à vide) when they get 9.4t for the rafale C 9.7t for Rafale M and 9.9t for Rafale B all in the Class of 10t!

Still waiting for a link to a credible source of the 9.4t empty fuel Rafale…

Could somebody remind us of the outcome of some dogfights between Rafale and F-16 some years ago?

As I recall it the Rafale “won” however also the F-16 scored some points…

Rafale is no doubt a fantastic a/c!

However if the latest rumors are to be believed, the L1 may well win.

Based on open statistics from the Swedish Air Force, the calculated cost per flying hour is 4,000 USD including fuel but excluding cost for mission personnel (operations, maintenance and other) at Level 1. The major cost elements included in this cost are as follows:

• Fuel consumption at 0.40 USD per Liter

• Level-1 maintenance material and repair parts

• Airframe Level-2 maintenance, repair and overhaul, including labor and material (i.e. D-level)

• Propulsion System Level 2 maintenance, repair and overhaul, including labor and material (i.e. D-level)

• R&M (Reliability and Maintainability) driven Modifications and Upgrades. Any modification kits and associated spares required for safety or deficiency correction purposes will be provided within the framework of the proposed Support concept. A cost for specific R&M driven modifications and DMS (Diminishing Manufacturing Source) changes has been estimated and is included in the cost per flying hour.

http://www.saabgroup.com/en/Air/Gripen-Fighter-System/Gripen-for-Brazil/The-Gripen-Solution/A-winning-denominator—Gripens-LCC/

Comparing operating costs is a risky business… but here we got at least some level of detail.

Does anybody have comparable figures from Dassault and Eurofighter?

Pure bias flaming with false sources!

as exemple,
Rafale C is 9.400t last ministery sources!
EF is 12t last consortium source
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDIQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eurofighter.com%2Ffileadmin%2Fweb_data%2Fdownloads%2Fextpub%2F01_F22Article_EF_World.pdf&rct=j&q=eurofighter%2012t%20empty%20fuel&ei=YHShTdXlNJO5hAfw9t2HBQ&usg=AFQjCNFqVseakyLb0kufPfZx7BiCHGB2DA&cad=rja

in CAP Rafale has a better T/W ratio than EF Gripin SH etc..

Pretty strong to say “pure bias flaming with false sources” when that’s exactly what you do yourself…

You have not yet given any sources for the 9.400 kg number.

And the 12t number is not empty weight as you indicated. You are comparing apples to pears that don’t exist…