glitterWell, if the Rafale’s deal between France and UAE are broken up finally, this may be due to the most ridiculous reason I’ve ever heard……:D
The truth is that’s two toally stupid arguments … which means two excellent reasons from a political point of view.
glitterWe never know what is included…In 2006, there was a figure available, 35,000 € per hour for the Rafale M, but it was to decrease with time.
The target cost is 13% higher than the Mirage’s (which is considered as good since Rafale is a twin engine).
Edelstenne (Dassault CEO) was quoted by the Assemblée Nationale saying that the MCO should cost 12,000 € per flight hour.
Are we sure we aren’t comparing apple and orange ? 35.000 € versus more than 70.000 € The gap looks too important.
glitterThat is not anyone’s fault and what Swerve said was that the rules of the competition made the Mirage-2000 ineligible. That is not at all true. If Dassault could have kept the line open, the Mirage-2000 could have been offered. It’s a different matter that it would’ve been uncompetitive against the likes of the Typhoon and Super Hornet.
Are you trying to say that Dassault should have enter the competition with the Mirage and not the Rafale, without a single chance of winning ?
But why ? For the lulz ?
It might have been in French and Dassault’s own interests to develop a Mirage-2000-X derivative like the Gripen NG. It would’ve kept Dassault competitive in many smaller markets where the Rafale was simply unaffordable.
Do you know the cost of a Mirage 2000-9 and a Rafale F3 ?
I still have a pdf copy of a 1980s Flight International where Dassault’s exec himself was stating that the lighter planes have historically sold more than the heavier ones..and yet they moved out of the market themselves.
You are quoting a 30 years old article ?
They moved out, of course, Dasasult couldn’t upgrade the Mirage AND the Rafale. There was a customer for Rafale, none for Mirage.
But that is because it’s a test-bed for the Rafale’s radar and OSF. If an AESA can be tailored for the Gripen NG or F-16 (even the retrofit SABR and RANGR AESAs) then there is absolutely no reason why a Mirage-2000 cannot be operational with an AESA. Thales could’ve certainly custom-made an array for the Mirage-2000’s nose, power and cooling requirements.
Maybe the issue is that the French didn’t have the kind of captive markets that the US does which allow for large volumes and spread development costs over several airframes.
In one word: yes.
So it was the French govt that decided that the Mirage-2000 line should be closed?
I quote a paragraph from you about the France-Taiwan relation, and this is something ruled by governements, not Dassault.
glitterThis isn’t true, there were no new rules that made the Mirage-2000-5 ineligible for the MRCA competition. It was purely a Dassault decision on economic grounds, to close the Mirage-2000’s assembly line due to lack of orders and withdraw it from the MRCA competition, and also because they wanted to promote the Rafale instead.
Certainly, on the other hand, as soon as the line up for the MMRCA has been compose of Typhoon or Super Hornet, do you think it would have been wise for Dassault to let the Mirage 2000-5 by itself ?
They knew that the process would take quite some time, so they propose the Rafale instead.
But the bigger issue was the fact that Dassault didn’t develop the Mirage as much as it should have, possibly because they were afraid that it would eat into the Rafale’s sales.
That’s certainly true, Boeing has the same problem betwen Super Hornet and Eagle.
Feasibility is not an issue here- there are Mirage-2000 flying testbeds with the RBE-2 AESA and OSF (not sure if functioning or not though), so with company funds it would have been possible to further develop the Mirage-2000-5 into a Mirage-2000-X model with RBE2 and OSF, or at least elements of OSF, coupled with light weight composites derived from the Rafale, allowing a lighter all-up weight and even more sprightly performance. that would’ve been similar to the F-16 Block 60.
Feasibility doesn’t equal with efficient operationnal plane, mirage with OSF or RBE2 were prototype only.
So, yes, dassault was in position to heavily upgrade the mirage 2000 with lots of technologies from the rafale program …. so they would propose for the same price a mirage 2000-x or a Rafale, that doesn’t looks wise.
You just have to look at the huge difference of price between a F-16 block 52+ and a block 60.
They didnt’ push Snecma for a new engine with more thrust, or at least newer variants of the M53-P2 with higher thrust which precluded the development of any new variants with higher weight and added capabilities, otherwise at least a few nations would’ve been interested in a Mirage-2000-X variant.
The M53-PX exist http://www.scribd.com/doc/29188425/Snecma-M53 and no customer has shown any interest.
and had the French not screwed Taiwan over so badly by cozying up to the Chinese, they’d have definitely got larger orders from them. If anyone is to blame for the Mirage-2000 line’s demise, it is Dassault and nobody else.
Dassault can’t be blamed because of a decision from the french governement.
glitterI’m pretty sure there were articles in the past about how customers were denied the ability to use other kit on their Mirage.
During the Korean comeptition, the american senate said they would refuse the integration of AMRAAM on the Rafale in case of victory of the Dassault’s bird.
Greece decided to buy the Viper at a time when Dassault was begging to sell them more Mirage’s , namely the year 2005 when they were looking for alternative to Eurofighters .
Mode Jackjack ON
In fact, the mirage is so good that HAF hasn’t been in need to increase the number of mirages meanwhile, the lack of flexibilty of the F-16 is such an hindrance that they had to buy more of them.
Mode Jackjack OFF
The threads are here to exchange arguments pal .It might sometimes turn into a clash of opposing views. So what ? ..You don’t wanna read anything I write? Your choice its fine for me !
The problem is that what you’re talking about isn’t the topic of that thread.
glitterFeasible, certainly. Worth the cost in the current context and real-world requirements ? Not sure.
Wasn’t it DassaultMDBA who had in mind to create a kind of “coffin” to reduce the payload/pylon RCS ?
I haven’t heard any news about that since then.
glitteri was just answering this
Originally Posted by jackjack View Post
you’re ducking, weaving and just generally waffling on modes, its been clearly statedglitter said
So, is it a stealthy way to say that you were wrong ?
Yes, that you were wrong about the lack mix of air/air and air/ground.
the rest isnt worth the effort, especially when you cant even follow your own posts
It’s quite hard to follow because you always switch the subject of the discussion, a basic trollistic behaviour.
glitterthe vice chief of the french airforce said it, are you saying he’s wrong ?
The quote was about the origin of spectra, what is his opinion about that ?
glitterErkokite
as i read it when there are multiple suppliers, there are multiple names
this indicates that Thales North America Inc. is the sole supplier and supplies the whole system…
Wow, a single line in an article and Jackjack is jumping on any conclusion.
Anyway, SPECTRA has been develloped in France, with common work from Thomson and Matra.
http://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/defense/rafale/smart-and-discrete-sensors.html?L=1
or they would have has just MMIC’s if this was the case and then named other suppliers that built other parts
Or they don’t want/can write who made other parts.
About OSF and the problem of IR from SAGEM, any news about the UK company who did such a mess ? Since it’s english, I understand why it doesn’t work. :diablo:
you’re ducking, weaving and just generally waffling on modes, its been clearly stated
So, is it a stealthy way to say that you were wrong ?
because it matters if usa puts an embargo on france, there will be no supply of usa origin or tech, not only on spectra, but several usa companies in that list for the rafale
thales usa cant export if usa gov say no
if we broaden it out to all of france’s defense equipment that is usa reliant, it makes quite a list
We have confirmation from Dassault that the Rafale don’t have any problem of that kind, I would like to see your sources.
glitteri was wrong about what ?
i’ve been waiting for you to answer my post #912 to you above
The post #912 was an answer to two posters but not to me.
the modes are the same for the new aesa, going by the links and the general said it doesnt have the modes uae wants
I suppose you understand the difference between:
– same modes from PESA to AESA
and
– doesn’t have the mode UAE want
aren’t you ?
BeingThinkingi know thats a hard one to swallow, there are more yank companies involved in making rafale
never let the flag waving PR guys kid you
LEt’s say Thales US did a huge work on spectra, so what ? As long as it belong to Thales and fully available to export 🙂
i just looked at the link, you’re right the french are doing the aesa, Thales Airborne Systems
but the swededs are doing the integration of the aesa antenna to the backend.
What is the “integration” of the AESA to the backend ? My god, according to YOU, there was nothing to do about such integration.
glitterDas Kardinal
ah, rafale fanboys and their dreams of photon torpedoes and klingon cloaking
its a fact thales usa do the electronics of spectra and the funny part is this self-reliance, if usa embargoes france, no spectra and no tactical gps satellite use
its a fact that thales uk do the fso/osf
its a fact the swedes are doing the harware intergration of the aesa to the backend
i dont know about the aesa antenna, but as the paper was written by thales netherlands, it is possibleEDS of course, would you like me to tell you some more ?
In fact, we were talking of functions for the RBE2 AESA but suddenly you change the discussion, why is that ? Just a problem to recognize that you were wrong ?
glitterglitter, you said that they have GMTT / GMTI interlacing/interleaved, give a link
Could you point my link with “the RBE2 has GMTT/GMTI interlacing/interleaved”[/QUOTE]
it is good news that the general said that its 10+ regardless for next year, i missed that bit
No problem my dear friend
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1625017&postcount=804
Deliveries to the French armies should be reduced to only 2 or 3 machines per year for a time, the export bringing the complement to reach the threshold of 11 Rafale produced per year.
since the Rafale does not presently offer that capability, can’t they just search for an existing aircraft that already does?
UAE don’t only look for a plane with such capabilities, they want a plane from a country that can put a military base there + deep ties.
glitternow you’re just spinning, give better information than that if you want to make your point, that i think just refers to getting aesa
I suppose it’s irony.
its not the extreme case, its the plans now, i quoted the french general that they are building 2-3, if you have a creditable quote that refutes this
The general said “11” rafale per year with perhaps 2 or 3 only for the french AF/Marine.
Unless extreme case.
the only way the line will stay open in a few years is if there are export orders or it will shut for 2 years, is the statement i saw
Extreme case
glitter[QUOTE=jackjack;1626813]got a link that it was done years ago ?
http://www.electronicaviation.com/aircraft/Dassault_Rafale/819
In January 2005 it was announced that eight aircraft would be cut from French orders specifically to free up funding for advanced radar development, while Meteor integration is also being accelerated.
regardless whether they get export orders or not, are only building 2-3 a year for france for a few years and then having a 2 year stopped french production, is the statements
In an extreme case, we can imagine that no Rafale AT ALL will be built for 2 years, no way that only 3 Rafale a year. I’m talking from the point of view of the production itself. Dassault already state that building fewer than 8 planes will increase the price so much that it would be pointless to buy fewer since it will be more expensive.
glitterbut it all comes down to money and it seems they have trouble enough just financing to build them
It was done years ago, come on.
as the general said, they are only going to build 2-3 french rafales a year for a while, its also been said that then there will be a 2 year period where no rafales will be built for france, even if there isnt an export order
The french governement is in a hurry to sign for export Rafale so that they could dodge the bill for 2 years of production, otherwise, they will have to built at least 10 or 11 Rafale a year.
Sign In
