glitterBoth engines are as efficient (and the M88 a little bit more).
Both engine are “as efficient” but the EJ200 is quite more powerful 🙂
The very fact that SNECMA need a complete upgrade (new air intake needed, bigger diameter, heavier) to be as powerful AND as efficient is only the proof that the EJ200 ON PAPER enjoy an advantage over the M88.
Of course, I can’t judge the friendlyness with maintenance, reliability and users.
glitterWhy is it rising? Having the largest and second most influential Lobby group [Rolls-Royce are No 1] against you isn’t good. 😎
As long as the TOT problem doesn’t reach an agreement, and unless the UK accept to give up any control over the RN, the JSF is a no-go.
Of course, if RR is leading the country, it’s another problem.
glitter“The government should consider a plan to build a naval version of the Eurofighter combat plan as a “fallback” in case it can’t get greater transfer of weapons technology on the Joint Strike Fighter, a U.S.-U.K. program, Turner said. “We do not see any other fallback solution,” the CEO [of BAE]said.”
Is this what we call “tongue in cheek” in english??? 😀 😀
I wanted to post the same paragraph?
Sorry Rob, obviously, the tiny chance of the Rafale is still rising a little bit.
glitterRe offset, neither France nor the US has ever injected SUSTAINED value into a customer’s economy in the way that Gripen International has done.
Are you talking of the South African deal ?
A read an article (not sure of the reliability) many years ago saying that the french secret service manage to get the offer from the Gripen team and said to DAssault to give up that deal. According to them, it was a trick from Bae to kill the export of the Gripen.
costs of operation, Gripen’s are a fraction of even M2Ks, while through life costs are dramatically lower. And the Gripen’s rapid turnarounds, and ability to operate with a tiny conscript groundcrew and minimal GSE are what give it the edge in off-base ops.
We have seen what a group of mirage 2000 can do with limited infrastructure (read Afghanistan).
Can you assure me that the gripen would have been able to do the same ?
glitterIf. IF they’re thinking seriously of putting a more capable aircraft on Sao Paulo, then Rafale makes sense. It has, after all, already flown off it. 😉 Used for trials before CdG was built.
A rafale on the Sao Paulo would be effective only in A2A, the limited payload (because of the short catapult) would be an hindrance for A2G weapons (unless the M88-3 is available, could help).
But I heard too that the onboard facilities aren’t the best for a plane such like the Rafale (much more equipement than the predecessor, so much more spare parts …)
glitterC Seven, Puffadder, Glitter,
You French blokes won’t acknowledge the strengths of any programme unless it’s French, will you?
Keep your whinning for yourself and ask to Rob if I’m not able to criticized french programs.
If you can’t see how a Gripen scores over a Mirage 2000, you need to open your minds as well as your eyes.
Of course I can, that’s why I spoke of Rafale.
but because its principal early export prospects were in Central and Eastern Europe Gripen was designed to allow the integration of Soviet, British, Swedish, Israeli and US weapons and its weapons system is optimised for quick and easy integrations. Dassault don’t offer that on Rafale, and nor do EF GmbH. Lockmart certainly don’t.
Ok, so could you explain us that miracle because I can’t see how it’s possible.
Nor can Rafale offer anything like the same ability to operate from semi-prepared forward strips, or with such a small logistics footprint and with so little GSE and infrastructure.
Is it something related to internal systems of the Gripen or dedicated infrastructure for the Gripen ?
Nor can the M2K, F-16, Rafale or Typhoon offer anything like the same low through life costs that Gripen International can.
Yes, even if I’ don’t remember if the difference with the Mirage 2000 is that important.
Any early Rafale exports would severely compromise the scheduled stand-up of AdlA Rafale units.
According to the CEO of Dassault, you’re wrong.
http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/12/cr-cdef/02-03/c0203017.asp
M. Charles Edelstenne a indiqué que la société Dassault Aviation n’aura aucun mal à faire passer ses capacités de production d’une cadence de trois appareils par an à un rythme de livraisons de seize à vingt-deux exemplaires chaque année. Elle serait même en mesure de soutenir un plan de charge plus dense encore.
In the Brazilian context, my understanding is that the Conops with Gripen could be adjusted to allow strip alert by aircraft on the ground at forward bases, rather than long endurance patrols.
I’m totally incompetent about this kind of thing so …….
EDIT
About the offset side, I must say that it seems that France haven’t the same consistent approach than USA, ISrael or UK but, again, since I don’t really care of that side …
glitterWho can tell me why Typhoon has still been using mechanically scaned antenna? Is that Radar Rafale used belong to a kind of passive electronically scaned antenna, so no matter both the antenna Typhoon and Rafale used is similar?
I mean whether if a radar is belong to passive electronically scaned, then elec-scaned and mech-scaned is similar, except the radar is belong to active elec-scaned?
I thought the question had been answered over times.
The Typhoon was supposed to be a pure fighter, so the radar had a focus over range.
The rafale is a multi role plane since the first day, since the AESA was too expensive (and/or technologies not mature enough) we went for the PESA even if it used to translate into a little sacrifice with the pure range. On the other hand, we trade that with many advantage of an electronic radar. (I said MANY and not ALL)
glitterSeriously though, the E2C would be sorely lacking from a UK carrier, but if you fit catapults on the carrier, then you can go with the carrier version of the JSF instead of the VSTOL version, so here the Rafale is out of the equation again.
the problem of tranfert of technologies would stay the same between a F-35B and F-35 C.
That would put too much prejudice on the Typhoon’s image in my opinion
No doubt that the marketing rep from Dassault won’t hesitate to use that argument.
But on the other hand, thinking of your customers as pathetic idiot isn’t the best behaviour too.
The naval typhoon doesn’t exist, so UK cannot buy what doesn’t exist.
and I’m not even talking about the anti french sentiment.
It’s not the first time I read that argument.
And it’s not the first time I wonder if it isn’t just groundless.
Would you really think that the golden boy in the city would think, while going to work “Damn, the navy just bought damn french RAfale” ?
Do you think that Harrier pilots would prefer to left the army and fly ATR 42 or SAAB 2000 instead of flying the Rafale ?
glitterGripen is a far better F-5 replacement than Rafale, is far more affordable, has greater weapons flexibility, is available now, has lower through life costs, and promises really effective investment in local industry – not just in aerospace/defence, but penetrating into the economy and genuinely paying for the procurement. Dassault simply can’t do that.
As a developing industrial nation, Brazil wants and needs the kind of offset/industrial package that only Gripen International are offering at the moment.
Six arguments and only 2 right for 4 wrong.
No other new fighter has the weapons flexibility that Gripen enjoys.
What the hell are you talking about ???
Well yes it is, actually. And they can offer used aircraft, upgraded to C/D standards. And they need an order to keep the line open and can deliver new build jets (if required) with less disruption to the domestic customer.
But the RAfale is available now too 🙂
Ok, certainly not as mature as the gripen but a quick delivery with a sub-F2 standard isn’t impossible.
They can offer direct participation in the form of work on any aircraft built for Brazil and for future customers, but more crucially Gripen International (supported by the Swedish Government) can offer imaginative offset work. The original Brazilian deal included an innovative public transport system for Brasilia or Rio, if I recall correctly. Gripen’s offset programmes have been proven in South Africa, Hungary and the Czech Republic, and Gripen International can credibly offer to repay the full value of a defence contract through offset and industrial programmes. Neither the USA, nor the UK, nor France has got the experience, expertise, government backing, or hunger to be able to match the Swedes in this area.
Yeah, the offset of more than 100%, we all know that.
First, you’re wrong about the USA, look at the deal for Polish F-16 (don’t look at what happened next :diablo: :diablo: )
So, you’re wrong about the governement backing, the hunger, what’s next ?
If the Brazilians want at least qualitative parity with & preferably superiority over all the neighbours then Gripen would give them that in a way that Mirage 2000s cannot. Rafale would, too, and so would Typhoon, but at much higher cost and with much higher costs of ownership.
I found you logic flawed here.
Brazil get a plane that answer to their needs, not that can just get them a better plane than his neigbourhood.
Grippen is obviously the best plane for a country like Switzerland, not like Brazil (even with a past with older Mirage)
Your point about range is well made, but with AAR and with the Gripen’s legendary deployability and forward basing capability, an air force that has been doing the job with F-5s and Mirage III/5/50s is entirely capable of accomplishing its tasks with Gripen.
Legendary deployability ? :rolleyes:
As we said, right, Brazil can use a gripen, but a plane like a Rafale or su-35 would give them a brand new capability.
glitterWont happen. The french verbally offered the Rafale, out of politeness John Reid said he would seriously consider it, and then the low quality journalism of the facist mail on sunday took over.
You missed the whole point, the tranfert of technologies coming with the JSF.
Pressuring USA with a navalized Typhoon was a joke. The rafale is obviously (with now the french CVF) is a real competitor to the F-35.
But unless the USA don’t change from their absurd position, the Rafale in RN isn’t the more probable.
glitterATM su30s are being mfg in HAL Nashik factory. So he does know what he speaks about.
….
The figure of 21M USD per LCA came from either of ADA or HAL. And it looks fair value of the quality of product it AC in paf or plaaf are dated or comparable that of IAF.
I give up :rolleyes:
glitteraustralia ca31,a great project,but failed………..
Can you say “Mirage III” ?
glitterWhat? I read an article where HAL chief quoted the above mentioned figures.
How can he know these figures ? Only god knows.
The problem of the IAF is that the LCA is LATE.
glitterWhat will India gain by getting that?
What about a 20 millions mirage ?
glitterIt’s obvious.
The mirage is out ….. unless India buy the whole production line 😀
Sign In
