glitterSingapore evaluated Typhoon, with several different pilots flying it in the UK, in Spain and in country, and also flying later software standards in the rig and in the active cockpit. They had a full bid with pricing, timescales and a full technical specification to assess and analyse. That’s what I call an evaluation.
The Netherlands did not evaluate the aircraft in that way.
If not for months, it’s a quick evaluation
Korea selected the F-15, and not (as I believe they should have done) the Rafale. It’s hardly a ringing endorsement for Rafale though, is it?
But were ranked first and when the Typhoon is kick out of the competition it’s a fantastic news for Bae.
no really, I don’t understand.
Remember that what prompted my remarks was the stupid claim that Korea, the Netherlands and Singapore somehow proved Rafale’s continuing superiority. Again: Korea – Rafale rejected. NL – no formal evaluation. Singapore – RSAF preference known to be Typhoon.
1) Korea ranked the Rafale first and buy Eagles for political reasons.
2) a quick avaluation in Netherlands put the Rafale really ahead of the Typhoon.
3) RSAF said the Typhoon “No thanks”.
4) In Austria, the Typhoon was opposed to the mirage and in few years, they will have a very basic Typhoon
5) Greece suddenly decided to buy overpriced Typhoon without any evaluation. Dassault make a bid 15% lower.
If I must believe an article in “Le Point” the french secret service asked to a greek minister why his brother in law got a huge fund movement on an account in Lebanon and the following week Greece dropped the Typhoon.
There have been plenty of leaks, some of them from Boeing, some from Dassault, some from the various radar/engine/weapon suppliers and the most persuasive from the RSAF itself. None of these sources had anything to gain by intimating that Typhoon was the RSAF’s preferred choice, but all did say exactly that.
Sorry, the single source I know about that is an article (smiling eastern or something like that).
The decision to eliminate Typhoon was essentially political. The fact that Rafale remains in contention merely demonstrates that it is politically preferable,
Could you elaborate please ?
Rafale is certainly the best choice for French requirements, and it will be for some other requirements, too (I’d include the UK’s carrier requirement), but Typhoon enjoys key advantages in other areas, and will be a superior choice for many users. Neither aircraft comes close to F/A-22, of course, though both are more cost effective than Raptor.
I think (nearly) all french posters can understand that, don’t worry 😉
glitterThere has been no formal Dutch evaluation of Typhoon. One senior officer having one flight in the aircraft does not represent an evaluation. Or do you think that the USAF evaluated it when Jumper had his jolly?
Korea unarguably selected F-15 over Rafale. Using Korea as an example of Rafale’s supposed superiority over Typhoon is thus rather silly.
Singapore. Typhoon was preferred by the RSAF.
LEt’s summarise
A quick evaluation (like the Typhoon in NEtherlands) isn’t fair to the value of the Eurofighter but another one in Singapore which is supposed to say that the Typhoon is the best is faire ?
When Korea put the Rafale ahaed of the competition and buy F-15 it means that the RAfale isn’t superior to the Typhoon but when SIngapore drop the same plane and keep the rafale in the competition, it can only means that the Typhoon is better ?
weird :diablo:
glitterbut as a proud singaporean i’m very pleased with the Formidable-class.
You ought to be.
Saudi or Taiwanese Lafayette are high end model, but I heard that SIngapor has bought even better model.
It’s noticeable for the superstructure which is supposed to be lower than previous model.
glitterSorry say again? Who is constantly doing THIS here? Who doesn’t know: Aerodynamic basics, Aerospacial history Basic of Air Combat and couldn’t tell a the difference between his mum ironing plank and an aerofoil?
You’re the guy who can be saying whatever, at least you could have the decency to take the critics your constant BIAS and false writing is attrating.
You’re iritating at least and only trying to deny the most obvious thing here, Rafale is a better combat aircrfaft by design point.
Get a life.
And we must assume that your superior knowledge allowed you to answer “You pathetic looser” for a question about acceleration and Weight/thrust ratio 😉
Sorry, on french forums, we have several posters with very good skills and no one is beting his m**t about the aerodynamic of the rafale.
glitterActualy Kovy it´s still far from done… there is a number of steps before this can be counted as a fact… Congress has to apporove this deal and the governments situation in relation to Congress is Chaotic to say the least… It will be an uphill batthe for the M2000C…. let´s wait a while before popping the champagne bottle…
On the other hand, the problem begin to be really urgent now and I don’t think that another deal can be signed in a short time for a smaller price.
glitterCorrect me if I’m wrong, but according what I understand Rafales intakes are not best suited for such supersonicspeeds, as they may be “to” small. At altitude air is more thin so it’s more difficult to supply engines with the necessary airflow…
The m88-3 with higher thrust need a need air intakes according Air & Cosmos.
Bigger but smaller RCS if we must believe them.
glitterIMO, why Saudi’s require latest A/C.. when US it guarding their backyard.. :rolleyes:
Maybe because they don’t want them to do that.
Saudi will probably not acquire Chinese or Russian aircraft. Simply not prestigeous for them. It may be ok if they are buying APCs or small arms but aircraft are just so visible.
It seems that SAudi wil buy pakistanis MBT.
glitterRafale C is supposed to be approx. 350kg lighter than the two-seater and approx. 620kg lighter than Rafale M. So I get a range of 9,650kg-10,000kg for Rafale C…
Perhaps these planes flew with some testing materials ? :confused:
Anyway, if Rafale has gained 600kg, that’s still half as much as Typhoon has gained over the same period. So the gap in T/W ratios has in fact narrowed. +1 point for Rafale… :p
On the other hand, the Typhoon engineers needed to manage quite a huge task (from an interceptor to mutlti role) whereas DAssault has had all cards in hand. (don’t remember the english equivalent :p )
glitterI only wanted to point out the fact that there’re other aircraft as flexible as the Rafale. Some people here tend to believe the Rafale is the first and only real multirole fighter, ah yes I forgot omnirole…
Let’s say that the rafale is the first carrier anable with electronic array fighter 🙂
About omnirole, well, no doubt that future version of superhornet and typhoon and all F-35 or f-22 would be as omnirole as the Rafale. :confused:
Perhaps that fonk is right and that Dassault manage the get the best aerodynamic materpiece. then what ?
glitterYou are right that these types are specialized, but you also see that many of them have the same tasks.
An F/A-18E/F could theoretically also replace all these types…
I think so too, but I’m not sure the aerodynamic is versatile enough.
glitterAh yes ok.
But I personally wonder what has happend to AMSAR as the french seems to go their own way. I know a demonstrator with 144 modules was tested in the later 90s. I also spoke with a radar designer from EADS Deutschland who showed me a T/R module he had in his bag. So also in Germany the work on AESA continues but there’re no current informations in which way work will go ahead and what’s going up with AMSAR.
A problem lies in what is/was the goal of the AMSAR program ?
IIRC, it was only to design a new generation of MMIC for AESA, not to built a whole array.
glitterDon’t know about the possible max g-load of Typhoon. -3g to +9g is the normal limit. But the FCS includes an emergency g-override function so that the pilot can pull even more g’s.
A mirage 2000 pilot can push to +13 or 14g IIRC, I suppose the rafale and any plane can be wired to do so.
But the advanced technology does not mean the RBE-2 is totally superior to CAPTOR in all areas. .
I think we must stay logic.
Thales and the AdA decide to go with a “basic” electronic array with a “limited” range in regard of what a AESA can give but with much more functions like simultaneous A2A AND A2G and so on, which fit better with an “omni-role” fighter.
glitterI didn’t say it has to do with AMSAR 😉
It’s me who taught they were related 🙂
glitterDRAAMA = Demonstrateur Radar a Antenne Active Modes Avances
This project was granted by the DGA in July 2004. In builds on the current results of AESA technology tested in the Rafale with AESA RBE-2. DRAAMA will include completly new functions for example generating jamming signals or acting as RWR.
On a french forum, I heard that that array hasn’t anything to do with the project AMSAR, more like a quick and dirty AESA.
glitterActive cancellation in practise is very difficult. A slight timing gitter may generate in-phase (instead of out-of-phase) echo, making the aircraft even more visible.
Everyone has understand the difficulties, thank.
Not to mention that they need account not only for the reflections from the Rafale itself (this might be possible, if it was designed to have not only a low RCS but also a *predictable* RCS) but those of the external weapons too. And very few of the latter were designed with tight RCS criteria in mind.
I thought of that already.
But
1) Wouldn’t make it easier for the “active cancellation” (if it’s exist of course) to try to cover only part with an important RCS ? The front sector is already pretty low and wouldn’t make sense.
2) Sorry but the modern weapons for the rafale has been made with a low RCS in mind. I don’t know much about the connexion wing/load which might be the main problem with the RCS. I heard severa times that Dassault is working of a “cocoon” that would cancel that problem, but nothing more.
Sign In
