glitterIt was/is 220bn Fr Francs which at the time of the switch to the Euro was about £21bn. Considering the current exchange rate of the Euro and the pound thats more like 30bn euros. In other words, about the same cost as the Typhoon. You are reducing and inflating figures as and when your argument requires it, regardless of accuracy.
I find hard to believe this kind of poor economic analysis.
So, the Rafale and Typhoon costed the same thing to develloped …… but the Typhoon is more expensive than the RAfale even if twice more will be built ?
Isn’t strange ?
glitterBTW, is the price of Rafale that was talked abt for Saudi Arabi, including the weapons, training and spares???
HArd to say since it’s only a rumor.
glitterWhy does the Concorde not count and why not mention the Jaguar?
Concorde ? such a great fighter indeed.
JAguar, max speed Mach2, is it that ?
Is it because that as an example they screw your argument that the British don’t want to work with the French?
Could you quote that exact statement from his posts ?
They are quite happy to work with the French, the French don’t like working with the British is all.
According from waht I know, it’s more or less true :p
The French did not want the Brits butting in on their sales drives and said that BAe would not get a penny from their exports. BAe said fine, same goes for us. When BAe sold more Jags than the French, :dev2: ( the French did not sell any) the French suddenly, though understandably, changed their minds.
I fear you’re totally wrong on that.
Dassault bought Breguet and said that they didn’t to have anything to do with the jaguar.
One of the reasons the French Navy was not allowed a navalised Jag rather than the Super Etendard was because it was ‘too British’.
Certainly that Dassault pushed for a 100% french solution but the navalised jaguar wasn’t a great success.
glitterThe Gripen wasn’t competing head to head with a US fighter whose production line was shutting down. And the Gripen isn’t French.
The grippen isn’t competing versus american planes ?
And what does that mean “it isn’t French ?”
THe Eagle’s price did not include the AESA, but then, neither did the Rafale in the Korean competition.
Not only that but the Rafale mk2 hadn’t wings or engines or even weapons, this kind of things is too dangerous, yoyu might hurt somebody with that.
Good. So we now accept the fact that its BLOODY expensive to integrate American weapons on the Rafale, EVEN if permission is given. That would mean that if the choice is the Rafale, we would have to get a whole new set of armaments JUST for the Rafale, which would also not be compatible with the JSF in future. Big minus point for the Rafale.
Bloody expensive ? No. Expensive, ok, but not that much.
but I forget something important, the rise of the Euro 🙁
I dont quite get your last statement, but if you are saying that the French never denied permission to integrate its weapons on American aircraft, the reason is simple. The French just dont have the clout to do so, denying their customers something like that would only jeopardise their own chances.
I fear your lack of knowledge about Dassault is obvious.
That was THE main point of Dassault “Ask me what you want, I’ll do it”.
In what way? Considering that we train with them in Red Flag, I would actually hazard a guess that we are closer to them than to the French AF.
I fear that you don’t understand.
The RSAF has enough planes to use the same tactics ? singapore has enough SEAD to establish the air superiority versus any country ? Ouch, great news, glad for you.
How long is long? I dont think it really is that long. If the AESA was really finished, then it would have been offered as a ready product. It isn’t.
I don’t remind the exact date, but the second prototype was in early 2004, a singaporian delegation was allowed to enjoy the test IIRC.
glitterI really think Japan would be the perfect (and only) Raptor customer.
If the administration refuses that sales, LM could propose again their F-16U (formely in the UAE competition before favoring the block 60 as we know it).
On the other hand, the super hornet has some good points too.
Just like in Korean, Eurocanards are totally out of the competition for political and economical reasons.
glitterAlpha Jet is a very complex bitch, hard to maintain and very costly to operate for a trainer, that might be the true reason why it never outsold the Hawk.
Is it that hard to maintain ? Really ?
Is it related to the older engines ?
glitterI’m getting worried, you dont seem to be reading my posts, or you dont seem to understand what I have put down in rather elementary English. Raytheon produces the radar, APG-63V2/3. The radar is exclusive for the F-15. The APG-63V3 isn’t going on the Rafale.
My bad, I said “Raytheon” as manufacturer of amunition, not radar.
Please do some research on the Korean competition, I’m tired of explaining to you.
The Korean competition was anything but an honest one. It’s sound different in singapore.
AND the rafale was ahead in the competition.
I too dont see how denying weapons integration on the Rafale constituts as bullying. To me it is the same as restaurants not allowing food from other places to be consumed at their premises. Who would want to help their competitors gain the upper hand?
And could you explain me why the grippen use american missiles ? 🙂
Unless you are in the DSTA evaluation team, I dont see how you can conclude with such confidence that the Rafale bid is lower. It is probably cheaper to maintain, (and considering that Singapore looks more at life-cycle costs, that is a plus for the Rafale), but how do you know Rafale’s bid is cheaper? Even with the Korean competition, Boeing’s later bid came LOWER than Dassault’s, as one post above states.
Yes, without the most important system of the plane, so for the same amount, a much less efficient airplane.
Integration requires the writing of software to make two systems compatible. It also requires the flight testing of the armaments to make sure weapons separation is ok, in flight weapons vibration etc are within limits etc. And they have to be done for ALL the American weapons.All of these make weapons integration a very costly exercise. AND that’s IF America gives permission. If they do not, we’ll have to buy a WHOLE NEW SET of weapons, JUST for the Rafale. You think buying a whole new set of armaments is cheap?
I know. According to a EADS magazine, the integration campaign of the Taurus on the Typhoon costed 60 millions euros.
BTW: that argument has been seen over and over in case of a country with american aircraft buy french aircraft, never for the opopsite 🙂
BTW, the French developed their weapons with the RSAF in mind? Oh wow.
With the French AF in mind, which is closer to RSAF than the USAF I think.
They dont allow you to integrate their weapons on the Rafale, but allow Frence weapons to be integrated on their planes? Think a little before posting please.
I never say it was 100% sure. but you, think a little too. You spend billions on aircraft and cannot use them as it please you.
India use russian missiles on mirages and french missiles on Mig. French or american weapons are much more easily to integrated I think.
AESA technology isn’t trivial, and by their complex nature, delays are very probable. You dont seem to get the point, I must add.
And Thales tested AESA on the rafale for quite a long time.
Not operationnal array, ok, but AESA.
I’m talking about risks (to the fielding of the system), not radar capability.
One thing strike me by reading that. According to what I read, Singapore is very keen on gaining complex technologies and the french proposition of sharing the program has been welcome in your country.
AND again, what do you have to prove that the APG-63V2/3 is more expensive than the RBE-2 active, considering that the RBE-2 active is still in development, and might face delays?
The goal was 10 times cheaper MMIC than american equivalent AT THAT TIME, so since the technology is still moving, it would be still several times cheaper.
glitterThe USAF F-15E’s are expected to serve through 2020 when their role will be taken over by a regional bomber currently being studied. There’s no way the USAF will be flying 20 year old avionics in that aircraft.
Reread what I wrote.
thanks
The F-22 was approved for full rate production with initial operating capability planned for later this year. Comparing to a spitfire is total idiocy.
Exactly.
Just like the previous statement.
Just because the F-15’s design is 30 years old doesn’t mean it’s junk.
Not junk, just behind newer design.
glitterQuestion was about the Rafale RBE2 radar vs the F-15T APG-63V2 radar:
The RBE2 is a passive-SEA, whereas the APG-63V2 is an active-SEA.
The thread is about singapore.
The active RBE2 is proposed to Singapore.
@ alexz33
About the purchase price: The whole package that is, in South Korea 40 Rafale were offered at about 4.27 billion USD, 40 F-15K at initially 4.46 billion USD, but was later reduced to 4.23 billion USD.
Without the AESA 😉
glitterWhy would they want to increase the chances of a competitor by allowing their weapons to be integrated to the competitor’s aircraft?
Because why Raytheon would refuse to sell weapons to an ally ?
But but but, everyone know that bullying is a second nature for american compagnies.
And while weapons can be integrated to aircraft, its not as simple as just saying ‘integrate’ and it’s done. It’s a much more complex thing than that, something which requires the help of the Americans AND requires substantial cost and TIME as well (we might face integration problems as well, who knows? All these are risk factors which must be taken into consideration).
I know all that, but as I said, the rafale is cheaper to buy AND use. The integration of few weapons wouldn’t be tHAT expensive too.
Anyway, about the fantastic american weapons, don’t forget that they have been develloped for the USAF in mind.
AASM would benefit much more to RSAF.
And that is not counting the fact that we will require a WHOLE new set of armaments for the Rafale, which cannot be utilised on the Falcons, NOR the JSF which we’ll get in future. PGMs dont come cheap. It is a very big minus for the Rafale’s chances, something which you dont seem to acknowledge.
Well, adapt them on US aircraft 🙂
Why do you think the Americans dont upgrade their aircraft as often? What evidence can you show to say that the Rafale will be updated more often?
Are you kidding ?
The eagle is near the term of his life.
What I have stated is true. In what way is that pathetic?
The spitfire fly, the F-22 isn’t ready yet. So, is the spitfire a better aircraft ?
In fact, with the greater work amount of experience in AESA radars done by Raytheon (dun forget the APG-79, which just entered production, and is also a Raytheon product), and with a working, in operation model flying, AESA is a safer bet on the Eagle than the Rafale.
1) thales know how to make AESA for years. AESA on aircraft is another matter.
2) Look at that wonderful experience, it’s so damn expensive that Korea prefered to use a classic one. The goal of the european AMSAR program is to get a much less expensive MMIC.
glitterAnd we would have to incur the additional cost to integrate the weapons, which would be substantial.
the F-15 is more expensive than the Rafale, Dassault has some margin here 🙂
AND that is IF America allows their weapons to be integrated on the Rafale, which naturally (and reasonably) they won’t.
And why ?
In addition, the Eagle has a working AESA already, whereas the Rafale’s AESA proposal is still under testing.
Please, stop that pathetic argument.
It may be out of production, but that would not mean no upgrades would be done.
I didn’t say “No update”, I just said “Fewer updates”.
glitterThe F-15 will not, as many Rafale/Typhoon pushers like to believe, fall into electronics and avionics obsolesence.
Of course not. But if you believe that the Eagle will have the same update than the Rafale or Typhonn ….
With regards to the PGM choice available, the US definitely offers more attractive options,
more attractive ok, but isn’t the french proposition good enough ?*
That is something that should not be underestimated
that is something that is OVERestimated for years.
as buying a whole new line of weapons that would only be compatible with the Rafale, but would not be usable in the F-16s currently, and the JSF in future, is not desirable, to say the least.
Any weapons can be compatible with any aircraft.
The USA refuse to give informations ? Dump them.
glitterThe thing that makes me shake my head is that those deep-poketed Middle East sheikhs buy their weapons without any sort of much-needed examination of their actual needs.
Until the end of 80’s, yes, it was as you said 🙂
Well, more or less political pressures of course.
What do you need the Rafale or the Typhoon for? Fighting the Americans? even the Israelis only have the F-16 and F-15, and the truth is, it’s much better to have double the amount of Mirages or Falcons or even Gripens (say 120) than 60 Rafales or Typhoons when fighting the Israelis. However, the most-needed component is decent air force discipline, organisation, and training.
More than that, you need skilled ground crew able to maintain planes. For the witness I know who worked in Saudi Arabia, these guys are totally dumb and unable to maintain Eagle or Tornado (and M-1 Abrams ….).
A rafale or Eurofighter are way way more easy to use than an eagle. I think it’s something that has some importance.
glitterso you found an article into a comunist french papper about Abysmal deficit caused by 18 trucks? lol and you shoot ? don’t understand, we are talking about 400 MBT at the dearer fare, and in the most modern MBT in the world, it’s not the engine the dearer, but the electronics systems and amunitions, giat is a great amunitions provider, plus UAE was quite wrong about taking a old technology engine, because later Leclerc shown it had best engine reliability than leo2 in kosovo, nato statisics say!
blah blah blah
That article is right, you don’t have any arguments agaisnt that. Point, nothing to add.
glitterPGM: They’re the latest craze, everybody wants them. Look at GPS bomb, laser bombs, cruise missile type ammo – more choise at US-mart.
Singapore can buy Rafale and buy american GPS bomb :p
Ok, perhaps they would refuse, another reason to avoid to buy american stuff.
Radar: F-15T as offered has ASEA, Rafale as offered has not. Right?
wrong
Upgrades: Engines, threat library, ECM, sensors.
the F-15 ? that plane that will have his production plant in few years ?
Sign In
