anayway, winning an evaluation doesn’t mean the plane is the best “overall” as it does often sound on this forum.

It just means this plane fits better the FAB’s requirements, under which the mighty F22 would most probably fail just as well lol

In the end, they’re looking for the best value for their money, considering they’ve less money than others, it makes sense to go to the cheapest even if it doesn’t have all the nice features of some others contenders. After all, the FAB’ll be the one putting the maintenance’s money in it ! It might even be that they prefer a plane with more cheap manual work on it (as their own workers are cheaper) than a plane more “computerized”, where their resources in this field are probably more scarce or comparatively way more expensive.

so…

a tornado driver? its quite reducing the abilities and knowleges of somebody’s leading the JSf reseach in uk..

and even with a typhoon close , he could have overturned it in 3 curves to down it as it was reported by pilots.

Squalls, could you please be so nice to read the entire topic before replying ?

Indeed, Scorpion82 was answering this post there : http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1493481&postcount=97

As I feel in a kind mood, Scorpion82 feelings about PC are put there :
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1493513&postcount=103

Amazing how people jump on each other throats, I’d better buy some armor lol

The most common figure is 3750 km because :
– That’s the figure stated on Dassault’s website, but not for ferry range (3750 km = ~1000 nm, given for the combat radius on a penetration mission).
– That’s the figure agreed by the Typhoon fanboys (so that the Typhoon doesn’t look bad), amongst others.

The 1000 nm combat radius figure speaks volume in this regard, because the ferry range is very likely to be much longer due to a less demanding mission profile, and either a lighter weapons load or a larger external fuel load. You don’t fly a ferry profile like a real penetration combat mission, don’t you ?
So you can stick to the 3750 km figure if you wish, but that’s obviously wrong.

well, let me finish your text with the source : on dassault website, ie http://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/defense/rafale/aircraft-characteristics.html?L=1 one can read :

Radius of action (penetration mission)……………More than 1,000 nautical miles

so here is your source sign.

BTW guys, that was damn easy to check, someone could have easily done it before me instead of getting on each others hairs !

++

EDIT : while on it, they also state that if it helps anyone :

Fuel (internal)……………………………………….4,700 kg (10,300 lb)
Fuel (external)………………………………………7,500 kg (16,500 lb)

“quite simply the most capable combat aircraft in the world today”. Last time I checked the Typhoon was a combat aircraft. Was I mistaken?

sferrin, please, please, please, with sugar on top 😉 : don’t misread me. I was just showing how easy it’s to discredit someone’s opinion, but I ended with this :

Seriously speaking this time, for record’s sake, I really think this guy knows what he’s speaking of !

Well the point is that some people were quiet quick in seeing that article as an evidence about the Rafale’s superiority as it came from a british guy. Something I had predicted very early and for what I was attacked by a certain banned member. Jacko pointed out some quite valid points which put things into a perspective, but was merely attacked by the virtue of his person. If people had actually bothered with comprehending what was said we could have saved a lot of bandwith, time, offenses and nerves by that and probably even some bannings. But no people did exactly what I expected from the very beginning and here we go.

it’s funny how we can both predict what will happen albeit from different people. lol

anyway, I don’t plan to argue there, I was just showing how easy it was to destroy/discredit someone assertion and then to conclude just from this discredit.

regarding peter collins, as you keep putting him back, a lot could be said, either fitting with your views (his conclusion is clearly over the top) or not (you if Peter Collins considers the full range of missions, then the F22 doesn’t appear so good, and if he considers the kind of mission any modern aircraft is likely to encounter, it’s even worse for the F22 and better for the rafale).

The point is that it’s easy to pick some weak point of someone CV to try to take down all of what he says. It’s so easy it’s pointless I would say, better try to say clever stuff about such reviews.

Now, if you still want my own interpretation of Peter Collins article, knowing that I don’t know any real crap about the topic, I would just say that the main body of the article, regarding the Rafale’s abilities, looks quite sound. But the start and conclusion look, respectively, quite political and over enthusiastic.

So, what do I take from that ? Well, that’s saying my plane is bigger than yours never convinced anyone, esp without a bit more context. Still it looks like the rafale has quite some good points (which, from the article, I don’t even remember explicitly). Furthermore, there’s nothing about the weak points which are often put first and for all to see about this plane, which is significant in itself.

He is indeed a Tornado F.3 driver. But hey don’t we know that the Rafale is much better than the F-22 because Peter Collins said he would take it anytime over any other aircraft?

Well, I thought Collins wasn’t a reliable source neither, is he ? lol

Anyway, my aim here was to show how easy it’s to discredit anyone. Hopefully we all agree that such behavior is pointless anyway, so don’t forget my last line :

Seriously speaking this time, for record’s sake, I really think this guy knows what he’s speaking of !

And yes I think Peter Collins knows as well what he’s speaking of, even if I disagree with part of his article. No one is perfect isn’t it, no even a damn plane 😉

I never get tired of posting this link

First five seconds says it all and he certainly knows more than a biased journalist.

Well, you know, it could easily be said that we don’t know what this pilot has flown on before. Maybe he’s coming from a Tornado or some Harrier, so yeah the jump is terrific. Obviously, had he flown a Typhoon he would explicitly speak of it for the sake of comparison, but he doesn’t, so obviously he hasn’t.

In the end, it’s a nice comment from this guy but, come on, he isn’t really qualified enough to discuss the matter of which airplane really is the best overall. So we should not take his words too seriously.

I could come up with another conclusion as well : we’ve heard similar comments from RAF pilot switching from Jaguar to Typhoon, so clearly Typhoon and F22 are quite close one from the other.

LOL

See what I mean ?

Seriously speaking this time, for record’s sake, I really think this guy knows what he’s speaking of !