This is true, but raw performance is a much easier task to achieve, than all of the systems integration, and I seriously doubt that the plane handles worse than they expected(which wouldn’t be backed up by pilot experiences). Just my $.02

Except for:
“Flight testing so far has revealed problems with handling in the transonic and medium angle-of-attack regimes, and a problem with screech – destructive high-frequency combustion instability in the F135 afterburner – which is preventing the aircraft from achieving maximum power.”

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a0941e5b4-a3c7-4406-85f8-151f2ef34d6b&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

A Flanker is more maneuverable in certain parts of the flight envelope, at certain weights, etc.…than the Viper or Superbug, would be a more accurate statement. The question though, is IF the F-35 is also more maneuverable than those 2 planes, than how does the Flanker compare to the Lightning II?

The same might as well be true for the F-35 (being superior in certain regimes of the flight envelope under certain conditions). Beesley carefully talked about selected areas where he compared the F-35 to a clean F-16 blk 50 or F-22 for example and in fact stated matches the blk 50, not exceeding it!

The Flanker does have HMS and good IR missiles, but as of now, is limited to engaging targets in the frontal sector. The F-35 will be able to engage targets in all sectors, and will have DIRCM. Additionally, due to the F-35’s VLO signature, the likelihood of the F-35 setting itself up in an advantageous position relative to the Flanker is much higher, than the other way around.

As of now the F-35 can’t deploy any weapons at all, has no DIRCM and a lot of other capabilities people like you like to hype on every possible occasion. It works both ways!

VLO can still reduce the effectiveness of a foe’s sensors/weapons in WVR. The F-35 doesn’t require Sidewinders, to engage HOBS targets. The AIM-120D can also accomplish this.

It’s not very likely that the VLO characteristics will help much at such short distances. Wrt the AIM-120D HOBS doesn’t automatically mean that the weapon can engage targets around the aircraft at all ranges! There might be some serious limitation for such a missile like the AIM-120.

Fair point taking the current situation into account.

The issue with the engine nozzles is indeed odd as well as that yellow marking on the right front fuselage seen on the earlier images. The bord number appears to be 2001 on all images available however and I somewhat doubt they use the same number on two different aircraft:confused:

@Quadbike,
you forgot about the MiG-35!:eek:

Those exchange ratio are still a total mystery to me :
Rafale VS F-16 : 4-2
Rafale VS F-22 : 0-2 (contrary to F-16s, F-22s managed no to get shot at at all, possibly because of the tremendous thrust allowing them to escape awkward situations)
Rafale VS Typhoon : 8-1 :confused:

Keep in mind that according to our pilots, the british imposed the conditions. Did they underestimate the Rafale ? (I think so, since Rafale was supposed to be “frightfully underpowered” (Defence Analysis quoting British pilots in 2007 AFAIR) at 20,000ft )
Is gun dogfight particularly demanding on an area where Rafale has an undeniable edge ? (I guess so)

How does the Typhoon performs at slow speed/High alpha ? (where Rafale, according to Dassault/Benco/etc, is supposed to enjoy an edge thanks to refined FCS and coupled canard/wing configuration)

Sorry for the topic.:o

That’s what I indeed think too. The British pilots underestimated the Rafale and didn’t had the right tactics to deal with it, maybe they expected it would be an equally “simple” match to what they were used to when “fighting” the teens and they got punished for that. Wrt the rules set up by the British I think they were pretty fair, according to what has been stated by A&C wrt how the encounters were set up and ~20k ft could be expected as a rather normal altitude to conduct such exercises. Wrt the “weak engines at altitude” that’s exactly the kind of claims I take with a great pinch of salt, especially if such claims are made by those who haven’t even flown said aircraft. How can someone really comment on an aircraft’s handling characteristics, performance, MMI etc. if he hasn’t flown it him self? You can certainly observe the one or other thing if encountering them but that’s only true for a few metrics.
The Rafale is a quite “lifty” design and that is what makes it so manoeuvrable especially at lower speeds and high AoA, the fuselage alone generates quite some lift, coupled with the close coupled canards and LEX. The Typhoon is more optimised for short, but tight turns something the Rafale is perfectly capable of as well, though the Typhoon relies more on the power of its canards and instability to achieve those.

@TMor
Well “Benco” actually said he doesn’t see a big difference between the two, concerning the WVR area.

Detection range claims seem not to come from that time, but I could be wrong. Doesn’t tell us anything about when the opposing side was able to detect them. The picture is as usual blurred and incomplete.

The problem is not the role. it’s the place.
A £70 millions fighter to defend a piece of rocks that nobody will attack and 10000 km away any current hot war zone.
That’s a waste of british taxpayer money. period.

The defence of the Falklands is a commitment of the UK government to ensure that something like in 1982 doesn’t happen again. It’s a political sign from the UK government that it takes care of its citizens there and can be seen as deterrence for any potential aggressor. It’s the way it is and it doesn’t matter whether you like it or see a sense behind it period!

Well it’s BAE, not the others who claims to be the 2nd best in A2A, one inch behing the F-22 and far above everything else.
After many exercices, it has failed to prove any superiority at all over the Rafale… just to name one.

And how many are there… Well let’s leave the marketing apart, I don’t get why you guys are permanently whining about the evil BAE as if anyone else would be any better. Dubious marketing claims can be found everywhere!

@Deino
Wasn’t that thing supposed to fly on Tuesday?