Which only add more questions..
How many Prototype or testbed will participate in this 2000 test flights?
Surly not a singel aircraft, they need several to do that.

Thanks

As mentioned before there will be 6 prototypes, including 3 flying examples, 2 static airframes for structural load and fatigue testing and a non flyable airframe for ground & systems testing.

@PeterG,
the Luftwaffe has only a few AIM-120B, that’s one of the reasons you rarely see them carried by the aircraft. The intended purchase of AIM-120C-5 has been abonedoned and the Luftwaffe intends to opt for the Meteor directly.
Luftwaffe Eurofighter’s have the rear MAWS, just the twin seater lack them and some early T1 examples and 3 T2 examples were delivered without DASS at all. The TRD being used is the Sky Buzzer from EADS, other Typhoon’s use the Ariel from BAe.

The image posted by Spduman is from spring 2009.

@HAWX Ace,
the Paveway’s aren’t used by the Luftwaffe. The aircraft shown is IPA3 which conducted trials in support for block 5 development. There are also images of IPA7 carrying PW IV in support for the P1E development.

ECM suite?

SPECTRA is the most integrated suite to this day, and the british have nothing comparable ready in any near future

Ehm DASS? I would consider this system not much less integrated or capable at all. With regards to an RN Rafale integration of the DASS would be problematic however.

Luftwaffe reacts on shortage of Eurofighters

Not really news for me, but it’s official now.
The JG 74 will sent most of its aircraft and some of its personal to Laage AB where the JG 73 OCU is based. It is planned that personal will be transported to Laage with Transall aircraft from next Monday and that they will be moved back to Bavaria on Friday and this will continue for the next few month. It is planned that training of the JG 74 personal is conducted at Laage as the Luftwaffe units have a shortage of aircraft. According original plans the Luftwaffe should have had 91 Eurofightes at the end of 2009, but just 49 aircraft are delivered so far (the article mentions 48, but there are 49). Not all of them are available either due 400 h scheduled inspections and the R2 upgrade etc. All overseas exercises are cancelled except for a single deployment to Deci. The Island QRA duty will be taken over by the JG 71 with its F-4F. A decision how to continue will be made in October. Until July it’s planned to fly with 3 waves a day à 12 aircraft.

http://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/Home/Lokales/Neuburg/Lokalnachrichten/Artikel,-Flugschueler-ziehen-naechsten-Montag-nach-Laage-um-_arid,2080311_regid,12_puid,2_pageid,4502.html

Read that too, but it’s quite some time ago now. The RAF has probably received around 67 aircraft (Excluding IPA1 & 5) or at least so many aircraft has been flown up to date and the AMI 35+ with possibly up to 44 aircraft being flown by now (+IPA2), but I have no exact numbers.

Sens,
I agree that the two programme don’t compare well as there lie some 12 to 13 years in between them, if we take the formal launch of both programmes as the starting point. They were conceived under very different circumstances and with an entirely different military threat situation as I tried to indicate with my statement:
“but it didn’t had to overcome such huge political changes on its road”

Where I have to disagree is that the Eurofighter was meant to be a pure fighter. That’s nonsense we had discussed a thousand times before. Even the TKF 90 proposals from MBB, VFW Fokker and Dornier were for a multirole fighter with a primary AA role and a secondary AG role to complement dedicated assets such as the Tornado IDS and Alpha Jet. Let alone the RAF’s requirement to replace the Jaguar and the EdA’s interest in a multirole capable design. What happened after the end of the Cold War was a shifting emphasis towards more AG capabilities. The AG capabilities weren’t really a cause for the delays in the history of the aircraft, as it entered service in a pure AA configuration as planned from the very beginning.

Likely it would be interesting to know where the other two arrays are. The wings leading edge was previously suggested. And what about the tail?

Come on! Seriously???

Right here and for the Xth time :

http://blog.francetv.fr/capitaine-romain/index.php/2009/12/19/158245-atlc-linterview-du-commandant-de-lescadron-de-chasse-01007-provence

from here first :

http://secretdefense.blogs.liberation.fr/defense/2009/12/carton-plein-pour-le-rafale-lors-dexercices-aux-emirats.html

And there f..k :

IN DEGRADED VERSION, four on four, the Rafale got scores of
4 to 0 and three to one.

No wonder these fora are so painfully boringly repetitious.

Personally, if i had the attention span of a squirrel with ADD
and on crack, i’d take notes!

Sorry but really………

Good day all anyway.

I see, sorry did got that as I haven’t followed this never ending discussion for some time now. “Degraded version” still sounds odd and tells us nothing at all. So far we know that generic missile ranges were agreed and that’s it.