jackjackWell Arthuro is not making anything up. It was said in the press release that during ATLC the Rafale was capable of detecting some SAM threats that the US F16CJ couldn’t. And in case you’re not aware of it, the CJ is dedicated to the SEAD role.
So “this bit” is justified as far as I’m concerned.
Nic
couldnt is a bold word to use, didnt would be better
arent training exercises fun
jackjackYeah, and Rafale can carry 9 tons, but of course, some planes can do better, the C17 for example.
,
as i said in a post above the rafale has high lift wings, its a nice plane, but lets not get carried away, i dont think 6 aasm weigh 9 tonns
jackjackbut we shouldn’t forget rafale impressive stand off striking capabability (6 AASM release in a full salvo) and SPECTRA ability to detect SAM threats better than dedicated/specialized SEAD aircrafts. That say even more about its operational capabilities…
…
and you were doing so well until you put this bit in, abilities not unique to rafale and some planes do it better
jackjackYes, those were two “4 Typhoon vs 4 Rafale” BVR engagements.
And i hope that people will accept the results without implying that French are :
-silly ;
-clowns ;
-liars ;
-desperate.This time, the Rafale won. We can speculate or not about the RoE, but would the Typhoon have won, it wouldn’t have surprised as much, it wouldn’t have brought as much scepticism.
This may not even mean that Rafale is superior to Typhoon. But it’s a serious indication that Rafale is unfairly and severely under estimated in the A2A role. The only fact that our AdA (as well as our Marine pilots at le Bourget earlier) revealed this story is here to tell the world “stop with all this nonsense”.
As Scorpion said :
You know how journalists can be. I know one who wrote a awful unbalanced article in Air International in 2006 if i remember well. It was time for AdA to react.
i’m not bagging the rafale, i think its a good little plane and a credit to france on a tax base of 60 mil people
it will be good when finances can upgrade some stuff on it, but it will come
i think what upsets a lot is fanboys making wild claims about spectra warning system
jackjackThanks Jackonicko,
Scorpion82- is that 4 typhoon v 4 rafale? if so that is a massive demonstration of rafales a2a capability, which is more than anyone would reasonably have expected wouldn’t you say?
sorry if i sounded short in my other post, it wasnt intended
i would say that you cant draw that conclusion, the ef is a fast and high plane with low lift wing
the rafale is a down in the dirt. high lift wing, more drag
put each in its enviroment and it will shine
our old f111 killed a f-16 that came low to play with us in the f-111 enviroment, does that meant a f-111 is a better dogfighter than a f-16
jackjackUSN (US Gvt.) payed it’s development share when contracted Boeing to develop F18E/F and now pays only flyaway costs. Same goes for French Gvt with Rafale, etc,…
it seems to burn you that the usa eats the r&d costs and sell at actual cost and the 3% fms the exception being the f-35 partnerships,
jackjackHello guys, I don’t mean to interfere, but for the shake of the conversation, I would like to point out that there has been a second DSCA notification, this time for Super Hornets for Brazil.
This time it was seven billion $$$ for 36 airframes.
Here is the link: http://www.deagel.com/news/FMS-Brazil-Seeks-36-FA-18EF-Super-Hornets_n000006453.aspx
My point is that from DSCA notifications alone, we cannot easily exract useful conclusions.
Best regards.
most of us agree with you,
cola is just playing a game, even he knows you cant just take a final price, in our case some 120 mil and say ,,it isnt flyaway 55m is it
the brazil 190 mil is probably different in some way, but i know aussie got a bargan with their buy, did i tell you we paid the same prices as what the usn pays :diablo:
jackjackI don’t get it??
Flyaway
Flyaway
NON-Flyaway
Flyaway
Flyaway
Flyaway
Flyaway
Flyaway
Flyaway
Flyaway
NON-Flyaway
Flyaway
***********
Now, if you think that 6 pare engines and 12 Joint Mission Planning Systems (whatever that is) cost 1.5 times over the rest then good for you.
got a link to your claim that all of what you said is fly away actually is ?
you also forgot to include this
145 LAU-127 Guided Missile Launchers
Also included are system integration and testing, software development/integration, test sets and support equipment, spare and repair parts, maintenance and pilot training, software support, publications and technical documents, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated cost is $3.1 billion
and who ever typed it up, they forgot the 18 AN/ASQ- 228 (V2) Advanced Targeting Forward-Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) Pods
again i refer back to the boeing contract of about 55m, the same as the usn pays
http://www.defense.gov/Contracts/Contract.aspx?ContractID=3613
jackjackwhat am i to think?
you should think that it was a training exercise and to try and draw any conclusions would be silly
jackjackWhere’s my link to what? To Australian deal? How about DoD?
I mean are you really that intelligent that you think Boeing loves Australia so much that it will give away F18s without charging program price, which even US Gvt. payed/pays??
LOL, I can’t believe we’re still having this conversation??
LOL,,,at first i thought you were just playing being silly, now i’m not so sure:confused:
from YOUR link, does this sound like a flyaway fitout ?
The Government of Australia has requested a possible sale of 24 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Aircraft, 48 F414-GE-402 installed engines, 6 F414-GE-402 spare engines, 24 AN/APG-79 Radar Systems, 24 AN/USQ-140 Multifunctional Informational Distribution System Low Volume Terminals, 30 AN/ALR-67(V)3 Electric Warfare Countermeasures Receiving Sets,
145 LAU-127 Guided Missile Launchers and
30 AN/PVS-9 Night Vision Goggles.
The proposal will include integration of the AN/ALE-47 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Systems,
Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems,
12 Joint Mission Planning Systems, and AN/ALE-55 Fiber Optic Towed Decoys. Also included are system integration and testing, software development/integration, test sets and support equipment, spare and repair parts, maintenance and pilot training, software support, publications and technical documents, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated cost is $3.1 billion.
jackjackHow does that what you wrote, differ from what I wrote? :confused:
Anyway, the question was whether AUS payed flyaway (~$55m) or program price per F18F they bought.
With ~$93m per plane, I think it’s pretty obvious AUS payed program price and that’s was my point.*********************
well this is my link, where is your’s ?
i think before the engine contract was a subcontract from boeing
http://www.defense.gov/Contracts/Contract.aspx?ContractID=3613
McDonnell Douglas Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Mo., is being awarded a $1,319,574,240 not-to-exceed modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-04-C-0014) for the procurement of 24 F/A-18Fs and Alternate Mission Equipment (AME) for the Government of Australia under the Foreign Military Sales Program . Work will be performed in St. Louis, Mo. (28.7 percent); El Segundo, Calif. (25 percent); Goleta, Calif. (8.6 percent); Clearwater, Fla. (2.3 percent); Greenlawn, N.Y. (2.1 percent); Burnsville, Minn. (2.1 percent); Johnson City, N.Y. (2.1 percent); Brooklyn Heights, Ohio (2 percent); Vandalia, Ohio (2 percent); Grand Rapids, Mich. (2 percent); South Bend, Ind. (2 percent); Mesa, Ariz. (1.8 percent); Fort Worth, Texas (1.8 percent); and at various locations across the United States (17.5 percent), and is expected to be completed in July 2011. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity.
not to exceed instead of firm fixed, heck we may even get some change, i luv it when our friends are nice to us
i wonder how much less that the $54.982 mil per plane it will be ?
this is the full contract that navy had and split our 24 out of, these numbers are too big for me, can you check and make sure we pai9d the same as the usn
McDonnell Douglas Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Mo., is being awarded an $8,562,099,934 fixed-price with economic price adjustment contract for the multi-year procurement of F/A-18E/F airframes. This Multi-Year II (MYP II) contract will cover the procurement of 210 F/A-18E/F aircraft over a 5-year period. Work will be performed in St. Louis, Mo. (60 percent), and El Segundo, Calif. (40 percent), and is expected to be completed in October 2011. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity (N00019-04-C-0014).
jackjackIn totally unrelated news to the JSF program the UK will cut its harrier squadrons with some redundancies expected.
There are three RAF squadrons and two Navy , one will defiantly go with another possible ~40%, cuts and the UK Ministry of Defence is at least £6 billion short of the amount needed to fund its 10-year equipment program.So what’s the effect on future UK JSF purchases considering the JSF is what replaces the Harrier in the UK coupled with the ministry’s funding difficulty?..
Well none at all! if you truly really believe and have faith that the full allocation will be bought despite not having squadrons to fly them or indeed any pilots… I see at least two squadrons of flying pigs coming right up!!
And how is the US tracking financially? 🙂 lets just say that unlimited spending isn’t their first priority.
So to recap – FEWER ORDERS, LATER DELIVERY, MORE DEVELOPMENT REQUIRED, MORE COSTS, and still not a fraction into testing!!!
Wow would someone please let me know when the bad news arrives!!!.:) or am I missing any tiny clues to a program in trouble (Death spiral)?
I fully expect some rosy reply.. what will it be? a Burbage type “we have it all in hand this time, so please ignore the last four c0ckups!” or a more mosaic approach were unquantifiable unrelated factoids are strung together to give a somewhat rosy impression? I’m quivering with anticipation.
It makes me think of the captain of a ship hit by a torpedo in mid Atlantic in 1943 asking his first mate where the nearest land was and the reply that they were only 2 miles from solid ground (unfortunately that the solid ground was 2 miles straight down), Hmmmm your not related to the first mate are you PFCEM?:D
Cheers
they are probably cutting back on pilots becase the f-35 will be optionally-manned, dam they are gunna be cheap to fly, UK has ordered 3 f-35b to play with
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2006/08/15/208488/lockheed-martin-reveals-plans-for-unmanned-f-35-jsf-among-other-new-uav.html
jackjackgee only 5 or so years of squabling to go before the f-35 enters a stable sell price through high production of about 100m average for the 3 of them, total paid in today dollars
this is better than a soap opera
jackjacki think bill left out ‘at this point of time’ as has been said block 5 or so there are plans for 6 aim-120d
there is also a plan for a new missile JDRADM and an updated aim-9, as well as the euro missiles being fitted including the meteor
the f-35 wont be left short in the air to air role
jackjackWouldn’t a sphere be more volume-efficient?
of course you’re right as i’m sure you alrady know that, a cube has much more surface area than a sphere of the same volume,
do you know the name of an oval cylinder shape and its surface area compared to a rectangular shape of the same volume ?
i bet you will be right again
Sign In
