ante_climaxEven “modern fourth generation fighter” leaves a lot of room. An F-15SG or Su-27SM is still believed to be a whole lot larger in terms of RCS than the Rafale for example.
As for the term itself, it’s still a marketing term that Knaapo brochures are very fond of. I wonder where the article has got the term from.
Lets say an F 16 like target or Mig 29 like target.
By the time the MMRCA winner is due to be inducted, Meteor will be just around the corner – if there are no further delays. Rafale is offered with Mica anyhow.
I said Sintra says, I do not believe its just that.
Because one is considered a critical technology while the other is not. A component does not automatically become subject to restrictions just because it is American, otherwise an US embargo would ground anything from military aircraft to civilian airliners and general aviation aircraft. Clearly a ridiculous notion.
GPS is a case in point actually, civilian standard receivers are freely available to anyone (probably even the Taliban, if they put their minds to it ) while access to more precise military-grade equipment is restricted.
Explain to me this
Acc to you Similar U.S components in EF and Rafale.
EF – Needs U.S sanction to sell the plane. The links above and Dassault Executive has said this.
Rafale – No critical American equipment, No need for American sacntion to sell the plane.
Simple logic is that if both have the same level of American tech in them, both will require American clearance.
That was precisely due to presence of GPS and MIDS on the Saudi aircraft, according to many other sources. Define significant amount
You believe its just that I believe not just that.
Lets wait for the impending Rafale deal with the Emirates. They would probably have GPS and MIDS in their package. Let us see whether American approval is needed. If not you must admit there is more U.S tech in EF.
ante_climaxI’m not looking for a whole list. Just name three to five parts in the EF that require US approval from the top of your head. And I don’t think a particular missile is an integral part of the airplane, nor is the AIM-120 usually sold through the Eurofighter consortium as part of the deal (but, if at all, as some G2G addon).
I don’t know which parts (possibly classified info) but i believe news from multiple credible sources, even if they do not go into the details. So will most people in the world.
ante_climax“Detection range versus a fighter-sized target” is very much marketing-speak, because there is no uniform “fighter-sized RCS”, so it’s not exactly a reliable unit of measurement. Could be anything between 25m² and 1m², really.
Its hardly a marketing article that. Moreover, fighter sized target should mean a modern fourth gen fighter.
ante_climaxI have a question though. Assuming that “US component” is not the same as “US component that underlies export restrictions”, with only the latter being of interest, do you know which specific parts (that may have been included in the Saudi-Arabian spec) of the Eurofighter require US approval?
I have been searching for it, flex posted a few of the components in his last post in the thread. Sintra says its the AIM 120 that is critical. But there is a whole lot of links saying it needs U.S sanction for foriegn sales.
Trident
It is safe to assume that it goes far beyond a Saudi Arabian spec that the aircraft structurally has more critical U.S components. If they are the same components like you mentioned, in Rafale and Typhoon, why would one need approval and the other not ?
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3797018
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/23/us_gove_saudi_eurofighter_sale/
hell the Americans are even probing the deal.
Washington’s approval is necessary because the Eurofighter, despite its origins, contains a significant amount of American technology which was only supplied to the Eurofighter consortium on condition that they would have to ask to sell it on to other countries.
Significant amount 😐
ante_climaxI would not even support that…Iran has all the right of the world to develop nuclear weapons (if they want to)
No they do not and for the safety of the world the must not be allowed to. And they will not be allowed to.
ante_climaxIt’s easy to deny the validity of a source when it’s rubbish. Do you think Martin-Baker are lying about their seats being in Rafales? Why don’t you ask Dassault?
Its a component barely worth mentioning, MB seats have a long history in IAF, so its never going to be sanctioned by anyone, and even if they do its easy to replace something like an ejection seat with one procured from somewhere else.
No I am only saying that non-french equipment in Rafale does not require clearence from another countries government. While U.S equipment in EF is critical that it needs U.S clearence.
BTW, I don’t believe that 300km range against fighters stuff. Against a large, high-RCS target, yes.
It is again confirmed by this months dti, the link is in a page or two before this one and it says fighter sized target. Oh and the 140-160 km claimed by Sintra in his posts is for the demonstrator radar (ie. not fully populated) that is also mentioned there.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1361653&postcount=144
ante_climaxUtter nonsense! There were multi-role aircraft with datalinks in service in the 1960s, before the F-16 was even thought of – in Sweden. The Draken was fitted with a datalink for interception, like the F-106, but the ground-attack capable D models retained the air-air capabilities & the datalink. Also, I think the Viggen had fighter to fighter links (i.e. not just the air-ground links of US & Soviet fighters) before the F-16 had any kind of datalink.
LM marketing hype. They probably have a Lockheed-Martin only definition of multi-role. Or maybe they’ve conveniently forgotten about the Swedes.
I was just pointing out the integration of ODL as offered by Lockheed. 😉
ante_climaxYou’ve done it again. Googled, come up with something, & not even read it properly. Firstly, AOL is the transmission channel, not the source – and it says so on the page you link to. Garbage in, garbage out. Secondly, what planet are you on? IANS (the source) is not a military specialist, & even the FT & the Economist make mistakes in details of military stuff.
This is a usual tactic you employ when your point is so comprehensively beaten, you deny the credibility of the source, previous experience includes Mig 35 radar range on dti etc, which was proven right again in this months dti.
Most of IAFs aircraft use a Martin Baker seat. It is not a ‘vital’ component and can be sourced from elsewhere.
Trident you are wrong about that on the Eurofighter it contains more U.S stuff than the Rafale and that’s why it needs American clearance.
ante_climaxSo true Trident and the Lockheed guys have taken this to notice already.
The F-16 was the first multi-role fighter to incorporate a data link capability, and the IAF’s Operational Data Link (ODL) can be integrated onto the F-16IN when available, ensuring interoperability with other IAF aircraft.
ante_climaxNo I have already got it. All i was saying here is that the Typhoon comes with more strings than the Rafale. And the GPS like you yourself pointed out is not going to be that important especially in the future, other than the joint thing with Russia we plan to have our own GPS alternative.
The French and Russians will give us what we ask for (inc Radar source code). The Americans and Eurofighter Cons have to do the same if they want to win. Otherwise the loss will be theirs alone.
The India specific Radar modes, in F 16IN website means that at least Lockheed are willing to offer more capability than they have offered UAE.
ante_climaxSorry to say that, but you are either blind or ignorant or maybe both. GPS is owned by the US, so every customer which wants to use has to receive approval from the US government! That the GPS receivers themself are produced in France is true, but that doesn’t give the customer the license and required codes to operate that system. Simple fact and if you don’t get it, your problem.
I am neither, even Indian aircraft upgrades use the GPS. India’s Russian ac uses GPS guided bombs etc. Eurofighter American content goes beyond the GPS to the point where it requires American sanction for sale.
The Rafale do not need it. Find any links which says it does, then come talk to me. I have given you proof with Dassault saying itself that its 100% french 😎
ante_climaxWhy do you keep repeating this nonsense? You’ve been told the facts (that the critical system is common to Rafale, EF & US aircraft, & blockable by several countries if they choose). Why do you refuse to accept it?
It is not an issue with Rafale, because Rafale (as can Eurofighter) can be exported without MIDS. There is a list of countries eligible to receive MIDS, & the USA will not block its export to them. Australia is one, which is one of the reasons there is no issue with F-18F sales to Australia. A general permission has already been granted to export MIDS to Australia, by all countries which can veto it. No specific permission is needed. If a country is not approved, an application can be made for approval, or the aircraft can be offered without it. Any country using its own, or another, datalink would probably prefer to fit that, for operational reasons, so a lack of MIDS would be no problem.
The GPS is another issue, but there are alternatives based on COTS technology, & despite occasional fits of insanity among the arms trade control people in the USA, they do mostly understand that they can’t ban the sale to a foreign government of technology which is already being sold to the civilian population of that country. Hence, the presence of US-made valves, carbon fibre, pins etc in Rafale is of no significance, & Dassault can truthfully say Rafale is not subject to US export controls. But that does not mean either that Rafale has no US content, as you appear to believe, although Dassault doesn’t actually say that (the exact words are “This legislative approval is not an issue in our case,”), nor that an export Rafale identical to those operated by France (which AFAIK is not what is on offer) would not potentially be subject to US export controls.
By the way, I’d be chary of taking the Thaindian News (what you linked to) as a reliable source. It thinks Eurofighter GMBH is offering a Raytheon radar on the Typhoon. 😀 Yet again, you seem to have gone into Google for something to support what you say, & then not even read all of what you found.
I really do not care what you or Sintra or anyone else here say as your ‘facts’ without any sources to back them up.
It is true that Eurofighter needs American clearence for Sale and Rafale DO NOT. I have given you more than link stating this, saying America clears EF sales.
And the link i gave you about the Rafale not having U.S content is also true. Thaindian news may not be reliable but they got that from IANS ( read it again ) which is as reliable as you can get.
now doubt the reliability of AOL if you want to.
They are willing to give us the Radar source code too the French 🙂
ante_climaxMore from Shiv’s excellent blog. http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/02/livefist-photos-inside-alh-dhruv-export.html
Inside HALs Dhruv ALH for Ecuador.
ante_climaxSintra, the basic FACT is that American government permission is needed to sell the Eurofighter. While the French do not need it for selling the Rafale. Neither do the Americans need EU approval for selling SH and F 18.
Like I said I believe Dassault when it says the Rafale is 100% French. Whatever American components it have are not critical. Or senior officals of Dassault won’t be making that claim.
ante_climaxThank you for the link, & bad cess on you for the gratuitous accompanying rudeness.
You are misrepresenting me – yet again. I have never said that. Nor would I, since it is public knowledge that it is false. But Rafale as currently built, & as in French service does have a small US content, as said elsewhere, & regardless of what Dassault says. It can, however, easily be replaced, which is the significance of Dassaults claim. For example, a different datalink could be installed.
India won’t be using NATO datalink anyway. So it hardly matters and I do believe Dassault over you.
Sign In
