This is a disreputable mode of argument. Instead of addressing what’s been said, or the real situation, you’re putting forward an extreme position you’ve made up, as if that’s what I’ve said. It isn’t.
Someone else seemed to sustain such position. It’s not always easy to understand who sides with who.
The fact is rather simple : haters gonna hate.
A lot of people thought Rafale would remain unsold, for many reasons.
At first, Rafale ended first or in better position than some competitors on all competitions. Haters had to dispute those results (Korea, Singapore, Switzerland, India). To do so, they just had to prefer some rumors over others.
They have been in a comfortable position as long as Rafale didn’t sell. They could even use the “unsold’ argument for pretty much whatever they wanted to “prove” (it didn’t sell because XYZ, because XYZ it was unsalable).
Now it happened (Egypt), the same people are disputing the validity of the sale (because it is backed by France up to 50percent, because it wasn’t a competition, or whatever).
And now several officials from both India and France announced a sale in a very official manner, haters are still disputing it, trying to confront they own analysis so as to persuade that anything else (Typhoon/F-35/Su-30 MKI) would have been better.
The fact is rather simple : fanboys gonna love.
A lot of people thought Rafale would sell, for many reasons.
At first, Rafale ended first or in better position than some competitors on all competitions. Fanboys loved those results (Korea, Singapore, Switzerland, India) and they pulled a lot of confidence from them. To do so, they just had to prefer some rumors over others.
They have been in a uncomfortable position as long as Rafale didn’t sell (though appreciated in AdA and MN, and combat proven). They lacked the “sold’ argument for pretty much all discussions with haters, but they were already convinced that Rafale was the best.
Now it happened (Egypt), the same people are happy with it, maybe too confident for some of them (but their problem was anterior).
And now several officials from both India and France announced a sale in a very official manner, fanboys are just trusting them, curious about how such a sale will be made and how deliveries will be planned, rather proud that Rafale was chosen by the selection process.
I’m not sure who has the biggest problem.
Vnomad,
I think Kovy already explained his definition of ‘obsolete’.
Don’t you believe that the odds are more favourable to Rafale than to any competitor after Modi’s speech?
You may be right about the interest of Typhoon T1 for IAF, but I think you’re rather quick at calling the French for cautiousness while jumping on other scenarios, against the odds (Modi/Hollande, press conference, press releases, etc).
I tried to keep nice.
ATM Dassault has zero Indian orders for operational or inoperational aircraft.
Ok… Let’s wait for a little while.
Updates coming soon.
– Standard is probably F3 (and not F3R with AESA)
AESA is available on F3 standard, and delivered with F3-O4T right now. F3R will come much later.
https://twitter.com/livefist/status/586609217831772161
“the aircraft and associated systems and weapons would be delivered on the same configuration as had been tested and approved by Indian Air Force”.
In fact, the today F3-O4T is very close to what IAF tested during the tender.
Many people here talk about the Typhoon T1, but would this Typhoon clear the IAF requirements (as evaluated) ? Are some people suggesting that Typhoon T1 is enough compared to Rafale F3-O4T ?
Je n’en crois pas mes yeux ! If this report is true then best put the courvoisier away (again):
Wrong information, dismissed by French MoD and Dassault…
Hence, you can file it with those reports declaring Modi would fly in a Rafale @ AeroIndia.
Not so fast. The article I posted give the name and role of the source. To me, it makes a major difference with “some governmental sources…” which are numerous on this topic and sometimes directly contradicted by named sources.
Though I admit it’s funny that this information isn’t copied worldwide, I’m not sure it’s a good reason to discard it.
I just notice that this information fits France point of view, hence Dassault’s statement.
http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/hal-will-take-full-responsibility-for-rafales/
Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) chairman T Suvarna Raju on Thursday said that HAL is willing to take full responsibility for the Rafales that it manufactures if the contract with French Defence major Dassault is signed.
…the perception is that…
…i think that…
…it seems to be…
What are we talking about ? 😀
“We would like to have the ‘same standard’ of what is being produced in France,” the minister said. He said efforts are on to thrash out the ‘pending concerns,’ which according to him cannot be termed as ‘issues.’
He said “Now that it is some thing, I think that we would expect them to help out in; …they are working it out, there are no issues, the logistics of the problem are being worked out, that’s all.”
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/460089/services-board-chief-defence-staff.html
Donc pas de blocage, comme l’affirment les médias indiens ?
Pas vu de notre fenêtre.
= no problem in Eric Trappier’s sight.
http://www.lesechos.fr/journal20150216/lec2_industrie_et_services/0204158928649-eric-trappier-ce-contrat-garantit-notre-implantation-en-france-1093506.php
It SEEMS that discussions are going on, they are negotiating. 😀
Wait and see.
Contract signed.
I guess it can’t be more official than this :
https://twitter.com/DeptofDefense/status/514432344917540864
Lukos, I don’t know who you are to chose which hypothesis should fit, but I’m going to write 2 things and only 2 which should make you think a bit more.
1- In South Korea, Rafale was proposed with 3 drop tanks and 2 cruise missiles. But there, this wasn’t enough (no tanker), thus, they also proposed CFTs.
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/rafale-fighter/images/rafale_9.jpg
I would tend to believe that if professionals (Korean militaries and Dassault) wanted those CFT IN ADDITION TO THE THREE DROP TANKS, it means that contrary to what you claim, those in the know have an idea of what to do with so much fuel.
(more to this : on the Rafale, CFT would be used on already heavy configurations, since there’s no way it would be a win-win solution -not dropable, too costly on performance-)
If you don’t believe this, then don’t loose your time here, go convince those who plan missions.
ASRAAM has no requirement for a datalink because its LOAL is fully autonomous, allowing multiple targets to be engaged in salvo fire. It is the only missile with this capability.
You should keep on learning instead of throwing hazardous assumptions.
Mica is a multitarget SR/BVR missile (IR or EM) which has got 4 shooting modes, only one of them requiring the datalink (longest range). 2 of them are LOAL modes (BVR and SR)
LOAL autonomously is permitted by the use of a inertial navigation system (just like Asraam AFAIK).
Keep in mind that Mica, IR or EM, are also BVR missiles, LOAL allowing Mica IR to hit targets several tens of miles away (pilot quoted by the Air Fan magazine). Mica EM has demonstrated a range of 67km (Taiwan), you may expect a bit less for Mica IR, due to the IR dome. Are you about to bet on a reduction by 3 ?
Le MICA dispose par ailleurs d’une capacité multicibles interne qui permet au pilote de traiter un groupe de cibles proches.
=> “The Mica has got an internal multitarget capability allowing the pilot to treat a close group of targets.”
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/salle-de-presse/communiques/ministere/la-dga-receptionne-le-1000e-missile-air-air-mica?nav=web
Let’s go back to topic.
Can anyone explain me what a shot between a lightining and a penguin are doing on Rafale thread?
I suppose the purpose of his post is to make fun of the DA’s “world premiere”.
When a world premiere is quite insignificant, there is no need to discuss it for days. The video is nice, but I still don’t understand why we should make such a fuss about it.
On a technical standpoint, there is, in the end, nothing of a world premiere. This has more to do with an aesthetic demonstration of Dassault’s know how (UCAV / fighter / Bizjet).
Actually that was what a Thales representative claimed about RBE2 AESA performance in a former article in A&C
I thought the comparison was about the technological maturity, not performance. :confused: