TMorespecially with a buggy SPECTRA…
Go on, you’re interesting…
TMorOk, thank you.
Comparison brought the off-topic, again.
TMorThe rafale has also good chances in Brazil and swizerland so I really hope that an export will become a reality…
😀 😀 😀
How low our moral can be !
Since the begining, Dassault claims the Rafale would be successful on the export market. And now, after years of articles remembering us that the Rafale remains unsold (the “ill fated” fighter), all those prospections are like a desert crossing… and could end up in… a desert ? 😀
One thing is sure, in 100 years, aviation history books will tell us how hard the French pushed to sell the Rafale. Will they tell that we finally succeeded ?:rolleyes:
TMorRaytheon and others say that the APG-79 is capable of electronic jamming, A&C is a bit chauvinistic here (“very similar ” can hide many things)
It’s not A&C, they quote Thales. It’s about hardware i think.
Is there anyone here who still believes that a sale of fighter is a matter of capacity, price or T / W ratio? 😀
😀
Nobody trusts the French when we claim we lost to F-15 in Korea and Singapore for other reasons than technical…:D 😉
Seriously : the question is more interesting if there is a competition.
TMorInteresting article on page 29 :
http://www.zinio.com/reader.jsp?issue=416083334
TMorEdit: Sorry, that was not really fair play.
This isn’t a problem at all… You were dreaming awake.
TMorArthuro, calm down 😀
video of rafale taking of in an heavy load AtA config in red flag during hot temperatures :
There is something i don’t understand here : the link i gave said :
aircraft are routinely equipped with supersonic three tanks of 1200 litres to mimic a heavy load configuration.
Ok, that’s 3 tons of payload… And there my be an equivalence in range and drag (same range clean + 3x1200L as with 2000L tanks and bombs ?)
But this is far from a 3x2000L tanks + 2 Scalp or 6 AASM configuration in terms of weight.
I really wonder if the margin is still as comfortable with such heavy payloads.
But yet, we have neither a proof nor the slightest hint that they have problems in Afghanistan (hot !).
The engine of the aircraft from Dassault does not provide optimum thrust for hot countries.
This doesn’t mean that it’s underpowered or not sufficient in hot countries. It’s not “optimum”. :rolleyes:
TMorDuring Red Flag, by 45°C, Rafale could take off with a cumfortable thrust margin.
The have nearly the same temperatures in Afghanistan (Kandahar) :
Les Rafale B ont réalisé durant dix jours à Red Flag quatre sorties quotidiennes de 2 h en moyenne (1 strike diurne + 1 nocturne) au sein de dispositifs d’attaque (Blue Air) d’une soixantaine à une cinquantaine d’avions en général. Ceci par des températures diurnes supérieures à 45°C presque identiques à celles subies à Kandahar en Afghanistan. Ces températures ont été d’ailleurs plus éprouvantes pour les équipages et les mécaniciens que pour les avions, la réserve de puissance au décollage des moteurs M88 ayant assuré une poussée confortable au départ des missions, les avions étant systématiquement équipés des trois bidons supersoniques de 1200 litres pour mimer une configuration de guerre lourde.
TMorAnd that’s crucial because ToT will often be critical – to the second – especially at low level. You may be co-ordinating with other assets, and need to be screaming over the enemy airfield at exactly 0600:24 to lay down your weapon, just as airburst 1,000-lb bombs are exploding over the enemy’s gun positions, and before your wingman’s bombs are exploding (he split off earlier to attack from a different direction) and to avoid hitting him over the target. Or you may be co-ordinating with friendly artillery, attacking as the barrage is lifted for a few seconds.
At the age of 11, i used to be a (virtual) Tornado pilot.
The video game “Tornado” by Digital Integration was really great to illustrate what you say, Jacko (and quite a realisitic simulator for 1993)
I remember several missions failed when i hit my wingman (air miss) or was blown by there bombs because i was late (2 or 3 seconds…)
Great moments, when 6 Tornado run on an enemy airfield, well synchronized, with the RWR ringing like a phone (an old phone), arriving from different locations, and hoping that the Alarms had done their job (and not kept hanging in the air). Freaky, but really efficient, as the surprise was great for the virtual enemy air defenses saturated by the rapid assaults of both the Tornado and the Alarms 😀
😮 Sorry…:D
TMorLoL
To what extent do we know that OSF IR channel is not efficient ? How much more will the OSF NG cost ?
The next step is the OSF IT (TV only).
The OSF NG isn’t funded yet and will include a brand new technology for the IR channel.
I don’t know exactly what’s wrong with the current IR channel. The fact is that pilots do not talk a lot about it, while they usually praise the TV channel. I think this silence says a lot, especially since we know there’s a problem with the OSF.
Logistical and technical said Admiral, what are technicals problems of M88 ?
Mystery. But they never complain about thrust, quite the contrary. There’s a problem which make it need too much spares… If the spares come, it will be “ok”. But of course, a perfect engine will never require logistics. 😀
Other problems ?
C’est un avion très simple, mais qui offre tellement de possibilités…C’est comme Windows. Il offre la possibilité de faire la même chose de quatre manières différentes. C’est en gros un PC avec tous les problèmes du PC, ça plante, il y a des surprises comme sur Windows…
There are bugs and software crashes… (pilot comment in LA POLYVALENCE DU RAFALE OU L’OBJET TOTAL by the CENTRE D’ETUDES EN SCIENCES SOCIALES DE LA DEFENSE)
There are problems which found a solution, like the vibrations of the gun.
There is an unclear problem with the radar range. They usually say it’s enough, than the max range is never used (which makes sens tactically), but DSI got a slightly different answer (something like “soon, the AESA will come”).
What else ?
TMorAnother unprove personnal attack. Please be respectfull.
Unproved ?
You’re annoying = you annoy at least me and made this thread… “different” to say the least.
insulting =
In 5 minutes you will all (french members) prove to me that Waterloo is a french napoleonian victory.
Ethics, fans have one ?
(this suggest we’re acting like stupid fanboys)
Why should I do what french members don’t do or don’t want to do?
Facts ? I give sources, you give opinions.
You’re saying we aren’t honest.
and not very informative.
The OSF issue has been addressed before, your point about the M88 isn’t very valid since you dismissed a part of the admiral opinion… etc
TMorYou can’t prove the french official reports are false, you prefer attack me, why not ? But it’s not productive:D
Please back to Rafale problems…
Where did someone said the reports are false ?
YES, OSF has some problem (IR efficiency ? fragilty for sure (Air & Cosmos)). Cost ? We don’t know.
When the Senat saies there a problem of cost-efficiency, i think it’s honest to show that the TV channel is still very useful in Aghanistan (for tankers) or for air-to-air (ID), or in a limited way, for battle damage assessment. There are articles about that. So, what’s wrong with its efficiency ? Fragility, obsolescence… These two points are also what make it cost more and more…
YES, the M88 has technical problems. Are they the reason for the low availability ? As the admiral saies himself : NO. The problem is mainly due to logistics. They are working on how to improve it.
Etc.
TMorI never said that Rafale was not the solution or was a bad aircraft, I say that Rafale have some problems like all other aircrafts of same generation, and all of you want to prove the contrary because you’re french. It’s not serious.
We’re not trying to prove the contrary, and certainly not because we are French. We are just showing that the engine problem isn’t exactly what you implied, and that other problems are being solved.
Facts :
-you’re late about the OSF ;
-you selected the quotations about the M88 so as so hide the whole Admiral’s opinion ;
-you didn’t prove me i was wrong about the thrust in Afghanistan ;
-your messages nearly all look like attacks… What a crusade !
Please read what I wrote, neither more nor less.
But nothing really interesting so far. In addition, you can’t write them without reproaching.
In 5 minutes you will all (french members) prove to me that Waterloo is a french napoleonian victory. 😀
Sure, when you fail to make your points, this is your only solution. We are revisionists, are we ?
Oh, i just realized you posted a message yesterday, and i didn’t answer it :
Because sometimes, people like you read their reports, and repeat all over without understanding the underlying reasons of what they “discovered”.
People like me ? Oh my god, another “I know all about all”.
Please change.
I don’t feel impressed by someone according to who all French members are revisionists just because they have enough knowledge to explain you what you failed to understand.
Have a look at the book by Germain Chambost “Rafale : la véritable histoire”.
The bibel about Rafale, I presume ? What are the sources of Mister Chambost ?
As a former AdA pilot, and journalist, he knows a lot of people. You’re attacking the Chambost’s credibility, why ? Are you afraid i’m right here ?
Sorry, i reported a fact with a source. Read his book, you may understand that he knows about what he is talking about.
We have to be careful, i think, when talking about some facts. They need to be explained, as much as possible. If it’s not possible, it’s all a matter of tone.
Facts ? I give sources, you give opinions.
Your source brings nothing new. to the debate. My opinions is based on other documents, and when “my opinions” are criticizism, you’re the first one to talk about “rumors”.
And YES, i also post facts.
You’re annoying, insulting, and not very informative. You’re so wrong that you’ll deny all other sources than yours so as to make your points.
«Please change.» :rolleyes:
How to solve this problem ? Damocles + Rover datalink, for example… But Senat and Assemblée do not say this.
The question is not necessarily to have a solution to a problem, it’s also to know that the problem exist.
The fact that there is a solution acknowledges that there is a problem (unqualified, unquantified). The fact that there is a solution show that the program is alive and goes on. In one information, you get two of them. That’s quite efficient i think.
But what’s your interest ? To show the world that Rafale has some problem ? Ok, that’s not a reason to deny us the right to show the solutions. And not a reason to bring here a debate that has no reason to be but your own whimsy.
TMorDear ghost of me,
Why do you think our answers have something to do with the lovely people who live on the islands behind the Channel ?
You are the one who think we are afraid of the British, and now you’re betting that we will rewrite history about Waterloo…:rolleyes:
What ghost are you if your soul is lost too ? Why are you attacking us ? How many messages will have to be posted about a fictive trial against us, instead of talking about the Rafale ?
You’re attacking “every french members” («you will all (french members)»), you should go on and tell us how you hate patriotism, chauvinism, ESPECIALLY when it comes from French, you know, this people who couldn’t cope with the german invasion some times ago (you love this fact, this is what you thought you had to remember us, arrogant French, in your first message when you registered somewhere else). Be frank and direct next time.
Oh… If you have something really new about Rafale, let us know.
Sign In
