Come on TMor, you read French better than I do, you keep tabs on Air et Cosmos and the French magazines, etc.

If i can find it, i’ll answer, but this information isn’t in magazines… Or not mines.

Thank you Arthuro.

If Jack could redesign Rafale, then it would have long moment arm with more instability, same MMI as Typhoon (at least), it would use DASS, and EJ200…
Am I right ? 😀
Just kidding. 😀

Signatory,

I love Bob Kemp like a brother […] the Korean contest simply arose too early to be a realistic hope.

This was an excellent and interesting message.That proves that Jack is actually able to do some fine writting 😀 . Thank you, Jackonicko.

In regards to this thread, I agree with many of Jackos’ points. I trust him on the basis that he has a similar point of view to Jon Lake, a journalist who many know contributes to the Eurofighter forum.

Yes, I know both, as i’ve used extensively PMs with both 😀
And that’s what surprise me so much, their views are so close… Those two guys must be brothers… 😀

I have also noticed that the supporters of the Rafale, don’t want to concede to Jackos’ views; perhaps due to the fact that Jacko cannot quote internet sources or magazine articles. His information comes from his work ‘in the field’.

Understand that his last post looks much fairer than when he talks about “poor radar performance”, “underpowered Rafale”, and “MMI with nothing falling under hand”. These were what I called “exagerated” claims.

There may be DASS and other functions that are better viewed on the HDD, even under g, or the HUD may fail, or the pilot may prefer to use the HDD.

The God view, in Rafale, isn’t a usual HDD. The distance between God View and HUD is as short as possible… This is intended to help the pilot under the worst situation (narrowing of FOV), and this is also why is it focused to infinity.

Many Rafale display modes cannot be commanded by HOTAS, according to Dassault, but only by touch.

Where did you see that ? No french magazines say so.
Maybe. But, under a 7g fight, why would the pilot want to turn pages ? As Kovy said, pilots will use the HUD or HMD.
In addition, on Rafale, the left screen is generally used for radio, or navigation, while the right screen is for hydrolics, electric circuit, or engines…
All screens can be controled by buttons, trackballs, and commutators, you can find 13 on the stick, and 24 on trottle command.
The only real lack in Rafale may be DVI, but it’s just a problem for France…
In the Air & Cosmos about Rafale, published at the end of summer 2006, it is said (I’ve just noticied) that DVI on Rafale were used for frequency changing, and sensor settings… Actually, we don’t know anything about it.
Let’s talk Dassault’s spin doctors : 😀

Compared with earlier generation systems fitted to other fighters, the Rafale’s Man-Machine Interface has been tuned to considerably reduce aircrew workload. One of the most innovative choices made by Dassault Aviation is the introduction of the combined Voice, Throttle and Stick (VTAS) system which drastically eases data entry and systems selections.
«As an alternative to using manual methods, the direct voice input technology allows the pilot to activate data entry functions, and select non-safety-critical modes», explains Philippe Rebourg, Dassault Chief Test Pilot for Military Aircraft. «In some demanding combat scenarios, manual actions can prove painfully slow, and the voice command system increases overall effectiveness: the pilot does not have to look into the cockpit any more. That enables him to focus on the mission and on systems operation.»
Developing such an advanced tool was a challenge since the various speech recognition algorithms had to cope with the noises of the cockpit environment as well as with the stress and the high g-loads that can affect pilots’ voice. But Dassault and Thales engineers overcame all hurdles, and two production Rafales,
two-seaters B301 and B302, are currently equipped with the direct voice input system. «These two aircraft allow us to push development even further», says Philippe Rebourg. «Numerous foreign test pilots have evaluated the system, and they all praise its efficiency: word recognition rates are better than 95 percent, and, depending on the custo

mer’s requirements, the system boasts a vocabular y of between 50 and 300 words. The response time is extremely short (less than 200 ms), and critical voice command selections are confirmed by visual feedback.» Display management, navigation tasking and mode switching are even quicker. A typical example is
radio and navigation aids selection: a single pressure on a button on the throttle activates the voice input system, and, with chosen code words, the pilot can instantly reprogram the flight-plan or select various autopilot modes or radio/IFF frequencies.
«As an added bonus, the voice command system proves also extremely useful by reducing high pilot workload during emergency situations», says Gérard Dailloux, Dassault Flight Safety Vice-President.

The direct voice input system will be available on export Rafale Block 05s, and, although Dassault has mainly concentrated on the Rafale so far, it could be adopted at some stage on the Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 and on the future Falcon 7X long-range business jet, helping reduce cost by increasing series production.

TMor,

Your whole first post consisted of comaprisons between Rafale and Typhoon. In framing your post as you did, you invited comment and correction.

Wrong.
It’s just your inability to speak about one without the other.

What you write is interesting, but it does raise questions, and hopefully these will help you remain fixed on Rafale

LOL

, and may help you avoid making spurious claims about superiority over Typhoon.

LOL I’ve never done so, except for fun.

If you answer them, you’ll even help put out some useful information on the aircraft.

I’ll do my best, and according to the magazines I have, to my memories, and Internet bookmarks…

1) The delay to eight aircraft. Is this the aircraft that were previously reported as having been removed from the order, taking the 2004 order from 59 to 51?

Yes.

Can you confirm that they are now only ‘delayed’?

This has been reported. Further contracts should buy these aircraft. Of course, we don’t really know as it’s relying on government (socialist ?), but it should be just a delay.

When did it change, and why?

What changed ?

Le 6 octobre dernier, la DGA a notifié à Dassault Aviation, Thales et MBDA un marché visant à doter le Rafale à l’horizon 2012 d’équipements électroniques aux performances accrues. Ce marché ne porte pas seulement sur des développements mais conduit à la sortie de chaîne en janvier 2012 d’un Rafale doté d’un radar à balayage antenne active et d’un détecteur de départ de missile de nouvelle génération. Ces travaux avaient été préparés par les différentes démarches d’étude amont menées par la DGA et en particulier la commande dès 2004 d’un démonstrateur de radar à antenne active. Le montant des travaux équivaut au prix de 8 avions, soit environ 400 M€. Un réaménagement du calendrier de production des 59 avions permet d’échelonner ce paiement et donc de rester dans l’enveloppe prévue, sans augmentation du prix des avions.

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/
The exact page is now dead. The above quote says that the contract was signed on October the 6th. It also explains that the delay (the production is lowered from 1.5 aircraft per month to 1.3) allow to save 400M€ without changing the price of the plane.

See also :

M. François Lureau, DGA, a précisé à la commission que sur ces 59 avions commandés, la livraison de 8 d’entre eux a été différée pour financer l’adjonction de capacités électroniques supplémentaires d’un coût équivalent. Ces capacités comprennent des radars, la détection de missiles, l’optronique et l’armement guidé laser.

Senat.fr

What orders have actually been signed?

Standard F2 (current deliveries) Standard F3, +developments for postF3 :
-AESA development (I don’t know exactely, as DRAA and DRAMAA already exist)
-new IR dual-band Missile Warner development
-OSF-IP
-LGB (+Damocles)
-industrialization.

Has the order due to have be placed in 2006 now been signed?

No. Next order is to be signed before the end of 2008.

Has the number of F2s dropped from the planned 82 aircraft (65 AdlA, 17 Aéronavale) to just 66 (48 AdlA, 18 Aéronavale) as detailed in the Vincon Senate report? What are the numbers now, by standard, variant and user, broken down into separate contracted orders and expected orders?

I’m too young to know your figures… 66 is the figure I know.
As planned, it should have been :
Ordered / delivered before 1999 :
-AdA : 3 / 1
-MN : 10 /0
Ordered / delivered in 1999 :
-AdA : 21 /1
-MN : 7 / 1
Ordered / delivered in 2001 :
-AdA : 12 / 0
-MN : 8 /5
Ordered / delivered in 2002 :
-AdA : 0/1
-MN : 0/1
Ordered / delivered in 2003 : |-> finally signed in 2004, and later reduced to 51 ! !!!
-AdA : 46 / 0
-MN : 13 / 0
Ordered / delivered in 2004 :
-AdA : 0 / 5
-MN : 0 / 0
Ordered / delivered in 2005 :
-AdA : 0 /10
-MN :0 /0
Ordered / delivered in 2006 : | delayed to before the end of 2008
-AdA : 48 / 13
-MN : 18 /0
Ordered / delivered in 2007 :
-AdA : 0 /14
-MN : 0/ 6
Ordered / delivered in 2008 :
-AdA : 0/ 15
-MN : 0 / 6
planned : Ordered / delivered after 2008 :
-AdA : 104 / 174
-MN : 4 / 38
Senat.fr
Is it enough ?

How many Rafales have been delivered to AdlA and to the MN each year, and how many are now in service with each unit? What were the last deliveries?

Up to the end of 2006 :
10 F1 aircraft to the MN
about 24 F2 aircraft
2 F2 for the MN

How many F2s have been delivered, and which units have them?

At least 27 :
-3 for the MN
– more than 24 for AdA :
-18 (20 in early 2007) F2 for AdA EC 1/7 Provence (15 B and 5 C) + 7 for this summer. See Spa15 and Spa77 (Spa15 also this summer).
– 6 in Mont-de-Marsan for EC 330

2) What other platforms did the DRAA prototype fly in? A Mystere XX, I know, but wasn’t there also a Mirage (used for the Singapore demo when B301 was unserviceable?)

M XX and Rafale B301 (the one flown to Singapore with DRAA)… I don’t know for the M2000.

What is its status NOW? Is B301 still flying with AESA? How many hours have been flown?

We don’t know, but it has demonstrated technologies. I think it’s over.

Which aircraft types, and which specific Rafales will DRAMAA fly in, and when?

The flight testing should start in April and finish in the end of the year. I don’t know on wich type, but this thread is here for that.

3) You say that: “The aircraft is already wired for this weapons (GBU)” but that only means that it has MIL STD 1553/1760.

Yes. But some sometimes suggest that all the work remains to be done. HP Grolleau (do you know him ?) proved it’s false.

Is there a full service clearance? When was it signed?

October the 6th ? I don’t know. But the delaying of 8 deliveries pays the LGB too…

When were the clearance drops? How many weapons were dropped, and of which types?

The B01 has already dropped at least ONE GBU-12 (for Korea).
I don’t know more, I’ve just something I would call a rumor that says that it’s all done (between october and now). I’ve absolutely nothing more.

Which will be cleared for use in Afganistan? Why only GBU-12 and -22?

Because bigger bombs aren’t employed there. French aircraft only drop 500lbs GBU-12 there. I would add that in reports, pilots show very afraid of friendly fire… The lighter the bomb, the better it is… But that’s my opinion.

Why integrate two 500-lb Paveways (GBU-12 and 22) and one 2,000-lb (GBU-24) and not a 1,000-lb weapon?

Paveway 3 is significantly more accurate than the Paveway 2.
Why no 1000 lb ? I don’t know, I’m also curious about this point…

In a dusty/cloudy environment, why is there no dual mode EPW clearance?

The GBUs are just a replacement for the late AASM (GPS + inertial). EPW will be intagrated later, but it’s not a priority for France.

Will Scalp be deployed?

Scalp is not a CAS weapon !!! 😀

4) Two lots of three aircraft for Afghanistan? Does that strike you as an unusual number? Has it been explained?

ONE Rafale brings 6 GBU-12. That’s to say 3 times more than a single M2000D.
In addition, it’s combat radius is much more interesting.
It’s been said that 2 Rafale are equivalent to 4 M2000D and 2 M2000-5.

5) Are you sure that Spectra includes full spec. laser warning yet? What was the growth path for Spectra?

Yes.
The growth path for Spectra are improvements of softwares, of course. But also improved missile warner (DDM) by 2012.
The 51 F3 won’t have their MW, as it has to be improved.
But the F2 are fully equiped. No problem with laser.

6) IR Mica: When were the in-service firings? How many, and on what dates?

The first Mica IR shooting with external designation has been conducted in July. But this tells nothing about the other shots. I think it’s been done by the CEAM (Mont de Marsan) during 2005-2006.

7) :dev2: :dev2: :dev2: “the Rafale can fight from very low alt to 50,000ft, wich make it capable of fighting at altitudes where the M88 will consume the less.” :dev2: :dev2: :dev2: How does Rafale ensure that the enemy are at the altitude for which it is best suited? :diablo: :p 😀

You’re true 😀
But you know that nowadays the M2000 is already a challenging aircraft.

8) Is OSF still to be limited to 48 sets? What was the originally planned number? Which aircraft will receive it, which won’t, and what will replace it? Why did the DGA described OSF (“‘Optronique Secteur Frontal”) as obsolescent?

Well…
The AdA F2 standard are all equiped with OSF.
Not the Marine’s Rafale F2 (as far as I know).
Non equiped aircraft will wait later when the OSF-IP will be ready. It’s even possible that finally, they never receive their OSF. There’s a possibility that a total of (18 + 51) never get their OSF… I don’t know.
“obsolescent” is the word to say that the components used in are no more produced, resulting in replacement issues. In addition, it’s clear that current technologies allow, for a reasonable cost, to develop a newer equipment, with modern components.

So prove me wrong, and discuss Rafale’s weaknesses.

It’s done ! :p

I’ve already admitting : radar lacks range for shooting Meteor against a modern threat (I mean with RCS reduction measures).
Engines lacks power according to MN pilots who will have to take-off from carrier with exceptionnaly loaded aircraft (the lack is a matter of comfort here, not a security issue).
Money is lacking too, and this could results in some Rafale without OSF nor Missile Warner (I mean the Rafale M F2 and all the 51 Rafale F3).

I hope I’ve been interesting.

But, from what I have seen, even people who are supposedlly very well informed because of their position are never totally objective (I had the same experience with boeing and EADS at the last paris air show). They have like us their preferences..pride habits etc… I guess it is just human.

Yes, this is why I’m very careful with what I’m told, espacially when superiority is claimed. 😎

TMor

Ok, you win :

GET LOST !

You’ve made this thread become a Typhoon vs Rafale thread… You keep repeating over and over stupid claims…

My brains have to work three times more when i write in english, and it’s very discouraging, but i’m going to do it anyway…

Typhoon has equal or better sensor fusion than Rafale (PIRATE, radar, DASS, SIFF, offboard sensors).

LOL…. Rafale data fusion : RBE-2 (IFF), OSF, SPECTRA (EM, IR, Laser), Weapons, offboard sensors too, of course, control surface, screens, FBW, FADEC, L16, radios, hydrolics, fuel, etc). This is a full data fusion !
Of course, Typhoon’s isn’t limited to what you wrote… But writting “EQUAL” would have been fair. Not “BETTER”.

Rafale may be able to make radio silent intercepts (so can Tornado F3)

Again ! Great ! You’ve been excellent on this point !
It seems that you’re still describing Rafale as if it was still limited to LF1 standard (do you even know what it is ???) !
Saying “MiG-29” or “Su-27” would have been much more appropriate… LOL

Go and ask Dassault, they didn’t think that it was necessary, and as a result, their cockpit has things like the mini-sticks, and is a much higher workload environment.

LOL You’ve already won, let me play at your stupid game : Typhoon work load is inferior because the aircraft is simply much less capable (air-to-air only)… You deserved this one.
What’s your problem with mini-sticks ??? Ooooh ! Typhoon pilots prefered the usual central stick because they find it more natural ???
Maybe, in Rafale, every efforts were made to improve the conditions under high G. Not relevant in your opinion, i guess.

Why don’t the French use it?

(DVI)
Full story ???
I REALLY WAS STARTING to believe that you had GOOD contacts, and good inputs about the programme.
FACT : everything you learn about Rafale comes from Internet fora.

France is lacking money. They prioritized the studies on effects of high Gs, and when they tested thorax compression system, it proved to be VERY difficult to talk to the DVI… Thus, DVI were dropped, and later, thorax compression system was droped too.
However, the DVI were not implemented as a cost saving measure.
I hope i’ve made it clear.

and because the BAE-led bid team failed to convince Singapore that the capabilities it would require would be available in the timescale required (it was said to have been a natural reaction to what insiders called “a shambolic performance” by BAE Systems during the early part of the bidding process), and crucially because the Tranche 2 production contract and the FCP contracts had not then been signed.

Of course, a full team of commercial agents could convince resonable people and military there that the capabilities could be ready on time.
Whereas every body on Internet could believe in Eurofighter… Funny.

and that a display that looks great to a lay-person, straight and level, may look very different when you’re trying to use it in glare, or at 8.5 g.

Again, very funny, since you reject comments told by French pilots who actually are well used to pilot Rafale and use these screen under 8,5g…
But, French pilot are lay-person, aren’t they ?

With regard to the Jag kill, clearly the French pilot made a massive error. But it’s an excellent story to make our French friends uncomfortable with.

And produced so little effect here. What a pity !

“The issues I claim superiority on” are not doubtful at all. Typhoon’s MMI is clearly superior.

Repeating is the best way to ensure that it will be “learnt”… Even when it’s wrong. Nearly everything you write about Rafale is about superiority of Typhoon’s MMI, I really wonder why.

but PESA is a dead end – a wrong turning, a technology that promised a great deal, but proved to be the wrong path. No-one should blame the French for getting it wrong, they were unlucky, while Euroradar enjoyed more luck and more success than they deserved, and the performance of Captor M has exceeded all expectations. (Just go and ask the Singaporeans!)

Pfffffffffffffff…. 😮
The dead-end RBE-2 was the best thing France could get before AESA become affordable.

On the contrary, the Captor M (same class as the RDY-2) IS the dead end, though securing the required specs.

Eurofighter have been the only one not to propose AESA (with capabilities the Captor M can only dream about) to foreign market… But the BAe performance was so “chambolic” !! !! LOL

TMor,

How ready is Rafale’s DVI? Exactly what tasks can be controlled by DVI, and what is the current vocabulary? Ask the questions. I have done, and the answer is not impressive, even if you believe that Dassault can go from a laboratory only capable to a useable capability for frontlinr aircrew.

I’m not PAID to ask them… You are, and French poster are ALWAYS AMAZED to see how much little you know (or understand) about Rafale.
I pay to read what they say : DVI is READY for export.
Pilots were impressed by what it brought : frequency changing, sensor settings…
300 words.

With regard to MMI, your example proves my point – AdlA and MN pilots tested the cockpit in the sim and in rigs, but they weren’t in on the conceptual and mock up design stages, and they didn’t, in any case, have the spectrum of experience that they enjoyed in the EF cockpit design committee.

My examples do not prove anything.
There’s no interest in discussing with you, as every material you’re given is hijacked to serve your interest : proving the exagerated Typhoon superiority ! So much for honesty.

Jackonicko methods :
-use exagerated claims
-mix it with partly true arguments
-divert other members’ answers to prove his points
-repeat intensively that everything was of a better idea in Typhoon, and that Rafale is (bad luck) a failure…
-never inform.

I’m happy that real enthousiast of both aircraft still exist, because with Jack, I couldn’t learn about Typhoon when I want to. 😡

—————————————————————————————-

Now please, let’s ignore this one, tomorrow, i’ll try to post some information about the program (though it will be short).
I hope people won’t believe I’ve something against Typhoon.

Best regards.

Jack, i’m sincerely sorry if I’ve been offending you. But there are still points where I don’t agree with you, simply because of tone issues… :

Despite his protestations, TMor started the thread in a confrontational way (“your Typhoon didn’t even want to fight against our Rafale at TLP”, “they failed to create a proper HOTAS” (an utterly baseless charge) RBE2 is “not a dead-end as much as Captor”, etc.). For someone who doesn’t want to talk about Typhoon, he talks about it a lot.

“your Typhoon didn’t even want to fight against our Rafale at TLP”
-> that was a reaction to the Jaguar incident. Because you talked about the Jaguar shooting down a Rafale. My fault on this point, I forgot to put this one : :p This may have made you understand that I was taunting you.

“they failed to create a proper HOTAS”
->”[…] i‘d answer that they do so because they failed to create a proper HOTAS.”
I’ve not started with this one (this was in my second post).
I thought it was clear that again, it was a joke in reaction to your initial claim. Because I do not think that they failed to create proper hotas at all (this is not was I’ve been told).

->”not a dead-end as much as Captor”
The only volontary fault.

Next time, i’ll pay more attention to smileys.

For someone who doesn’t want to talk about Typhoon, he talks about it a lot.

I would talk about it if I really knew more about it… I’ve just been pulling your legs.

And I don’t bash Rafale. I am rigorously honest about its shortcomings, and I do correct people who post erroneous information, and that often offends French posters here, because they find it very hard to accept ANY criticism.

You’ve posted judgements on the aircraft. I’d like to see technical analysis… 😀 At least to really understand WHY.
You’ve told us what may have brought to such a difference between the two types. And to be honest, I prefer reading “Typhoon MMI is a full generation ahead of Rafale’s” than “Rafale’s MMI are risible” or “poor”… Because they are neither poor, nor risible. Then, even the “full generation ahead” looks exagerated, because if Typhoon is a 5th generation aircraft, then it would mean that Rafale’s MMI are of the generation of olders M2000-5, or even F-15A etc… It’s obvious not.

Typhoon’s MMI may be better, but your claims deserve to be discussed, in regard of what’s published in French sources… I hope you understand my point of view.

“What I’ve been told.”
-> I really wasn’t suggesting that it was clear you were lying. I’m just wary of what you say, and I explained you why. Again, you’re maybe true. But I’ve nothing to match up…
I can accept criticisms, if I can match them up…

And so, I can admit that :
-the RBE-2 has made the Rafale been called “red nose”, because of over-heating issues, in the first months after delivery (before 2004). Its range is a bit short compared to others (but I don’t know how much, and certainly less than usual figures let us think). It seems that it’s not enough for a correct use of Meteor against modern threats (need for AESA), and it’s not enough for countries which do not have AWACS (but, of course, each time, the AESA has been proposed, and even shown and tested at Singapore).
-the M88-2 do not give the Rafale the same thrust to weight ratio (the difference is small). I think EJ200 has some edges in high profiles. After all, i remember the M88-3 have been advertised as being a better engine in high profile…
-MMI are really different to all what exists so far. But all what I can say now is that it just need training, where, maybe, other MMI are more “usual”… ? I don’t really know, it’s a conclusion based on what you told me, and what I’ve been told by an engineer… That’s all.

But it would not be fair to hide that :
-RBE-2 has an excellent scan speed resulting in the so known capabilities, that it has the capability to operate in LPI (certainly not like the APG-77 I know), etc…
-M88-2 is enough for France and even newer engines will only help reducing through life costs… (no thrust improvement)
-the MMI are OK with French pilots who are very happy with it…

“I do correct people who post erroneous information, and that often offends French posters here”
-> in this case, you violently reacted to Foofoone stupid claims about Typhoon. You really used exagerated words against Rafale…

And unfortunately, no military aircraft exists in a vacuum, and depending on the context, we will always want to be comparing it with what went before, and with its rivals and competitors.

Yes, but I’ve never read articles of HP Grolleau, or Bill Sweetman for example, comparing aircraft as you do… 😮

Time to go to bed… Bye ! 😀

Eurofighter have none of this… the same guys was bashing the deltas fighters in the 70’s with they fabulous tornados, why copying the french way of fly if Tornado is so “better”?

I really hope people here will IGNORE Foofoone.:(