Why didn’t you just make a list with the 20+ threads comparing Rafale to Eurofighter is saying why they crap/super?

Because, and I wonder ever you noticied it or not, that I wasn’t opening ANOTHER comparison thread…

I’ve just been talking about Rafale, except when I put the two picture (and wrote Just for fun), and when I wrote “not a dead-end as much as Captor”. Why ? Because I’m not willing to see a new Typhoon vs Rafale thread, I know how boring they are. I just reacted because I think that Jack’s assertions hides realities about Rafale.

At least, this thread will prove that one can’t start a discussion about a type without the others talk about and compare to their national aircraft….:(

As for Jackonicko …

I’m astonished that you should choose to put your own reputation on the line by defending quite such a childish and imbecilic idiot.

I’m astonished that instead of seeing that I just wanted to correct your arguments as i did on pprune, you considered that I came to defend Foofoone… I don’t care what he wrote, we do not have the same approach of discussions.

As to Typhoon and Rafale, since they were not pitted against each other on TLP, there wasn’t much opportunity for the Typhoon boys to shoot down your Rafales, since the RAF doesn’t usually target its allies. No RAF Jaguar has managed to shoot one down so far, though they didn’t seem to have much trouble bagging a Rafale.

This was the last fair part of your answer !

PESA is a technological dead end, and its out performed by the best M-Scan radars, including Captor.

In range. And Captor is still a technological dead end also (or, maybe, there is a linguistic issue lol). There is more in common between a PESA and AESA than between M-Scan and AESA. At least, the PESA better prepared France for the next step, that was my point.

Moreover, having gone down the PESA route, Rafale has been left with a small nose cross section,

Did you know that before the RBE-2 was chosen, the planned radar was the RDX ?
A derivative of RDX is the RDY… both M-Scans… About the noze size… I’ve never denyed that the Typhoon enjoys an edge in detection range. But I wasn’t comparing at all.

OK, you can retrofit an AESA antenna – but you can with Captor, too

Ok… The only moment I compared the Rafale’s equipment was “not a dead-end as much as Captor”. :p
I didn’t want to say “Rafale is better”. But of course, I don’t know, maybe I’ve hurt your feelings, you’ve explained all what must be known about Typhoon…

but you can with Captor, too, as you’ll shortly see flying on DA5. The Captor E-scan antenna switch is estimated at five hours, by the way, and they have actually done it in that time.

Ok, when will it be ready for prod ? :rolleyes: (let’s talk about it in my Rafale thread ! 😀 )

The M88 is producing much less thrust than was ORIGINALLY intended,

Maybe you refer to a M88 not adapted to Rafale ?
The one with a 0.5 bypass ratio ?
Rafale is built to be propelled by two 7.5kN engines.

and that is now the target of a separate growth programme.

No. Engine growth is planned since the very begining. See M88-3 and 4…
The engine was said to have a potential of 50% additionnal thrust…
Foofoone (if he’s the one I think) may help us about the M88…

Under-powered may be harsh, but it’s more accurate than Foofone’s constant inaccurate jibes about Typhoon’s weight and aerodynamics.

Ok, so, you were partially ironic… 😀

As to MMI, […] or can’t judge handling characteristics by examining the stick.

😀 😀 😀
Do you think i was giving MY point of view ?
I was refering to this PDF : http://www.c2sd.sga.defense.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/c2sd_polyvalence_rafale_2006.pdf
It’s a pity that there is no translation of this… It would have shown you how the pilots love the Rafale HMI, and WHY. And the arguments I gave were intended to give you an idea of what makes the success of HMI…
One thing is sure, they are very good, pilots are happy with it, screens, colors, sticks and buttons, and tactical situation representation…
Do not reply by “they should try Typhoon’s, they would understand the meaning of Life”… 😀 😉

EF GmbH will let pretty well anyone fly the Typhoon rig and see the MMI at first hand, and it’s the one element of Typhoon that’s acknowledged by pilots (not just pilots from the customer nations and partner nations) as being world-beating. Even the F-22 blokes regard Typhoon’s MMI with envy.

At least 75 foreign (non french) pilots have flown Rafale (see Fox One n°1, that was in 2000/2001)… Do you think Dassault failed to notice that the majority thought Rafale HMI is poor ? No.
Even journalist have flown the aircraft…

As you were talking of Typhoon : then, what happens when pilots seat in ? Do they feel like gods ? :confused: Tell us ! Try to describe what they like or not, instead of saying again the usual “EF GmbH will let pretty well anyone fly the Typhoon rig” and “Dassault is much less forthcoming”… (wich is false, see above)

Since you mention DVI, the Typhoon pilot can change frequencies, update the nav system, demand display changes, and can sort, prioritise and allocate targets across the formation using DVI.

Since, again, you used my Rafale thread to talk about Typhoon, because of your comparing whim 😉 :p , i’d answer that they do so because they failed to create a proper HOTAS.
Dassault DVI are not used for critical function. They decided so… I wonder why.

I’m not saying that Rafale is better. I’m just defending it against… you. :diablo: