Having different topics is interesting because in the topic of Typhoon, people talk about Typhoon facts and news, in the Rafale thread they talk about Rafale facts and news, etc.

So, IM(H or not)O, the problem is not the organisation of the forum and threads, but the people contributing to it (those who try “to prove that the aircraft they “support” is incontestably better than the one they don’t.”)

The Twinblade message here, for example, even for humour, is deeply boring me, since it shows what people may think about the opinion of French members. I don’t blame Twinblade though… Only the members who systematically try “to prove that the aircraft (Rafale) they “support” is incontestably better than the one they don’t (Typhoon).” I warned them once, and thus I retract since the mood is just awful.

I once was tired to see Rafale topics polluted by one anti-Rafale first-class liar member, and now, I’m tired to see years of efforts blown away by…. Oh, you know, no need to use names.

@Tmor
The question IMO is not how it looks but how it is in reality, what is the truth in other words.

Now suppose that the Rafale is actually superior to the Thyphoon? (something I believe perfectly possible), how one is supposed to say it?

Now you can argue that it’s useless to try, which I would agree too.
But let’s admit that it’s then another debat and it’s not easy to treat as trolls those who want to try their chance.
It’s something else to say to someone: “it’s useless to try to show the superiority because it looks trollish” (even though you are convinced) than to tell him: “you’re a troll”.

Fact is that the French who know (Dassault, the pilots, French specialized journalists) seems very arogant toward the EF and there is maybe a reason.

The reason could be that Grandclaudron, Captain Romain and Co have been briefed to say so. Another possibility is that they are sure of the superiority of their machine.

Personnaly I believe in the superiority not because of this or that but because I don’t believe that General Motors would win the Formula1 championship the first year because it’s bigger with more money.
Advanced fighter – like Formula 1 – is a highly evolutionnary business and I’m more confident with Dassault ingeneering smooth trajectory. Simply that.

(in many area of expertise when you are, say, 3rd generation of a material with the same team framework making R&D for 15 years on the same subject, I can garanty you that each gen’ made previous one really, really, … outdated. I can see that during work days…)

Now I agree it’s useless to argue with that on forums, the indian test team are probably aware and we’ll see.

Let’s just hope it’ll be fair or again we’ll won’t know more that time.
I personaly fear a lot EADS dumping with EADS explaining in 2 years during a share holder board: “our results are very disapointing because of Cassidian heavy losses mostly due to the badly anticipated Indian contrat costs…. bla, bla, bla….
…. but fortunately the Airbus results as well as Eurocoptere results have been very satisfying so that overall results is balanced in spite Cassidian losses…”.

The AASM example is a bad one. Its not really the kind of program you want to advertise for work efficiency and all. The end product is good, but it was not easy and the program wansn’t managed that well.

Little problem!

The big problem is when you can’t put out a breakthrough weapon like that with a design out of the paved sentry.

But that’s for me a subject of interest so let’s not go further because it’ll finish off topic :rolleyes:

I nonetheless see no need to bring the Typhoon programme up here, it’s offtopic and if you have any related questions ask them in the appropriate thread.

So I’ll ask the question later, (I must go) 😉

OT : well even the dinosaurs understood the benefits of diversity. After all, a tiny branch of the theropods (ie birds) managed to dodge extinctions and evolved until present days 🙂

And without little rats, we wouln’t be there 🙂

That’s what I meant. And without SAGEM which was a tiny, unrational, not restructured, not merged, etc… company: no AASM!

That’s one example between many.
(When I think of the incredible diversity and creativity the US aviation industry used to have….)

Anyway anyone would have hard time to lecture Dassault on production and cost management: just look at Catia from Dassault System and how far they go here.

From collaborative design…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YN0RCVUlH0U

to manufactury (DELMIA)
http://www.youtube.com/user/DassaultSystemes?v=frE8QiHPk6I&feature=pyv&ad=7363853996&kw=ENOVIA

(Check DELMIA and the demo for aerospace industry right side of the screen)

Well the cross check “false” signals parts makes sense but is also no guarantee that these are in fact false signals, albeit the possibility to identify them as such is greater. One has to bear in mind that the problematic of interference blanking and cancelling out the own radars transmissions is not exactly a new or Rafale specific issue. In theory one could argue that any RWR must do so and could be used that, but as said that’s the theory.

Well… seen from my armchar, I would just redirect all incoming signals from the EW antenas to the RBE2 receiver when the RBE2 emit (those of the RBE2 frequency at least). Like this that makes like a bigger receiving antena and it make the filter btw.

But anyway, my point wasn’t to tell how it works, I don’t know, but my point from the beginning was to say that for emiting yes: only the radar size & power counts. But for receiving it’s much more complex than that and we may have to take into acount the radar size but also all the other receiving antenas between many other issues.
And yes: if so, it’s probably the same for every last gen’ RWR.

Production rate that low cost French tax payers enourmously..Correction, this year only 10 fighters is planned..Its correct to assume that even without export orders the production is secured until 2018 but Dassaults original production programm and manufacturing cost calculations were certainly not optimized for one fighter a month for such a long period of time.

One should not wonder why RAFALE is sooo expensive…

People who don’t know what industry and production is, greatly overestimate the “economy of scale” concept. It’s because that’s the only thing they can understand. (Nothing against you personaly Merlin, I’m annoyed by those industrial “merges”, “critical mass”, “economy of scale” and other paper pushers BS as a general thing”.

Ask General Motor how cool are economy of scale :diablo:

And ask the american aviation industry now that they’ve lost all diversity with only LM and Boeing that remain. They just can put out a 787 or a F35.

Diversity is a lot of little problem to deal with but that avoid BIG problem (ask the dinosaurus!)

If you claim that the SPECTRA can help with analyzing it’s own radar reflections, then you would have to say the same about the EF’s DASS and the F-35’s RwR, or any other fighter that has a RwR.

In either case, it’s moot because there is not evidence of this ability.

Well… 8 AESA antena seems to me like an overkill for a RWR. But let’s admit it’s a big RWR, that just meen that this debat on the ‘big nose story’ is naïve because if we discuss the receiving capability, we must include much more parameters.
Those discussion are interesting for the shake of the debat but let’s admit that only the Indian evaluators have the whole picture.
I tend to agree with Eagle. The noze size debat toward the Rafale is just a bone given to the EF fans because they have few to brag about.

Even the press print according to the alegence to those who make advertizings in their little shop and provide few to discuss about.

Size has a lot to do with received signal too. All things being equal a radar half the size of X will only receive 1/4th the return that X will.

Yes but there, if the Rafale has a “small” nose, it still has big shoulders and the quite prominent canard roots are used for 2 not small AESA receiving antena of Spectra.

Those antena’s task is only to suck all the trons of the environment, that’s what they are made for, and I’m convinced personaly that they work in addition with the RBE2 as receiver antenas (with ELINT tasks in background task). Because that’s simple logic. If those antenas are made to detect and treat incoming radar signals, they can detect and treat the return signal of the RBE2

They were AESA before the RBE2 itself. And this one is perfectly appropriate to emit enough, but not too much.

There’s nothing in the prosecutor’s folder in the field of the nose size, no charges 😀