One of the main raison I read about the rafale having the intake on the sides is in order to have better crash resistent aircraft (underbelly intake been quite fragile), less structural stress from heavy load…

IIRC, the stronger nose gear required for carrier ops is one reason why Dassault went with side intakes… but thats basically the same as crash resistance. 😀
That plus space. A solution à la F-16 or Typhoon would have been less than perfect: where to fit that bulky gear?

IIRC, the Strike Eagle can carry up to 7 JDAMs – 6 on the lower CFT stations, 2 under the wings and 1 on the centerline station.
These stations are equipped with the BRU-47/A racks which are compatible with the latest guided bombs.
The upper 6 CFT stations use the BRU-46/A which isn’t.
More info about the racks here: http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/en/weapons/weapons-stores/120-bomb-release-units

I wouldn’t count out the possibilty that they upgraded all the racks though.

Can anyone confirm they are operational with GBU-49 and IRIS-T?

GBU-49 I don’t know, but they are using IRIS-T missiles:
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article12849184.ab

Availability of the mirage in OPEX (ie with normal spare availability) is close to 100%

You can’t beat the Tornado as far as mechanical failure is concerned. Everyting on this plane has mechanical mooving parts which are prone to failure by design :
The sweep wings
The wing pylons
the refueling prob
the 2 radars
the 2 engine reversers
the air intakes
the airbrakes
2 guns…

Conversely, the 2000D is a very simple aircraft as far as mechanical systems are concerned :

no mooving air intake
single engine with no reverser
fixed refueling probe
elevons instead of flaps + elevators
no guns

Some points:

Air intakes are fixed on Tornado GR4s, limiting top speed to Mach 1.3, while the Mirage 2000 intake works with movable cones to achieve speeds in excess of Mach 2.

Tornado GR4 is only equipped with 1 gun, no gun for the GR4A. Besides, not having a gun surely is a huge advantage for a mud mover. 😀

You are right. Closer to a Mark 82 but it looks somewhat longer.

Upon closer inspection and comparison, looks like a GBU-31 JDAM.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GBU-31_xxl.jpg

It looks like a JDAM with a BLU-109 penetration warhead. Would make sense given the target.

Now that you mention it, it’s obvious you were talking about the Triple Nickel squadron. Thanks for the clarification. 🙂
On a side note, this reminds me of where one of the 555 jets ended up some years later: http://www.f-16.net/gallery_item208119.html

To (almost) return to topic: CF-18s at least are using the dual launchers:
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?195079-Libyan-Conflict-Photos-and-Videos&p=5541819&viewfull=1#post5541819

Yeah, i saw a similar pic of that RAAF SH before; it was taken at the Avalon Airshow recently. But i am dubious of those “Airshow loadouts”. The pics posted by SpudmanWP were also all taken during air shows or promotional events and dual AMRAAMs are clearly not cleared for use on the Super Bug…

Yes, its an airshow loadout and wouldn’t be used in real ops. But 4 Sidewinders are apparently cleared.

I remember a 1974 Fighter Weapons Review that had as its cover an illustration of what at the time we all thought was a look at the future.

It was a flight of F-15s and F-16s…the F-15s were loaded with bombs and the F-16s had only Sidewinders on the wingtips.

Funny how things turned out.

The F-15 always had A/G capability. The radar had some A/G modes and up to 16,000 lbs of bombs could be carried. Didn’t see much use though.