Still focused on d*ck size rather than how to use it ?

What!?

Do you have any recent sources for “radar 2”? Are you sure it will ever be implemented?

I understand how you could not be bothered by the Swiss — in particular when they start doing things that don’t support your view of the superior Typhoon… — or is it only with Radar 2 that it will be superior?

Both Rafale and Typhoon have their weaknesses, and I already said it is beneficial to have a larger radar, so I am not sure what you are referring to.

Rafale most likely will fly in Indian colors — I agree it is an open question whether it will fly in Swiss colors, that was not the point, the point was that the Typhoon will not even enter into the race. If the upgraded Typhoon is so superior to the Rafale, isn’t it a bit strange that they keep the Rafale in but drops the Typhoon? In particular if all it takes to understand the superiority of Typhoon is to read a few articles about the future upgrades…. Seems strange if the Eurofighter marketing department did not bother to update the Swiss on the fantastic new capabilities of the Typhoon….

Yes, QinetiQ have put in far too much work already for it to be disregarded and the current plan is 2021. We could have GaAs base model AESA in 2 years but we are holding off for the more advanced version, hence why Kuwait will have AESA first. It should also be noted that it is not standalone according to RUSI, it is to be integrated with the DASS upgrade and IRST system. It will function as part of the DASS both passively and offensively.

All I’m saying is that they can’t predict how good a future Typhoon will be without evaluating it, it’s like predicting how good a Gripen E will be without an eval, and I’m not sure how many of the UK advancements will be for export. And it’s a small contract, limited cash purchase, likely to be a Gripen for a multitude of reasons. Rafale is there to make the bid competitive.

Well I don’t know, looking back you’ve kind of tried twist it into a positive, greater good, kind of thing.

I don’t know, that contract signing for India just keeps dragging and dragging. The Swiss can’t possibly know how good the upgraded Typhoon will perform as of now, no one really does at this point, it’s also possible that it’s now ruled out as part of the bid process rules, or that it’s too expensive for their limited budget. Looking at the last eval, the Typhoon lost mainly on EW, Detection, Acquistion and SA and often not by a huge margin. Well every one of those things is being greatly improved, so I don’t think it can be rationally ruled as being worse at this stage. Nobody has such knowledge of the future.

Right, so by 2021 the EW will be even more impressive; it will have a huge GaN radar, and several other improvements.

However the Swiss are not impressed:

http://www.janes.com/article/58331/switzerland-adds-hornets-to-fighter-replacement-plans

So in spite of all the improvements to the Typhoon, the Swiss are not interested in even evaluating it once more.

To be honest, if there is one person here very much looking like a “fanboy” right now, that is Starfish.

Or would you argue that it’s the Swiss air force that is full of Rafale and Gripen fanboys…? 🙂

It will be interesting to see who will win the next round in Switzerland; the technical eval will no doubt be won by the F-35 (if it is invited), and Rafale will be pushed down to second, followed by the Gripen E, however when cost and ToT is included in the assessment, who knows? Will Dassault manage to reduce costs (due to exports between now and 2025) sufficiently to compete against the F-35? Or will the budget be so small that Gripen E will again be selected?

The only thing we know for sure is that the super-duper-Typhoon will never fly in Swiss colors (or Indian colors for that matter..).

Well the bad news is that Radar 2 won’t be for export, certainly not with the RF attack and cyberwarfare functions, so it’s likely irrelevant to the Swiss. Also not really sure how they can judge an aircraft standard that they can’t possibly have analysed yet. Maybe they just don’t want the cost of repeating the full eval. I’m not really to bothered about the Swiss though, I’m more interested in domestic capability and it’s only a very small order.

Me? And not all the Rafale guys trying to deny that it has any weaknesses.:D

Heh, I’m not massively sure the Rafale will ever fly in Indian or Swiss colours either.

What makes you think Rafale will beat Gripen E technically anyway? Sure it’s not the 6th gen aircraft marketeers claimed but it will be a very modern Gen 4.5 fighter.

Because it hasn’t even been introduced yet and we already know what’s going to replace that “technology”.

And we know that hypersonic robot planes with lasers are going to replace fighters, so everything currently being worked on for manned fighters is rubbish right?

Nope but it’s pretty obvious that the swash plate is a dead end, as logic dictates that the future will be “smart skin” with 360° multifunction GaN coverage.

Nic

It’s not a dead end at all, the small radar is the real dead end for the next 20 years. JFC, it’s like saying, “radars and smart skin are a dead end, ESP is the future.” Get it somewhere even moderately close to production, or at least a proven technology, then we’ll discuss it. If smart skin is the future, then a small aircraft is also a dead end.

For the next 2 decade a swash-plate radar and 2-way data link will enable the pilot to go evasive much sooner and hence improve survivability.

The EW is very impressive right now, we can only wait to see what the EF comes up with in 2021.

“kinematic performance” does not normally refer to the max speed….

You are actually right, one should not just assume that “Detection” refers to the radar only; perhaps it is something more than that.

Regarding “engagement”, why don’t you back up your definition of the word?

Here is one definition, probably written by somebody who knows much more about this than either of us:

http://www.f-16.net/glossary-E.html

Unless you can come up with something better than “you are wrong” I suggest we end this silly discussion right here.

In terms of increasing the range of a launched missile, it actually does, speed and height, it’s really that simple.

Engagement means only one thing in air combat. And that definition pretty much backs up my version. The EF can get in a position to launch first because the radar can gain lock from a greater range. Gripen C with the exact same missile only scores 5.5 vs 8 for the EF. I would have to argue that the ability to get into a firing position first is maybe being underrated.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Engagement-Fire-Control.html

Engagement and Fire Control Radars

Perhaps it’s also just a coincidence that Detection, ID, Acquisition and Engagement are all next to each other.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?140099-If-you-had-to-choose-between-Rafale-or-F-35&p=2340111#post2340111

It’s only silly because people such as yourself are unwilling to accept any weaknesses in their fan aircraft, even those that come out in an eval that they themselves use in the first place. You don’t see me arguing about what detection means, or debating the QRA figure.