in a guns dogfight, i’ll probably give a higher % of kills to the rafale, other than that i’ll back the fa-18’sh
as i said, it will need to be looked at again when rafale gets their upgrades

In a guns dogfight the Rafale wins hand down. HMS is useless in a guns dogfight.

i only suggested that it would be nice to see a comparison, due to 1 engine vs 2 and bigger vs smaller.
not that anyone beats the other in any way, rafale have probably the longest legs in this comparison.
But i dont think the win is with a big margin, as it was before.

But you still can add a belly tank + 6 AAMs.

Not saying the Gripen NG isn’t impressive… but the Rafale just isn’t in the same class.

Nic

Just want to clarify one thing. The LDP is mounted on “pylon 4”. This is a weapons station exclusively for pods. Thus it’s not replacing any weapons/drop tank.

I know where it is located, but I’ve yet to see proof that it can be mouted as well as a 1000lb LGB on the starboard belly point. Are you sure both can be carried at the same time?

Nic

Are you saying that Rafale has 13 pylons that are all cleared to carry a2g munitions?

Of course not.

But if you really want to carry 5 heavy class weapons, you retain the capability to use CFTs, and you can carry 6 AAMs as well. You get less external fuel than with the 1700L tanks of the Gripen, but you also get much less drag, and you still have more internal fuel.

And if those weapons are LGBs and require a LDP, it can be added on the Rafale, while it would need to replace one of the weapons/drop tank on the Gripen.

So your Gripen can carry 4 1000lb LGB + 1 LDP + 2 tanks + 2/4 AA missiles

While the Rafale can carry 4 1000lb LGB + 1 LDP + 2 CFT + 1×1250/2000L tank OR a 5th 1000lb LGB + up to 6 AAMs

Nic

Anyway, it’s funny that Rafale in some cases actually can carry less ordnance than Gripen NG… 🙂

Its BS.

I liked the AGM65 part. Let’s integrate it on the Rafale on just the two middle wing pylon!

Why the hell would anyone in his right mind do that when the Rafale can already carry 6 AASM on said pylons, which are way better than a maverick.

But provided you integrated the maverick anyway, why would you limit yourself to integrating it on just the middle wing pylon and not the outer pylon, if not to give the Gripen the “advantage”?

Nic

Congratulations…

Strangely enough my interest in aviation grew while “reading” my dad’s aircraft magasine from 1982 ownards (I put reading in quotes because was 6 at the time, and no need to say I didn’t speak english back then: The magazine was Air International).

Nic

Are you sure it wasn’t french markings?

When I was in the army we had equipment recognition courses and they showed a jaguar with RAF roundels, and the chief said it was a jaguar and that we could recognise the french “cocarde”.

Nic

According what the french guys have researched the currently expected total programme cost is close to 40 bln €, with a planned production run of at least 286 airframes (180 of which are contracted now). Do the math and you get the clue.

I think that the planned production run is 294. I was under the impression that the 8 airframes were deducted from the last batch in order to make funding available for the RBE2 AESA, but were supposed to be re-ordered on a subsequent batch?

Nic