TooCool_12fJSR, I don’t know what you’ve been smoking, but it’s way too strong for you…
fitting the M-88 in a M2K?
it’s half the size of a M53, for example
we ask you for data and you post a couple of pics
I would expect such thinking from a 10-year old kid but… er… well, now that I say it, maybe we have the explanation… 😀
TooCool_12fjust a small precision about “led the other canards by half a decade”
had the “other canards” not been delayed by the political decisions (budget cuts) which, basically meant putting them more or less in “pause”, there wouldn’t be anything like that
In development, they did more or less the same (considering that the gripen didnt have to “pause” as sweden kept its engagements with saab).
in any case, none of these aircraft went anywhere near the F-35 in delays and “over-budget” because of development problems
TooCool_12fI understand the different statements of the press conference such that the performance tests of 2008 were important to get a solid base to which they’ve added the deltas of the upcoming aircraft improvements (each delta with a relative reduction depending how far each development is from the final stage (uncertainty factor)).
yes, that is in the second part of the leaked report: the evaluation of the estimated capabilities of improved fighters
but I was answering to Jackonicko about his statements saying, basically, that the tests from 2008-2009 could be considered as irrelevant as the aircrafts had evolved in the meantime
in fact, at most, one could consider that, if the evolution seems not to confirm the estimations, an additional study should be done, not just say “ok I pick this one…” like if you were buying cakes to go with your tea
TooCool_12fbetter for what use?
a light dogfighter vs a delta interceptor…. not the same purpose at the start
add to that the various evolutions that depend mostly on the needs and spending capabilities of the owners…
TooCool_12f@Not Cool 12F,
…
well, if it’s already too much for you to spell correctly a name on a board, no wonder a report of several pages is a complicated thing…
now, as far as the nonsense of “tests that may haves become irrelevant in 2 years (2009-2011)… let’s see
thorough testing usually takes several months at least. the data has to be computed, analyzed, and then, comparisons done. then you have to draw conclusions, and present all that in an understandable language to the deciders.
two years to get to the decision of such a process is a quite short timespan.
if the tests are considered irrelevant in just 2 years, why would any nation conduct these? just let your minister decide what he wants with the data he considers relevant: aircraft price, manufacturers buffet, his future holiday place or even the nice girls he may “accidentally find in his hotel room”
basically, let him decide any way he wants…
TooCool_12fI think Dassault got two surprises; the first was that the Swiss did not want to stretch the budget as much as Dassault expected when all this started some years ago (perhaps due to the economical crisis which few could predict at that time). The other surprise was that Switzerland would delay this sufficiently to allow a dramatically updated Gripen to be introduced. Dassault probably expected the Gripen C/D to not meet the strict Swiss criteria, however how could they predict that the Swiss would go for the MS21?
The swiss were proposed the MS21 as well as upgraded rafale and typhoon from the beginning. nobody expected them to buy, in 2015, the fighters in their 2008 configuration
Anyway, it’s all politics in the end…
Now we do agree, except that it looks more and more probable that the whole thing will get cancelled as it is the Swiss politicans (beyond what the anonymous people who may have to vote on it may think) who are after Maurer and asking him to explain what on earth (to stay polite) he was thinking…. 😉
TooCool_12fBudgetary and political requirements are always vital. Industrial requirements are often important.
Dassault and Eurofighter failed to meet these requirements while Saab did, and their aircraft was chosen as a result.
In Switzerland, the technical report was only ever going to account for 60% of the score.
And yes Maurer stated late last year that “all three contenders meet the requirements.” That report said, TWO YEARS EARLIER that the Gripen did not THEN meet the requirements. The Swiss have had another look, have obviously reassessed the importance of price, and may or may not have reassessed Gripen’s capabilities. Whatever the case, Gripen obviously does meet the requirement now!
Crying about how ‘unfair’ you think the result of a competition was may fit the pattern for Rafale fans but it is not going to change anything.
er, it seems that the report, even with pages missing, was too long for you? they compared the aircraft as they were when they tested them AND tehy compared alos how these would perform given the upgrades they were supposed to receive based on data provided by manufacturers.
Besides it is saab that made the most promises (something like 98 significant changes, when the rafale was to get something like 15 if my memory serves well), and even with all these, the gripen was rated dead last and technically unsuitable to fulfill the requirements
It’s not about “how unfair they are” it is them (SwAF) who say (even NOW) to Maurer “you’re giving us a lemon!”
TooCool_12fit all depends also on progress made by detection systems. The french consider that the best way to beat them is to develop electronics, and that’s what they do with the rafale (and that is also why they don’t look to invest into something that would have a stealthier shape, especially considering the cost involved… their point being, for less money they’d get a satisfactory result by ECM development)
TooCool_12fAs he should; as a politician he should make decisions based on a number of factors: Technical, financial, industrial, political, etc. It’s a balancing act, and he cannot let just one single factor determine everything.
Politicians are also not technical experts. They cannot read technical documents, they need to rely on briefings from the experts. High-level briefings that even a politician can understand and relate to.
I know many French are bad losers, but this is becoming ridicilous…!
Maurer stated publically, when he announced his choice that “all three contenders met the requirements” yet, that report says clearly that the gripen does not
If he says now that he doesn’t know what that report contains, how could he claim that the aircraft meet the requirements? unless he decided just to take for granted whatever PR people said to him regardless of the work done by the SwAF
For sure the Rafale will not be ordered, it did not meet all the requirements (in particular those related to the number of air frames given the limited budget).
except that it never was a requirement. It met all the technical requirements (feel free to point out any that it didn’t), and had there been a requirement to fit 22 frames into a fixed price (non negotiable) do you really think Dassault would have competed and then given the price 30% above? They’d either propose a price whithin the acceptable price range or not even bother competing since being priced below what they consider acceptable would mean loosing money
TooCool_12fdata JSR?
TooCool_12f@Corran
the MTOW is the maximum weight at which the aircraft can be operated. of course, that means “safely” and “repeatedly if (in fact, it is supposed to be able to operate at the MTOW for every flight for its entire lifetime)
it is obvious that the aircraft can’t always perform perfectly due to weather, parts getting used, etc… in order to be able to take off safely at the MTOW it has to have a demonstrated built in margin, which means that at the MTOW it is still far from the breaking point (and even not too close to a deformation point)
so, while you ne er go beyond MTOW in normal conditions, if there’s an absolute necessity like in wartime, you can overload the aircraft by a certain margin
TooCool_12fhttp://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/defense/rafale/specifications-and-performance-data.html?L=1
JSR:
have you any that the rafale doesn’t fulfill its makers specifications sheet?
until you bring something valuable, it is your opinion vs dassaults data, data which of course would be already contested by all the nations who did test the aircraft… in other words, they are credible and that should be enough evidence for anyone
TooCool_12fJSR, take a deep breath, relax…
YOU claim it’s not possible, official data say it is
one of the two is credible… and let me give you a hint… it’s not you
You say “rafale can’t weigh only 10T”
then you say “it can’t go to 24.5T MTOW”
based on what? your personal assuption (liking?)
if it was just a matter of “liking” I’m sure most manufacturers would “like” to make X-Wing fighters and Tie Fighters ever since Star Wars was first released in 1977…
TooCool_12fNot really. There are several examples that the max external load can not be reach by full internal fuel-load. Some Flanker variants are prominent examples about that. For the MKI it is 38,8 tons in over-load conditions. But here as for the Rafale it does not matter much because both have the option to top-up the internal fuel after take-off by air-refuelling. Every aircraft has a level flight-capability of 10-25% over the certificated MTOW. 😉
you misunderstood me, I answered to JSR who claims that the rafale can’t have MTOW of 24.5T because it would be too much external stores. Isipply pointed out that the MTOW is a demonstated figure so the rafale, if it’s MTOW says 24.5T can really fly that heavy safely (and of course, as there are always safety margins, it is certain that it could take off and fly somewhat overloaded, at least by 10% with no particular problems (which would give us around 27 tons weight total)
TooCool_12fMIG-29K range on internal fuel is 2000km.
These are more reasonable numbers
but i have doubts about Rafale 10 ton weights. Dassault website mentions 10 ton class. There is no mention of range on internal fuel.
There is no proven way of carrying 9.5T external load by Rafale to reach 24.5T MTOW.They say it cannot carry 3 Black Shaheen with extended range stirke. It means the engines are not powerful or ET are not big enough with 3 cruise missiles.
http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/uae-s-rafale-deal-is-no-mirage.html
well, the MTOW isn’t just some fancy number, it is a demonstrated capability. If its MTOW is 24.5T, then it, obviously, can carry as much stuff externally on top of the internal fuel capacity
Sign In
