the only problem with your statement is that you obviously ignore (on purpose?) that the pics you saw weren’t representative of the AESA the Rafale is using, so, counting the modules on these is pretty much irrelevant.

In any case, Dassault is in fighter business since before WWII, managed to make a world class fighter and they’d mess up a simple thingy like the nose cone diameter while any visitor on this board can see it’s too small? yeah right… 😀

or another possibility:

“guys, we need airborne tanker that can take off from a QE class carrier, bring in the lawyers and you’ll have to provide one at your own expense”

should work like a charm 😀

The French have nothing to laugh about right now, and between Britain and France right now, it’s the British who have the most to be happy about, not the French.

I’m french and don’t seem to be particularily embarrased by the Euro problems. In fact, as far as the everyday life goes on, it’s pretty much the same on both sides of the channel – and in fact, it’s cheaper overhere… (I spend most of my time in UK for my work, so I do have a small idea of both)

in any case, as far as naval aircraft go, on this side of the channel, we can be pretty satisfied with our situation, especially if we look at the mess the RN is getting into.

A couple of years ago, I was on a ferry entering the Southampton harbour, and there were all the british carriers, being dismantled apparently. two weeks ago, I was there again, and saw only one remaining… sad… 🙁

it all depends on a size of the country you have to go over.

Imagine you have to strike a country where your carrier can’t get close enough, what do you do? if you have ground bases nearby ok…. just send some tankers there, but if you don’t, all you can do is send in cruise missiles.

That question is, of course, less relevant for the US which can always send in their B-2s as they can reach any point in the world from either their base in the US or from Diego Garcia, but the other countries?

The french, or the USN, can always send up a package of SHs (or rafales), top up fuel right before entering the combat zone, and have a couple SH (rafale) refuellers that come forward to refuel a bit the attackers when they come home a couple of hours later. With the F-35, to this point, this won’t be an option

Relax, Dave. Your string of words are slightly muddled up & make little sense, take a deep breath. Take it easy, you’ll live longer.

As I more or less stated a couple of posts ago in reply to Obligatory. The RAF & RSAF, at least, are pushing ahead for enhancements & upgrades, in some cases the RSAF more than the RAF going by more recent reports. Late coming? Of course, I wouldn’t state otherwise. Will they come? Again, of course & I wouldn’t state otherwise. Other Typhoon users? Well it depends on their requirements, if theres something they don’t feel the need to intgrate then they’re obviously not going to. However, P1E is due any time now which is quite a major step up in capabilities/enhancements, the Luftwaffe, or Diehl, seem to be in the early process of intgrating Pilum in the not to distant future, integration of Meteor onto Typhoon will be before Rafale and we’re likely to see Small Diameter Bomb & Brimstone integrated before too (if the latter ever gets them anyway) by the RAF at least and likely by the RSAF also, who knows maybe even before the RAF.

Its not all as one sided as so many think it is.

you forget one little detail or two:

– france produces its own missiles, which isn’t the case for typhoon users, who depend on the US for their BVR armament, so, the integration of the meteor may be simply a matter of getting the independance from the US in that regard that the french already have

– SDB and Brimstone? nice, but, again, what they do, the Rafale does already with current armament… so you can’t list that as a lack in the offer or capabilities (in case the RN suddenly gets Rafales, though, you can be sure any of these could be rapidly integrated unless there’s an opposition from the US – for the SDB)

besides, you compare the modules numbers, but you don’t take into acount the aircraft’s RCS….

if the rafale detects a Su-30 (imaginary example, of course, as I don’t have the real numbers, just like anyone here 😉 ) from 80km head-on, and the Typhoon from 120km, you may say that the Typhoon has the advantage.

Now, if, from the Su-30’s perspective, it cas see the Typhoon from 140km away and the Rafale from 60, would you still consider that the Typhoon has the advantage?

IThe fact is, it’s not the distance at which you can see that counts, but whether you can see first, and the rafale has a rather low RCS, especially from the front, and can combine that with excellent electronics integration and first class ECM suit

eagle1, swerve is right on that one…

when I first read that article, I had to reread it, because I didn’t believe what I’ve read.

Of course, Jon Lake is still in his “ours is better” stuff when he talks about the “potential”, but still, admitting that the rafale does everything it has to right now while the Typhoon is behind is something I wouldn’t expect from him, based on what I’ve read from him here and there… methinks you should reread his statement in full, calmly, you’ll see that, for once, he’s not in his usual rafale-bashing role

Not necessarily with heavy load.
EF is bigger so it won’t get as affected as Rafale, EF also has more thrust so can keep speed up higher than Rafale, which in turn translate into more range.
Same reason as why Gripen NG most probably out-range Rafale on light loads, but can’t keep up with heavier loads

according to wiki, the furthest the typhoon can be expected to go is about 750nm on ground attack mission

the rafale, on a penetration mission (so also loaded for A2G) can strike beyond 1000nm

You’re right to say that the Typhoon has more thrust, but the thrust doesn’t come out of nowhere. more thrust means either much higher temperature ( Typhoon does have an edge there, but not enough to justify the difference) or/and higher fuel consumption.

As a result, it simply can not go as far as the rafale.

A totaly fuel capacity for the typhoon is 4500kg, rafale 4700kg, for the same internal capacity, yet, the maximum range of the rafale goes beyond 3700km while the Typhoon reaches 2900km… in other terms, either somebody made a mistake, or the typhoon burns fuel at a much higher rate