the difference with the F-35 is that the rafale was delayed due to political decisions (based on budget reductions), and not dassaults inability to deliver the product as it was supposed to do the rafale demonstrator (prototype if you like) flew by mid 1986, and the C prototype six years later (the M prototype a little later the same year (1991) )

it took it about a decade to start entering active service with a couple of years standing by on political decision

Some will appreciate the title of this post. Almost certain VADM Dave Venlet will.

Bob Cox over at the Ft Worth Star Telegram has this to say about what now seems to have become annual event – specifically, the third restructure in three years of the F-35 program:

http://blogs.star-telegram.com/sky_talk/2012/01/dod-officials-to-review-update-f-35-program-plans.html

As Bob says, provision of this information is due in no small part to the diligence and hard work of Jason Sherman and the Team over at Inside Defense (subscription).

Inside Defense reports that two (2) meetings of the DAB have apparantly been scheduled and, as Bob Cox says in his article:

The outcomes from these meetings should provide yet another opportunity to calibrate (if not verify and validate) the estimates from the independent assessments made via the risk based cost modelling done by the team at Air Power Australia back in 2006:

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af168/Horde01/JSF%20Costs%20and%20Pricing%20Data/JSFCostingHistory_3_Iss1.jpg

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af168/Horde01/JSF%20Costs%20and%20Pricing%20Data/GAO_Table_App1_15Mar11_Addendum.jpg

..

“flawed analysis”…. yeah sure… :rolleyes:

very low because they delayed that buy for years already and their fighters need replacement badly, if I’m not mistaken

as for “two more weeks”, it sounds very “olegish” to me 😀

however, one phrase from the last link

Officials say “life-cycle” maintenance costs of each plane will determine the winner of the deal.

if they determine the winner on lifecycle costs, does that mean that the ToT packages proposed from both sides were similar?

In such case, the rafale may have the edge there, especially if india takes into consideration the other export customers experience, like austria whose flight hour cost more than tripled from what EADS annonced them

You couldn’t say that about the Rafale program when only 30 odd examples had been built either, but I agree the programs aren’t comparable.

you’re right on one thing: they aren’t comparable, as dassaul delivered what was asked from them, not LM and the delays in rafale program were due mainly to politicians will to reschedule orders for budgetary reasons, not dassaults inability to make the aircraft up to specs (changeable ones, besides, while LM has trouble getting just to the original ones)

in the end, there are over 100 rafales (not “only 30 odd examples, as you incorrectly imply) in service right now which is over a third of the French total planned number, with dassault having a quite clear idea on how much profit they make out of every aircraft, so, if they say thay can make it profitable even without exports, chances are they have a clue what they are talking about… about LM, that last point still has to be proven

That is not the issue

not yet… if may become an issue if they increase the efforts on the parts involved, which is considered as an option

From Thales:

http://www.thalesgroup.com/Portfolio/Defence/Aerospace_Product_SPECTRA/?pid=1568

The SPECTRA system for the Rafale combat aircraft operates in electromagnetic, laser and infra-red domains. Using sophisticated techniques, such as interferometry for high precision DOA and passive ranging, digital frequency memory for signal coherency and active phased-array transmitters for maximum effectiveness and covertness, the highly advanced multi-sensors and artificial intelligence data fusion capabilities of SPECTRA provide the Rafale aircraft with the best chance to survive in harsh and lethal environments. The Rafale combat aircraft and the SPECTRA system are fully operational onboard the French Navy’s Rafale.

Offering unique high sensitivity detection and multiple threat capability, and operating smart data fusion between multi-spectral sensors, it provides identification, location, jamming and decoying against an extensive range of electromagnetic, infra-red and laser threats.

Additionally, SPECTRA fulfils new functions in a combat aircraft, while significantly participating in the determination of the aircraft’s tactical situation, and providing the crew with operational advantage by performing accurate threat location.

By virtue of its fully passive situational awareness capability, SPECTRA is a major contributor to the low observability concept of Rafale.

one may also ask: if you apply a stronger force on the hook to keep it against the deck, how will it affect the durability of the hook and supporting system?

more force meaning higher efforts to withstand, meaning, in return, higher fatigue and shorter lifetime for the parts involved

F3

actually, what you find “strange” is how things work in real world: you develop something, test it and, if it works consider your problem solved.

it is only in LM fantasyland that you make a nice drawing on your computer and consider the issue over before even knowing whather ot works. that’s exactly what they do in this program since the beginning and why it’s such a budgetary mess: it is called “wishful thinking”, not engineering