how have I been corrected on that claim? the only thing people have said is that Im wrong with no facts to back it up. Actually people have been contridicting themselves saying that the Rafale has a far more advanced airframe than the M2K but saying the Gripen and M2K are exactly equal

if you read what’s been said: the M2k and le MIII have only one thing in common: they’re single engine delta fighters.

But that’s where the similarity ends. The balance, controls, electronics and, basically, everything else is different

thing is, when rafales started flying over Lybia, other nations waited for cruise missiles to clean up the defences, which were considered too dangerous to fly into (Article in “Combat Aircraft” a few months ago, don’t have the issue at hadn right now).

If the Rafale could do it, it is because of its electronic protection suite. Put the same into a mirage 2000 and you’ll get the cost as well.

So, even when saying “it can do the same jobs as the rafale” is a bit of a stretch. It can… almost.

Technology goes forward, and that is what costs so much. When you look at the F-35 that costs a fortune, it is because of all the latests technologies that have to be developed to have it do stuff it’s supposed to do the way it’s supposed to do.

Of course, one may say that over afghanistan you don’t need all that, and one’d be right. In fact, you could take an A-1 Skyraider against the taliban and do a good job, as it is rugged, carries a lot of ammo of all sorts, has a good loiter time… what do you need more?

Just look at the cost of uprgrades India has just agreed to make… it will bring their mirages fleet to a more modern standard but still lag behind the rafale in various areas. Do you think they did it just for fun?

probably yes, as networking is a feature most if not all modern fighters are made for

arquebus, you should read a bit about stuff you talk about…

M2k was developed at about the same timeframe as the F-16, and entered production only a couple of years later.

It is a pure delta as the Mirage III, but the similarities end there. If you take the initial F-16, one may say it is only an improveed F-86, light dogfighter, having little to no avionics, no decent radar, but just a canon and a couple of sidewinders to play with.

of course, it is much better than that, but the same goes for the M2k, which is in a completely different league than the Mirage III.

well, basically, about a generation better..

it’s like saying, why did the USA go for the F-15 while it didn’t bring anything significantly better than the F-4 it was to replace in its various roles…

you can stuff most of rafales gadgets in the M2k, but as those gadgets are what makes the aircrafts high price, you’d end up again with a costly aircraft.

and, for the record, the M2k was on the market for years without getting any new orders before it was finally removed from the Dassault catalogue to be replaced by the Rafale

Every major arms corporation in this world has a history of malpractices, including french. Sometimes i wonder if the look on sales executives faces would be the same when they are placed second in financial bids compared to being second in bribe bids. Of course, in either case, its usually the party with losing bid that complains of corruption.

actually, when he talks about 2 bribery scandals, it’s about the Typhoon alone (the two sales outside the partner nations), which is a way of sorts to disqualify the “exports” of the Typhoon as an argument of quality

Or it tells us that EF is playing that much harder to win.

As things stand, Dassault does not have a single export customer yet for the Rafale. The EF already has two, Austria & KSA.

Teer, again, as said right before your post: Typhoons exports were made under the table, to speak politely. It is a publically available information that there was jail sentences in austria for that and politically stopped inquiry in UK… so, talking about Typhoons exports… how to say… :rolleyes: