Man you are SO lost in the woods! I know both gentlement the atricle refers to. They are honest, serious and professional. The USED to work for FAB and Embraer, which is a BIG different to being a “man inside” ineptly as you put it above. The are prive consultants who know excalty what is crucial in the minds of FAB and Embraer leaders. Their work is to assist Saab in setting up their proposal so it appeals both to Embraer and FAB. Nothing is wrong here it’s just superior salesmanship from the Swedish side, Maybe Dassault or Boeing ought to have hired them instead of Saab… But they didn’t!

So, Too Cool, if you have no clue about what’s happening over here as you’ve shown repeatedly please try not to keep imagining rose-tinted hypotetical scenarios that make Dassault’s proposal seem better than it really is.

Ask us who are monitoring this development from upclose and we’ll gladly tell you everything.

Regards,

Hammer

strange how you know everybody personnaly, and everyone is a “good honest man”…

I don’t know thempersonally, and, to be honest, don’t care anyway… but I can read (until now), and the article of a brasilian newpaper stated clearly, without an ounce of hesitation that these gentlemen were hired by SAAB (that means they’re working for SAAB, paid by SAAB, etc, etc…)

like it or not, their job, which they accepted if they were hired by SAAB, as such, is to promote SAAB, not to care about FAB’s interests or Embraer’s ones…

So, considering their connections (FAB and Embraer) depicted in the article (which they were most certainly hired for), the idea of “honest, impartial men” may be right, except that that would mean their “honesty” goes towards their employer… SAAB.

And if you believe they cared only about “impartially telling the FAB what’s in its best interest, then, either you are the one needing to remove your “rose tinted glasses” or admit they’re not so honest (taking their paycheck while taking into consideration someone’s else’s interests than the ones of their boss which is SAAB )

again, you can’t have it both ways

1. it was a guns only dogfight

2. if you believe that about usa radar even in training mode, that it cant pick up a the rcs of a rafale, i’ve got a bridge to sell you cheap

1. that’s what I said (WVR)
2. a rafale doing nothing it certainly can, a rafale with its ECM suite working, that’s what the question is about… and I quoted what an f-18 pilot said, not french ministry or some similar source

if he can’t get a lock while his radar is able technically to do it, the only other option would be that he doesn’t know how to use his own aircraft… I don’t know why, but I wouldn’t bet my house on that one… 😀

has anyone even bothered to open his attachment ? he has a creditable copy of an email from ef germany with a name, phone number and email address

I did, and that’s precisely why I have doubts about it. I’m definitely more willing to believe an officer stating things openly than some obscure “communications department scribbler who can’t say you things but can say something”… BS, sorry

a good CAs aircraft is one that can loiter long time over target, manouver tightly at not to high speeds in order to keep target in sight and help the guys on the ground

The F-35 is heavy (more than double empty weight compared to a harrier), with very high wingloading, while its wings are made for fast flight (not much lift from these)… it won’t be able to turn around rapidly at low speeds, which means it will need more time to go around, find its target again, etc…

it’s simply not the right type of plane for that kind of job… if you look back, the best aircraft for it were always slow, with very high lift wing profiles allowing them to carry lots of ordnance at low speeds while turning tightly to stay in contact. They had to be rugged, able to withstand damage and keep flying regardless of that as long as friendlies needed help. Examples of such aircraft are the A-1 Skyraider, the A-10 Thunderbolt II or, on the russian side, the Su-25 Frogfoot… it’s always a (more or less) flying tank that’s able to deliver ordnance close to firendlies.

And today, we’re supposed to consider an aircraft that has fragile thin skin, that weighs way too much, has small stubby wings (for its weight) and is aerodynamically optimized for speeds (in a straight line) around Mach1 as a good next gen CAS aircraft?

All right, here we go…

This is a reply, I got from Eurofighter GmbH, on my question regarding ATLC in Al Dhafra.
First, I’d like to suggest ignoring comments like (unjustified, very French, etc,…and I posted them just to make quotation coherent) and concentrate on factual part of the letter.
The importance of this is in the fact that this gives us better insight into ROEs and overall context in which this exercise occurred.

Well, it’s just as I though, so here are some comments:

So, Rafale scored 7/1 against Ty/Red side? Now, considering “Red side” flies with onboard sensors only and with WVR missiles, in that context reducing MICA’s range to give ASRAAM a chance to shoot at all, makes sense, but hardly any point. Given the claim that Rafale flew “Red team” too, we can only imagine how Rafale fared there and it wouldn’t surprise me if it got banged 0/8. (I’m pretty sure F22 would got banged too in that setup).

Another thing is that, “EF carried more” and was “above Rafale”.
This most probably means that Rafales flew A/GCI, while EF flew CAPs and/or swing tasks. I don’t think there’s a need to specially emphasize the importance of this and overall concept of initiative in the air, but let’s do it just in case.
So, flying low gives your sensors (radar/IR) better range at equal output power and if Rafales called IR shots, that means they approached in silence. If externally guided (AWACS/Ground), the low plane can track while beam-ride high one, thus completely denying it tracking and therefore dictate terms of battle and have initiative.

Few questions for the end…
– What was the score when Rafale flew “Red team”? EF equal handicap.
– What happened when Rafale flew swing/CAP/whatever heavy configuration? EF equal handicap.
– What happened when Rafale got above EF? EF equal handicap.

To conclude.
As usual, only partial truth (very partial in this case) was disclosed in the report from “French Lt.Colonel” and it’s pretty obvious he found himself in the same situation, mr.Beesley is in LM, today. This is why establishing personal credibility is stupid and irrelevant. They all say what they must, if want to keep the job.

Another good pointer of “worth” of this score was the fact that no news agencies relayed that report, except that once press conference (which I didn’t find anywhere, btw) and so it was most probably an (unsuccessful) attempt to sway Brazil, France’s way since mr.Lula declared Rafale buy delay a few days later.
So, why nobody denied this result? Because it was so far off any point that apparently no one even figured there’s a need to publish it in the first place, while apparently French position is such that it called for such a desperate measure. Well, there’s no dignity in business and Dassault must sell.

Now, this is where knowing your way around an aircraft helps and keeps you out of dumb conclusions, like ones many French posters managed to draw from this report.
I always thought highly of French posters here, but after seeing many of them falling down to pfcem’s level, I must say I was rather disappointed.

No offense guys…

so, basically, the Eurofighter people working in “communications” can’t speak correct english but their talk must be taken for granted?

sorry, but that definitely doesn’t answer anything. The press conference at the french MoD it was said that:

a- the rafale typhoon and F-22 were on the same side during exercises
b- they engaged each other in simulated fights “in degraded conditions” besides the official exercise (and that’s when the “scores” have occured)

Chalk it up to differences in translation or what not but it seems as though the comment was not that the Rafale LOST only once in 6 dogfights BUT in 6 engagements was ‘killed’ WVR (or again depending on translation by GUN) only once, which says nothing about how many times the F-22 ‘killed’ the Rafale from BVR (perhaps even without the Rafale even knowing except for the F-22 being the most likely aircraft to have done so without the Rafale knowing what/where its ‘killer’ was).

actually, it says that they only engaged in WVR fights, so, one can be pretty certain that the raptor scored no BVR kills against the rafale on that one (if you don’t play, you don’t score…. it’s logical 😀 )

however, there was a quote of an F-18 driver saying that, during the exercises against the rafales, they couldn’t get a lock from a distance… While I can’t say which radar he had in his Hornet (or super hornet… don’t remember), if rafale’s systems allow it not to get locked, there are little chances of a BVR kill… while in the same time, if the attacker is using its radar trying to detect and lock the rafale, the latter’s own systems will have the exact direction of the radar trying to get a lock on it… alowing the OSF suite to be pointed in its direction and passively (without using its radar) get a solution and shoot back

Thing is, the detail of what the real capabilities of each aircrafts systems are, is pretty sensitive stuff, and not accessible to public…

You are wrong: The source was the first version of the evaluation report. Nobody has denied that. On the contrary, If you read the statements and reactions from Lulas office as well as Jobims office they are angry about the leaks from the FAB…. How can they be angry about the leaks from FAB if this was all invented?

Furthermore, if it was invented, why did they just not say so instead of throwing mud at Gripen and Saab?

Thing is, the deciders are politicians, and if a “leak” comes out, endorsed by FAB, it doesn’t matter if it’s only about price and exports (something the FAB is not concerned in the first place) because most people won’t read beyond the title. It puts the politicians under pressure because if they choose another aircraft, the voters may wonder why these civilians don’t listen “to the experts”…

in this particular case, the two persons hired by SAAB, one which is at home in the comittee that had to write the report (basically, they could’ve handed the paperwork to SAAB to do it, doesn’t look very impartial to me) and another which is closely related to embraer, and Embraer, according to that article, was interested in buying part of SAAB through exchange of shares, which means, again, they had interest in buying the Gripen, even if it was a total piece of crap (not that it is, but that would make no difference in the financial interests of the company).

Now, you make a sum of that:

– SAAB employee inside the comittee who made the report
– SAAB employee “inside embraer”

who can believe one second that the “leaked” report was anything by SAAbs spinning?

FOR THE nTH TIME

THE RAFALE DID NOT CHEW UP THE RAPTOR

RAFALE LOST JUST ONCE, (IF IT HAD WON THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PUBLICISED) AND IS HAILED AS AN ACHIEVEMENT SHOWS TO ME THE SUPERIORITY OF THE RAPTOR

relax mate.. breathe slowly and read again what he stated…

he never said that rafale chewed the raptor.. actually, he said that from the results, nobody could conclude it would do so (be it against typhoon or raptor), but only that it was a serious oponent and which anyone should consider as such rather than some mudmover with limited A2A capability as some like to pretend