This thread just has “flame war” written all over it.

IBTL :diablo:

With all you “guaranteeing” knowledge and all that…..I assume you have seen EF going vertical straight after takeoff with 4 amraam, 4 asraam, and 3 tanks? I think not.

Really, what does this have to do with whether the Typhoon can supercruise or not? Unless this aforementioned vertical climb loaded with full kit was done without afterburner…

1. Provence
2. Gascogne (ASMP-A)
3. Normandie-Niemen
4. Alsace
5. Lorraine (ASMP-A)
6. Lafayette
7. Cigognes
8. Ile-de-France

Thanks! Just what I was looking for.

Kurt

KF,

The nine extra flight detail was added to the thread to counter an over-colourful interpretation of a very minor Typhoon serviceability which led to one flight being delayed from one afternoon to the next morning.

If you’re going to read major implications into minor changes to Typhoon’s flying programme, it’s only fair to acknowledge that Rafale’s flying programme has also been subject to last minute change.

As I’ve said before, it may be nothing, or it may be indicative of real but relatively trivial problems. It may even be a good sign. It’s unlikely to mark a show-stopping problem.

We’ll find out the reasons soon enough, I believe.

Jacko,

All I was commenting on is that you spun the extra flights as if Rafale was deficient in some way that it *needed* 9 additional flights to generate the requested data that the other airframes are doing in 30. Let’s not spin something in a negative light until we know more. Right now, other than the comments about utilizing the OSF and Damocles in realms other than their primary use that was mentioned by a posted, we don’t really know the reasons for the extra flights.

KtD

1) In LardAssup’s own link, it said that: “30 flights are planned”. Rafale actually flew 39. Therefore there were nine unplanned extra flights.

Gripen flew 30 flights. 30 flights are scheduled for Typhoon. Rafale needed 39. Nine extra flights.

Maybe I’m missing something here with the abysmal signal to noise ratio, but isn’t all we really know is that 9 additional flights were requested? Until we know the reasons for those extra flights, it’s a bit early to paint them in the tone and implication you use. “Needed”, to me in this case, carries a negative spin. We don’t know that’s the case, perhaps the Swiss wanted to evaluate something in a manner that wasn’t covered by the original syllabus.

It’s like taking a Hummer on a second test drive over rough terrain when you set out to buy a Subaru Outback; both are all wheel drive, but when you saw the Hummer you realized it had some capabilities you didn’t realize and you wanted to test them.

Just some food for thought.

KtD

I think that the problem was insufficient bombs.

LOL And perhaps the Philly FD trying to put out the fire when the shooting stopped.

I would agree that you can’t point to one single factor. Yet, the point was and is that Larger and More Powerful (and yes less agile) Fighters have one the day more often than not………..

But I don’t think it was simply Larger/bigger = better. There were some serious fundamental flaws to the Japanese aircraft and by the time they got those issues resolved, their trained crews were dead. I’d submit that had the US been armed with the Spitfire MkV, Me-109, or even the Fw-190, the outcome would have been very similar.