Just reread old test of Rafale, as many people have talked about acceleration loaded, with 3×2000/ + 4 Mica + 2x SCALP (storm shadow) missiles (1300 kg each) (flt 250), 35 secs from mach 0.6 to 0.9; roll rate 150°:sec, up to 5.2g during the test.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/combat-ready-53125/

Taurus cant be exported in more than 250 kms range(regulations) or did i miss a point?

F 35 resume arrested hook trials in Lakehurst

[ATTACH=CONFIG]223946[/ATTACH]

Please forgive me for not knowing how to play this game but could you please explain to me how it works?

A study by the, arguably, most prestigeous non governmental group, although sponsored, can be discarded as pure marketing bs but an interview with with a VP for a large weapons manufacturer shall be regarded as an undisputable fact. Am I correct or am I missing something?

Noone entirely discarded it, neither anyone take it as a God’s talk, including Jane’s.
First, this study was never officially published by Jane’s Weekly.
Beside this, they still consider it gives soe insights despite inherent imprecisions.
All in all, interesting to read, can give tendancies, but no more (which Jane’s do not claim in their original study)

Technology transfer is in almost all cases a complete waste of money and effort on the part of the buyer. Local production, technology transfer, etc… they sound good as a PR exercise but they very rarely pay real dividends. Typically by the time the transferred technology has been fully assimilated it is already obsolete. In most cases the purchaser is never able to make as much use of it as they believed they could.

As has already been pointed out, India received extensive technology transfer with their Su-30s, and yet they have struggled for decades to produce the LCA. Here they are a few years later and they are once again trying to buy technology for a different 4th generation fighter (Rafale), and a fifth generation fighter as well…

China is probably the only country in recent years that has been able to fully assimilate foreign technology, much to Russia’s chagrin.

THalès UK
I absolutley agree, ToT from BAe/ (EW warfare), or simply BAe/QinetiQ (VTOL systems) will be of no use to LM.

Somebody… I think Tu-22m explained how operating cost of fighters actually decrease during combat operations; sortie rates increase with an unchanged or reduced maintenance/downtime schedule.

Which doesnt mean everyone will agree. Source is here http://vanguardcanada.com/mission-satisfaction-rafale-offers-proven-capability/

Btw, this price tag was also quoted in front of Ductch parliament.

Well from what I have seen they are not there either. But if you are looking for french contributors, I’m here ;).

From what I saw on french forums, there is disappointment but also some guys talking a lot about closing the 2000 assembly line and arguing it was a mistake (which I think it was not) saying having a 2000-ng would have been good for those nations that chose less expensive and smaller aircraft .

Given the financial restriction of the deal, it makes sense that the Rafale was not selected in the end. Biggest mistake in my opinion is to not have bagged the thing when Lula and Sarkozy agreed on it.

Typhoon rejection from UAE do not directly point a future succes for Rafale. So “we” are just prudent.