Rover is nothing but a protocol “, and far from panacea (no clue, but when i was on active duty, it was impossible to “net center” rover)
Frankly, i wouldn’t simiss F35 due to miss of rover capability on early versions. It will come in time, and in the meanwhile US have other Rover equipped assets.
I still things it is a wrong plane, but.

Juicy post on the Aviationist for those of you who like high speed data fusion network cloud type warfare capability in your Typhoon:

http://theaviationist.com/2013/11/08/bae-syntetic-exercise/#.UnzwxPnxqvw

Finally !

The French soldiery, (and air force) by and large fought well and bravely in 1940.

Their strategy and leadership let them down.

Moggy

Ce
Yes and no. 1st, antisemitic etc. feelings were quite strong (media related) . The famous author Louis Ferdinand Celine for ex was fascist or so.
2nd, WWII started only 20 years after WWI massacre (1.7 million dead, the country half destroyed etc.). General feeling was “never more” But you are right, strategy was terrible…
I feel quite comfortable as former military and grandson of an officer that earned 6 stars during WWI

I have no clue on how the numbers were built, i just know how they were billed 😉

Original Rafale software was done in Ada (1.5 million code lines), and now guess which language is used? Oh and btw, last versions of Catia autocode… (dont ask me details, not my specialty)

Speciallt considering that some Lybian pilots are going to be trained on mirage F1 (have no moe details)

It certainly is. It would appear that the SH’s fuel burn is indeed higher than the Rafale. I would though be interested in seeing the methodology – the F-35’s figures are half than of the Rafale and the one for the F-16 less than JAS-39.

Also the overall figure for the USN is 40% lower than the Rafale while that for the RAAF is 40% higher. I think we need more data.

You can ask for methodology to Jane’s, thats how i got it. But they dont want it spread over internet (as they must ask Saab in order to give it to someone).

REcently new Cassdian PR stated that basic CPFH was 15 or 16 Keuros, in constant lowering.

Rafale basic CPFH was 14000 euros during Mali operations (should be lower for peace time operations).

An SAAF general quoted 14000 $ for SAAF Gripen.

Again, everything depends on numbers computed etc. Hard (if possible) to accurately compare.

The STANG3910/EFEX (20Mb/sec Fibre Optical bus network) was defined for use on board the
European Fighter Aircraft (EFA) project which used MIL-STD-1553 but required increased data
throughput and bandwidth for the future. This lead to the development of the STANAG3910 bus
which uses MIL-STD-1553 used as a Low Speed control bus for a High Speed 20Mb/sec Fibre
Optical Network (Star topology). For the Tranche II aircraft this has been further enhanced to
the latest EFEX (EFAbus Express) which is a high speed optical only (High Speed) bus
implementation.

http://www.pxisa.org/files/resources/Articles%20&%20Application%20Notes/Databus%20Test%20Cards%20for%20PXI%20with%20new%20levels%20of%20Compactness%20%20Performance.pdf

I think that F3.3 std Rafales now use fiber optic (due to nuclear missions)