Again, it is a Norwegian AF restriction during peacetime. The fact still remains that they can choose to operate their aircraft, any aircraft, any way they please during peacetime. The article clearly mentioned that these limits won’t apply during conflict and of course there is no evidence in the article that claims this is a technical limitation.

As usual you seem to find absolute non-issues and try to inflate them to something big.

Come on, seriously. You cant’t participate to biggest NATO training in ten years, happening on your soil but you would fight -without training (as you can’t train during pea e time) – in these very conditions? And ALL other planes did the job?
I could accept a “we do not know the jet enough yet”, but THAT is not baked at all…

My argument may be half baked, but yours is also. There is no clue that another solution but oled could be fond. Anyway, the histrory of the helmet is just an example. Sorry, i do not believe the risk assessment studies were properly led. Neither some like the calculation pwoser needed.
In the meanwhile, other planes did the work while F-35 was grounded. Frankly! 16 Kts side wind, one can handle that with a Cessna T172… (with troubles,yes).

Anyone said eveil americans? Things are quite more complex aren’t they? Evil french also use Pleiades satellites (and further), Gabriel C160, some ship, ASTAC pods etc to do it. Definitely with less assets of course. If you talk to mils in Syria, more and more documents are classified “5eyes + France”. But not Norad. We are only guessing here.

France is just butthurt that they will not be able to look at the 5/2-Eyes related intel as they create the MDFs.

Even if so, how do ou create MDFs without data?

As i told you i’m digging. Therefore i will not answer you know. Maybe (i insist on maybe) Canada NORAD would need to know things we do not want to unveil such as nuke systems. I don’t know exactly.

Like most modern fighters – ie Teja, Typhoon, F-16, most F-15, F-22, J10, J20, F-35 or even F-8 or F-4…

Seriously…

There is no logic to that argument at all…

If your claims were coherent it might be worth taking them seriously but in contrast to having the information explained to you multiple times you simply come across as having sour grapes because the F-35 is winning sales campaigns while the Rafale doesn’t.

“Anything to bring into the dbate? Because “you lack logic” is 4th level like argument.