The F-35A will be able to carry a maximum of 6 AAMs
. When? In 10 years? Hope it will not have to open its bays every ten mins in the meanwhile… (is that fixed btw?)
In the meanwhile it is unable ot use properly AMRAAM and completely unable to use IR missile on LBL mode, a prerequisite to execute properly air policing.
Anw what would CANADA do with stealth? Useful only for first day entry and OCA… Competely useless for canada.
Wondering what is revolutionary in it. Uk use to do that for years with pirate and type 45
Ah the French complaining about the limits of globalism. What do you mean we cant export missiles with american components in that not fair!
Well you are exporting mlanes with french components aren’t you? Apart from that, anything to bring to the debate?
If you are looking at the complete lifetime cost, you have to also figure in the F-35’s larger amount of airframe hours over the F-16/18.
Personnaly i highly doubt that. several sleps enhanced lifetime of F-16 and F-18, not sure F-35 can do that.
All of which applies to a future manned jet as much as a UCAV.
Which definitely was the aim. But there is something troubling in recent report on armed forces in France. Stealth features will stay strictly national. I guess they were not talking about shapes…
Honestly Bio, i will answer you when (if it is revealed) one will know which parts are involved (really sensitive or just pretext).
[QUOTE]You mean the US exercising its veto authority over export of technology it owns? Why wouldn’t it if it feels that this is in its best interest? Does France not do that, or do the French not expect its government to look out for its own National interest when it involves sanction of arms sales, a known lever of NatSec policy? [QUOTE]
Is that a joke? You already did the same joke on Eagle Eye contract lost by LM, trying to block it on completely unsensitive parts… For commercial reasons. US are doing the same, nothing to do with morality, US do not have any as far as business is concerned, specially in Middle East… Really..; US trying to lecture europeans about behabiour in middle east. Would be laughable if it was irony but…
Would you agree if France blocked some parts of F-35 AFTER an export market is signed? (there ares, tyres, obogs parts, many cabling, batteries…) .Or if Thales blocked HMDS due to obvious VALID patent infringement?
Did you read the article?
Apart from that it woudn’t be first time USA behave in such a way (see UAE satellites…)
Apparently (i had the same info end of december) yes, they try to block SCALP sales, but Egypt want Rafale WITH Scalp.
Sry forgot the link
According to “La Tribune”, USA would be trying to block Rafale sales in Egypt due to a US component into SCALP missile.
Ajai Shukla was denied a backseat flight on Rafale during MMRCA. He is n°1 Rafale baser eversince.
Definitely agree mrmalaya.
Prezsently very hot parts are tested at DGA propulseurs … And they are not designed specifically for M88, but more for the FCAS engine. Heat resistance is useful in this case for longer MTBI aka as few as ossible “opening the can” to reach the engine.
This site claims the Rafale costs $115 Million each without initial spares, weapons, ect…
Rofl. Ajai Shukla. Permanent Rafale basher since he was denied a flight by DAssault. Funny.
Using F-35 so early during the learning curve would be foolish anyway. MAstering a new sophisticated weapon system is quite lengthy in time, + intiating new tactics etc. Some pilots still say they haven’t yet fully mastered Rafale, imagine the more recent and probably more sophisticated F-35…
It is an antenna, part of spectra. The colour cap is simply different. Or maybe you are talking about Rafale M? (a positioning system for carrier landing is located close)