Combat ready without proper MDFs???? just quoting “Even with the final version of 3F, the Air Force will not be able to use the newest aircraft in combat. The service will, however, still be able to deploy the majority of the aircraft in the squadron, which are in the 3i configuration, Graff stresses. The Pentagon has not yet finished building and testing the operational Mission Data File (MDF) set for the 3F software, which will provide a vast databank of threat information needed for combat, Graff notes.”

You want to make a generalization about low-level ingress/egress on the modern battlefield based on statistics from 1991 Iraq i.e. populated by mostly static defences?

*
*What do you want to make statistics from on the other hand?
Interesting deate btw, not sure there is any definitive answer.
About weapons, yes AASM has a “short” range at low level, but still quite comfotable at 100/200 fts. it is not that easy, even with an approximative heading a terrain hugging flying over 600 Kts. (Except i f you have an automatic system slaving your targeting system.

mproved moving target attack capability,

“improved”? It existed?

Post 199 in this topic made by “Hallowene”, who is a French Aerospace/defense Journo

non profesional ;). But thx
PS. Main source was Collet-Billon, head of DGA at the time…

Perhaps once the 2 nation-specific demonstrators have flown and a follow on project ensues, it would be possible to allow other parties some kind of programme access.

It was the initial plan.

Both the French Navy and Army use NATO standards, protocols and systems, or in other words, they use L16, L22, Rover and so on, American standards, protocols and systems.

I think he is talking about “CONTACT” program, phase 3 (air) starting next year. Much more advanced networking than any NATO standard.

And ESSOR european program, with a european waveform software.Albeit SCA compatible. Btw, theselected waveform will e candidate for STANAG NATO Wideband Waveform.

Let’s be realistic, France does what it wants and there are no more valid motivations than Industrial or strategic thinking to prevent the loss of an Industrial asset like STX

You know that STX was a property of Koreans, do you? And that Fincantieri DO have a deal about large ships with chinese involving tech transfer?