about 800kg difference in weight b/w the M’s and land version.

85% commonality. 250 Kgs for dront gear. arrestor hook. Landing help systems…

Numbers…. not Ezco B.S. I posted them, refuted them or shut it. Rafale 212+ million in 2011 dollars program costs + acquisition (based on planned numbers)
F-35 129 million (2012 dollars) PAUC.

Refute it or stop bragging how “cheap” the Rafale program is compared to others- because as a program undertaken by one nation, the Rafale wasn’t cheap at all.

easy. http://www.senat.fr/rap/a13-158-8/a13-158-814.html
That includes 20% VAT (we checked while writing http://www.portail-aviation.com/2013/12/le-veritable-prix-du-rafale-par-version.html

Dev costs are also well documented, around 40-50 billions (can’t cite purely from memory)

Again, appple to apple. Fly away cost for building nation.

Just to cut about Gilmore, copy paste from DOT&E website.

The Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E) is the principal staff assistant and senior advisor to the Secretary of Defense on operational test and evaluation (OT&E) in the Department of Defense (DoD). DOT&E is responsible for issuing DoD OT&E policy and procedures; reviewing and analyzing the results of OT&E conducted for each major DoD acquisition program; providing independent assessments to SecDef, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (USD(AT&L)), and Congress; making budgetary and financial recommendations to the SecDef regarding OT&E; and overseeing major DoD acquisition programs to ensure OT&E is adequate to confirm operational effectiveness and suitability of the defense system in combat use.

Btw, isn’t it illegal to deploy fighters before Milestone C?

Taranis Aerodynamics
11th January 2017
Personal Lecture Theatre, Warton Aerodrome
Lecture

https://www.aerosociety.com/events-calendar/taranis-aerodynamics/

a backlog artificially sustained by the slow pace of production output… Don’t be mistaken by the nbr. Nor by the very weird financial incentives that led to the Egypt order. Although the situation is better than 2 years before (Raf line), a trend toward an equally slow pace decline can be outlined without being overly pessimistic.

In the meanwhile, the chain is doubling its production pace and preparing to triple… Good shot 😉

I don’t have launch weights available that can back up my claims, hence the use of the “likely”. What I will provide is F-18 NATOPS, which in Chapter 8 discusses launch weights and required power settings. https://info.publicintelligence.net/F18-EF-000.pdf
If we look at operational use of the aircraft though, the only example of a light launch would be an airframe test. Every other profile can be launched with suitable weight to reduce the opportunity for oscillation and even an airframe test is an additional opportunity for training on the jet.

Is there a single other mission profile that would result in a light launch?

Global Security has some good info on emals here, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/emals.htm but the pertinent paragraph is probably below.

10 Nimitz class in service 5 were built before 1990 with the Nimitz approaching 50 years in 2025 with each subsequent vessel every 4-5 years after that. Given F-35C won’t hit the fleet until 2019 and will be operated by the USN till at least 2060 it will almost certainly see more work on Ford class carriers than Nimitz.

Yes there are some profiles with light lauch : scramble and on the opposite very heavy but buddy to buddy refueling at start of the mission.

Linear (uniform) acceleration. Think hand gradually applying force to your back vs. releasing a rubber band. Also the EM cats can can be dialed in to more accurately apply the correct amount of force for take-off weight.

Ok, but in the meanwhile? There are still 10 carriers using steam catapults no?