Rafale?

[Big-E]

Why isn't she selling? Her sellers say "You can talk about fourth-generation or fifth-generation aircraft all you want, but what really matters is that Rafale is one full generation ahead of all other aircraft." Considering she is to be 1/3 cheaper than her nearest rival and the fact she has an ECM package second to none why is she not being grabbed off the shelves?

[Whiskyjack]

Why isn't she selling? Her sellers say "You can talk about fourth-generation or fifth-generation aircraft all you want, but what really matters is that Rafale is one full generation ahead of all other aircraft." Considering she is to be 1/3 cheaper than her nearest rival and the fact she has an ECM package second to none why is she not being grabbed off the shelves?

Might it be a case of:

'one careful lady owner' :D

Are you saying 1/3 cheaper than Eurofighter as well? I find costing to be very confusing as what is included in one cost won't be included in another. Like comparing apples and oranges. Considering that the Rafale was flying well ahead of the EF, the RAF have had an operational squadron since 1 April (maybe a April fools joke)! And this French Squadron has only half it’s Rafale’s, with the next one operational in 2008.

[Subangite]

Why isn't she selling? Her sellers say "You can talk about fourth-generation or fifth-generation aircraft all you want, but what really matters is that Rafale is one full generation ahead of all other aircraft." Considering she is to be 1/3 cheaper than her nearest rival and the fact she has an ECM package second to none why is she not being grabbed off the shelves?

Her sellers also say that in Asia when Rafale was in competition for the next gen fighters of the RoKAF and the RSAF, American political clout made Rafale loose against the F-15. That said, they did "out preform" the Eurofighter during trials and selection, as the Eurofighther got eliminated first, before the Rafale.

I don't know, maybe there's hope for her yet. Perhaps India or Pakistan might be interested?? Though maybe unlikely, Pakistan having recently ordered more F16's and India ordering a large quantity of Su-30MKI.

[tphuang]

The French are just bitter, that's all.
A fully loaded Rafale is supposed to be 145 million. I'm not sure what the typhoon is at after all the stuff is added, but it's definitely not 3 times that.

[Big-E]

The French are just bitter, that's all.
A fully loaded Rafale is supposed to be 145 million. I'm not sure what the typhoon is at after all the stuff is added, but it's definitely not 3 times that.

I don't think they meant 3x but 1/3 less than the cost of EF... is that true?

[swerve]

I think Rafale is suffering from the Swedish problem. For many years, Sweden built great fighters nobody would buy (of those the Swedish would sell to - they were a bit fussy about that). A major problem was that Sweden had an integrated air defence system, & their fighters were designed to work within it. To export them, they had to convince potential buyers that the plane could be taken outside the environment it was designed to work within & still succeed, or build a special export version.

Rafale has a similar problem. The PESA RBE.2 has many of the desirable characteristics of an AESA, but less range than the mechanically scanned RDY-2. For the MN & the AdlA that is bearable, as they expect to use them only in an integrated environment, with AEW etc., are confident in their skill in using the whole package. AEW gives the detection range RBE.2 lacks, & they think the other characteristics are desirable enough to make up for the deficiencies. It was a compromise made with open eyes, to suit their own assets & modus operandi. But foreign buyers don't like it.

It's also been criticised for being underpowered relative to the competition.

[merocaine]

give the raf some time, the french tend to be more felexible in pricing than any other sellers, they will keep dropping the cost until someone bites, the mirage is a good example, they sold the fighter at any price as long as it would win foreign sales. If selling the plane suited french foreign policy Dassault were able to undercut any compeditor. Actual economics were the last thing considered.

[Twix101]

I think Rafale is suffering from the Swedish problem. For many years, Sweden built great fighters nobody would buy (of those the Swedish would sell to - they were a bit fussy about that). A major problem was that Sweden had an integrated air defence system, & their fighters were designed to work within it. To export them, they had to convince potential buyers that the plane could be taken outside the environment it was designed to work within & still succeed, or build a special export version.

Rafale has a similar problem. The PESA RBE.2 has many of the desirable characteristics of an AESA, but less range than the mechanically scanned RDY-2. For the MN & the AdlA that is bearable, as they expect to use them only in an integrated environment, with AEW etc., are confident in their skill in using the whole package. AEW gives the detection range RBE.2 lacks, & they think the other characteristics are desirable enough to make up for the deficiencies. It was a compromise made with open eyes, to suit their own assets & modus operandi. But foreign buyers don't like it.

It's also been criticised for being underpowered relative to the competition.

Exactly,

Talking about EW suit lastest news reveals that SPECTRA can be used as a "radar" to guide air weapons.

For Engines on Rafale, the French government wants more a engine with less consuption than a more powerfull engine, fater it will depends of export success in future markets.

[Waylander]

I think the Mirage 2000 is one of the main problems.
There are not many countrys which are able to buy planes like latest F-teens, EF or Rafale.
A Mirage 2000 with the latest gadgets in it is still a good plane for most countrys.
The Rafale sellers argument with the price but I as a buyer would also think that buying the cheaper Mirage 2000 is not a dumb idea instead of the Rafale in lesser numbers.

[gf0012-aust]

I think the Mirage 2000 is one of the main problems.
There are not many countrys which are able to buy planes like latest F-teens, EF or Rafale.
A Mirage 2000 with the latest gadgets in it is still a good plane for most countrys.
The Rafale sellers argument with the price but I as a buyer would also think that buying the cheaper Mirage 2000 is not a dumb idea instead of the Rafale in lesser numbers.

I seem to recall seeing a comparison which put the M2K at 70-80% of rafales capability at half to 2/3rds the cost.

[contedicavour]

Talks are still going on for a sale of 40 Rafale to Algeria. However the latest MIG-29s are likely to be bought first, especially as Algeria already operates older -29s.
I think the Rafale's key problem today is that it took even longer than the Eurofighter Typhoon to become operational. The first dozen entered service in the Air Force only last week. The Navy has operated a dozen for 2 years now, but only in air-to-air configuration to replace the obsolete Crusaders.

No major customer is likely to buy the Rafale until it has become completely operational in sufficient numbers in its final air-to-air and air-to-ground configuration, let's say in 1 or 2 years' time.
It could then start its international career by replacing the oldest Mirage 2000s (Greece, UAE, Peru, India).

cheers

[111Lover]

I'm sure this has been said in a hundred different threads, but how about exploring the possibilty of buying used aircraft carriers or even see if we can buy some CVFs and reactivate the FAA's fixed-wing capability with the Rafale? I know there alot of people like the F-35B/IZAR option, but the Rafale would be much cheaper. IMHO, the decision not to replace the Majestic Class is the worst defence decision in Australia's history.

[swerve]

I'm sure this has been said in a hundred different threads, but how about exploring the possibilty of buying used aircraft carriers or even see if we can buy some CVFs and reactivate the FAA's fixed-wing capability with the Rafale? I know there alot of people like the F-35B/IZAR option, but the Rafale would be much cheaper. IMHO, the decision not to replace the Majestic Class is the worst defence decision in Australia's history.

There's a whole thread devoted specifically to the subject of Australia & aircraft carriers. Perhaps you should post this on that thread.

[BilalK]

A recent Flight International article put the Rafale's full unit cost at 130mn USD; including required infrastructure, training and support. That is a hefty price tag; but its a new generation fighter, and a lot of the countries who bought or could buy Mirage 2000, MiG-29, F-16s, etc, would find inducting such a fighter expensive. But I'm quite optimistic about Rafale; and in the 2010s it should be able to secure some good orders.

[Twix101]

A recent Flight International article put the Rafale's full unit cost at 130mn USD; including required infrastructure, training and support.

About these part, the thing ot remind is Rafale has got a internal test system, including, hydraulic test system, Engine test system, which doesn't need a complete kit of mobile test system. The main problem of the cost is the Mica Missile, 660 000 €, in comparision, the SCALP cost nearly 790 000 € and the AASM 93 000€ in the metric version.

[Magoo]

That said, they did "out preform" the Eurofighter during trials and selection, as the Eurofighther got eliminated first, before the Rafale.

Ahhh, no. The Eurofighter was eliminated because Singapore wanted Tranche 2 standard aircraft to be delivered from 2008, something which Eurofighter could not achieve. Only the Rafale and F-15SG could meet that timetable.

I think the Rafale's key problem today is that it took even longer than the Eurofighter Typhoon to become operational. The first dozen entered service in the Air Force only last week. The Navy has operated a dozen for 2 years now, but only in air-to-air configuration to replace the obsolete Crusaders.

Actually, this is also inaccurate. Development of the Rafale commenced after the French pulled out of the Eurofighter program in 1985, after the EAP aircraft had flown. You rightly say that the French Navy jets are in service, but they preceeded the Italian Air Force standing up of its first operational (air-to-air only) unit for the Winter Olympics. All other 'operational' Eurofighter units and only T&E or OCU/OTU units.

Magoo

[TrangleC]

I heard that the german navy is considering to invest into the future french-british aircraft carrier program to have a own Rafale squadron onboard a french carrier.
That sounds so weird, aircraft from 2 different fleets and nations on one carrier, that i can't really believe it, but since it was a gouvernment politician who mentioned this on TV.......

[Waylander]

Which politician? Green party? ;) :D

[European]

On the brasilian Sao Paulo carreer there are Argentinians plane.

[TrangleC]

Which politician? Green party? ;) :D
Ich glaub das war der verteidigungspolitische Sprecher der SPD. Weiß den Namen gerade nicht mehr.

I think it was the defence secretary (hope that is the right translation) of the social democrats, one of the two gouverning coalition parties.

[Waylander]

Dumb idea.
First we phase out our naval attack wing and than some people begin to think about carrier jets... :rolleyes:
As if we would have enough money for something like that.

[TrangleC]

Well, you know how it is...
The "we want to do our part for international security too"-attitude is all over Berlin, so to say.
If they would have the money, they might even build their own carrier now. Just joining in on the british-french thing like this would at least be a much cheaper alternative.
And the idea sounds like something the french would like too. After all they would have the same capabilities but pay less for it if some of the aircraft would be german.

And that is why i think it's stupid. What is the point of having a naval airforce when it can only go and do to where and what the french send their carrier.
Since the french will buy new carriers anyway and most likely use them only with a european backed UN mandate, installing a german naval airforce there would only mean to fund and to subsidize the french navy and not to enhance the german defence capabilities, since this aircraft could only go where the french send the carrier and only do what normally french aircraft would have done.

It would be much better to use that money for buying more F124 frigates and Type 212 submarines that could contribute to a naval european defence force by escorting the french carriers if neccessary and still be of use without those carriers.

Or we just could skip the era of aircraft carriers and build our own arsenal ship. That can't be too complicated and expensive. All you need is a cruiser sized ship with a lot of vertical launching tubes for cruise missiles and stuff like this.
Hell, just take the trunk of a container ship, ad some military improvements to it, put the radar and self defence systems of a modern anti-air frigate like the F124 on top and use the rest of the free space for vertical launching tubes. Then give it some stealth-coating and viola, you got your big and powerful arsenal ship that could match the offensive capabilities of a big aircraft carrier. After all it's the whole aircraft-infrastructure that makes them so expensive and complicated. The arsenal ship is a good idea because with sophisticated guiding systems for your cruise missiles, you can just cut the mediator and let the bombs fly directly from the ship to the target without having them put beneath the wings of an aircraft first.

However, buying Rafale or JSF and renting space for them on a foreign carrier would be really stupid.
But let's not freak out as long as there are no real news and details about this rumor.

[perfectgeneral]

A CVF would be very cheap on the tail of an order of four. Rafales are pretty cheap too. You might get the CVF and 60 Rafale(M)s for under 6 billion euros. Germany has contributed very little (1.5% of GDP) to EU defence in recent years. With the greater demand for expeditionary capability this purchase would be highly appropriate.

[radiosilence]

what is the price per plane(rafale) including weapons load and infrastructure?

[TrangleC]

I guess you are right, but that surely won't happen.
That arsenal ship thing i mentioned neither.

The german public barely accepted the transformation of the army into a intervention force and only because of all those cute fairitales about helping poor people somewhere and soldiers building schools and digging wells and stuff like that. Hell would break loose here if the gouvernment would declare plans to buy or build a big warship that doesn't build schools or diggs wells or escorts feministic activists from home to their office, but only can blow up things.

They even had to tell the public that the new submarines are meant for surveillance and to track the movements of terrorist boats and not for really shooting torpedoes at somebody or anything awful like that, to be able to buy them without masses of pacifists and old hippies storming the gouvernment buildings.

It really is a wonder that they are buying some Eurofighters after all. But i guess that was all the ignorance towards public opinion the gouvernment was able to bring up for a few decades. He he he.

Another thing is the nuclear powerplant of the CVF... also politically impossible in Germany.

Germany will never have a aircraft carrier or anything as big and exclusively offensive like that - well, at least not as long as all those old hippies and left wing activists from the 70ies are not too old to cuff themselves to anything, to throw stones and to hijack the political system.

Sorry, won't go that far off topic anymore from now on.

[Whiskyjack]

Another thing is the nuclear powerplant of the CVF... also politically impossible in Germany.



What nuclear power plant? I didn't think nuclear was an option.

Sorry I know its off topic.

[TrangleC]

One last time being off-topic. Sorry again.

The new british-french carrier is not to have a nuclear powered engine? That would be astonishing news to me.
The old carriers were powered nuclear, at least the french ones - not totally sure about the british, but i think they too.

Or may it be we are just talking about different things here and i misunderstood you?

[Whiskyjack]

One last time being off-topic. Sorry again.

The new british-french carrier is not to have a nuclear powered engine? That would be astonishing news to me.
The old carriers were powered nuclear, at least the french ones - not totally sure about the british, but i think they too.

Or may it be we are just talking about different things here and i misunderstood you?

I think you will find the French are moving away from nuclear due to experiance and cost, only the new carrier is nuke none of the others have been. The British have never had a surface warship that is nuclear powered and well I am sure it has been considered I don't think it will be a nuke as I think the new electric options are prefered as in the Type 45.

[swerve]

One last time being off-topic. Sorry again.

The new british-french carrier is not to have a nuclear powered engine? That would be astonishing news to me.
The old carriers were powered nuclear, at least the french ones - not totally sure about the british, but i think they too.

Or may it be we are just talking about different things here and i misunderstood you?

Whiskyjack is right. The UK ruled out nuclear power for CVF very early on. The French navy is far more keen on commonality with the RN ships than it is on nuclear power*, so happy to adopt the British conventional-powered design.

Charles de Gaulle is the only nuclear-powered surface ship France has ever built, & it hasn't been a happy experience.

*For several reasons, including -
Cost - such a ship would need a newly-designed, one-off, powerplant. Very expensive. Or it would have to be a copy of CdG, which is considered unsatisfactory.
Adopting a common design makes it harder for politicians to force them to shrink the ship, since they can credibly argue that starting a new design process, losing the shared elements, & the delay caused by having to start again will cancel out any cost saving from building a smaller ship.

[Waylander]

BTW, we would never buy a Rafale after the French left the EF program. It is a question of pride (Ok we don't have much pride here in germany ;) ) and a question of local jobs.

[Twix101]

BTW, we would never buy a Rafale after the French left the EF program. It is a question of pride (Ok we don't have much pride here in germany ;) ) and a question of local jobs.

Ok, so we will instal a factory in Germany to build them, like Dassault did several times.

[Whiskyjack]

Ok, so we will instal a factory in Germany to build them, like Dassault did several times.

Which will probably mean paying 50%-100% more for each aircraft!

[Sea Toby]

I can see Germany acquiring a LHD, something similar to the French Mistral or Spanish LHD design, except built in Germany. LHDs are very popular in humanitarian missions, providing a base for supply laden helicopters. Germany may even reorganize a commando unit to deploy from a LHD.

Great Britian, France, Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands will have similar capabilities, why not Germany too?

[TrangleC]

There were plans and even pretty much complete designs for a big, advanced helicopter carrier and socalled "commando ship" cancelled a few years ago.
Can't see that coming back soon.
Maybe the german politicians don't really want too much intervention capabilities. I suspect they want to keep it simple so the force can only be send somewhere where the situation is already stable enough so you don't need stuff like such ships to do the job. Kind of a "We would like to help, but unfortunatelly we don't have the equipment to do the hard jobs, so we'll just join you later when the situation is clear enough to airlift our police-work-stuff there."-policy.
They deliberately keep the equipment to a low capability level that suits and fits the internal political climate with that extreme pacifistic public opinion. But that is just a suspicion of mine.

[Waylander]

It is just too expensive.
With the money you save there you are able to support thousands of army soldiers with good equipment and it's the army who is by far the most used part of the Bundeswehr in our oversea missions.

[contedicavour]

Ok, so we will instal a factory in Germany to build them, like Dassault did several times.

Pardon me, but why should Germany waste money buying 2 competing jets with similar roles ???
If Typhoon Batch 3 were to suffer delays or cancellations, then the issue of replacing Tornado IDS would appear. However I would bet on F-35s in that case.
European collaboration is key to lower costs and I am very supportive of it when country specifications coincide (Horizon, FREMM, NH-90, U212A, Tiger, FLA Airbus, EFA Typhoon and before it Tornado .......). Rafale, with its delays, was probably a mistake in cost-efficiency terms, since Typhoon would have done the job perfectly for the Armée de l'Air. Other solutions could have been envisaged for the Aéronavale (adaptation of Typhoon, F18E/F, etc) without forcing the Armée de l'Air to abandon the EFA consortium. :rolleyes:

cheers

[contedicavour]

It is just too expensive.
With the money you save there you are able to support thousands of army soldiers with good equipment and it's the army who is by far the most used part of the Bundeswehr in our oversea missions.

Agree, and besides, we can share roles & responsibilities among EU countries. If Germany lacks a big LPD, the Netherlands or the UK will help within EU or UN missions.
In absence of budgets, some degree of specialization will be needed :( .

cheers

[Twix101]

Other solutions could have been envisaged for the Aéronavale (adaptation of Typhoon, F18E/F, etc) without forcing the Armée de l'Air to abandon the EFA consortium. :rolleyes:

cheers

So, the Other Europeans countries doesn't wanted to have this eventuality and French government wanted a multirole plane at the beginning and the rest of the team only a air superiority fighter.b Totally uncompatible with the Future.

[contedicavour]

So, the Other Europeans countries doesn't wanted to have this eventuality and French government wanted a multirole plane at the beginning and the rest of the team only a air superiority fighter.b Totally uncompatible with the Future.

The EFA Typhoon was supposed to be a multi-role plane from the very beginning. Even the Batch 1 planes can launch Paveways, JDAMs and Storm Shadow...
If France had remained in the programme these capabilities (already sufficient to replace the Jaguars and Mirage F-1 of the Armée de l'Air) would have been enhanced. France knows very well how to negotiate in international procurements programmes.

cheers

[Twix101]

The EFA Typhoon was supposed to be a multi-role plane from the very beginning. Even the Batch 1 planes can launch Paveways, JDAMs and Storm Shadow...

cheers

Nope, there is not firing trial which has been completed for these weapons, the EF-200 can only operate these weapons for the moment:

AIM-9L
IRIS-T
AIM-120B
1000L tank

Check the Eurofighter News please, the Eurofighter is NOT certified to firing A2G equipment.

So the Rafale can use:

R.550
MICA IR
MICA EM
SCALP EG
APACHE
AASM
1300 L tank
2000 L tank
Refueling tank

:D

[contedicavour]

Nope, there is not firing trial which has been completed for these weapons, the EF-200 can only operate these weapons for the moment:

AIM-9L
IRIS-T
AIM-120B
1000L tank

Check the Eurofighter News please, the Eurofighter is NOT certified to firing A2G equipment.

So the Rafale can use:

R.550
MICA IR
MICA EM
SCALP EG
APACHE
AASM
1300 L tank
2000 L tank
Refueling tank

:D

I just saw picture of Spanish Eurofighter launching Paveway 2. Storm Shadows will be "certified" as you say early 2007 with the first Batch 2 and retrofitted to Batch 1.
So don't worry, Rafales entered service in the Armée de l'Air last month, and less than a year later Typhoons will have the same armament.
Now, for a year of less, was it worth it to go at it alone ??

cheers

[Twix101]

Because it got a longer range.;)

6000L External fuel for Rafale agaisnt 4000 L for EF-2000

[contedicavour]

Because it got a longer range.;)

6000L External fuel for Rafale agaisnt 4000 L for EF-2000

Ok fine ;)
What about refueling with a tanker :D ? France and all the 4 original Typhoon acquirers have modern tankers such as Boeing 767...

cheers

[Scorpion82]

Actually the Rafale can carry up to 8500 l external, the Typhoon is currently limited to 3000 l.

[Waylander]

Just photo... ;)

[Twix101]

Well, no designation POD, I wonder how it will lock target for those inert GBU's.

Pray for A2G Ops on Typhoon...:pope

:p: :lol3

[Waylander]

Yeah right, we are going to forget the POD. :rolleyes:
This is a photo from A2G tests. And befor you test full scale A2G missions you have to implement the weapon itself.

In germany we are planning with GBU-24 and Taurus as the main A2G weapons for our EFs.

[Twix101]

Good stuff it is. I've seen trials photo of this weapon (taurus), very effective against bunkers.

[Aussie Digger]

Well, no designation POD, I wonder how it will lock target for those inert GBU's.

Pray for A2G Ops on Typhoon...:pope

:p: :lol3

It's a heavy stores test, to check the flight parameters etc when Typhoon needs to carry a heavy A2G load. It's not representative of an "operational" load.

Or did you know that already and were being obtuse? :confused:

[Twix101]

It's a heavy stores test, to check the flight parameters etc when Typhoon needs to carry a heavy A2G load. It's not representative of an "operational" load.

Or did you know that already and were being obtuse? :confused:

Yeah I know that, that Why Rafale doesn't have too much MICA loaded for A2G and only carry 6 A2SM.

So if it don't use the 3 tanks it will be problematic for long range bombing.

[Twix101]

I was septic because of the time needed for test of A2G weapons.

[ajay_ijn]

BTW, we would never buy a Rafale after the French left the EF program. It is a question of pride (Ok we don't have much pride here in germany ;) ) and a question of local jobs.
if we see last ww2 German Plane models, it was like Future Aviation Industry will be Ruled by Germans.
I think B-2 was actually orginated from a Nazi ww2 expt plane.
And those Nazi Mystery Aircraft generate much of Curiousty in kids.
Some people like to believe that if Nazis had the time, they would develop a Plane which can turn the whole tide of war.:germany

But i dunno why Germans aren't that competetive nowadays.
is it that German Industry doesn't have funds or Americans and Soviets Kidnapped Much of german Scientists and engineers :D

Gary says German Subs are Best in the world.
why not the German military Aviation.

Ha
About the Rafale.
I read somewhere that
Rafale was not able to show its capability of Claimed Spectra EW System.
that Stealthy jamming mods, Active Cancellation technique.

Moreover Rafales man machine interface is much different from F-16/15.
Especially Rafale has head Level display with touch screen panels.
Koreans and Singaporeans are used to US Fighters type of interface and thats why Rafale was not selected.

Bottom line is US lobbyists would Rule in Korea or Singapore and thats why both Typhoon and Rafale Lost.

Cost may not be the only Factor.
In one line Rafale is not worth of 65 million dollars.

But India Could be forced to buy Rafale.
As India has no other option,
India cannot buy US Systems due to political factor.
India is fed up of Russia Spare problems.

Rafale is only left option for them.

[Waylander]

We cannot be everywhere the Nr.1.
conventional Subs, tanks, tube artillery and handguns are enough. :D ;)

Do you really think anybody could compete with a country which puts more money into its military forces than we have for our whole country? :crazy

[Aussie Digger]

Yeah I know that, that Why Rafale doesn't have too much MICA loaded for A2G and only carry 6 A2SM.

So if it don't use the 3 tanks it will be problematic for long range bombing.

I doubt that Typhoon would ever carry 6x 2000lbs guided bombs on an operation unless they were operating at VERY short ranges. I'd guess 4x GBU's, plus AAM's, drop tanks and targetting pods would probably be the heaviest operational load it would carry. As you say carrying ridiculously heavy loads is not a recipe for long range.

Australia conducted a test last month where a single F/A-18 carried and dropped 10x live Mk 82 500lbs bombs on a single mission. It's unlikely to ever do that operationally but I guess air forces need to know what they CAN carry if necessary...

[ajay_ijn]

Yeah I know that, that Why Rafale doesn't have too much MICA loaded for A2G and only carry 6 A2SM.

So if it don't use the 3 tanks it will be problematic for long range bombing.
i thought rafale could carry heavy A2G +A2A in 1800km Radius with 2 conformal fuel tanks.
Isn't that enough.:confused:


Can anybody clear my doubt
How to Calculate Radius??
For example if radius is 800km, Then does that mean Fighter can go to max of 800km, perform its operation and return back??

western fighters specify in terms of Radius but Russians give the maximum range with Internal Fuel.

[Aussie Digger]

i thought rafale could carry heavy A2G +A2A in 1800km Radius with 2 conformal fuel tanks.
Isn't that enough.:confused:


Can anybody clear my doubt
How to Calculate Radius??
For example if radius is 800km, Then does that mean Fighter can go to max of 800km, perform its operation and return back??

western fighters specify in terms of Radius but Russians give the maximum range with Internal Fuel.

Yes, radius in terms of aircraft means how far an aircraft can fly and still be able to make it back (without aerial refuelling). I SERIOUSLY doubt Rafale would have an 1800k radius, even F-111's don't have that great a range. Beyond 1000k's is starting to equal "strategic" range in my book and no tactical fighter has that great a range...

[Twix101]

Yes, radius in terms of aircraft means how far an aircraft can fly and still be able to make it back (without aerial refuelling). I SERIOUSLY doubt Rafale would have an 1800k radius, even F-111's don't have that great a range. Beyond 1000k's is starting to equal "strategic" range in my book and no tactical fighter has that great a range...

The max range is with 6000 L external tank + 2 SCALP EG + 4 MICA Missile (the exact type dosn't matter), so the Rafale, will get a Strategic use with the implementation of the ASMP-A in the plane weaponry, and Rafale is designated to replace the Mirage 2000N and Super Entendard in Nuke Role.

[ajay_ijn]

I read from some sources
the Normally Rafales Range is 1800km with Internal fuel of 5300 Ltrs
But Rafale has good external payload of of 9500Kg.
So carrying two 2000 ltr Drop Tanks, will still allow Rafale to Carry much of its heavy Munitions and Missiles.


With twin conformal fuel tanks holding a total of 600 US gallons of fuel - designed and flight-tested by Dassault during its campaign to win Korea'sfighter contest - the Rafale can perform a 1,000-nm-radius strike mission, carrying both heavy air-to-surface weapons and air-to-air missiles
Source (http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/rafale.htm)

[Twix101]

Source (http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/rafale.htm)

And itself taken from Journal of Electronic Defence, very interresting article they published, what do think experts ?

[Ding]

this will be very off-topic... but I have to say it. I think the Rafale looks way better than the EF. And somehow, somewhere i remember someone saying 'if it looks good, it flies good' Sorry guys, that's just an opinion based only on looks.

You guys may continue:D

[contedicavour]

this will be very off-topic... but I have to say it. I think the Rafale looks way better than the EF. And somehow, somewhere i remember someone saying 'if it looks good, it flies good' Sorry guys, that's just an opinion based only on looks.

You guys may continue:D

Yeah right and based on aesthetics only we should just all acquire F14s ;) :D
We'll try to make Batch 3 Typhoons more beautiful :lol3

cheers

[Waylander]

Some chrome would be nice. Maybe new bumpers.
PIMP MY EUROFIGHTER!!!! :D :lol3

[Grand Danois]

Some chrome would be nice. Maybe new bumpers.
PIMP MY EUROFIGHTER!!!! :D :lol3

Yeah! And it should be able to bounce up and down like a real pimpmofighter. :D

Gonna look goood in the sales brochure.

[Ding]

Yeah right and based on aesthetics only we should just all acquire F14s ;) :D
We'll try to make Batch 3 Typhoons more beautiful :lol3

cheers
or maybe you should!:D seriously guys, statistics and performance aside (those things are always a point of contention anyways) i still think rafale is more beautiful

[Twix101]

Yeah! And it should be able to bounce up and down like a real pimpmofighter. :D

Gonna look goood in the sales brochure.

But Rafale can does that with it's "jumping front landing gear" ! :lol3