The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 24, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Rafale Thread
Softwar    3/9/2009 9:47:25 AM
Started with hope that BW will limit his comments here instead of in every other Fighter thread. I'll start off with:

1 - no export sales
2 - no laser designator
3 - no AESA
4 - overpriced 4th gen fighter
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34   NEXT
warpig       3/22/2009 2:14:27 AM
BW, I'd love to hear how a MICA IR (or any IR air-to-air missile) can be used as an IRST.  I'll grant the "IR" part of IRST, that's obvious.  And once the missile seeker is locked on, *it* can then perform the "T" part for itself.  Feel free to offer up anything regarding how an IR missile can provide any amount of "S" and "T" for the aircraft, much less perform as an IRST the way the IRST part of the OSF of some of the F2 versions that actually do have an IRST does.  Don't forget things like how the seeker is controlled and cooled during all this S and T time.
 
 
Quote    Reply

earlm       3/22/2009 2:41:32 AM

BW, I'd love to hear how a MICA IR (or any IR air-to-air missile) can be used as an IRST.  I'll grant the "IR" part of IRST, that's obvious.  And once the missile seeker is locked on, *it* can then perform the "T" part for itself.  Feel free to offer up anything regarding how an IR missile can provide any amount of "S" and "T" for the aircraft, much less perform as an IRST the way the IRST part of the OSF of some of the F2 versions that actually do have an IRST does.  Don't forget things like how the seeker is controlled and cooled during all this S and T time.

 


It's another one of the pieces of bull manure he throws out casually in a post thinking no one will catch it.  He's only done this a few hundred times over the course of several years.  He gets caught every time and then he does it again in the next post.  He just took a shot at the F-22 a few posts above.  He can't make an intelligent case showing where the Rafale is superior in a few areas to an F-teen so he takes shots at the Typhoon, Raptor and F-35 as a rhetorical tactic.  He gets the hell beaten out of him and comes back for more in the next post.  And he never learns the tactics, physics or engineering which after a few years anyone who reads the board should improve in.  Herald knows physics and engineering and Leroy knows a lot about tactics but BW never learns a thing from anyone.
 
Quote    Reply

locutus       3/22/2009 3:09:36 AM

Look at that lovely aircraft , the F-15 Eagle :

h*tp://img4.imageshack.us/img4/3326/2754954023e55e057248b.jpg


 

(nice pic isn 't it)




 
This is better.
 
 htp://traxxmaxmaster.deviantart.com/art/F-15-Vapor-109550734

 

 
 
Quote    Reply

locutus    FYI   3/22/2009 3:14:35 AM











 

This is better.


 

 htp://traxxmaxmaster.deviantart.com/art/F-15-Vapor-109550734



 A couple of things I should mention:
 
1)Click on the photo and view it full size.
2)If you choose to explore the site, many photos at deviant art are NSFW.  So be careful.
 



 
 
Quote    Reply

leroy       3/22/2009 4:22:59 AM
"Back to the Rafale .  I said that the IR MICA can be used as an IRST and it is . Leroy is wrong again . The AdA in late 80s was already using the Magic 2 onboard M200s as an IRST , the Magic 2 had a 28km range aquisition . The IR MICA seeker 's unofficial range studies give it a 40km range . Of course , this is nothing comparable to OSF (100km range) but it is better than nothing and IT IS used as an IRST ."
 
Uh huh... there are so many things wrong with this I hardly know where to start.
 
First off, in order for a Mica seeker to pick up a target at 40km, it would have to be looking at it from the rear.  Its range in a forward hemisphere scenario is going to be far less than 40km.
 
The whole idea is just beyond stupid.  If cued where to look first, a MICA may be able to detect a target beyond visual range with its seeker, but that is a completely different problem from having the missile perform a search for targets autonomously, and then feed that data back to the aircraft.  The seeker simply isn't designed, nor capable, of performing that mission.  While I am at it... even if we pretended the Mica could somewhat reliably detect targets at 40km in a real world scenario, and it can't, that would still be useless in any kind of modern air combat scenario.  Your opponent would have killed you long before you got an opportunity to fire yourself.  The Rafale is not a stealth aircraft and isn't going to be sneaking within 40km unless your opponent is asleep in his seat.
 
"Regarding the 1st European F-35 , I hope to see it participating at the TigerMeet in 2013 if the program has luck on its side , but we could well not see it before 2015."
 
Ah yes, because as usual you seem to think these things are about "proving" something...
 
"In 6 years time , the Rafale will be F3+ , the Typhoon will have 5 years of operational service and the gripen will most probably be the Gripen NG . By that time , more and more Vipers , Eagles and Hornets will be at rest , rusting away on gigantic airplane parks . "
 
So?  Yes, the Rafale will probably be closer to finished by then, and yes some additional aircraft of various types will have been retired.  While we are at it... new capabilities will have been added to most fighters in the world.
 
 
"Tell me something poseur4 , who 's looking to buy a pure interceptor nowadays ??? No -one .
Today , the goal is to have multi role platforms and we have the tech to do some good jack of all trade Fighters ."
 
Well, the US for one... but even nations that want multi-role aircraft still have differing relative priorities in mind.  If the main mission a aircraft will be tasked with is air-to-air, the EF or various other aircraft would be better choices than the Rafale. 
 
"Anyway , where did you get that the Typhoon could beat the Rafale BVR ??? The jets met twice already and the outcome is not clear ."
 
lol, ah yes, at one of your aerial championships no doubt.

"On the other hand , during the South-Korean evaluation , the Typhoon had the upper hand on Rafale with a suppositly 4-2 score . We know of a 3rd encounter but the outcome has not been published or even talked of . Again , I repeat that France has never used the active capabilities of SPECTRA yet ."
 
Yeah, once again this is just stupid beyond words.  You think the Koreans were flying EFs against Rafales to see which was better?  That doesnt' even make sense.  The Koreans are not worried about fighting EFs, or Rafales... they are worried about regional threats. North Korean, Japanese, and Chinese aircraft. 
 
As for "Spectra" who gives a crap?  The EF has its own self protection jammer, as do most modern fighters these days.  Nobody uses anything more than the most basic capabilities in exercises for a whole list of good reasons.  (One of the biggest being that exercises are NOT contests and there is no medal ceremony at the end...)
 
"While the European Forces know a bit about the ECM onboard our M2000s , no one has ever experienced active jamming from SPECTRA besides French Pilots over French soil and in restricted airspace . JP Bergerac (if he wants to) can back me up on this ."
 
So?  Again, who gives a crap?  You act like it is unusual that a country wouldn't show off their best ECM in exercises.  
 
Leroy answered by another BS :
""You are an idiot bluewings.  Only an idiot would still be looking at that problem from a platform-centric perspective after all the explanation we have given you.""
 
"AH !!! As soon as we wanna talk about a platform , you bring the usual net centric thing and start to talk BS about how a Fighter should never go alone and bla-bla-bla .We all agree but this is not what I am asking , so don 't try to hide your incompetance and already lost cause behind some poor and off topic excuses ."
 
We talk about platforms all the time, in a context where it makes sense to do so.  If a country is considering buying one of two fighters, they are thinking about which platform would best fit into their system.   When fanboys like you start trying to imagine up idiotic scenarios where a fighter has to "survive in heavily defended airspace" we are instead talking about systems, and missions, and everything else.   
 
"Let me just nail you in your coffin poseur4 :
The UAE are using Vipers Blk 60 (and not the USA , only Blk 52s) but they still want to buy the Rafale to be their main Interceptor , how do you explain that ? The fact is that during evaluations , our Rafales smacked the Blk 60s and the UAE learned the difference . "
 
lol, right right, that must have been at the Middle Eastern championships right?
 
Seriously bluewings, get a new act.  This one isn't funny anymore. 

 
"Weeell , now you downgrade RedFlag and you pi*s in the Aggressor Team 's boots ?! Coming from you , I am lololol !
The USAF Intructors flying the Reds must be lol too ... You are a CLOWN and a very bad one ..."
 
Downgrade Redflag?  What the heck does that even mean?
 
The opposing force in Redflag are simulating a threat country.  They use tactics and equipment designed to simulate what a threat country might use. 
 
Meanwhile, the blue force in Redflag is practicing fighting an airwar as part of a coalition.  All the aircraft work together doing various missions.  The objective is to teach lessons in a realistic scenario, not "prove" anything about a specific system or jet.  If Rafales simulated a low level strike and didn't get "killed" good for them.  They likely weren't the only ones at that particular exercise that did. 
 
 
"Furthermore , Rafale RCS and ECMs give the Fighter a much better PK than any of the Teen Fighters (avoid the mistake to go against the facts) ."
 
Yeah, and you know this because....
 
Why make things up kid?  We all know you are as clueless as they come.  You don't know a thing about fighters, missiles, or ECM, but you want to offer your opinion on which are the best.(all French naturally)
 
Naturally, the Rafale is just the best aircraft ever!  That is why the various F-Teens keep beating it out for one export order after another...
 
 
Quote    Reply

leroy       3/22/2009 4:26:28 AM
"It's another one of the pieces of bull manure he throws out casually in a post thinking no one will catch it.  He's only done this a few hundred times over the course of several years.  He gets caught every time and then he does it again in the next post.  He just took a shot at the F-22 a few posts above.  He can't make an intelligent case showing where the Rafale is superior in a few areas to an F-teen so he takes shots at the Typhoon, Raptor and F-35 as a rhetorical tactic.  He gets the hell beaten out of him and comes back for more in the next post.  And he never learns the tactics, physics or engineering which after a few years anyone who reads the board should improve in. "
 
It is really about time he was banned.  I am not generally in favor of banning people, but he is either brain damaged or trolling most of the time. 
 
It is obvious he really doesn't have a clue what he is talking about, but it is also obvious that he goes out of his way to be an idiot most of the time. 
 
It would be better for everyone involved if he were gone.
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       3/22/2009 5:04:05 AM

A little reminder about panel fit and RCS issues....
 


 


 

note the difference in saw tooth panel fit and construction on US aircraft and then on Rafale. (pictured)
 
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Temember that little question earlier   3/22/2009 8:58:57 AM
about how an aircraft shockwave generates heat and that heat can sometimes be seen? What does an IR missile (or any object) do even while it hangs on the rail of a wunderwaffe like the Rafale moving at 250 m/s+ ? All physics is local............
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

Beazz       3/22/2009 11:21:54 AM




A little reminder about panel fit and RCS issues....

 








 







 




note the difference in saw tooth panel fit and construction on US aircraft and then on Rafale. (pictured)

 

WOW!! Even for someone like myself with zero technical knowledge on all this, these photos are quiet revealing. Looks to me like something glued together by a bunch of drunks!! I've saw models put together by 12 year olds that look more professional! Thank God we Americans have all those *inferior* teen series and Raptors ;-)) No wonder anyone who does actually have a clue about this is NOT buying that thing. Maybe they want something that was put together a lil more professionally.
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid    more BW BS   3/22/2009 11:48:33 AM
"Rafale's radar is circular with an array diameter of 550mm.  The F-16's nose is elliptical with max dimensions of 740 x 480 mm.  That works out to an area of of 0.238 m2 for the Rafale versus 0.279 m2 for the F-16."
 
Wrong . To star with Phaid , since I know that you 're not a wannabe and since I respect you and your knowledge , let me bring to you a nice pdf never posted on SP before , it is in french  :
h*tp://www.unilim.fr/theses/2008/sciences/2008limo4027/estagerie_fx.pdf
 
What does a dated paper that still talks about AMSAR have to do with anything?
 
I hope that you will enjoy the paper . 
Then , some pictures to show my case :
h*tp://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4678/demonstratorrbe2radar2t.jpg
h*tp://img8.imageshack.us/img8/4124/testingphaserafale2.jpg
 
Yes?  One is a picture of a demonstrator, the other is a picture of the radar being fitted into a Rafale.  Notice that in the second picture, the radar has not been fitted into the airplane yet.  Notice the size of the pointy end that the guy on the ground is maneuvering around.  It is not large.
 
The elliptical nose of the Viper can 't have a radar the size of the RBE2 , it is as simple as that .
 
You are completely right, for once: it is impossible to fit a 550mm diameter circle inside a 740x480mm ellipse.  However, the 740x480mm ellipse has a larger surface area.
 
Other bits and pieces:
 
The UAE are using Vipers Blk 60 (and not the USA , only Blk 52s) but they still want to buy the Rafale to be their main Interceptor , how do you explain that ? The fact is that during evaluations , our Rafales smacked the Blk 60s and the UAE learned the difference .
 
Wrong. There were no competitive evaluations between the Block 60 and the Rafale.  The UAE wants the Rafale for one reason: the ability to carry Meteors.  It doesn't offer anything else they do not already have, which is why they have specified that the only way they will buy it is with Meteor capability (and the AESA required to support it fully, and the uprated engines required to support AESA).
 
 You that the Rafale can 't exploit the range , huh ??? Furthermore , Rafale RCS and ECMs give the Fighter a much better PK than any of the Teen Fighters (avoid the mistake to go against the facts) .
 ...
Over the Med sea with nowhere to hide , you should say that the best and purest Interceptor would win but it was not the case , it seems that the Rafale/Typhoon encounter was a draw . On the other hand , during the South-Korean evaluation , the Typhoon had the upper hand on Rafale with a suppositly 4-2 score . We know of a 3rd encounter but the outcome has not been published or even talked of . Again , I repeat that France has never used the active capabilities of SPECTRA yet .
 
Here, some light reading:
 
 
I hope I did those links right.  If any of them comes up as a tiny image, just remove the ".th" from the URL.
 
For those who don't read Greek, this is an article about HAF Block 52+ and Rafales in an exercise.  The Block 52s were brand new and not fully equipped -- apparently they didn't yet have their RWRs installed.  Nonetheless, they did rather well against the Rafales.  Some highlights:
1) The lack of RWRs in the F-16s was a problem; the French fighters aborted when they detected a lockon; the Greek fighters were not able to do that.

2) The F-16's AGP-68(V)9 worked extremely well and gave the HAF the ability to detect the French from quite a long distance and coordinate maneuvers at long range via Link-16

3) Due to its PESA architecture, RBE2 range is inferior to AESA; based on performance in the exercise HAF estimates its range is not superior to the [mechanically scanned] AGP-68(V)9.  However the RBE2 was, as expected, more flexible, giving it the ability to track more targets simultaneously.

4) The French requested a second exercise after the conclusion of this one, which speaks well of 115CW and its F-16 Block52+

5) The ECCM of the 52s worked smoothly when the Rafales used their Spectra ECM system.  The active jamming on the Rafales was not able to break the lock of the APG-68(V)9s.

6) The French pilots reported all their shots as a shoot-down regardless of range.  The HAF improved its performance placing the majority of its shots in the "noescape" zone of the AMRAAMs.  So the French aircraft got more shots, but the HAF's ones were much more likely to result in an actual kill.

7) In all,the Rafale showed a marginal superiority but with a large numbr of low PK shots, unlike the Block 52s which achieved fewer shots but all in their missiles' no escape zone.  All in all, the Rafale had only a marginal advantage in this exercise with the blk 52+.
Certainly, the HAF aircraft in no way dominated the Rafales.  But the Rafales' performance fell far short of the claims often made about it.
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Your kidding?   3/22/2009 12:08:07 PM

"Rafale's radar is circular with an array diameter of 550mm.  The F-16's nose is elliptical with max dimensions of 740 x 480 mm.  That works out to an area of of 0.238 m2 for the Rafale versus 0.279 m2 for the F-16."


 



Wrong . To star with Phaid , since I know that you 're not a wannabe and since I respect you and your knowledge , let me bring to you a nice pdf never posted on SP before , it is in french  :



h*tp://www.unilim.fr/theses/2008/sciences/2008limo4027/estagerie_fx.pdf

 

What does a dated paper that still talks about AMSAR have to do with anything?



 

I hope that you will enjoy the paper . 

Then , some pictures to show my case :

h*tp://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4678/demonstratorrbe2radar2t.jpg




h*tp://img8.imageshack.us/img8/4124/testingphaserafale2.jpg

 

Yes?  One is a picture of a demonstrator, the other is a picture of the radar being fitted into a Rafale.  Notice that in the second picture, the radar has not been fitted into the airplane yet.  Notice the size of the pointy end that the guy on the ground is maneuvering around.  It is not large.



 

The elliptical nose of the Viper can 't have a radar the size of the RBE2 , it is as simple as that .

 

You are completely right, for once: it is impossible to fit a 550mm diameter circle inside a 740x480mm ellipse.  However, the 740x480mm ellipse has a larger surface area.


 

Other bits and pieces:

 


The UAE are using Vipers Blk 60 (and not the USA , only Blk 52s) but they still want to buy the Rafale to be their main Interceptor , how do you explain that ? The fact is that during evaluations , our Rafales smacked the Blk 60s and the UAE learned the difference .

 

Wrong. There were no competitive evaluations between the Block 60 and the Rafale.  The UAE wants the Rafale for one reason: the ability to carry Meteors.  It doesn't offer anything else they do not already have, which is why they have specified that the only way they will buy it is with Meteor capability (and the AESA required to support it fully, and the uprated engines required to support AESA).


 




 You that the Rafale can 't exploit the range , huh ??? Furthermore , Rafale RCS and ECMs give the Fighter a much better PK than any of the Teen Fighters (avoid the mistake to go against the facts) .

 ...

Over the Med sea with nowhere to hide , you should say that the best and purest Interceptor would win but it was not the case , it seems that the Rafale/Typhoon encounter was a draw . On the other hand , during the South-Korean evaluation , the Typhoon had the upper hand on Rafale with a suppositly 4-2 score . We know of a 3rd encounter but the outcome has not been published or even talked of . Again , I repeat that France has never used the active capabilities of SPECTRA yet .

 

Here, some light reading:

 




 


I hope I did those links right.  If any of them comes up as a tiny image, just remove the ".th" from the URL.


 

For those who don't read Greek, this is an article about HAF Block 52+ and Rafales in an exercise.  The Block 52s were brand new and not fully equipped -- apparently they didn't yet have their RWRs installed.  Nonetheless, they did rather well against the Rafales.  Some highlights:


1) The lack of RWRs in the F-16s was a problem; the French fighters aborted when they detected a lockon; the Greek fighters were not able to do that.



2) The F-16's AGP-68(V)9 worked extremely well and gave the HAF the ability to detect the French from quite a long distance and coordinate maneuvers at long range via Link-16



3) Due to its PESA architecture, RBE2 range is inferior to AESA; based on performance in the exercise HAF estimates its range is not superior to the [mechanically scanned] AGP-68(V)9.  However the RBE2 was, as expected, more flexible, giving it the ability to track more targets simultaneously.



4) The French requested a second exercise after the conclusion of this one, which speaks well of 115CW and its F-16 Block52+



5) The ECCM of the 52s worked smoothly when the Rafales used their Spectra ECM system.  The active jamming on the Rafales was not able to break the lock of the APG-68(V)9s.



6) The French pilots reported all their shots as a shoot-down regardless of range.  The HAF improved its performance placing the majority of its shots in the "noescape" zone of the AMRAAMs.  So the French aircraft got more shots, but the HAF's ones were much more likely to result in an actual kill.



7) In all,the Rafale showed a marginal superiority but with a large numbr of low PK shots, unlike the Block 52s which achieved fewer shots but all in their missiles' no escape zone.  All in all, the Rafale had only a marginal advantage in this exercise with the blk 52+.


Certainly, the HAF aircraft in no way dominated the Rafales.  But the Rafales' performance fell far short of the claims often made about it.




MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
 
Herald
 
 
Quote    Reply

earlm    What's so funny Herald?   3/22/2009 1:01:05 PM
Anyone with some technical knowledge could make the case that the F-16 is more cost effective than Rafale.  You can even make the case that with AMRAAM vs MICA the F-16 is overall better than Rafale.
 
 
Meanwhile BW searches google for more off topic tangential irrelevant garbage to post in response.
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Whats so funny Herald?   3/22/2009 2:13:52 PM

Anyone with some technical knowledge could make the case that the F-16 is more cost effective than Rafale.  You can even make the case that with AMRAAM vs MICA the F-16 is overall better than Rafale.

 

 

Meanwhile BW searches google for more off topic tangential irrelevant garbage to post in response.



Is SPECTRA's failure against the APG-68(V)9.
 
That was hilarious!
 
Herald

 
 
Quote    Reply

earlm       3/22/2009 2:42:16 PM
Unless both are in wartime modes it's almost irrelevant.  But you do have a statement that SPECTRA has never been used in active mode, then you have an article in Greek that says it has and it failed.  When we will we establish the facts:
 
1.  Totally overpriced
2.  Good A2G capability with some holes
3.  Only capable in A2A against good opposition because of very good pilots
4.  Will struggle in A2A in the future unless it gets AESA and Meteor
 
Are these facts so hard to comprehend?  What's the issue here?
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    Herald is a troll   3/22/2009 3:20:09 PM


Well actually V^2.......

 

As for you, Darth, I see that is your physics example? :rotflmaoayid.

  


 






 

There is no more than 1.7 gees positive load and no more than 1.5 gees negative load in that film clip. I can even tell you the positive and negative acceleration loads and when they occur.

 

Can you? 


 

I can also tell you that you will NOT be able to hit a 1/2 inch square on a touchscreen without your finger skittering off the hot spot under those ridiculously small acceleration loads.


 

Arrogance can only work for you; if you can back it up, junior.


 

Herald


 




WERE YOU BORN THIS STUPID HERALD?

CAN YOU READ?

Obviously you can't do the second question because if you could, you would have noticed when I said that the Touch Screens are for BATTLE MANAGEMENT and situations where the aircraft is not in the process of violent maneuver. ARE YOU DENYING I SAID THAT? IF NOT, why are you posting this stupid strawman nonsense?  It's because you have no idea what BATTLE MANAGEMENT is so when I mentioned it, you tried to hide your ignorance with a silly little strawman physics example and your usual hateful vitriolic responses. Herald, what you are going to learn, and I'm not mentioning names out of respect, but when you know something. You don't need to get arrogant and insulting. Every once and a while maybe. But this is your MO and it is to hide ignorance. The funny thing is HErald it's OK not to know something. Just ask me next time instead of posting a stupid post header like BUTT OUT. Oh let me guess, "I don't take advice from Pousers" or "I'll take you behind the woodshed" or "You are incompetent" blah blah blah. lol so freakin stupid you are. Thanks for making the already obvious even more so. Just for a recap. One you can't insult your way out of. IF YOU ACTUALLY UNDERSTOOD WHAT I SAID TO YOU...


"I don't need to do that Herald. Again, you are letting your ego get the better part of your judgement. I'm going to keep this objective and not personal and insulting so that maybe we can learn something and remain cordial. Almost every Humvee, Tank, Brandley ect has whats called Blue Force Tracker mounted inside. A lot of our allies have it as do a lot of our ATTACK HELOS. The interface is touch sensitive. It isn't just two dimentional either. The vehicles sit on springs and shocks which move in the vertical plane very violently over terrain and when doing offensive/defensive driving and it goes without saying that the helos arent 2D limited either. The application is battle management focused. There is no reason a fighter can't benefit from this as well. The turning fight and hard manuvering is only PART of the flight profile and then you have other controls on the stick for the basic immediately needed functions. We aren't the only ones either. Look at Helic3om as well." 
 

 
Now stop trolling and pretending to know everything when you don't troll.


-DA 
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy