gf0012-aust="F-22 and JSF are real 5th generation. They're ground up 5th gen, not retrofits. The EF was designed for a different employment philosophy. If you want to make a generational comparison at a multi-strike level, then the closest carrier based modern 4.5 gen with bells and whistles equivalency on paper is the Shornet F or Growler if you want to compare two seaters."

F-22 and EF are overpriced and overspecialised. JSF is full of promises and the price is already on a steep slope. Indeed the Superhornet is Rafale direct competitor.

phaid="No. It is a perfectly correct comparison: two not quite mature and yet obviously equivalent airplanes."

The comparison is correct and theresult is known : an immature aircraft hardly beat another immature aircraft several years ago.
The bias comes from the way you presented the exercise:&S221;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.&S221;.
You took the time to explain that the F-16 involved in the exercise were immature but you didn't bother to do the same for the Rafale involved. Bias.
Often when people mention the F-16, they specify the Block : 40, 52, 60 (like you did), the same thing should be done for the Rafale as several
Standards (ie Block) exist : F1, F2, F3, but you didn't. More bias.
It is explicity mentionned in your greek document that the Rafale involved were @ F1 standard and you chose not to disclose it.



phaid="BIAS would have been to claim that "SPECTRA has never been used in an active mode" when it clearly has, as the article I posted illustrates."

I didn't claim that, I said that nobody will reveal the full extent of their EW systems unless they really need to.
So drawing EW conclusions from an exercise is useless. 
 


phaid="Mais bien sur. Every time Rafale loses, it is because the French were holding back! Just like in Singapore, just like in Korea, just like against the Super Hornets
in JTFX, just like the Rafale killed by a Jaguar in TLP, just like in every other exercise in which the Rafale shows that it is simply a competent but very pedestrian
little 4th generation fighter.
That line is so tired, you know? At some point you're just going to have to admit that your 4th gen fighter with its DJM suite with a nice marketing name is really just a slightly more au-point F-16, and be content."

-The F-22 was killed by a F-16, a F-18 and a growler. So what ? During the same TLP the two Rafale F2 involved achieved the second air-to-air ratio despite the fact they were tasked to air-to-ground missions only .

-Videos speak louder than words, no need for excuses this time.
link /> link />


phaid=&S220;That Rafale in the Armasuisse trials was flying a prototype RBE2-AA whose performance has not been described publicly. But doesn't it seem odd that 1) the AdlA has not agreed to re-equip its current Rafale fleet with RBE2-AA (when it becomes available of course) and 2) the only Rafales offered for sale with AESA are those that would be equipped with uprated M88s? Tiens, tiens.&S221;


Your rumour doesn't sound plausible. You believe France would develop an AESA antenna that cannot fit into a regular Rafale ? The AESA was developped and tested on a mirage 2000 test bed and on a Rafale. The Rafale was designed from the outset to operate an AESA antenna.
No credible source has ever mentionned that uprated engine were required for the AESA. The Rafale demonstrated the AESA in Switzerland with it's current engines and completed the whole evaluation.
link />

1) No it doesn't seem odd. Budgetary constraints are most likely the real reason. Unfortunately, not all Rafale are created equal (same thing for the F-16 & F-15 & Migs & Sus), the Rafale already built will probably keep a passive antenna, the newer ones will be equipped with an active antenna in factory. The FAF should order a new batch of Rafale (@F3) somewhere in the future, those planes should be ordered with the AESA.

2) Wrong again. The Rafale offered for export are regular Rafale + AESA, in some particular cases the door was, and is,
left open for more powerful engines depending on the requirements of the client.
The Rafale offered to Switzerland are the same as the ones for the French Air Force : regular F3 + AESA (the FAF is not interested in uprated engines).
link /> link />

Many BW "technicals" have been rebutted convincingly -- you are one of a very few who choose to ignore this.  France has but a single operational, problem-plagued catobar carrier from which to stage naval Rafale and hence project power absent landing rights.  No foreign Rafale customers despite aggressive sales attempts -- ?!

v^2