Guys,

 

any chance we could steer this thread back on track ;)  Im very interested in the whole South America theater. What does Brasil need in a fighter?  What is the driving requirment behind this procurement?  What does Brasil see as its likely threats?  Does brasil intend to step up onto the world stage at some point in the future with regards to coalitions operations with teh US or European allies, these are the things I would like to see discussed!!!!

 

Regards

 

Arty

Arty , it is time for me to go to bed but I will try my best to respond to you 2moro .

 

Cheers .

Above local security and modernisation needs, Brazil want to emerge as a global power able to influence global policy including with a seat in UNO Security council
It means that Brazil want to be able to participate to coalition wars under UNO mandate (like in Korean or Gulf war in order to have influence on peace settlement or diplomatic pressures).

So their navy increase, their SSN procurement and futur fighter procurement.

Of course they want to be able to withstand foreign pressures including their weapon supplier pressures or embargo.

So they want source code, technologies, ability to produce spares etc.

It will not be done in a decade but they prepare for the futur.

Is it that weird to believe that the Rafale option has the most advantages in the unique case of  Brazil?

Certainly seems Brazil seems to think so?

Then there's also my hunch that the electronics in the Rafale may be easier to modify than in certain alternatives.

 

 

 

Duplex :

""Brazilians will suck the last drop of blood  from Dassault so nothing will be left  on the table for the French.

Just for the sake of it , I think it is time to re-post this excellent video :

 

h*tp://www.dailymotion.com/video/xzrje_rafale-global-punch_extreme

 

I re-post it because it shows what 3 Rafales F3 can do with a good mission planing and an AWAC in the rear .

SEAD , Interception , deep strike . 

It is not "amazing" or new in itself , but it has the quality and it shows very cleverly the ease of use and deadliness of the platform .

Bare the HMS , this what our actual Rafale F3s can do (and more) .

 

Cheers .

 

 

Brazil has most probably more intels on the tested aircraft(s) than we do and I trust them to look at every important layers of the jets .

I would like to know a bit more about the airframe quality design and robustness of the Gripen NG and the SH .

Stuff like airframe strength , planned maximum flight hours/landings , etc . Do you have anything ?

 

On my side , here is what I have about the Rafale :

 

 

The "185% design limit load before the airframe broke" is excellent . Another thing who called my attention is the difference in between the initial flying hours/landings and the planned flying hours/landings .

There is an increase of around 40% regarding the flying hours and an increase of around 85% regarding the landings (!) .

It seems that the main strength resides in the robustness and longevity of the airframe in general including the landing gears which is proving the sound and time proof original design .

 

Do you have any infos on the Gripen and the SH ? I am curious ...

 

Cheers .

 

These are the materials used :

 

 

 

Cheers .

My guess is that Brazil wants a genuine modern multirole fighter, with probably an eye towards replacing their F-5s.  The Rafale is a good choice in that regard.  I don't recall the arrangement with the Mirage 2000, which I would regard as still a superb interceptor; a mixed Mirage/Rafale force would give them an edge on Venezuela.  (Venezuela's Flankers are nothing more than overcompensation by Chavez IMHO; most of his air force still depends on Mirage 5 retreads and F-5s, now that his F-16s have been grounded.)  I thought that the Rafale might have potential of a follow-on to replace the A-4s on the Sao Paulo, but Doggtag (I believe) tells me that the Rafale's a bit too heavy for combat operations off that carrier.

 

At this point, I would say that Brazil's only real rival in South America is Peru, which is operating mostly Russian equipment, and Chile, which just started fielding F-16s to replace their Mirages.  Argentina has potential, but their economy is hurting and they're still depending on ancient A-4s and Mirages.  Colombia's in kind of the same boat, with upgraded Mirages and Kfirs, but both nations really need a newer multirole fighter.  Dassault could do worse to push the Rafale there, and I wonder if that's one of the reasons for the Brazil partnership.

What is the current US position regarding H. Chavez and his foolish behavior ?

We have some news and reports here in France and it seems that the Obama admin (POTUS , Pentagone , NSA) are keeping a good eye on the clown with a sarcastic smile . Is that correct ?

 

Cheers .

gf :

why?  because everyone doesn't leak data as it would destroy the trust between the manufacturer and potential customers.

they would never get a sale in the future from that country or its immediate friends for a long long time - if ever.

there is a bit of a difference between engineering empirical stats and performance stats against an RFT.  eg the materials list you show for Rafale is almost nonsensical as the actual quantum is into double figures.  so, the diagram is in real terms meaningless 

gf :

""I do for some and I'm not saying.

1) because it's treated by the manufacturers as commercial in confidence against the RFT""

 

Of course but please can you give me the proof that you know of , that would prove your status to me (no bad intended) .

 

""2) because some of the requirements directly impact upon mission issues, planning issues, combat vignettes etc...""

 

Obviously , I agree but we are talking about the planned flying hours and landing (I quote) "under a severe usage spectrum" . Can you provide any infos about your SHs ?

 

""3) when other manufacturers appeal against a decision, even they do not get access to the other vendors specific submission vectors.  They get debriefed, but they don't get data""

 

What is your point regarding my questions ?

The rest of your post is sound but it seems to me that  : or 

-1) you know nothing and you can 't answer my questions (no big deal)

-2) you know and you are bluffing

 

Cheers .