Eric Trappier is probably right (for now) because of many reasons like Integration , Coast , Ease of maintenance , etc .

Europe is now a living being and will be so for the foreseeable futur .

 

SlowMan :

Making collaborative programs is not end at all of Dassault and french aircrafts.

Moreover if it is not feasible, we could still switch to a all french program like with the Rafale.

Wonder of wonders, I find myself in agreement with FS.  The French have always pursued an independent course, for good or bad.  If the next European fighter isn't what France wants--or, as BW hints, Dassault doesn't have the lead in its development--France will be more than happy to pursue their own course.  The Rafale was born out of French concerns over the Eurofighter project, both IMHO for good reasons (the Aeronavale had to have a replacement for the aging Super Etendard and ancient F-8) and bad (the UK, Germany, and Italy weren't willing to kiss Dassault's ass enough).

 

Either way, I can understand and applaud France if they decide to go solo on this.  It makes sense.  While Europe has had some real winners in committee-designed aircraft (the Jaguar, Tornado, and Typhoon), there's always the danger that it could end up with an early F-111--jack of all trades and master of none, which as I recall was also a fear with the Typhoon and remains one with the F-35.  You're going to want an aircraft tailored to what your country needs.

 

Decision would be post 2015 BTW and I don't see other Europeans launching a program before 2020 so for a 6th generation fighter produced after 2030.

Dassault is only speaking in a politically correct way.

Dassault has no reasons to drop investment in Rafale since it can be improved to match 5th generation needs and has received funding for that.

 

So much for those who said that it wasn't possible.

The reason France pulled out of Eurofighter Consortium was because EC wanted to use Rolls-Royce's engine, while France insisted on Snecma engine for Eurpfighter. Now imagine Typhoon powered by M88 instead of EJ200 and you can see what an underpowered disaster Typhoon would turn out to be if EC gave into French demand.

usajoe :

What a suprise BW rates the rafale the worlds second best fighter, and of course the Typhoon is vastly inferior.
Why it needs AESA wait a minute fuck me so does the rafale, and it needs long ranged missiles, such as AMRAAM or METEOR perhaps, (meteor being a uk german missile.

AESA for the typhoon is as per the rafale in development but back burnered as its not required against current threats.

Do you know im finaly naused off with youe rafale = uber  and feet stamping if anyone insults it whilst you spout shite about other aircraft

 

lets analise a few recent claims on other threads

1 rafale is the only aircraft that can passivley detect thanks to OSF,  A OSF is only on earlier rafales asits obsolete and hasnt beenreplaced and B typhoon and many others have irst

 

2 Rafale is a much better strike aircraft. I cant disagree and it probably allways will be any superiority the typhoon has will probably down to weapons integration (more types)

 

3 RCS I am willing to concede the rafale probably has a slightly smaller rcs than the typhoon given shape and size if we ignore the huge radar reflector to the stbd side of the cockpit, it isnt ram coated (if it is i wouldnt use it thats for sure)

this advantage is not so great as to offset the advantage afforded by the captor. Its a good to excellent radar.

 

 

What a suprise BW rates the rafale the worlds second best fighter, and of course the Typhoon is vastly inferior.
Why it needs AESA wait a minute fuck me so does the rafale, and it needs long ranged missiles, such as AMRAAM or METEOR perhaps, (meteor being a uk german missile.

AESA for the typhoon is as per the rafale in development but back burnered as its not required against current threats.

Do you know im finaly naused off with youe rafale = uber  and feet stamping if anyone insults it whilst you spout shite about other aircraft

 

lets analise a few recent claims on other threads

1 rafale is the only aircraft that can passivley detect thanks to OSF,  A OSF is only on earlier rafales asits obsolete and hasnt beenreplaced and B typhoon and many others have irst

 

2 Rafale is a much better strike aircraft. I cant disagree and it probably allways will be any superiority the typhoon has will probably down to weapons integration (more types)

 

3 RCS I am willing to concede the rafale probably has a slightly smaller rcs than the typhoon given shape and size if we ignore the huge radar reflector to the stbd side of the cockpit, it isnt ram coated (if it is i wouldnt use it thats for sure)

this advantage is not so great as to offset the advantage afforded by the captor. Its a good to excellent radar.

 

 

I don't see Dassault failing or having to merge.  The French government will see to that.  Saab and British Aerospace merging I think is a possibility.  And I disagree the Rafale is a disaster, though its teething problems and a glutted market have hurt its development.

 

As far as A2A fighters, I would rank the Rafale above the Su-35 on the basis of pilot quality, putting the Rafale in third place.  The F-22 would be in first, the Typhoon in seccond (on the basis that it was designed as a pure fighter; the Rafale was not) with a narrow lead over the Rafale. The Gripen I would stick in at fourth, with the Su-35 trailing at fifth. 

 

As for what a 6th gen fighter would look like, I have no idea.  I'm saddened by the fact that it might not even be manned.

 

computor had a moment

3 cont as a rough guide given comparable systems with radar bigger = better.

minimil differences in rcs are not that significant between the 2 aircraft.

 

4 EW  why oh why is it impossible for you to accept that there are equal and possibly better systems on the market than spectra. Spectra is also lacking a towed decoy - this is an as well as not an instead of - nor does it prove the spectra is so superior its not needed.

 

5 fighter - the typhoon has been designed from the ground up as a fighter the rafale as a strike aircraft . the typhoon is optimised for the air superiority role. now you use this optimisation as justification for inferiority in the strike role, but refuse to concede this optimisation equates to any superiority in the a2a role.

 

HMS typhoon has rafale doesnt.

 

so in short

rafale has an adaquate radar, reasonable missiles (to vgood when meteor comes on line) irst (on some)  good defensive system, some limited rcs measures, good sensor fusion, and is optimised for a2g