usajoe :

"I meant it was a disaster in terms of its funding for systems like TP, HMS, AESA radar, more powerful engines, etc...and cost."

First Rafale program is not a disaster.

Actual over spending is less than 10% which is quite good.

However due to insufficient budget, it was delayed, so some new standards are available later then expected initially (4 years late).

Still F3 standard is available but few years later, like AESA.

HMS cost few but french procurement was cancelled because not considered very necessary now, for the same reason than on F22.Still an HMS is available for a customer who wants it (and who is willing to pay additional cost to finish development to get the french one or to integrate an Israeli one).

 

Moreover Rafale as a infinity collimated like (HUD) wide color medium level display  which allow pilot to have an extended 360° wide view of tracks without readapting its eyes to shorter distance (ands losing hundreds microseconds).

A other reason to abandon HMS is that helmet was still considering a little bit too heavier for air combat and pilot necks under 9g.

Same for more powerful engine even existing M88 provide a T/W ratio close to Eurofighter at 7,5 ton rating or as good at 8 tons rating (with reduced engine service life).

Far to be a disaster and BTW we had to get a new fighter since in any case we would not purchase abroad.

The only alternative was to go Eurofighter and frankly almost everybody is happy we went Rafale now.Eurofighter was more expansive and less capable overall!

usajoe , I don 't believe you .

However , you are and still of a very small importance to me because you don 't walk the talk .

And it shows ...

 

Cheers .

well this was a fun thread, trolls have so much energy and dont let the facts get in the way of trying to wind people up

hey dont seem to care that even the french wiki showes them up ...

[excuse the google translation]

 

"""The front-sector optronics (OSF) is a visual processing system comprising: 

     * A track Sagem Défense Sécurité infrared dual-band (3-5ìm and 8-12ìm) always able to target more than 100 km. It will be deleted because of its obsolescence in the transition to standard F3.

     * A television channel Thales able to identify a target, to detect weapons, etc. to more than 40-50 km. The TV sensor is coupled to a laser rangefinder weak and little discreet."""""

 

""""The French Navy prefers the F/A-18

In February 1987, President François Mitterrand announced the launch of a derivative aircraft operational Rafale The latter does not apparently Rafale M will arrive too late to replace its F-8 Crusader , he preferred to rent or purchase "shelf" of a thirty F / A 18 Hornets used that have worked on the U.S. carrier

In 1990, when the Gulf War, even François Mitterrand would have regretted this choice: "I acknowledge that I made a grave mistake. I should opt for the F - 18. Today, I would favor the purchase of United States, even if this would displease Mr. Dassault """""

 

english wiki

""""Initially the Rafale B was to be just a trainer, but Gulf War... and Kosovo... experience showed that a second crewmember is invaluable on strike and reconnaissance missions, and therefore more Rafale Bs were ordered, replacing some Rafale Cs. 60% of the aircraft will be two seaters. A similar decision was made by the Navy, who initially did not have a two-seat aircraft on order; the program nevertheless was stopped"""" 

 

 

If you compare Rafale and Eurofighter T/W ratio you would find that:
-with a standard load of 4 missiles of about 700 kg with pylons in both case (4 mica for Rafale, 2 ASRAAM and 2 AIM120 for Eurofighter) which is the most likely real configuration (even both planes can get 8 or 8 missiles).

-and a 1,3 fuel ratio ((airplane+fuel) weight/emptyairplane weight) which give a similar combat autonomy:

 

Eurofighter weights 15,2 tons and has 18 tons engine thrust so 1,18 T/W

 

Rafale weight 13,26 tons and has 15 tons engine thrust so 1,13 T/W or 1,21 T/W with 8 tons thrust rating and reduced engine service life.

However the M88E4 rated at 8 tons with reduced engine service life has same service life than the M88E2 rated at 7,5 tons.

French air force prefere 7,5 tons rating to spare money on engine support.

So Rafale has currently a good motorization.Of course 9 tons would be better for supercruise.

actually, i thought this quote was worth repeating

 

The dual band OSF1 of Sagem is obsolescent because better IR chips exist now to get dual band.

So a new OSF2 will be procured later( in 2012?).

In 1990, when the Gulf War, even François Mitterrand would have regretted this choice: "I acknowledge that I made a grave mistake. I should opt for the F - 18. Today, I would favor the purchase of United States, even if this would displease Mr. Dassault """""

It was indeed a mistake since we have our carriers without a decent air defense fighter during 15 years until Rafale F1 IOC came in 2003.

We should have purchased 40 F18 in 1990.

Imeant it was a disaster in terms of its funding for systems like TP, HMS, AESA radar, more powerful engines, etc...and cost.

"First Rafale program is not a disaster.

However due to insufficient budget, it was delayed, so some new standards are available later then expected initially (4 years late).

Still F3+standard will be available same year of F35 IOC in USA.

Remember that with electronic scan radar which can tracks and priorize dozen of planes in a 60°off boresight cone, plus IRST in case of Rafale with a wider angle of track, HMS is less needed.

Same for more powerful engine even existing M88 provide a T/W ratio close to Eurofighter at 7,5 ton rating or as good at 8 tons rating (with reduced engine service life).

The only alternative was to go Eurofighter and frankly almost everybody is happy we went Rafale now.Eurofighter was more expansive and less capable overall!