ROFLMAO, this would be the same bunch of cretins who fervently hope for a grand naval showdown?

 

would it be the same bunch who obviously struggle to interpret this written word properly?   Read the article very very slowly so that you don't miss anything, then go back and look at the consortium contribution conditions for production of components by members, and then very very carefully try and draw a link between what is and what is proposed due to constitutional issues.  then make the effort to understand that existing contracts relate to extant consortium members.  Japan is not part of 8.3 and even if she does seek early entry, then her constitution does not allow her to buy military capabilities from others until her govt changes the procurement rules under the constitution.  (which they are now talking about doing)  until then, she will only be able to buy US gear under FMS, and any US gear covered under FMS currently made under contract by consortium members (such as JSF ewarfare modules, radar components, some harness issues, main spars etc will either have to be made in Japan or a US  manufacturer contracted to do so.  She can't buy those components from the Danes, Canadians, Australians, UK etc because her constitution forbids it.

 

geez, you even make herc look intelligent and rational

 

Fifth generation marketing word make sense only if you have a magnitude better efficiency compare to previous generation in AtoA and AtoG.

And performance on a aircraft can be defined in:

Awareness: captors, networking, datalink etc.

Survivability: stealth, ESM/ELINT, supercruise, ceiling etc.

Firepower: manoeuvrability, kinematic performance, weapons etc.

Autonomy: range

Sorties rate: logistic, maintenability etc.

 

Technical means which are used to achieve a further step in those characteristics can be different.

For example Survivability can be achieved by pure high level of passive stealth or ECM plus passive stealth.

 

Clearly, futur Rafale (post F3 with AESA, DIRCM, reduced RCS, improved ECM, 9 tons engine with better supercruise...) are as fifth generation if not better than F35.

 

Lets do this for the Rafale then.. Shit radar, passive systems are far shorter in range...
Not low observable in anything LIKE the same ballpark as the F35 , no active cancellation, for reasons already well explained. No supercruise, ceiling around 55 000 feet.
Short/Medium Range missiles... at a disadvantage in any BVR encounter.
Nice long range whilst carrying giant bimp-like drop tanks.
Logistics are poor.


Yup, passive stealth is good, the rafale hasn't got that, and it hasn't got active stealth either, it can jam older radars i'm sure.

Yes.. er.. Clearly. : /

 

 

You're living in a fantasy land, in any case I bet there won't be a future version with so few in production and no one else buying without substantial concessions (bribes) and a grovelling sales pitch from your salesman (sarkozy).

 

The Rafale is not equivalent to the F35, or it would be IN DEMAND. You have to understand that the proof of having something that is world-beating is that people want it.

 

 

Is there any chance that if we are posting about any aircraft we will just talking about that aircraft without seeing anybody trying to compare that aircraft with the Rafale and at the end see the Rafale stealing the thread. 

This thread is for the F-35, PLEASE KEEP IT SO.