In my opinion it is very simple. Either they design and build the Rafale or France "permanently" loses the ability to design and build fighter jets. Retaining that ability in the long term is more important to France than the "short term" benefits the joint strike fighter offers them.

 

The downside is that every once in a while any company will design a "turkey". Having only 1 French jet fighter manufacturer means that this can cause some problems.

 

 

So - let's sum this up here:

 

1 - Rafale still has no customers

2 - Rafale still does not have AESA

3 - Rafale has no laser designator

 

Thanks to Phaid - we know the truth from the article.  These were elderly block 25 Falcons - with early electronics and engines- not the advanced versions, pitted against the latest and greatest Rafale.  It should have been a clean sweep for France but was not.

 

Now lets compare -

1 - F-16 and F-18 both have lots of customers backed by a ton of logistics

2 - F-16 and F-18 have AESA

3 - F-16 and F-18 have laser designators (several types in service)

4 - F-16 and F-18 can drop GPS guided munitions, laser guided weapons, and fire cruise missiles

5 - F-16 and F-18 cost less than the Rafale

 

OK - so this has all been posted before (again and again and again) with long winded insults and some very unreasonable claims being spun between the basic facts.

Well I think you should give the US a break about being bad losers.  Histroically we just have not had as much practical experience as the French.

The story so far:

-Rafale can be beat old Falcon but not without loss

-Carlo Copp should never be used as a reference*

-Typhoon and SH are good for their design

-Carlo Copp should never be used as a reference

-F22 is good

-Carlo Copp should never be used as a reference

-Everyone is patriotic and supportive of their respective militaries, and why shouldn't they be.

 

*Australians know what I mean

Amen. 

This has been the most accurate series of statements on this forum that I've seen for a long while... :)

I think that we should discuss how these 4.5 generation aircrafts are used (or could be used) in today 's operational theaters .

As Lizard said , we should better compare them as a part of a highly developed Networked Concentric Warfare .

 

Regarding C4ISR , communication systems , AWACS , JSTARS , Satellites , Command & Control , Electronic Warfare , the USA are not only playing in the top league , they are leading . Only a Nation with the same (or approaching) capabilities has a chance to hurt them for a while before attrition put the USA back on top again .

Since nobody in Europe wants to fight the USA , that 's good :-)

 

The other Nations having such capabilities and using a 4.5 generation aircraft are not many (UK , France , Sweden and Spain) and only the UK and France have a decent satellite cover with a highly sophisticated communication system .

Russia is also a contender and their latest Sukhois are almost 4.5 generation aircrafts bare the stealth/discret factor . China is a bit of an unknown fish and we tend to see the Chinese not as good as the Russians regarding their quality of pilots and training , so it 's hard to say .

Israel also has an excellent pedigree and going against the Isreali AF is not an easy task , far from it . Basically , they rule the Meddle-East .

 

But since we talk about aircrafts like the SH , the Gripen , the Rafale (and the Typhoon) , which aircraft is susceptible to integrate best in a major operation should be the corner stone of our discussion .

 

The F/A-18E/F seems to be the yardstick . It has all the electronic gizmos to perfectly integrate into a big operation : COMs , Electronic warfare , AESA radar with excellent A2A and A2G modes , it also can do Recon . It is a deadly foe in BVR , it is an excellent striker and its armory allow it to do almost any kind of mission . Without really being a "discret" aircraft , some good work has been done to lower its RCS (new air intakes , RAM paint (?) and toothedges) . It can aslo do buddy-buddy refueling . The SH seems hard to beat ...

 

The Gripen has a very special net concentric warfare ability (maybe the best) , a good radar with excellent A2A missiles and it can do ground attacks rather well , but it has short legs . Staying a long time in the air is a force multiplier on its own because it allows the user to have more flexibility , to use less in-flight refuelings which can be a burden at times . It 's supposed to have a rather small RCS and its electronic warfare suite is top notch . It has no combat experience yet .

 

The Rafale is known enough here for me not to repeat again what it can do . Let just say that its COMs , Electronic suite , Optronic suite are also top notch . It is also probably the best flyier of the three . It can do buddy-buddy refueling .

Its radar while being a PESA has proved itself and contrary to the common belief has a good range (similar to the RDY on M2000-5) . Its A2A missiles might not have the range of the AMRAAM but there is a IR version and they can do a 180deg BVR attack .

Regarding its A2G armory , the AASM is a big step forward and the latest INS/GPS+IR version really act as a small cruise missile , correcting its flight by itself to hit a possible moving target without the help of the launching aircraft , something a LGB can 't do . The Damoclès pod will be introduce in early 2009 with the F3 software . The aircraft also completed its anti-ship capability :

""At approximately 9.45 a.m. (GMT) on Thursday, 14th June 2007, the latest Mod2 development of MBDA?s Exocet AM39 Block2 air-launched anti-ship missile successfully completed its final validation firing.

The test firing took place at the DGA?s Ile du Levant CELM missile launch test centre (situated off the French Mediterranean coast). Exocet AM39 Block2 Mod2 was released from a naval Rafale F3 combat aircraft one hour after its catapult take-off from the French aircraft carrier, Charles de Gaulle.

Release from the Rafale F3 took place at high altitude (27,000 ft) and approximately 50km from the intended target. The missile dived at supersonic speed to its planned very low altitude where, one minute after release, its cruise propulsion system took over and Exocet adopted its autonomous sea-skimming trajectory. During its final approach phase, the missile carried out first an angular and then other evasive penetrative manoeuvres. After less than three minutes of flight, the Exocet AM39 Block2 Mod2 successfully impacted against the target.