Shrug, if it can't bomb then its totally worthless to France who poured all their airpower hopes into that one air-frame.. Stepped into that one all by yourself, Mk.

 

So you see,  you better well hope that I am right that it is a bomb truck, a decent one.  

 

Herald

 

 

 

 

Don't be afraid herald it can bomb and not only that. The point is that people like you claim the aircraft is a bad performer at anything but tree top level and that it is a bad performer in AA, which is as important as a mission as is AG. And so far the feedback from countless exercises, which is simply ignored, blanked out and dismissed by you and your likes tell us a somewhat different story. That's being the point I made here.

That is NOT what is reported from exercises or evaluation, but then you just don't see the actual performance markers ,do you, in the press fluff.

 

No sale is the most obvious giveaway, ALWAYS. Gripens sell. Rafales don't.Why?

 

Performance per Euro and I mean PERFORMANCE. 

  . 

I just tell you why.

 

H.

 

That is NOT what is reported from exercises or evaluation, but then you just don't see the actual performance markers ,do you, in the press fluff.
No sale is the most obvious giveaway, ALWAYS. Gripens sell. Rafales don't.Why?
Performance per Euro and I mean PERFORMANCE. 
 

H.

Well if sales are the sole indicator the Super Hornet can't be a great platform! There are certainly multiple reasons why the Rafale hasn't sold yet and as time goes by the chances look more and more slim with the proliferation of the F-35. The Rafale was too late for many competitions, not developed and mature enough, its individual weapons are a problem for customers used to US made equipment, the $ : ? ratio, lower political weight, badly coordinated sales efforts between the DGA and Dassault and of course the costs of the aircraft itself. Countries buying the Gripen were always rather small countries for whom aircraft like the Gripen or F-16 are the best choice on cost grounds alone, often the capabilities offered are more than sufficient and if you require a flexible combat aircraft from the outset it was/is a better option to opt for a prove/mature platform. 

 

I agree that on a performance/value ratio the Rafale doesn't score to well, it certainly has improved in that area, but it's in some ways still not competitive. 

Super Hornets have sold. Buyers would like to have it. Just the wrong kind.

 

Rafale offers yesterday's solutions (badly executed and built, and all Dassault's and Thales' fault.) today. It may be rescued if the French allow the US, or someone (Italy or Israel) a crack at fixing it, but that gets into a question of national hubris on many sides. There is still a lot of American anger at the French for some of their industrial espionage pulled off in the 1990s. As for Dassault, they don't want some outsiders (any outsiders) to show how easily most of the stupid choices and idiotic mistakes that they made in that bird can be fixed   

 

Just is the way it is. The Swedes aren't proud. They asked for American help and got it. As a result, Gripens sell.

       

 

Super Hornets have sold. Buyers would like to have it. Just the wrong kind.


The Swedes are proud enough, but they didn't have a choice. They lacked the expertise wrt the engines as this was given up at some point and the funds of a country with such a small population are limited as well. The Swedes opted for a solution which was most viable for them and they were successful in doing this. At times of economical crisis, shrinking defence budgets and limited military requirements the Gripen is a more viable option than the Rafale.

 

Where and from whom do you think the French stole all of that tech?*  http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emcrook.gif" align="absmiddle" border="0" alt="" />

 

As for the US stealing tech, sure they steal from their enemies. The Russians, for example, are not stupid and the Americans would be crazy not to reverse engineer captured and acquired relevant Russian tech. 

 

* and how soon after it reached the PRCs, (aside from some American corporate traitors like LORAL)  

 

 

Where and from whom do you think the French stole all of that tech?*  http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emcrook.gif" alt="" align="absmiddle" border="0" />

The Americans are "borrowing" technology from their allies as well, not just from their enemies. And if nothing is wrong with the US stealing such technology, why is it an issue wrt others for you!?

1. The US bought and licensed from Britain. Even did from Italy and Japan. What we stole  was from enemies at war with us.

 

2. That fairly sums up both  Thales and Dassault in their dealings with the US, Germany, Italy, and the UK. They are thieves

 

 

H.