Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: 6*F-22 vs 6*Typhoon vs 6*Rafale in the UAE?!
giblets    11/16/2009 4:48:58 AM
According to both Flight Global, and Defence News, other than attending the Dubai airshow, the USAF, RAF, and FAF each sent 6 of their finest fighter aircraft to the desert Kingdom to take part in multinational exercises. Other than adding much fuel to the fire for forum members here! It raises many questions (such as why the USAF was unable to send 1 F-22 to Paris, and can now send 6 to the UAE, despite no drop in operational tempo). And will the F22 and Typhoon not be in the air at the same time again?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Das Kardinal       1/5/2010 5:13:23 AM

Those of you jittery about Typhoon. Don't be. The Rafale crowd had their usual bugles out to blare up their bird, for the second quarter sales 2010 and used the UAE exercises as a ploy. Dassault is very desperate. The F-35 is about to enter the list and when it hits the rounds, the Squall is done. The Typhoon is STILL competitive.   

I agree that the F-35 is Rafale's most dangerous competitor. But it doesn't look like Typhoon's going to stay vry competitive. Both the British and the Germans are apparently reducing their fleet size aims, even trying to resell already-purchased ones in the German case. In fact, the F35 will probably a decent A2A platform by virtue of stealth and state-of-the-art radar (plus DAS) which eats straight into prime Typhoon territory. It is going to be a better striker too if L-M's marketing is to be believed. The Typhoon is going to be increasingly squeezed out, as the Eurofighter nations are also F-35 buyers. 
Nor has Typhoon come out outstandingly in recent technical evaluations AFAIK. It's not a contender in Brazil any more. The UAE are not going to buy it even if they don't purchase any Rafales (they'd buy American planes). Only politics can save it, for it's not significantly cheaper than a Rafale and it does less (and it's not combat proven, la la la).
In the Swiss evaluation Gripen looks like a more cost-effective competitor for what the Swiss need.
The trend, in my admittedly non-professional eyes, is Typhoon quietly vanishing from the international market with Gripen NG, Super Hornet, F-35 remaining in competition (leaving the Russian birds aside). Of course future events may prove me wrong, we'll see. 
 
Quote    Reply

One Five Five Echo       1/5/2010 7:28:35 AM
But as usual, any professional comment favorable to Rafale will be taken with a ton of salt and hefty doubt regarding the competence of the source (going so far as accusing them of blatant lying) while comments against it will be taken at face value, like John Lake's, and anyone asking questions will be cast down as a dumb, biased, Sampaix-possessed fanboy. 
It is a dishonest way of looking at things.
 
You reap what you sow.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       1/5/2010 8:49:45 AM



Those of you jittery about Typhoon. Don't be. The Rafale crowd had their usual bugles out to blare up their bird, for the second quarter sales 2010 and used the UAE exercises as a ploy. Dassault is very desperate. The F-35 is about to enter the list and when it hits the rounds, the Squall is done. The Typhoon is STILL competitive.  
I agree that the F-35 is Rafale's most dangerous competitor. But it doesn't look like Typhoon's going to stay very competitive. Both the British and the Germans are apparently reducing their fleet size aims, even trying to resell already-purchased ones in the German case. In fact, the F35 will probably a decent be A2A platform by virtue of stealth and state-of-the-art radar (plus DAS) which eats straight into prime Typhoon territory. It is going to be a better striker too if L-M's marketing is to be believed. The Typhoon is going to be increasingly squeezed out, as the Eurofighter nations are also F-35 buyers. 
 
1. Its the best out there. Of course it will be the most dangerous competitor.  The DASS system in the F-35 is doubly dangerous in that if you change the interface (put in tele-operation) you have a ready-made UCAS.
2. Economics and threat assessment, not the plane. The Americans (Gates) made the same stupid set of decisions using the same excuses. The difference is that LockMart screwed up their plane for what was needed and expected, then LIED about it, while Eurofighter delivered exactly they promised. The Typhoon remains a superb air to air combat aircraft with an ermerging air to ground capability.
3. The Typhoon was supposed to be the air to air half, the F-35 the bomb truck. Smaller Russian air force=fewer air superiority fighters. The EU needs bomb trucks that work. 
     
Nor has Typhoon come out outstandingly in recent technical evaluations AFAIK. It's not a contender in Brazil any more. The UAE are not going to buy it even if they don't purchase any Rafales (they'd buy American planes). Only politics can save it, for it's not significantly cheaper than a Rafale and it does less as much or more (and it's not combat proven, la la la).
 
4. It is cheaper than Rafale and it has WON foreign sales (two) against American and Russian aircraft.
5. A buyer buys American  to get the Heinemann interface and guided weapons technology base. The French do not have this. The British, (Eurofighter) and the Russians do. The Russians copied and the British bought in. The Swedes USE American tech base to build their good little fighters (weapons, radars, avionics, ENGINES.)    

In the Swiss evaluation Gripen looks like a more cost-effective competitor for what the Swiss need.
 
6. We shall see. As the F-5 is a low-end of a high-low mix, I agree. I still think the Swiss are in a wait and see pattern.  

The trend, in my admittedly non-professional eyes, is Typhoon quietly vanishing from the international market with Gripen NG, Super Hornet, F-35 remaining in competition (leaving the Russian birds aside). Of course future events may prove me wrong, we'll see. 
 
7. The Russians have nothing really new out there as most of their work is Flanker evolved. Super Hornet is also very derivative. Gripen needs a growth spurt. Sheer power matters. Typhoon still has room to grow thrust and there are customers it will fit who need it to make that iterative leap. Its politics, not tech, that holds it back-not the plane. Its not a turkey like some LockMart or Dassault bungled designs I know.
 

 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       1/5/2010 4:17:59 PM




So here's another source for you - Jon Lake current defense-editor of arabian aerospace(ex. defense-ed for flight daily news).






ht*p://typhoon.starstreak.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1842&st=0&sk=t&sd=a



 Jon Lake on 18 Dec 2009 23:28







"An RAF pilot who participated in the actual exercise said to me that: "We have no idea how good it is in comparison to us as we are not allowed to merge with it in dogfights."















A senior industry source (who also didn't want to be named) said:















"The stories about the Rafale vs Typhoon are an unjustified and unfair representation of what actually occurred.















In the exercise sorties Typhoons and Rafales worked together on the same team! There were red Typhoon/Rafale combos and blue Typhoon/Rafale combos.



















During the CT (continuation training) sorties outside ATLC both Typhoon and Rafale squadrons were conducting work-up sorties for their junior pilots and yes - mistakes were made on both sides where some results like those quoted did occur (but both for and against Rafale) - however to make a big deal about training results would be unfair and entirely unrepresentative.?







 







I hope to learn more now that 3 Squadron are back.















I think that Rafale probably did well against F-22, but in that context, it just means they took longer to be wiped out."







 


















I am just adding this to the thread as it's not (to my knowledge) been posted here - you may draw your own conclusions (including a post on the subject) about the veractity of the quote/source.







 







Also it sounds (from what I've seen on french forums) like the engagements publicised were WVR, making them of limited importance when assessing real air-superiority capability (aside from all the other reasons that people have explained about DACT of course)

















R







I wondered when this was posted if it would be acceptable and what a suprise - it doesnt support the Rafale Alles Uber brigade so straight away its debunked as face saving and that no one would let their aircraft be a sitting target on exercise (WRONG)



 



The
 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       1/5/2010 4:18:05 PM




So here's another source for you - Jon Lake current defense-editor of arabian aerospace(ex. defense-ed for flight daily news).






ht*p://typhoon.starstreak.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1842&st=0&sk=t&sd=a



 Jon Lake on 18 Dec 2009 23:28







"An RAF pilot who participated in the actual exercise said to me that: "We have no idea how good it is in comparison to us as we are not allowed to merge with it in dogfights."















A senior industry source (who also didn't want to be named) said:















"The stories about the Rafale vs Typhoon are an unjustified and unfair representation of what actually occurred.















In the exercise sorties Typhoons and Rafales worked together on the same team! There were red Typhoon/Rafale combos and blue Typhoon/Rafale combos.



















During the CT (continuation training) sorties outside ATLC both Typhoon and Rafale squadrons were conducting work-up sorties for their junior pilots and yes - mistakes were made on both sides where some results like those quoted did occur (but both for and against Rafale) - however to make a big deal about training results would be unfair and entirely unrepresentative.?







 







I hope to learn more now that 3 Squadron are back.















I think that Rafale probably did well against F-22, but in that context, it just means they took longer to be wiped out."







 


















I am just adding this to the thread as it's not (to my knowledge) been posted here - you may draw your own conclusions (including a post on the subject) about the veractity of the quote/source.







 







Also it sounds (from what I've seen on french forums) like the engagements publicised were WVR, making them of limited importance when assessing real air-superiority capability (aside from all the other reasons that people have explained about DACT of course)

















R







I wondered when this was posted if it would be acceptable and what a suprise - it doesnt support the Rafale Alles Uber brigade so straight away its debunked as face saving and that no one would let their aircraft be a sitting target on exercise (WRONG)



 



The
 
Quote    Reply

Das Kardinal       1/7/2010 9:55:38 AM



See this is why its impossible to debate the Rafale - nobody on here has said it didnt happen -all thats been said is lets wait for more information  before drawing conclusions. I for one would be suspicious if the results were 7-1 the other way round.

But straight away any attempt to question debate or rationalise is percived as an attack on the rafale.

 


Hopefully more details will filter.
Or we could make a wish and the 30K pages-long Brazilian report will end up on the net :-D
 
Quote    Reply

StobieWan       1/7/2010 10:30:16 AM
This is the problem with the Rafale discussion - I'm genuinely interested in the aircraft, and I certainly don't detect any bias against it - but FS and BW have both made so many erroneous or simply untruthful claims about the aircraft that it's very hard not to flinch when the "R" word is used.

I suspect the Brazilian decision will come down to economics - the Rafale may be a more capable swing role fighter than the Gripen but it's better to have a package that has a few more aircraft, more spares and more missiles in the main. Both aircraft need to make a foreign sale to strengthen their hand in future bids they're involved in.

I'd very much like to know more about the DACT results as it's always interesting to find out what they were doing up there of course.

Ian
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       1/11/2010 8:25:47 PM
StobieWan   
Name errors I'm supposed to have done.
And which bias?
I'm backing my claims with links and proofs (often from american official sites when I can) and not fanboy claims.
 
Quote    Reply

StobieWan       1/12/2010 6:18:30 AM
There's no point, you've been picked up on all of them at the time by various posters and what usually happens is you simply give up and ignore posts once you've been boxed into a corner, only to return with the exact same claim a little while later. In fact, several people have listed erroneous claims by yourself on separate threads and all it does is start the arguments over again. 

Bias wise, I've said I don't feel there is a bias against the Rafale, most people here would be happy to talk about the A/C without feeling the need to run it down or be rude about it.

Your links are often poorly sourced or fail to support your argument unfortunately and this is something that's been demonstrated many times. 

Ian




StobieWan   

Name errors I'm supposed to have done.

And which bias?

I'm backing my claims with links and proofs (often from american official sites when I can) and not fanboy claims.
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       1/12/2010 5:15:28 PM
Like on time measurement components sourcing?
LOL
Hamilcar was proven wrong an other time.
You can not find a single fault of my part on this site;when I don't know, I don't post or I mention it is speculations.
 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics