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: Rafale Proves Itself
SYSOP    8/7/2011 7:59:23 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54   NEXT
heraldabc    GF is an EXPERT.   12/1/2011 12:23:50 PM
You are not Holloweene. You would do well to LISTEN and LEARN. There are reasons Rafale fails.
 
If you look at the GERMAN design shops of MBDA, you would not have made your stupid statement, by the way. Further; if you think that crap products like ASTER and MICA are anything to brag about, then you live in Delusionville.   
 
PAVEWAY uses RAYTHEON tech, Holloweene. I would think if you know anything about this site, you would know where you stepped in it when you made that reference and addressed it to ME. DAMOCLES is coded for that LGB, but only because the US developed the stolen tech for it. No stolen tech, no pod, no LGBs for Rafale. It's that simple. As for other American guided weapons? Are you kidding?  
 
By the way, thanks for pointing out that it was French stolen American tech that you then sold to the Russians.  
 
I won't rehash the reams of words I wrote about the RBE2 and its myopia in either its PESA and still-not-working properly AESA configurations. Have they cured the sidelobe noise problem yet? The answer is NO. 
 
Do I trust the Washington Post, Washington Times, or the New York Times? Are you kidding again?  
 
 
Just because its in a newspaper, doesn't make it true.
 
Hamilcar
 
 
Quote    Reply

giblets       12/1/2011 12:50:07 PM
I've seen the quotes in the paper, but no-where on their site can I find the graph, or the review of the performance as quoted on Rafale News Blogspot? Anyone care to link?
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       12/1/2011 3:05:31 PM
Reminds me of:
 
 http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51T6f2JRi-L._SL500_AA300_.jpg" alt="" />http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51T6f2JRi-L._SL500_AA300_.jpg" width="300" height="300" alt="" />
 
And as you can see the EF is the bestest because it's on the cover.
 
 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       12/1/2011 4:09:08 PM
nothing to do with it ;)
 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       12/1/2011 4:12:29 PM
I lobe assumptions like paveway integration was stolen tech etc etc made me laugh a lot, kinda tired now...
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/2/2011 12:51:00 AM
Once again, if you were a journalist, could you publish a 550 pages report? No.

a nd if you had any idea of what I am talking about rather than blithely presenting material as you have, then you'd realise that in tender/platform evaluations there is an executive summary. The summary is broken up into the critical assessment blocks as identified in the initial release package - it is not presented in this fashion. what you have is another uncontrolled snapshot.

I would add again, that tender eval reports are not released into the public domain because they are militarily and commercially sensitive - the other vendors are not even told the specifics, but of lack of success against block requirements in the broadest terms. we don't say - jet a was faster, jet b was less efficient. the detail is quite complete - because it has to survive a challenge from the other vendors if they seek to go to court/arbitration. dumbing it down to "cheapest" would see the other vendors immediaterly raising a challenge

You have to sum it up. If you had read carefully you would have noticed the journal copyright under the graph. which has got zero to do with the accuracy of the extract as presented.  

again see above

Yes of course its a leak, The Basler Zeitung stated that they could get the confidential reports...But i guess you dint even try to go and have a look. Please do it, surf a bit on swiss press sites...They are, whatever language and political opinion, unanimous to say that Rafale had won the tech eval.

and if its a leak then you would be expecting a challenge as the other panelists are within their right to contest that the integrity of the entire evaluation has been impugned and compromised. companies take leaks seriously. the germans for example have challenged governments on the integrity of the evaluation teams when its happened to them. I would be expecting the swiss (of all people) to be rapidly running an investigation team if any of this material was actual material released to the reviewing agency for approval by the govt


 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/2/2011 12:52:21 AM

Btw this journal is not a tabloid. If the Washington post or the New york times stated they could get a copy of a confidential report would you trust them? Yes.

if the new york times did something similar you could guarantee that the americans would be sending in forensic investigations. In the 30+ years I have been involved with various military projects as a contractor/consultant, and as a govt worker I have seen maybe 2 projects where accurate information was released to the media - and those releases were drafts and not close to the final report. the govts sent in federal investigation teams and issued warrants against the media outlet

If a former USAF commander said "every professionals knew X plane was the best would you trust him? Yes again.

not without seeing the selection and assessment criteria - to just accept a oneliner is absurd. we don't allow companies to spend (with aircraft assessments) $10+m and spend $1m on an assessment team to give out stupid one liners. Its why companies are debriefed

If US Press was unanimous to say that one plane had one the eval tech qould you trust it? Probably yes

no, I'd argue the same, and I have done so in the past - unfort for you you are taking the jingoistic approach and have a need to defend the result on that basis, and have no comprehension of wht the merits of that release are subject to more robust analysis

If you had chosen a plane as government would you say it fits? Yes

yes, and we write reports that are not presented in such a manner. again, I have seen first hand UK, US, French. German, Spanish, Russian platform presentations and the corresponding Govt reports from a range of different countries - nobody dumbs them down in that fashion as it is completely out of context

If a foreign client head of govenment stated that financial issues were primary issue in its choice would you trust it? Yes.

no, because life and actual experience doing this for a job as both an assessor and as an employee of companies that submit proposals I know that its far more complex. Companies such as Thales, BAE, LM, NGC etc... don't get sound bite feedback

I just said that Rafale had won eval tech, quoting sources instead of opinions. The only answer i got is that an evaluation report doesnt look like a diary article (what a surprise!) and the usual rafale/french bashing from the blues brothers duo (aussie and herald).

and you take the personal country approach again because you're being driven by national jingoism rather than any understanding of how we do these things in the real world. and on that basis I assume that you're a kid with zero experience outside of the internet. If you see this as rafale bashing then your comprehension skills are even more challenged than I thought.  you're quick on the juvenile response but short on comprehension on how evaluations and assessments are conducted.  You obviously know little about australians or you'd know that we're more critical of our own processes than any other country.  

I'm not an expert, but I know my trade and I've worked in this sector at both the industry and government level.  whether you understand that or not, what it means is that I do actually have a functional working knowledge of how these things are conducted.  thats a whole lot better than a "copy and paste" expert.

 
Quote    Reply

giblets       12/2/2011 4:27:08 AM
As gf0012-aust and others have pointed out, the evaluation report does not go into much detail. The two graphs, offensive and defensive cases have absolutely no data on how they were calculated.
 
It could be simply done on aerodynamic factors, how much weight was put on radar capabilities etc. We just don't know, and until we see the alleged 500page report in full, we will not know. We already know that this report contradicts statements made by the Swiss Government already.
 
We also know from various statement that in various areas (inc. cost), the  Gripen came out top. We know that Saab was offering more aircraft, and far less infrastructure change for a start.
 
Overall, this document, and the reports that we have been given are far too vague to give us a good understanding of the results. Understandably there are some vocal supporters of the Rafale in Switzerland, and, based upon a number of different criteria, Rafale will have beaten Gripen/ Typhoon, however, there are a number of areas where the opposite will be true. 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

somnophobe       12/2/2011 5:49:08 AM
What I find really funny is seeing a French poster thumping his chest about the Rafale being rated a whopping 14% better than the F/A-18C.  Considering it costs more than twice what new-build F/A-18Cs would cost today, it is not surprising they went with Gripen instead, which comes closest in terms of price/performance.
 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc       12/2/2011 8:43:10 AM
What the French can and cannot do.
 
 

U.S. Army Receiver May Get French Pod

By pierre tran
Published: 18 Jun 13:18 EDT (17:18 GMT)
http://www.defensenews.com/images/print.gif" alt="Print" class="verticle" />  Print...  |  http://www.defensenews.com/images/email.gif" alt="Print" class="verticle" />  Email...

PARIS - L-3 Communications is in talks with Thales to potentially link up the U.S. company's Rover portable receiver to the Damocles reconnaissance pod built by the French systems company for the Rafale combat aircraft, an L-3 executive said June 18 at the Eurosatory trade show here.

The Rover allows troops on the ground to receive video pictures from aircraft, offering greater security and accuracy in air-ground operations.

International business development director Jim O'Donnel said Thales is interested in connecting the Damocles pod to the Rover, which is in service with the U.S. Army.

L-3 Communications and Safran's Sagem Défense & Sécurité said June 17 they have signed an agreement to develop a broadband connection that allows full-motion video to be transmitted on the French company's Felin infantry kit.

Under the agreement, the two companies would develop the Real Time-Situational Awareness Airborne Targeting System, which would allow a forward observer to send real-time pictures and coordinates to aircraft, using Sagem's JIM long-range goggles over a data link with the Rover terminal.

In other words, the French tried and failed to duplicate US tech and now that they cannot, they have gone hunting for a 'partner' whose tech they hope they can learn and then duplicate and sell as their own. 
 
This is typical French practice by the way.
 
Hamilcar
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics