The Rafale is being built rather slowly. The line will be open for at least another 10 years (& probably more) for France.
Rafale loses out again?
- Thread starter Musashi_kenshin
- Start date
Scorpion82
New Member
There should be some 40-50 Rafales in total. Production run is planned to continue until 2023.
So, til 2023 there is still time to gain some requirement.
May be that € will drop out in future and will permit more countries to choose the european fighters.......
contedicavour
New Member
The Rafale's difficulty with exports is just another proof that Europeans should cluster around a single type of aircraft, fund it appropriately and limit delays and then push strongly and together on exports. Otherwise American and Russian planes will just own the markets.
Yes the Rafale was needed to have a carrier jet, but it would still have been better for France to join Typhoon and buy F18E/F for their carriers. Dassault is doing good on civilian aircrafts and would certainly have negotiated a sizeable portion of Typhoon work if it had remained with the consortium.
Anyway, if Morocco doesn't buy Rafales (a whole airshow was delayed until after Sarkozy's visit to make sure bad news wasn't simultaneous with his visit...) it still leaves Libya, Brazil, and potentially India, Switzerland and why not Egypt.
cheers
Yes the Rafale was needed to have a carrier jet, but it would still have been better for France to join Typhoon and buy F18E/F for their carriers. Dassault is doing good on civilian aircrafts and would certainly have negotiated a sizeable portion of Typhoon work if it had remained with the consortium.
Anyway, if Morocco doesn't buy Rafales (a whole airshow was delayed until after Sarkozy's visit to make sure bad news wasn't simultaneous with his visit...) it still leaves Libya, Brazil, and potentially India, Switzerland and why not Egypt.
cheers
Umm, France was in Typhoon. When it was still the Fighter 90. Project didn't move fast enough for them, so they split in 1985 and built their own spin-off, which flew in 1991 already.
And the F/A-18E/F... not around at that time either. France was considering F/A-18A/B in the early 80s for Foch and Clememceau (to replace F-8E in fleet defense).
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #127
The problem was French arrogance, in that they kept making unreasonable demands. It's time they realise they don't run Europe anymore and accept work & project control has to be shared out evenly.
I don't see any of those countries buying Rafale due to the cost - Egypt especially as it gets military aid from the US (which has to be spent on US equipment). Switzerland's budget is not very big and it couldn't afford many. If it wanted a new plane I think it would either go for the F-35 or Gripen.
To be fair, I know both sides still have bitter memories of how the other acted during the Jaguar Program. Thus a joint European fighter developed between Breguet and BAC's follow-on entities in Dassault and BAE was always going to be a difficult undertaking - the history of competition and acrimony is just too intense.
Again, let’s move away from the chauvinism and state reality.
Dassault would love to not have to share Neuron development - it’s in their business interest for starters.
However, it needs the funding - Eurofighter, Hawk sales and in this isolated instance (IMO) the MoD appear to be unusually generous. Dassault have no comparable funding source, the French Government demanded it open up Neuron to other European partners in fear it would have to foot the bill.
Thus linking up with SAAB and others is not only welcome but also a necessity if France is to maintain some form of independence in the UCAV sector.
Moderator Comment:
Anyway genleman, lets try and not stray off-topic and good luck to both England and France in tonight's Rugby Union World Cup... Rugby League far much better!!
Last edited:
The MN is on record as saying in the 1980s that the F-18A met its requirements. The objections to buying it were from Dassault & its supporters.
http://frenchnavy.free.fr/projects/hornet/hornet.htm
The MN changed its (official) mind when the government leant on it, but was furious in private at having to carry on with F-8s which should have been in museums, for many years. BTW, if the MN had bought F-18A when it wanted to, i.e. 20 years ago, Rafale would be the leading candidate to replace it - after replacing the SEMs.
The Eurofighter could easily have met French requirements, if France had stayed in the programme & thus been able to influence the design. The specifications were still being discussed when France quit. The real disagreement was over organisational arrangements: France left because the other countries refused to accept French demands for domination of the project, & insisted on control being shared in accordance with investment.
Consider what the situation would be now, if France was fully involved:
- a carrier-capable Eurofighter as a contender for the Royal Navy.
- France sharing in Eurofighter exports
- France having an aircraft to sell backed by multiple buyers, so potential customers would not fear being "orphaned"
- four other partners paying for integration of a wide range of weapons, thus making the aircraft more attractive to buyers
Overall, France would probably have gained much more than it lost.
I think Gripen is the ideal aircraft for Switzerland. It might have been designed to their requirements. Compact (should fit in their mountain hangars), short T/O & landing run, servicing designed for dispersed, austere, bases, low operating costs. The limited range & payload aren't problems. Systems & performance perfectly adequate. Ditto for Austria, & if Saab hadn't taken the Austrians for granted & tried to overcharge (a mistake they're unlikely to repeat), that contract was theirs for the taking.
contedicavour
New Member
I didn't want to start an argument over French procurement :shudder
though I'll say that the fact that French industry left the Eurofighter programme (yes I'm aware that France was inside until the mid-80s) actually left more space for the defence industries of the remaining 4 countries. While R&D costs were thus higher than with France in the programme, Germany-Italy-UK-Spain are now receiving a better return on investment (especially since the Saudi and Austrian orders). Dassault is remaining afloat because of its excellent civilian business, while the military one is losing money because of insufficient orders.
cheers
though I'll say that the fact that French industry left the Eurofighter programme (yes I'm aware that France was inside until the mid-80s) actually left more space for the defence industries of the remaining 4 countries. While R&D costs were thus higher than with France in the programme, Germany-Italy-UK-Spain are now receiving a better return on investment (especially since the Saudi and Austrian orders). Dassault is remaining afloat because of its excellent civilian business, while the military one is losing money because of insufficient orders.
cheers
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Even moreso when you take into account that the Swiss only operate fighters in the air defence role, with little to no A2G capability.
The AMRAAM/AIM-9X-IRIS-T in combination with the Gripen makes it perfectly suited to Switzerlands requirement.
Like their F/A-18's however, they are easily configurable for A2G operations if their requirements evolve...
An advanced Gripen option would probably be the most suitable aircraft given the current models have few benefits over the Swiss existing C/D model Hornets...
A Advanced gripien would be neat for the Swiss.
AESA METOR compadible and all the advantages of the the Gripian which is seems very well suited to the Swiss doctrine [do consripits servise planes in Swiserland i knew that they flew hunters].contedicavour
New Member
Switzerland is litterally encircled by Typhoon operating countries - opting for it would reduce training, maintenance and logistics costs and make things easier for international exercises that are becoming frequent.
Rafale would use weapons systems that are different from the ones the Swiss are using aboard the F18s (buy a whole new stock of MICA AAMs for instance instead of Amraam). Rafale is also, for the moment at least, mostly A2G since it is replacing Jaguars and Mirage F1.
Gripen is the cheapest alternative and the closest to the F5E/F it would be replacing.
Let's see who wins...
cheers
Rafale would use weapons systems that are different from the ones the Swiss are using aboard the F18s (buy a whole new stock of MICA AAMs for instance instead of Amraam). Rafale is also, for the moment at least, mostly A2G since it is replacing Jaguars and Mirage F1.
Gripen is the cheapest alternative and the closest to the F5E/F it would be replacing.
Let's see who wins...
cheers
Not quite encircled. France is to the west.
Only reduces costs if you share facilities with the neighbours. And Gripen is operated by countries close enough that logistics sharing is almost equally easy, & France is next door, so that argument applies to all three - and will apply to F-35 when Italy gets it. Also, it's probably outweighed by Gripen being cheaper to operate.
Also, surely part of the point of international exercises is to train against dissimilar types.
hmm,not quite.in fact it was the fact that the other countries wouldnt agree to using the french design,france having the design lead and also the bulk of the manufacturing!
Well, isn't that the same as "you're not fast enough for us" in a way?
in a very lateral sense although i think that it being called a dassault rather than eurofighter was the prime driving force,not lead in schedules!:vampWell, isn't that the same as "you're not fast enough for us" in a way?