Eurofighter vs Rafale
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As some posters have mentioned operational results, I feel the need to add another aircraft to the debate.........And one which I feel would be far better than both in the current theatres!
The Canberra
Not the RAF one but the USAF copy one, the B57. It had very good visibility and low light TV etc. Long endurance, very strong and plenty of kinetic bang stuff.
Back to normality, a quick question.
When did the RAF receive its first Typhoon (in reality, and not in PR speak), and when did the Armee d le'air receive their first Rafale?
The Canberra
Not the RAF one but the USAF copy one, the B57. It had very good visibility and low light TV etc. Long endurance, very strong and plenty of kinetic bang stuff.
Back to normality, a quick question.
When did the RAF receive its first Typhoon (in reality, and not in PR speak), and when did the Armee d le'air receive their first Rafale?
As I said four years ago:
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...ml#post3128645
I think that has stood the test of time pretty well. Although from a customer standpoint, the big issue today is which (if indeed either of them) has the better, more robust-against-economic/strategic-turbulence upgrade plan.
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...ml#post3128645
I think that has stood the test of time pretty well. Although from a customer standpoint, the big issue today is which (if indeed either of them) has the better, more robust-against-economic/strategic-turbulence upgrade plan.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Green
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Code:
A flight of either would be easy prey for opposing F-22s. GF
Irak?...noo
Libya? nooo...
Where are they???
This is starting to look more and more to my old schooldays recess philosophical conversations...
A flight of either would be easy prey for opposing F-22s.
So it's just as well that nobody can afford to buy, support, operate and deploy them, and that "nobody" may well, in the medium term, include the USAF.
So it's just as well that nobody can afford to buy, support, operate and deploy them, and that "nobody" may well, in the medium term, include the USAF.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think as Europe, we failed bringing up the right aircraft after the cold war.
We spent tens of billions in a Eurofighter that has no stealth, thrust vectoring, a lot of range and needs to be rebuild to offer credible AtoA capabilities.
An interceptor can carry bombs, but there is more.
We spent tens of billions in a Eurofighter that has no stealth, thrust vectoring, a lot of range and needs to be rebuild to offer credible AtoA capabilities.
An interceptor can carry bombs, but there is more.
Until Uncle Spam equips F-22 with a datalink which is compatible with all other players (i.e. Link 16) it isn't going to deploy anywhere in a coalition environment....
Never mind, I'm sure Alaska's nice....
Never mind, I'm sure Alaska's nice....
But you can't use Link 16 because when you transmit in a way that allows lots of people to pick up your message, you also let lots of other people know you are there, and where you are, and the last time I looked, the whole point of this stealthy business was somewhat opposed to that concept.
So instead you have the secret-squirrel pencil beam link that only talks to other F-22s - but wait, there's a fix for that, you just transmit data back to a Global Hawk that then relays on the Link 16...
Until someone on the other side says, "err, what's the Global Hawk stooging around there for, outside its sensor range?"
So instead you have the secret-squirrel pencil beam link that only talks to other F-22s - but wait, there's a fix for that, you just transmit data back to a Global Hawk that then relays on the Link 16...
Until someone on the other side says, "err, what's the Global Hawk stooging around there for, outside its sensor range?"
But you can't use Link 16 because when you transmit in a way that allows lots of people to pick up your message, you also let lots of other people know you are there, and where you are, and the last time I looked, the whole point of this stealthy business was somewhat opposed to that concept.
F-22 - so stealthy as to be useless as a coalition player.
To clarify the designation pod debate.
A RAF Typhoon departs from Gioia del Colle, equipped with Enhanced Paveway II bombs, air to air missiles and a Litening pod in support of the UN sanctioned No Fly Zone over Libya. 16 April 2011 Picture: Sergeant Pete Mobbs RAF, Crown Copyright/MOD 2011
http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafi...llamy1_big.jpg
http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafi...llamy2_big.jpg
http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafi...llamy3_big.jpg
From page 2 of Typhoon and Tornado gallery.
RAF - Typhoon and Tornado
TJ
A RAF Typhoon departs from Gioia del Colle, equipped with Enhanced Paveway II bombs, air to air missiles and a Litening pod in support of the UN sanctioned No Fly Zone over Libya. 16 April 2011 Picture: Sergeant Pete Mobbs RAF, Crown Copyright/MOD 2011
http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafi...llamy1_big.jpg
http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafi...llamy2_big.jpg
http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafi...llamy3_big.jpg
From page 2 of Typhoon and Tornado gallery.
RAF - Typhoon and Tornado
TJ
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: FR
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ Archimedes, perfect abstract it seems
A balanced conclusion, too
@ airborne_artist, may I suggest to use a modified droppable fuel tank for your golf clubs ? Both aircraft do carry such tanks.
@ Geehovah
It indeed was one of the reasons. One other reason (and this being as important as the weight issue, if not more) was the A2G importance as noted by keesje.
(...)
Rafale turned out well, according to its users. Not an export success so far, but clearly multirole by now (just in time for Libyan ops), and slightly ahead of Typhoon on that particular aspect.
@ Trim Stab
Well, on a side note on this :
- the EC 1/7 Provence squadron, first AdlA unit on the Rafale, now(*) flies with single pilot on board (even in Rafale Bs) for A2A, A2G, Recce roles.
- the 12.F (naval squadron) only uses Rafale Ms (carrier version - single seater), and does A2G amongst many other roles (A2A, Refuel, Recce, Nuke)
- on the other hand, the EB 1/91 Gascogne uses only two seaters Rafale Bs with a pilot and a WSO according to the AdlA rules for its main role (nuclear deterence).
(*) i.e. since a separate & dedicated OCU, ETR 2/92 Aquitaine, was created.
@ Jollygreengiant64
Rafale does indeed look better IMO. Mais bon, les goûts et les couleurs !!
@ barnstormer1968
The first user of the Rafale was the Marine Nationale:
- first two aircrafts (Rafale M - F1 i.e. A2A role only) delivered in december 2000
- 10th aircraft (last F1) delivered in october 2002
- FOC on Rafale F1 in june 2004
- first Rafale M - F2 (limited multirole) delivered in may 2006
- FOC on Rafale F2 in may 2008
As for the Armée de l'Air:
- deliveries begun in late 2004, directly on the F2 standart
- FOC on Rafale F2 in june 2006
All F2s have (MN & AdlA) have now been upgraded to the F3 (full multirole) standart. F1s are stored, awaiting upgrade.
Cheers
AZR
A balanced conclusion, too
@ airborne_artist, may I suggest to use a modified droppable fuel tank for your golf clubs ? Both aircraft do carry such tanks.
@ Geehovah
I'm struggling here but IIRC, the reason the French left the project was that they wanted a 9 ton aircraft and Eurofighter was well in excess of a 10 ton "girth".
(...)
That said, I have no knowledge of how Rafale turned out. Typhoon wasn't a bad compromise in the end.
(...)
That said, I have no knowledge of how Rafale turned out. Typhoon wasn't a bad compromise in the end.
(...)
Rafale turned out well, according to its users. Not an export success so far, but clearly multirole by now (just in time for Libyan ops), and slightly ahead of Typhoon on that particular aspect.
@ Trim Stab
They also realised that a two seat version was better in dedicated ground attack role.
- the EC 1/7 Provence squadron, first AdlA unit on the Rafale, now(*) flies with single pilot on board (even in Rafale Bs) for A2A, A2G, Recce roles.
- the 12.F (naval squadron) only uses Rafale Ms (carrier version - single seater), and does A2G amongst many other roles (A2A, Refuel, Recce, Nuke)
- on the other hand, the EB 1/91 Gascogne uses only two seaters Rafale Bs with a pilot and a WSO according to the AdlA rules for its main role (nuclear deterence).
(*) i.e. since a separate & dedicated OCU, ETR 2/92 Aquitaine, was created.
@ Jollygreengiant64
Rafale does indeed look better IMO. Mais bon, les goûts et les couleurs !!
@ barnstormer1968
The first user of the Rafale was the Marine Nationale:
- first two aircrafts (Rafale M - F1 i.e. A2A role only) delivered in december 2000
- 10th aircraft (last F1) delivered in october 2002
- FOC on Rafale F1 in june 2004
- first Rafale M - F2 (limited multirole) delivered in may 2006
- FOC on Rafale F2 in may 2008
As for the Armée de l'Air:
- deliveries begun in late 2004, directly on the F2 standart
- FOC on Rafale F2 in june 2006
All F2s have (MN & AdlA) have now been upgraded to the F3 (full multirole) standart. F1s are stored, awaiting upgrade.
Cheers
AZR
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do either compare to a big ugly aircraft with a bloody great bug gatling gun, two bulk standard commercial engines and a job lot of Titanium?
Pity "they" won't spend to open the line again...