Spruce:
Two thirds of the six names I'd have suggested were chaps who have retired recently.
As to 'petty character assassination' I'm not questioning PC's character or motivation, I'm just providing a little balance.
His piece has received massive prominence (printed in Flight, repeated in full in one of the issues of the Daily at Dubai, and ad nauseam across the net and in the blogosphere), and Dassault have exploited it remorselessly and have encouraged its wider dissemination. A few gentle rejoinders and corrections on line isn't 'banging on', and it reflects what has been, in my experience, a widely held unease with the piece. Very many people shared my concerns about the article.
The entire point is that this was NOT in any way measured, calm, or analytical (unlike your own stuff, which is unimpeachable).
Instead you had a TP who hasn't flown a frontline jet for more than 20 years, whose frontline experience was on the Harrier GR3 and SHAR FRS1, and whose post ETPS test flying was at RAE (later DRA) Bedford where his job was pure Aerospace Research flying. He did not serve at Boscombe Down and thus gained no experience of clearance/assessment/’operational fitness for purpose’ testing. You had a TP who had not flown anything remotely comparable with Rafale, so no wonder he thought that it was the best thing he had flown. Put me in a PC-21 and I'd rate it the best turboprop trainer I'd ever flown.....
Collins' military test flying career ended in 1993 when he joined Fokker (F60 & F70 airliners), moving to Dornier (Do 328 turboprop and 328 Jet), then to KLM, before joining Raytheon as UK TP/project pilot on the ASTOR Sentinel.
A distinguished senior TP judged that he had: "little recent, relevant experience that would provide him with any real basis for comparison with the Rafale."
Despite this, PC felt happy to conclude that: “If I had to go into combat, on any mission, against anyone, I would, without question, choose the Rafale.”
He backed this with what my TP source described this as "bad Test Pilot analysis."
Flight enthusiastically validated this OTT conclusion, however, using the coverline "Rafale Rules" and the teaser “Why we think favourite for UAE fighter contest is most complete combat aircraft we have flown.”
I admire your loyalty to Flight, but this article was a joke, and the way in which it was handled marked a poor judgement call, though one of your advertisers must be delighted by it.
A balancing point of view is that "The evaluation was rather cursory and the concluding superlatives are more journalistic than real conclusions and recommendations. If he would risk his life in any combat situation based on the evidence of what he actually saw...... words fail me!”
The 'Rafale Rules' piece marked a real departure from the high standards set by Flight's previous TP, the great John Farley, who might have been away from operational flying for many years, but whose air power brain and insight put yours, mine and Collins' to shame. I wonder how he'd have rated Rafale?