Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Year of the Rafale

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Year of the Rafale

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 4th May 2015, 01:12
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RAAF test pilots rated the M2000 as one of the nicest aircraft they had ever flown during the selection process c.1979-1981. Other contenders were F-18L, F/A-18A and F-16A.

Trouble is, Australia had been burned by the French in refusing to support a Mirage IIIO deployment to SE Asia in the 60s, plus the M2000 was considered a little under-developed at the time.

The Hornet was the logical choice, as F-18L remained unsold to anyone despite its sparkling performance, and F-16A had no BVR AAM and they kept crashing.

Check out the book Hornets Down Under (McLaughlin 2005) and its sequel, Hornet Country (Moclair & McLaughlin 2014) for a great summary by the lead RAAF evaluation test pilot, WGCDR (later AVM) Bob Richardson.
FoxtrotAlpha18 is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 08:37
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Still better than the Brits getting in a lot of corruption to sell the Saudis a plane designed to intercept Soviet bombers and barely able to do anything more even 25 years after the end of the Cold War.
Rufus Shinra is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 12:04
  #23 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Qatar
Age: 68
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Arrow

Thanks FoxtrotAlpha18 for the informative post.

Both Mirage 2000 and F16 were a little bit under-developed at the end of the 70s - although the F16 had of course a couple of years lead.
Subsequent versions of both aircraft were more mature - F16C, 2000-5...

"Australia had been burned by the French in refusing to support a Mirage IIIO deployment to SE Asia in the 60s"
What a strange and new story - could we know a little bit more about it ? Why would a strong AF like the Australian one need support from a European one to deploy fighters to SE Asia (Butterworth I presume ?) They were not mature enough to move along by themselves ?

It's also true that Canada might join end of this year, let's wait and see. They should just cut the umbilical chord from US (Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow ...) Also please don't say "to please the French" because... french-speaking Canadians are not French ! (or next time I chat with an American, I will say : " oh I met one of your fellow citizens from Sydney" ....)
There might be also another terrific N°4 contract in the pipeline, and this time promise we will run onto the ceiling !
Reinhardt is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 12:25
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,578
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Dassault also claims that it buys more from Canada today than LockMart does, which is quite credible since the Falcon 2000, 7X and 8X are all P&WC-powered.

Rufus - I didn't know that the Tornado F3 was on offer.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 12:45
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Reinhardt
There is still memory (and caution) in the Australian Defence Department of the French due to their action in related to the ban on continuing to supply DEFA 30mm ammunition to Australia during the Vietnam war.
Plenty of maturity in the RAAF then, but naive trust in the French that is unlikely to be repeated.
Also involved in other bans at the same time were Swiss, Swedish and UK governments (Porter aircraft parts, Carl Gustav, and 1000lb bombs for Canberra aircraft). All of which left a memory in Australia.
US since then seen as a much more reliable supplier (and ally) than Europe, in our context.
rjtjrt is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 13:03
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by LowObservable
Rufus - I didn't know that the Tornado F3 was on offer.
You know perfectly well what I'm talking about. But, heh, guess sticking a few bombs for photo shoots doesn't make a plane multirole. Good thing the Tornado is still flying, though.

So, heh, talking about the French selling inadequate planes to other air forces is a bit of a laugh. Because then there would be the Austrian Air Force, stuck with Typhoons as expensive as the latest versions but with massively limited capabilities. I was just pointing out to dat581 that the pot should watch out around the kettle.
Rufus Shinra is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 14:14
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Europe
Age: 59
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 9 Posts
rjtjrt
Plenty of maturity in the RAAF then, but naive trust in the French that is unlikely to be repeated.
Also involved in other bans at the same time were Swiss, Swedish and UK governments.
All of which left a memory in Australia..
Hawk 127 / PC9 / 330 MRT / Tiger / MRH 90 / AS350 / EC135

RAAF chose the F18 because it was the most suitable aircraft for their needs, not because of events 20 years old at the time.

P.S : So I suppose that with such a good memory to which you reffer, Australia doesn't do business and has not a link with Vietnam and China (the first one killing your boys and the second one providing the weapons to the first one 50 years ago).
.

Last edited by HeliHenri; 4th May 2015 at 21:18.
HeliHenri is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 14:31
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 45
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Tiger and MRH90 were mistakes and none of the others have a combat role except maybe the Hawk 127. Can't see Britain holding back anything we wanted short of nuclear weapons these days.
dat581 is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 17:52
  #29 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Qatar
Age: 68
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Arrow

Tigers, NH 90.... beautiful machines which give a lot of satisfaction to many other countries. Of course it's not american - what a disappointment if you have been watching Hollywood movies since your early childhood
- and there is the Airbus 330 tanker...
- and the HMAS Success, a Durance-class tanker (same as French Navy, which has 5 of the type) (also exported to Saudi Arabia) ....
- and the submarines Scorpene, which might come down South before the end of the year (offered by a country with nuclear submarines, both attack and missiles-launchers - to the contrary of Japan and Germany)
The Australian MOD was visiting France two weeks ago :
Dcns Welcomes Australian Defence Minister To Cherbourg Shipyards | DCNS Group
But with US Marines now based in Darwin (!) I'm not surprised of the bias displayed by a vocal minority on this thread.
Reinhardt is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 20:52
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But with US Marines now based in Darwin (!) I'm not surprised of the bias displayed by a vocal minority on this thread.
Yaaawwwn

and the submarines Scorpene, which might come down South before the end of the year
Unlikely, but possible, not sure where the bookies have the odds but I'm guessing the Japs almost have it in the bag.


There are many reasons for defense procurement, one of them politics, sad but true. Our whole defense revolves around partnership with the Yanks, a fact of life. As such there will always be a modulation in what we get that, in relation to what lubes the relationship.

Continuity of supply is a potential problem that is taken very seriously.
rh200 is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 21:06
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
seems to me that Rafale has done its talking on the pitch, so to speak, and is getting the recognition it deserves.

Not doubting there may be other factors at play, but I doubt any of these countries would knowingly buy an inferior product....

As for end of production timing I suspect that Typhoon is the one now facing the more serious issues?
andrewn is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 21:49
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Henri and Reinhardt
Whatever! No interest in debating this with you two.

Last edited by rjtjrt; 5th May 2015 at 05:30.
rjtjrt is offline  
Old 4th May 2015, 22:39
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London
Age: 44
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
Fascinating how this thread is bringing out some brand new posters who have an identical posting style to a well known lunatic drench rafale troll who usually gets banned very quickly indeed.

The French have had to put some interesting deals in place to support this and I suspect called in a lot of favours to make these decisions happen.

Typhoon remains credible in a number of competitions, but rafale will have a boost from recent developments. But medium term good luck to the French affording a new design to replace it...
Jimlad1 is offline  
Old 5th May 2015, 02:57
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 45
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well the American aircraft the RAAF have bought recently have worked straight out of the box with no problems. F/A-18F and C-17 have insignificant changes such as the altimeter adjustment reads in millibars instead of inches of mercury and the MH-60R looks to be going the same way. Can't say the same for MRH90, Tiger or A330 Tankers.
dat581 is offline  
Old 5th May 2015, 05:37
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The French have produced some wonderful aircraft over time. I have no arguement with the manufacturers, just with past politicians.
Let us hope newer politicians have more integrity, although that is an oxymoron for nearly all the worlds politicians.
rjtjrt is offline  
Old 5th May 2015, 06:30
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jimlad1
Fascinating how this thread is bringing out some brand new posters who have an identical posting style to a well known lunatic drench rafale troll who usually gets banned very quickly indeed.
Cute accusations. Pointing out the other planes' flaws is now called trolling? Must explain the mindset of some people around. But, please, I am clearly a sockpuppet, it must explain everything. Of course.

The French have had to put some interesting deals in place to support this and I suspect called in a lot of favours to make these decisions happen.
Well, less corruption than in the Saudi situation, that's for sure. At least we don't need our prime minister to tell the guys investigating the accusations to drop them.

Typhoon remains credible in a number of competitions, but rafale will have a boost from recent developments. But medium term good luck to the French affording a new design to replace it...
Typhoon will remain credible only if its upgrades actually go through and it catches up to the Rafale. Depends on the political will of its manufacturers.
Rufus Shinra is offline  
Old 5th May 2015, 09:31
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Rufus,

Not the political will of its manufacturers - rather that of participating Governments, especially the UK.
jindabyne is offline  
Old 5th May 2015, 10:19
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by jindabyne
Rufus,

Not the political will of its manufacturers - rather that of participating Governments, especially the UK.
Apologies, that's what I meant by "manufacturers": manufacturer countries. I should have been more clear.

I have nothing against the engineers in charge of the Typhoon: they've been held back by idiotic management and bad political choices (both through political incompetence of the EF partners unwilling to spend the required money to keep the plane really competitive and geostrategical bad luck, which made the primary Typhoon mission moot while giving Rafale a lot more chances to shine).

One of the big problems, IMO, to the Typhoon is that the program did not have a single, well-established leader. Without it, everyone wants to save money while getting the whole package (I'm looking at you, Germany, ordering a lot of planes to get the industrial kickbacks and then cancelling tons of orders). And as for exports, the cacophony of these four countries isn't helping either. A good example is Iraq. When your average tinpot dictator with some cash looks at 2003, he sees that the Frogs (I'm French, so please, mods, don't kick me for that derogatory term) did their utmost to save Saddam's behind, both for practical reasons and because he was a good customer. The EF partners? Divided on the issue, each with different foreign military sales policies that are much more likely to end up with an embargo, and so on.

If the Brits had put their foot down when the French left, and said, "OK, now, Germany, Spain and Italy, I'm the leader here and what I say goes", it might not have been very cordial, but at least, there would be some visibility.
Rufus Shinra is offline  
Old 5th May 2015, 12:09
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,197
Received 390 Likes on 241 Posts
Reinhardt:
NH 90 might not be the best example to support your position. Beyond the extended development time, the current frustrations of some NH-90 users (see the Germans) takes the shine off. But they are still in service, so that's a plus.
Lonewolf_50 is online now  
Old 5th May 2015, 12:43
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London
Age: 44
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
I am not accusing rufous of direct sockpuppetry. However as always with rafale threads, I do find it a wonderful coincidence how the moment it is discussed, we so often get a range of new posters turn up using a peculiar form of syntax and grammar, determined to bash the typhoon, big up the rafale and generally be fairly unpleasant towards the Brits and others.

While I am not saying rufus himself is the troll in question (likely just poor timing on his part), it is peculiar how so many posters are brand new and only on this thread, and now so many have the identikit sneering tone of the troll known as Thunder/Gilles/Sampiax/Gn/GoGo eat who has a hatred of the UK bordering on psychotic and who is banned from just about every aviation forum going.

Just saying...
Jimlad1 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.