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?

What is the price of each aircraft?

4 years after the Rafale, the Typhoon interceptor dropped its first PvwyII against Lybian tanks...

BZ :E

It probably didn't need an old Mirage along to designate for it though:ok:

Edit: Although, reading the other thread, it might have had an old Tornado!

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.

A flight of either would be easy prey for opposing F-22s.

GF

And when was the last time that that aircraft dropped a Paveway?:cool:

As long as it dares showing up in some Operationnal area...:hmm:

Irak?...noo
Libya? nooo...

Where are they???

This is starting to look more and more to my old schooldays recess philosophical conversations...:rolleyes:

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.

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.

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....:bored:

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?"

Only a very capable enemy would be capable of detecting, let alone making use of, L16 transmissions with their exceptionally low probability of intercept characteristics.

F-22 - so stealthy as to be useless as a coalition player.

Or so stealthy that no one, not even the coalition, knows it's there ;)

To clarify the designation pod debate.

http://www.abload.de/img/ellamy9061104160075outfxfs.jpg

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

Another view -----

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/b...rosse/0000.jpg

@ Archimedes, perfect abstract it seems :ok:
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. :p

@ 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 !! :cool:


@ 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

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?

Well, having lain in the couches in a -135 and seen how it struggled to match the refueler I think that there might just be a bit of life left in the "run away bravely" FJ's actually....however once the "big" rockets are gone, Yes it comes into it's own, provided there are enough deployed to cover the ground (in time).

Pity "they" won't spend to open the line again...:hmm:

The french make better cuisine, therefore better-looking and flying aircraft.