Eurofighter Typhoon News & Discussions VI

[Colibri]

this "Typhoon world" issue was above all a PR exercise urgently needed after Typhoon recent setbacks (Switzerland, Japan, India...) to revert the "loser" syndrome momentum.

Exactly.
The eurofighter consortium needed to beef up their confidence with another fairytale.


like this one :

October 2011,

The "flawless" performance of the Eurofighter Typhoon in the Libyan war has catapulted the aircraft ahead of its main rival to win one of the most lucrative of defence deals in recent times. blablablablablablablabla The Typhoon was already leading the pack after the jet scored highest in a technical assessment blablablablablablablabla

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...arms-deal.html

The whole article is a gem filled with the typical BS from EF's sources.
Looking back, it truly reveals the sad and pathetic PR efforts of Eurofighter's camp for what it was/is : incantations.

[f-35pwiii]

I'm surprised there hasn't yet to be honest, internet connection must be bad in a certain part of Europe, either that or they're still in bed...

They're up now.....

I'm not sure why you Rafale fanboys are moaning anymore, Rafale's pride ? Your own pride? Ef world made one tiny comment about Ef and Rafale in DACT and you take it as if they're on a massive PR campaign against Rafale.... I can't waite untill that Typhoon HuD screenshot with the Rafale in the gun CCIP finds it's way to the Aviation Blog. Ofcourse it being Ef world I would take it with a pinch of salt but it's not like they claimed dominance over Rafale.
As promised eagle1.... http://icas-proceedings.net/ICAS1998/PAPERS/04.PDF

[seahawk]

He left out bits like "it weren't the only encounters between the two types at Aldhafra" or that "the RAF jocks were young sports still growing on the Typhoon". These are important facts which put those claims in a different perspective. I don't think that anyone with a sane mind considers the Rafale as a bad fighter or the Typhoon as unbeatable. The Swiss evaluation reflected the situation at that time, both aircraft moved on since. Typhoon's capabilities in various fields have grown, be it sensor fusion, PIRATE capabilities, maturity of the helmet, capabilities of DASS and the related mission data for both DASS and Captor play a role as well. Considering claims of vast superiority wrt "superior MMI, ID capabilities or even SA" the evaluation put a damper at such claims put forward by many Rafale fans, many of those claims were and still are equally unsubstantiated as those you have criticized coming from the other side.

Still the Swiss came to the conclusion, that even an up-graded Typhoon could not close the capability gap to the Rafale.

[mrmalaya]

Stirring again?

I do agree that some of the pro-rafale contributors take these things very personally.

Perhaps to make life more interesting we should all be allowed to quote from manufacturer publications and individual pilots as long as we are responsible and say something like:

" Oooh, ooh I found this and it says my favourite aircraft is brilliant, but caution reader - it is from a single source with much potential for bias!"

[Sintra]

Still the Swiss came to the conclusion, that even an up-graded Typhoon could not close the capability gap to the Rafale.

Exactly the oposite, read the reports.
The Swiss came to the conclusion that a Typhoon P1E could not close the capability gap to an upgraded AESA equiped Rafale...
The Typhoon P1E is very much today´s aircraft.

[f-35pwiii]

upgraded AESA equiped Rafale...

Just thought I would underline something....

[seahawk]

Exactly the oposite, read the reports.
The Swiss came to the conclusion that a Typhoon P1E could not close the capability gap to an upgraded AESA equiped Rafale...
The Typhoon P1E is very much today´s aircraft.

Or in other words, the latest production versions. In fact the AESA F3 Rafale was even more superior in comparison.

[TMor]

In fact, we don't care. EELightning have provocated some off topic answers, but we still are in a Typhoon news thread...

[Sintra]

Or in other words, the latest production versions. In fact the AESA F3 Rafale was even more superior in comparison.

Again no, Dassault (praise to them) sent an AESA equiped aircraft to the Swiss evaluation which was extensively flown and tested.

[Jackonicko]

“The Swiss came to the conclusion that a Typhoon P1E could not close the capability gap to an upgraded AESA equiped Rafale...”

Not even that. The Swiss report judged that once a risk/credibility weighting had been applied, the P1E Typhoon didn’t score as high as Rafale. It could be that the upgraded Rafale was leagues ahead, but that the upgrade was viewed as being unlikely to happen and so the weighted score reflected only a relatively narrow victory. That’s not probable though. Much more logical and likely is that the Swiss judged that there was a real risk that P1E would not happen, or would not be exactly as advertised, or would be late, and that the Typhoon score was heavily penalized by the risk weighting.

Moreover in this context (of WVR combat) the Swiss judged that Typhoon had better performance, lower pilot workload, and was superior in ‘engagement’.

There are very many reasons for Rafale fans to be inordinately pleased with what the Swiss report said, but this is perhaps not one of them.

(I can happily accept that the Swiss preferred what they saw of Rafale to what they saw of Typhoon, just as the French ought to be happy to concede that the Saudis and the Singaporeans reached a different conclusion).

Eagle 1 raised an interesting point:

“I don't think he has been contradicted by any official RAF source as far as I know…….. both Grandclaudon (squadron commander) and captain Romain think that the rafale is by far superior in the AtA arena. They put there name and reputation at stake which is far more credible than a pure PR paper.”

The French are unusually open in claiming victories (I don’t want to be controversial, so I’m not going to use value-laden language, I’m not going to make comparisons with Clostermann, and I’m not going to speculate about psychology).

Other air forces (and especially the RAF) have a different approach, emphasizing ‘deeds not words’, and with a more circumspect approach to discussing the results of exercises and DACT. There are practical reasons for this. There has always been a huge reluctance by RAF pilots to talk about how they fare in DACT with UK-based USAFE units, for example. When the RAF wins, they stay silent, as it is felt that to embarrass one’s training partners by highlighting their weaknesses would put future co-operation in jeopardy. When the RAF loses, they stay silent as they don’t want to highlight weaknesses to potential enemies. The same approach extends to other opponents. The RAF are never going to come back from Magic Carpet, boasting about how they 'whupped' the Omanis, because they value the training, and don't want to jeopardise future opportunities.

In Lightning days, the RAF was used to winning against all comers. In Phantom days the odds were closer, and in F3 days, WVR was always challenging. With the Typhoon, the RAF is again used to ruling the roost (especially since the introduction of the HEA) as Frisian flag demonstrated. But you’re still unlikely to find named RAF pilots talking about the results of DACT without a really major shift in policy.

I think that this policy is mistaken, and that the French approach is a better one. No-one is pulling out of training with the Rafale, after all.

The inability of the RAF to officially refute the half truths, exaggerations and distortions offered up by the French side about ATLC and Solenzara is frustrating, but should not be taken as being an indication that the claims made are in any way accurate.

To paraphrase Kovy, this doesn't change the fact that the Rafale has had its share of defeats at the hands of Typhoon on a regular basis!

Nor does it change the fact that:

“As of today a Rafale brings much more value to a battle field being able to do much more things.”

As of tomorrow, however, with P1E, the gap will be narrowed, and there is every sign that the pace of integrating new capabilities is accelerating dramatically. P1E will not give Typhoon a stand off weapon in AASM's class, nor a strategic capability. Nor will Typhoon have a strike capability, or an anti-ship missile like Exocet. Nor will ROVER make Litening into a recce tool in the same class as Reco NG. Rafale will remain more versatile, with a wider suite of capabilities.

But Typhoon will at last be a fully Swing-Role/Omni role fighter, capable of simultaneous air-to-air and air-to-ground engagement.

[Scorpion82]

Scorpion, with all due respect I think you are wrong on this one.

The press conference : what got out of this is just what french journalists wished to publish. He cannot be accountant of those initial reports. And a press conference is by nature less detailed than an interview in a specialized magazine.

You are contradicting yourself here. First you blame it on the journalists and then you point out that press conferences are less detailed than interviews. At the end of the day we don't know as neither you nor me, nor anyone else here appears to have attended the press conference. What's certain about this press conference is that it wasn't centred around the encounters of Rafales and Typhoons, but about the deployment to Al Dhafra in the first place.

The interview : Nobody forced him to take this interview. It his honor and credibility that he put at stake which is something not that usual when you think about it. He brought some nuances to his own initiative and could have kept these "aspects" for himself if he wished. What could you reproach to him ? He took a huge risk being interviewed in a specialized english speaking magazine...Think about it...I mean as a squadron commander and for the french air force reputation. That should mean he was certainly confident enough ! Really I believe that you and others are some times a bit paranoiac each times a frenchmen declare something. If he had something to hide why taking the interview ? Why such a risk ? And he was not forced to give certain aspects of those DACT so it's all to its credit.

Many pilots were and are being interviewed and named by the press. I don't see a GrandClaudon taking a "special risk" in doing what many have done before and after him as well.

I am waiting as much transparency from the other side...Waiting for detailed interviews with names and professional reputation at stake with details of the ROE...Nothing like this for the moment hence the credibility deficit. We must swallow the "anecdotal evidences" etc etc of a Typhoon lobbyist for years if you see what I mean...

Lt.Col. Marc Grüne has done so and actually admired strengths of the Rafale as well in contrast to a Cpt. Romain and a Lt. Col. GrandClaudon which may not even have flown against the Typhoon themselves, unlike Grüne. It's well known that Rafales and Typhoons met each other more often than at Solenzara and Al Dhafra, even at Al Dhafra there were more engagements as acknowledged by GrandClaudon, interestingly he didn't bother to discuss the outcome or details of these engagements and interestingly they didn't mention the various other DACTs as well...

And even with those precisions taking down 4 typhoons with full capability with only 2 rafales in BVR only using a single missile at a time and illuminating the typhoon till impact is a big performance. And this scenario was repeated twice with one rafale loss the second time vs 7 typhoon losses in total. And again I repeat that other situations could lead to a typhoon advantage and that I am not one of those claiming total superiority. Just that there is a least no significant edge from on side or another like the F22 could bring.

Well I'm not making such claims either...

As for the so called superiority I would remind you that both Grandclaudon (squadron commander) and captain Romain think that the rafale is by far superior in the AtA arena. They put there name and reputation at stake which is far more credible than a pure PR paper.

Many pilots believe that "their aircraft" is the best. Both commented on subjects they can't really know without having flown the type and some of the claims wrt the MMI in particular are utterly wrong.

Personally I think the truth is somewhere in the middle but bottom-line the swiss still rated the rafale higher in both defensive and offensive AtA scenarios.

They did yes, they may come to a different conclusion in some areas nowadays where PIRATE, HEA and DASS are more mature and sensor fusion is more developed on the Typhoon. Upcoming further improvements with the P1E not withstanding.

[Sintra]

As of tomorrow, however, with P1E, the gap will be narrowed.

Maybe, but Dassault, Thales and the French MOD have not exactly "frozen" the development path of the RAFALE.
With the Indian victory, they may even have to accelarate the program (think MBDA Meteor, IOC from 2018 to 2015/16, by example).
And P1E doesnt bring an AESA and CFT´s, the kind of improvements who would level the operational capability gap.

[Jackonicko]

Indeed Sintra.

P1E does not level the versatility gap, but it turns Typhoon into a true swing/omni role platform, and is the facillitator or enabler for the new capabilities and advanced/complex weapons that will level the capability gap.

Which is why I said 'narrows' and not 'levels' and which is why I said 'tomorrow' and not 'today' and which is why I reiterated Eagle's point - hence:

Nor does it change the fact that:
Quote: “As of today a Rafale brings much more value to a battle field being able to do much more things.”

[EELightning]

EELightning have provocated some off topic answers, but we still are in a Typhoon news thread...

Yes, I deliberately didn't mention the Italian Typhoon pilot's claims in case the usual Rafale-Trolls came out of the woodwork (one of which had a nasty habit of posting Rafale news on Starstreak from January 31st), obviously my own efforts weren't enough.

Jackonicko, I very much doubt we'll get something about P1EA in the next few weeks, however will there be a high chance we'll get something out of Farnborough this year?

[Nicolas10]

(I can happily accept that the Swiss preferred what they saw of Rafale to what they saw of Typhoon, just as the French ought to be happy to concede that the Saudis and the Singaporeans reached a different conclusion).

What are you on about? The saudis never test-flew the Rafale, nor did they ever make a competition.

And I dare say that if the british gov hadn't shut down the investigations about alledged corruption in the Al Yamammah deal, there wouldn't be a Typhoon is saudi colours.

Nic

[Nicolas10]

Many pilots were and are being interviewed and named by the press. I don't see a GrandClaudon taking a "special risk" in doing what many have done before and after him as well.

I agree. Although the point, in my opinion, is that those sources are named, unlike most sources from jackonicko/jon lake.

There is a difference between named sources and "I've been told by some well informed dude that...", especially when the guy quoting those unnamed sources have been cought lying a couple of times, and is always trying to distort the truth (for instanced when he says that the saudis reached a different conclusion... (read: when evaluating the Rafale & the Typhoon. Nevermind such evaluation never took place)).

Nic

[Kovy]

Yes, I deliberately didn't mention the Italian Typhoon pilot's claims in case the usual Rafale-Trolls came out of the woodwork (one of which had a nasty habit of posting Rafale news on Starstreak from January 31st), obviously my own efforts weren't enough.

Please, stop calling French contributors to this forum "Rafale-trolls"
It really starts to be annoying.

[EELightning]

Did I name everyone French to be a Rafale-Troll? I think not. Do pay more attention.

The exercise will commence on 2 May and complete on 10 May, spanning the May Bank Holiday weekend. During this weekend there will be a visible and audible presence of RAF Typhoon and Military helicopters operating above Greater London and the Home Counties. There will also be flights occurring throughout the exercise period, to allow pilots and other forces to become familiar with operating in the London and Home Counties airspace.

Both air and ground based elements will be involved in training exercises designed to test the Defence response to an unknown aircraft entering the restricted airspace which will be established in order to ensure that the Games are safe and secure. There will be a number of such training ‘serials’ each day, though the amount of flying has been reduced to the absolute minimum necessary to ensure that our forces are ready for their important role.

RAF Typhoon, RAF Puma, Royal Navy and Army Lynx and target aircraft, will fly between 4,000ft and 2,000ft above ground level for the majority of the Exercise to de-conflict with existing civilian air movements over London; however, military aircraft will occasionally operate at 1,000ft above ground level and, for a very brief period on three occasion, will descend to 500ft to achieve the necessary training objectives. It is recognised that military aircraft operating at this level could cause concern to the general public; therefore, time spent at the lowest levels will be minimised. However, members of the public should be reassured that safety remains are utmost priority, and our pilots and aircrew are well-trained and experienced in these sorts of operations.

We recognise that this activity may cause a disturbance. We have taken steps to ensure that flying activity takes place at times that keep this disturbance to a minimum. On current planning, one of the Typhoon training serials to be undertaken on 5 May is scheduled for the late evening, but will finish no later than 2230hrs. We regret any disturbance caused, but we hope that the public will understand why this important training has to take place.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive/o...urity-27042012

Be gentle with those throttles. :diablo:

[Kovy]

Did I name everyone French to be a Rafale-Troll? I think not. Do pay more attention.

If you have problems with some Rafale enthusiasts, report to the moderators, and stop your troll calling.

[eagle1]

-As said by Sintra & Jackoniko although the P1E will not bring an AESA it is certainly the most urgently needed step forward to justify its price. What is a bit of a shame is not the lack of AESA but true multirole capability in 2012.

One thing that I agree is that the coming year will be pivotal for the typhoon. If no clear go ahead is given then the program will not have a bright future ahead.

Hopefully the Saudis looks interested in a typhoon upgrade and that would change the situation. This is of particular importance to close the gap when the typhoon lost all its competitions against the rafale when compared during technical evaluations.

@Jackonicko : The RAF is not silent when it wins against F15 or SU30 mki...

[EELightning]

If you have problems with some Rafale enthusiasts, report to the moderators, and stop your troll calling.

I have no problems with Rafale enthusiasts, its the Trolls that mess up the place. Hence my attempt to not mention the Italian Typhoon pilot's claims because the thread becomes a battle of nonsense from both sides.

[Scorpion82]

I agree. Although the point, in my opinion, is that those sources are named, unlike most sources from jackonicko/jon lake.

There is a difference between named sources and "I've been told by some well informed dude that...", especially when the guy quoting those unnamed sources have been cought lying a couple of times, and is always trying to distort the truth (for instanced when he says that the saudis reached a different conclusion... (read: when evaluating the Rafale & the Typhoon. Nevermind such evaluation never took place)).

Nic

Lake isn't the only journalist reporting on the Typhoon and in fact many pilots interviewed have been named, though not too many were talking about DACT results.

The French at least offered Rafale to Saudi Arabia, at one point the French press even stated that SA is going to buy 96 Rafales. Whether the Saudis were given a closer look at the Rafale at some point I don't know. The selection of Typhoon was not from an open competition however. So unless there is a confirmation of the opposite we must indeed assume that there was no serious evaluation of these types by the Saudis in a similar fashion as by Switzerland, Singapore or India.

Wrt Lake lying, it lies in the eye of the beyonder. Some of his claims more or less proved to be right. The Typhoon pilots supposedly commenting on Rafale's "underpowered" engines may feel so in comparison with the Typhoon. The Italoan pilots remarks in the eurofighter world issue, Switzerlands scoring for Typhoon wrt ac performances and Lt. Col. Grüne's comments are all pointing into that direction. Supercruise adbantages of the Typhoon reported wrt Singapore are now being pointed out by the Swiss as well, while no word about any supercruise capabilities of the Rafale has been made. We know from French pilot comments that the Rafale can supercruise to some extend, but is it really as significant when multiple sources appear to praise Typhoon for this, but not a single indepent source is conforming this for the Rafale? Maybe there is some truth in what is immediately dismissed as lies by you guys...

[eagle1]

I would add to Nicolas10 points that some of Lake claims are factually wrong like the Dutch evaluation was conducted by the CBC bureau. Just look at the dutch press :

http://vorige.nrc.nl/nieuwsthema/jsf...en_vliegtuigen

and if it was a pure commercial/industry works as he claims the result would look completely different with the F35 being probably last. So even some basic common sense collides with his claims.

One thing that also harms his credibility is his bias toward the typhoon although he has done great effort to do it in a clever way. I mean in the end the good story/anecdote is always for the typhoon like in india or singapore but never for the competition. And he even can write a full tribune for the typhoon against the rafale which is hardly a stamp of neutrality.

[Scorpion82]

That the NL never conducted any evaluation of the aircraft in form of flight trials is true however and the Dutch competition was in essence a paper exercise. So "completely wrong" is an inappropriate description. Not fault free would be a more fitting description. No one is perfect at all and most people have a certain bias. Those criticising Lake for the lack of neutrality are often not any more neutral themselves, in many cases the opposite is the truth. Journalists aren't gods, they are justhuman beings like everybody else, they tend to influence the audience with opinions and they make errors. Lake isn't really a special case, though many of you appear to make a special case out of it.

[eagle1]

agree with you scorpion my words were a bit too strong but I think you got my point nevertheless. I never called into question the paper exercise but the CBC argument that it was merely an industry/commercial study.

As far as neutrality is concerned this is a non issue for me as long as you are transparent. I don't have any issue with someone supporting another aircraft that the one I support nor do I have an issue with journalists with an opinion. I do have an issue when Lake takes advantage of his position to bring unsubstantiated claims and pretend to be neutral. That's not fair. I am sure you get the nuance.

The difference is that as a journalist and an opinion maker it is normal that some call into question his claims while the crowd of rafale enthusiasts are merely anonymous posters that don't publish.

[swerve]

I would add to Nicolas10 points that some of Lake claims are factually wrong like the Dutch evaluation was conducted by the CBC bureau. Just look at the dutch press :

http://vorige.nrc.nl/nieuwsthema/jsf...en_vliegtuigen

and if it was a pure commercial/industry works as he claims the result would look completely different with the F35 being probably last. ...

No, because the Netherlands is a JSF partner, & gets work share. There's not much Dutch in Rafale, Typhoon or Gripen.

[eagle1]

an economic study is also about price and ToT...How do you explain the Gripen so far behind then and the rafale so close to the F35 ? (un)Surprisingly the ranking is fairly consistent with the swiss eval for instance. A simple look at the dutch ranking make the economy/industry argument irrelevant.Not to mention the dutch literature.

Another question : why to mention different upgrades if it was merely an industry/economic assessment ?

[Kovy]

I have no problems with Rafale enthusiasts, its the Trolls that mess up the place.

Who ?

Hence my attempt to not mention the Italian Typhoon pilot's claims because the thread becomes a battle of nonsense from both sides.

Paralipsis (παράλειψις), known also as praeteritio, preterition, cataphasis (κατάφασις), antiphrasis (ἀντίφρασις), or parasiopesis (παρασιώπησις), is a rhetorical device wherein the speaker or writer invokes a subject by denying that it should be invoked. As such, it can be seen as a rhetorical relative of irony. Paralipsis is usually employed to make a subversive ad hominem attack.

At least accept the fact that it is you who trigered the reactions (which have been very balanced btw) while you could have just report the story in a neutral way.

[TMor]

That the NL never conducted any evaluation of the aircraft in form of flight trials is true however

Yves Robins :

As a result, the Dutch were only able to assess the F-35 on paper. However, a Dutch Air Force contingent came to Dassault to undertake a comprehensive in-flight evaluation of the Rafale. They flew several missions to assess for themselves how the Rafale handled.

In 2010, Canada parliament :
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublicati...76#Int-3474371

Obviously, at that time it was not possible to make an in-flight evaluation of the F-35, so the evaluation was made from the paper information provided by the manufacturer to the Dutch air force, whereas the Dutch air force went on the spot to where the other aircraft were manufactured and performed an in-flight evaluation of those aircraft. That in-flight evaluation was a pretty comprehensive one. It involved several flights addressing several types of operational concerns. They made their evaluation and they came back with their conclusions, and the result of that evaluation was published in the Dutch press.

[eagle1]

Excellent find Tmor,

I just realized that I was myself intoxicated by Lake disinformation and apparently not the only one as even scorpion was wrong. Another proof of Lake lies.