Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 150 of 299

Thread: Rafale 2018 Thread: Europe's best Eurocanard

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    France
    Posts
    1,451
    The antenna for Spectra is at the back if I'm not mistaken, this is something more akin to a bottle top at the front of the DDM-NG bar and isn't on all Ms or all Rafales. I'll show a picture or you'll probably think I'm mad.
    This is a forward looking camera only mounted on test bench aircrafts (here on the B301)
    The Rafale international forum :
    http://rafale.freeforums.org/

    Rafale news blog :
    http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    France
    Posts
    1,451
    Will those new Rafale be F4.2?
    Yes.

    AFAIK, the Rafale B358 will be the last French F3 aircraft to be delivered (next month).
    The 28 remaining French Rafale of the tranche 4 to be delivered after the B358 will be F4.2 aircrafts out of the assembly line, even if they won't have all the F4.2 features immediatly. They will get them step by step between 2022 and 2025)
    The F4.1 standard is supposed to be a software upgrade for all the F3 Rafale before the B358.

    The main difference between F4.2 aircrafts and F3 retrofited to F4.1 aircrafts, is the hardware : The F4.2 will get the new GaN antenna, new OSF IR channel, HMD, cockpit updates...)
    The Rafale international forum :
    http://rafale.freeforums.org/

    Rafale news blog :
    http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    124
    Hi Kovy,

    have you done any new awesome photoshops lately?

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,693
    This site claims the Rafale costs $115 Million each without initial spares, weapons, ect...
    Rofl. Ajai Shukla. Permanent Rafale basher since he was denied a flight by DAssault. Funny.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,693
    According to "La Tribune", USA would be trying to block Rafale sales in Egypt due to a US component into SCALP missile.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,161
    Wouldn't they try to block SCALP sale (assuming this is true)?
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,693
    Apparently (i had the same info end of december) yes, they try to block SCALP sales, but Egypt want Rafale WITH Scalp.

    Sry forgot the link

    https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises...nt-768856.html

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,161
    The US may have issues with its equipment being exported on board a missile. Saying "USA would be trying to block Rafale sales in Egypt" is rather disingenuous imho.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,693
    Did you read the article?
    Apart from that it woudn't be first time USA behave in such a way (see UAE satellites...)

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,985
    Quote Originally Posted by halloweene View Post
    Did you read the article?
    Apart from that it woudn't be first time USA behave in such a way (see UAE satellites...)
    The nerve.... after all France was bullied into signing the MTCR. Or wait, they were willing signatories until they wanted to export cruise missiles, I forget.

    I’m sure it’s in everyone’s interest to sell cruise missiles to a country that recently went through several government upheavals. Maybe throw in a few ICBM’s and watch Rafale sales go through the roof.

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,161
    Did you read the article?
    Apart from that it woudn't be first time USA behave in such a way (see UAE satellites...)
    You mean the US exercising its veto authority over export of technology it owns? Why wouldn't it if it feels that this is in its best interest? Does France not do that, or do the French not expect its government to look out for its own National interest when it involves sanction of arms sales, a known lever of NatSec policy?

    "In view of the concerns of the Chinese side, the French Government has undertaken not to authorize any French enterprises to participate in the arming of Taiwan," a joint statement said. https://goo.gl/u2s515

    Last edited by bring_it_on; 16th February 2018 at 22:55.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  12. #132
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    577
    Really, given the way new Egyptian regime is shaping up, I can't fault US at all if they're uncomfortable about selling them missiles.

  13. #133
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,985
    Quote Originally Posted by halloweene View Post
    Did you read the article?
    Apart from that it woudn't be first time USA behave in such a way)
    What is truly amusing would be a Dassault executive in India having to explain a situation similar to Taiwan’s “no strings attached” experience with French combat aircraft when tensions with China ramp up.
    “Well, we planned to upgrade those Rafale... soon, Twice the cost for parts than US aircraft? Ummmmm...”

    No need for Gallic fierte from French posters, I think the Rafale was an excellent choice for India, only giving Hallow a bit of his own constant misrepresentations and trolling.
    Last edited by FBW; 17th February 2018 at 02:57.

  14. #134
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    124
    yep I Agree with our tasty Fresh Burger Whopper
    its really all about picking which export is the lesser evil for you

    US - tight controls over spares/upgrades/stock
    French - more flexible but will charge you twice as much as the Americans. Unless your enemy has more money
    Swedes/Germans - you must follow their human rights philosophies or no spares
    Russians - no spares to give, no cares to give
    Chinese - spares made in China

  15. #135
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,835
    Quote Originally Posted by CastleBravo
    This site claims the Rafale costs $115 Million each without initial spares, weapons, ect...
    Ajai Shukla's just repeating what was widely reported at the time of the Rafale deal. The "bare-bones" cost to India i.e. the flyaway cost was -

    Rafale C: €91.7 mil ($114 mil)
    Rafale B: €94 mil ($117 mil)

    ____________________________________

    Deal's breakdown

    Aircraft: €3,420 mil
    Weapons: €710 mil
    Customization; ~€1,700 mil
    Support & Spares: ~€1,800 mil
    PBL: €353 mil

    Total: €7,870 mil
    Last edited by Vnomad; 17th February 2018 at 04:05.

  16. #136
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    5,363
    Really, given the way new Egyptian regime is shaping up, I can't fault US at all if they're uncomfortable about selling them missiles.
    And by the way, they don't need more Rafale and SCALP cruise missile. They need Scorpions and alike (not something that could not have been put together in a short time by Dassault... or Airbus (?)).


    @VNomad: mind that we came around this value at the time by ourselves pretty easily. The great (yet unanswered question) already was what made for the other 100M$)?
    Last edited by TomcatViP; 17th February 2018 at 08:41.

  17. #137
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,523
    The nerve.... after all France was bullied into signing the MTCR. Or wait, they were willing signatories until they wanted to export cruise missiles, I forget.

    I’m sure it’s in everyone’s interest to sell cruise missiles to a country that recently went through several government upheavals. Maybe throw in a few ICBM’s and watch Rafale sales go through the roof.
    A US dude (I just typoed IS instead of US) giving moral lessons about the middle east.

    Thanks for the laugh!

    BTW if true WTF were they thinking putting some US components in the Scalp?

    Nic
    Last edited by Nicolas10; 17th February 2018 at 11:06.

  18. #138
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,693
    [QUOTE]You mean the US exercising its veto authority over export of technology it owns? Why wouldn't it if it feels that this is in its best interest? Does France not do that, or do the French not expect its government to look out for its own National interest when it involves sanction of arms sales, a known lever of NatSec policy? [QUOTE]

    Is that a joke? You already did the same joke on Eagle Eye contract lost by LM, trying to block it on completely unsensitive parts... For commercial reasons. US are doing the same, nothing to do with morality, US do not have any as far as business is concerned, specially in Middle East... Really..; US trying to lecture europeans about behabiour in middle east. Would be laughable if it was irony but...

    Would you agree if France blocked some parts of F-35 AFTER an export market is signed? (there ares, tyres, obogs parts, many cabling, batteries...) .Or if Thales blocked HMDS due to obvious VALID patent infringement?

  19. #139
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,161
    Would you agree if France blocked some parts of F-35 AFTER an export market is signed? (there ares, tyres, obogs parts, many cabling, batteries...) .Or if Thales blocked HMDS due to obvious VALID patent infringement?
    Yes I would agree. If France wanted to do that then I would have no problem with it since that is France's right to control to whom and where technology part of its NatSec apparatus is sold just like the US or any other country. When you choose to bring in foreign companies into your supply chain you do expose yourself to this and at times it can become a problem that you simply have to find workarounds and execute and find solutions with alternative vendors.
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 17th February 2018 at 15:52.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  20. #140
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,693
    Honestly Bio, i will answer you when (if it is revealed) one will know which parts are involved (really sensitive or just pretext).
    Last edited by halloweene; 17th February 2018 at 15:56.

  21. #141
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    259
    Ah the French complaining about the limits of globalism. What do you mean we cant export missiles with american components in that not fair!

  22. #142
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    135
    In fairness ITAR is beyond a joke. You have guys at the US end who don't really know what should and shouldn't be labelled ITAR, so they play it safe and consequently you end up with fire extinguisher brackets labelled as ITAR. No joke, the Nimrod MRA4 had fire extinguisher brackets in the ITAR database and a whole load of other miscellaneous crap that wasn't remotely cutting edge, or a matter of military security, or even military really.

  23. #143
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,693
    Ah the French complaining about the limits of globalism. What do you mean we cant export missiles with american components in that not fair!
    Well you are exporting mlanes with french components aren't you? Apart from that, anything to bring to the debate?

  24. #144
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally Posted by J-20
    ….its really all about picking which export is the lesser evil for you

    US - tight controls over spares/upgrades/stock
    French - more flexible but will charge you twice as much as the Americans. Unless your enemy has more money
    Swedes/Germans - you must follow their human rights philosophies or no spares
    Russians - no spares to give, no cares to give,
    Chinese - spares made in China
    J-20 sometimes I think your original and twisted sense of humour flies over many peoples' head!

    Pretty pretty close to the bone....with just some truth....anyway made me smile ;-)
    Last edited by Tony; 19th February 2018 at 19:33.
    Stand up for what you believe in even if you are standing alone...Sophie Scholl (9 May 1921 - 22 February 1943)

  25. #145
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    259
    To elaborate on my original response and to illustrate why I was so dismissive of french position.

    They knew from the time they designed those missiles with US components. That they would have to get US approval to export them. They chose to use those components anyway. Now their upset that something they knew was going to happen has happened. It was entirely predictable that US was not going to allow export to the middle east.

    If France wants to have clear ability to sale arms exports, then it shouldn't use US parts. There is cost to that choice both in weapon system cost and time to duplicate whatever US component are required. Then you have secondary effects of taking those french resources away from other things to duplicate US components. And then the long term the drifting apart of the US and France on defense cooperation caused by refusal to use US sourced components. Lastly you have the potential loss of french exports to US that such a policy would inevitably result in as US returned the favor.

    All of those things were very much considered when France designed that missile. Now they find what they knew going into it. That exporting said missiles to the middle east was going to be a non starter for US. So they sit and bitch about it even though they knew all along it was likely outcome.

  26. #146
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    124
    Not all parts are affected by US arms control. With a wise selection of US components you can make both, fine deals with the USA and still sell your weapons all over the world.

  27. #147
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    124
    You're welcome Tony!

    As for Siddar's remarks,

    he is probably referring to US blocking SCALP sale to Egypt. it was mentioned in the news thread.

    I was surprised since I thought it was an entirely European missile but I guess it has some US components.
    The question now is, will Russia sell them the Russian equivalent for use on their MiG-35s

  28. #148
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    389
    To elaborate on my original response and to illustrate why I was so dismissive of french position.

    They knew from the time they designed those missiles with US components.
    That's far from obvious.

    Without any detail on the component in question, there are several scenarios where a component that was ITAR-free can suddenly become subject to US regulations. For example, the company making it might have been bought by a US one. Another possibility is that the US government might have decided to reclassify the component as dual-use.

  29. #149
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,693
    @Siddar I understand your point, but.
    Obama changed the rules setting ITAR regulations as retroactive (afaik) . Second point : some GPS stuff is now classed in items cat. XII since 2016. ITAR rules change.

  30. #150
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,983

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

 

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES