Its first flight was in 94, F-22 first flight was in 97.
The Rafale first flight was in 1986.
The EU should have all jumped into the Rafale wagon.
Any reason they didn't do so?
The Rafale is still being sold to other countries. Meanwhile the Typhoon is 100% dead.
France was originally part of the EF-2000/Typhoon program but the wanted a carrier capable plane for the Charles De Gaulle but no-one else in the program did. so they left Typhoon/EF-2000 and built the Rafale instead.
The joint service thing was only one several reasons.
EF was primarily designed as an interceptor, we wanted a multirole. We also needed nuke capability which was not a priority for EF
But the main thing was the engines. Since EF uses Rolls Royce jets, us adopting it would have murdered our own jet engine industry both civilian and military, which would have resulted in substantial unemployment, loss of revenue, technological know-how, and prestige, but most notably having to suck Anglo wiener every time we needed jet engines. Independence being our obsession in all things since (Based) De Gaulle, this was the last straw and we quit.
What stopped the french from just swapping engines like the bongs did when they adopted the phantom?
Because swapping engines wouldn't have magicaly turned a land-based interceptor into a carrier-capable, nuke-capable multirole?
>Nuke-capable
>This requires major changes
Lol, a stock trike could be made nuke-capable for under $100.
But enough about the F35 being the sole capable plane in history able to drop a dumb gravity nuke
>But enough about the F35 being the sole capable plane in history able to drop a dumb gravity nuke
What does this even mean?
It means that even Apple is less israeli than the US MIC
>*a few decades ago*
>"We don't want you to develop nukes. We'll give you some instead. Here, have some B61"
>*fast forward to today*
>Sorry, B61 are now only compatible with F35, they TOTALLY can't be delivered with your current means anymore. Buy new F35s or else.
seethe and cope
the F-35 is just better
>The joint service thing was only one several reasons.
Just dropped. Pretty interesting infos.
That RR engine is pretty fricking breasts though.
>Was the Typhoon a big fricking waste of money?
Not obligatorily. However it definitely wasn't properly managed, from the start, which turned into a less convincing result.
>Its first flight was in 94,
The first flight of the EAP took place in August 1986, following that of the Rafale A on July 4, 1986.
> F-22 first flight was in 97.
The first flight of the YF-22 was in September 1990.
>The Rafale first flight was in 1986.
That was the Rafale A which was the demonstrator. Rafale C01 which was very different and representative of the final aircraft, was in may 1991.
>The EU should have all jumped into the Rafale wagon.
Yes.
>Any reason they didn't do so?
Because they could not admit Dassault had the best proposal, were the most experienced, and simply were the better company.
They also wanted to force France to abandon the national motorist, Snecma, that became Safran, and to opt for Rolls Royce, although France already had several functional modules for the M88 engine in 1982 and Rolls Royce had nothing for the XG- 40 in 1984. In fact, the Eurofighter prototypes all flew with Rb.199 engines, those of the Tornado, until 1998.
Yes.
This.
The Rafale A flew with a pair of GE F404, then with one F404 and one M88 in February 1990. The Rafale C01 flew in may 1991 with a pair of M88. The EJ200 engine first flew with the IPA7 Eurofighter testbed in 1998.
This proves France had no reason to abandon the M88.
In 1985, they had proposed a dual configuration for the future Eurofighter, either with M88 engines or with Rolls Royce engines, at the customer's request, but other partners had refused.
>What stopped the french from just swapping engines like the bongs did when they adopted the phantom?
Anon, you don't get it. What you suggest was the French proposal. It is the other partners who refused.
You sound like you know what you’re talking about but I don’t believe it cause otherwise I’d have to admit the frogs seemed to be in the right
Get used to it, mon petit rosbif
he sounds like he does until his facts get countered, and then he rapidly devolves into
spewing bullshit, which is when you realise his convincing-sounding castle of cards is built on very shaky sand
IOW it's just the resident rafalegay schizo deteriorating to warriortard levels of disingenuous screeching
Are you denying reliability issues even though EF is still rated for only 6000 hours of service life?
Source: your ass
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/uk-to-retire-tranche-1-typhoons-with-more-than-half-of-airframe-hours-remaining
Also, consortium is claiming that EF might finally have 8000 hour service life by tranche 4 which is still far in the horizon.
>With the Typhoon notionally rated to an airframe life of 6,000 hours, 2,544.8 hours represent just 42.4% of airframe use
lol what's the point asking for a source if you're wrong?
I did say it was rated for 6000 hours, not that it will fall apart not even halfway through
>You sound like you know what you’re talking about but I don’t believe it cause otherwise I’d have to admit the frogs seemed to be in the right
I understand anon. It's natural.
I am not this guy
>Before the M53, every Snecma turbofan had been based on foreign designs
Although the very beginning of their bloodline was indeed tied to German engineers, the line of ATAR engines were not foreign in essence at that point.
If you want to go back to the Gloster Meteor's Nene to justify RR's position of dominance in 1985, 40 years later, so be it, but that's not the point I was trying to make. My point was ditching something that is there for something that isn't really doesn't make a lot of sense, or must be motivated by a desire of sovereignty that can't be brought up against somebody else's desire for such sovereignty. Else it is simply hypocritical.
Not to forget this was in a context where France, due to the need of a carrier variant and of a replacement for both Mirage IV, Mirage F1, Jaguar, and Mirage III aircrafts at a foreseeable deadline, would have been by far the principal client of the anticipated European joint fighter. Which is why France wanted primarily a multirole aircraft when other European partners who at that point operated recent and capable Harriers and Tornados that were here to stay in their respective roles, needed primarily an interceptor. Case in point, the Harrier got replaced with the F-35B, and the Tornado is without a real replacement except in Italy and Germany with F-35A, and in the UK with the integration of the Storm Shadow to the Eurofighter. The real replacement of the Tornado may become the Tempest and the NGF, and incidentally, that's what is driving the weight estimate for both these planned future 6th gen jets, both supposed to be much heavier than a Typhoon or Rafale, but also heavier than a F-35.
The repercussions of past decisions are insane when you think about it.
>Tornado is without a real replacement
what exactly is the role Tornado plays which doesn't have a replacement?
>pivot from reliability to service life
shaky shaky
>what exactly is the role Tornado plays which doesn't have a replacement?
Long range strike without refueling using Storm Shadow cruise missiles.
The Eurofighter clearly doesn't have the range to do it as well since it must decide between cruise missiles and external fuel, and thus rely entirely on multiple refuelings from tankers.
When they carry the same pair of Storm Shadow a Rafale carries twice the fuel a Typhoon does.
In the same way, where are the AGM-158 for Britain's F-35B? What kind of range could the F-35B achieve with such a payload?
This is where the Tornado was useful and I have no doubt the Tempest will retrieve this long range capability.
How do you replace the 11,211 lb of internal fuel added to a pair of 6,600 lb external fuel the Tornado carried, plus a pair of Storm Shadow? Not with cutting that amount of fuel in half with a Eurofighter Typhoon.
>Long range strike without refueling using Storm Shadow cruise missiles.
So, just a single very specific mission type.
But in all other respects it's fine.
>When they carry the same pair of Storm Shadow a Rafale carries twice the fuel a Typhoon does.
Our best guess (given that fuel capacity is classified and all sources are unofficial leaks) is that a fully loaded Rafale with 3 subsonic drop tanks and 2 SCALP carries 16,500 lb of fuel
while a Typhoon with 1 supersonic drop tank and 2 SCALP carries 12,800 lb of fuel
while there IS a significant difference, that is not "twice"
and if the Rafale wishes to go supersonic while carrying tanks, it can only carry 14,250 lb which further narrows the difference
>where are the AGM-158 for Britain's F-35B?
Depends on the plans for the Anglo-French cruise missile. If the French are a little more considerate, then they'll design it for F-35 integration; if not, then the RAF will have to buy JASSM.
Once again, this is only 1 very specific mission the Rafale can do that the Typhoon can't. The rest of the time, both aircraft are quite similar.
>is that a fully loaded Rafale with 3 subsonic drop tanks and 2 SCALP carries 16,500 lb of fuel
Okay two things. First you're correct saying twice was exaggerated. But your numbers are for two 2000 liters tanks, not three.
Numbers are officially 4.7 tons of internal fuel with a Rafale C, that translates to about 10360 pounds, meaning roughly 5,800 litres of kerosene considering a density of around 0.8.
You are looking at 5,800 liters + 3 times 2,000 liters that's 11,800 liters of kerosene or about 21,250 pounds.
The difference between Typhoon and Rafale's internal fuel is not that big. Roughly 5,000 kg internal for a single seater Typhoon and 4,700 kg for a single seater Rafale, 4,400 kg for a twin seater Rafale which would be preferred for a strike mission.
However the difference in external fuel tanks is up to the double. Typhoon carries 1000 liters external fuel tanks, Rafale either 1,250 liters supersonic ones or 2,000 liters subsonic ones.
You cannot have both external fuel tanks and Storm Shadow missiles with a Typhoon since the heavy wing hardpoints are the ones with the plumbing for the fuel tanks.
So you're limited to a single 1,000 liters centerline fuel tank in the case of the Typhoon, which is indeed around 12,700 pounds when added to the officially 4,996kg internal, but to up to 3 2,000 liters tanks in the case of the Rafale, which added to internal fuel is about 20,200 for a two seater or about 20,900 for a single seater.
>Depends on the plans for the Anglo-French cruise missile. If the French are a little more considerate, then they'll design it for F-35 integration; if not, then the RAF will have to buy JASSM.
Which FC/ASW missile are we talking about, the Cruise stealth subsonic one or the Anti Ship supersonic one that's not gonna be just antiship?
I can't see how these couldn't get onboard future platforms, it would be crazy from MBDA not to, especially with the perspective to sell it to F-35 users.
>What kind of range could the F-35B achieve with such a payload?
armed with 4,800lb of ordnance it can fly 450-500nmi and recover with 2,800lb of ordnance
>wanted to force France to abandon the national motorist, Snecma, that became Safran, and to opt for Rolls Royce, although France already had several functional modules for the M88 engine in 1982 and Rolls Royce had nothing for the XG- 40 in 1984
However RR had far more experience developing new turbofan engines than Snecma so was considered lower risk in the long run.
Before the M53, every Snecma turbofan had been based on foreign designs, and the M53 had had a long development between the first flight and the M53-P2 production engine.
The fact the Rafale prototype flew with an American engine was testament to Eurofighter's misgivings about Snecma. At least RB199 was European.
And yet RR equipped EF are garage queens while Safran equipped Rafale have much higher combat readiness.
>They also wanted to force France to abandon the national motorist, Snecma,
So all of europe should have abandoned their own strong national companies and become totally beholden to France as the sole supplier of european aerial defence, even when their own were demonstrably better e.g. Rolls Royce? This entire post reeks of French superiority complex. "Rules for thee but not for me"
Did the Rafale programme produce a good plane? Demonstrably yes. Did they do it faster than the eurofighter? Also yes. However, it is not better than the Eurofighter at the primary purpose of the programme, air policing, and the concept that other european countries should be happy to let their own industry wither on the vine for the benefit of French "sovereign capability" as if France is the only country in the world that deserves to protect their own industrial interest is laughable.
What finally happened was likely the best solution for all parties' autism. France kept their capability sovereign by paying out of the nose for it. Other countries got to collaborate and share capability and costs as they wanted. Will the lesson have been learned for FCAS? Who knows. France effectively have Germany over a barrel for it now though, so a lot will hinge on how deeply Dassault will demand to dig their claws into Airbus and how much it makes German politics screech.
>So all of europe should have abandoned their own strong national companies and become totally beholden to France as the sole supplier of european aerial defence,
France never asked for this but was asked to abandon the Snecma, the carrier variant, and any form of workshare despite planning to buy most of the European jets. France had the most to lose. Answer this simple question: what was France gaining with the Eurofighter? Don't you think having 100% of the share of 521 Rafale fighters today is better for France than having a fifth of the share of 706+521 European jets, assuming the sales would have happened in the first place?
>even when their own were demonstrably better e.g. Rolls Royce?
RR had not demonstrated anything regarding the future engine of the Eurofighter at that point, that's the issue. France did not ask for the termination of RR efforts. France demanded an alternative option for their own national needs. This was refused.
>This entire post reeks of French superiority complex. "Rules for thee but not for me"
I'd like to return the compliment, especially since France ended up doing its own plane alone, happily, and with great success.
Note to self: facts are idiotic.
I specifically said the opposite.
So now we're talking deliveries and not orders? Why?
Facts are fact. 311 Rafale sold abroad. 151 Eurofighter sold abroad. For years the Rafale was mocked for its low sales numbers. Now the tables have turned. Deal with it.
>The EU should have all jumped into the Rafale wagon.
>Yes.
hahahahahahaha
It was ordered during the cold war, when it made sense for the European nations to have a fighter.
The F22 flying in 97 isn't relevant, because that wasn't sold to Europe.
In the recent attacks in yemen, the Typhoon FGR4 has shown itself to be fully the equal of the A-4 Skyhawk in the strike role
A-4 wishes it could drop Brimstone, Storm Shadow and Meteor
The storm shadow is just a coward's bullpup and you know it
If a SU-24 can be modded to drop a storm shadow so could a A-4
>if a Toyota can be modded it can be an IFV
The highlux has a higher kill score than the warrior no joke
>was X vehicle a waste of money
If we are spending more on training, R&D and maintenance of the vehicle than on weapons and ammunition, it's a waste. Any vehicle that we don't use for its intended combat purpose is a waste. That goes for every soldier, every missile, every bomb. Yes. Doesn't matter which country or which branch. If it's not used it's a waste.
what if it's a successful deterrent?
I'd be willing to let that slide for nukes and maybe ICBMs, patriots, tomahawks etc. but not for vehicles or personnel. For instance an f16 flying a recon or patrol mission is fine, an f16 rotting in a hangar is not. sell that plane to some third world country.
>he thinks we have hangars
The F-16 gets a coat of white roof coating over the plexiglass and sits out in the sun
But also you're just dumb in general because all military capabilities are a part of your deterrent and allowing anything to escalate into a shooting war marks a profound failure by your political and diplomatic services.
>it's all posturing and scare tactics
How incredibly boring. Millions of people being trained, producing vehicles, machinery and weapons worth trillions of dollars with the only goal that we never have to use them.
>t.
Not even for what it does to build or maintain industrial capacity?
So what’s the latest upgrade package this thing is on?
Tranche 4 is in development
>Tranche 4
any word on if UK is upgrading or buying any tranche 4 or are they all-in on GCAP?
UK confirmed its intention to purchase 138 F35s up from the 74 they said a few years back so i doubt they will be getting anymore EFs. That and the fact GCAP has really gained pace lately.
Its a shame really especially given the UKs ecrs mk2 equiped EF will be the best version of the EF. Also retiring the T1s is a mistake.
They're retiring the T1s to strip them for spare parts.
if they don't retire them then they need to buy spare parts, and likely run heavier maintenance to make sure the T1s stay in decent shape.
tldr, it would be incredibly expensive and not worth keeping them in service when they have a fairly limited capability compared to the tranch 2/3/4 planes with no easy/cheap way to upgrade them to modern standards.
Ah ok. Its unfortunate they cannot be made airworthy and put into storage for a rainy day. I imagine the UK QRF is a busy one and puts lots of hours on airframes, the T1 would be good for chasing those shitty Russian bomber planes away and they could save putting hours on the newer T2/3s.
the RAF will retrofit at least 40 Typhoon T3s with the Mk2 radar by 2030
Mk2 radar isn't what makes tranche 4.
You can have a Tranche 3 aircraft upgraded with a Mk2 radar and it wouldn't be considered Tranche 4 equivalent without other upgrades.
I was simply posting about the RAF's Mk2 radar
"tranche" only describes production runs anyway. a T3 aircraft can also be retrofitted to be more capable than a T4 aircraft. it's just that generally speaking, newer production aircraft have better loadouts than older aircraft.
Pretty sure it’s already in production, tranche 5 is in development tho and will finally bring the planned airframe changes
I think tranche 4 development is ending but they haven't produced any yet, with tranche 5 development entering full swing.
Tranche 4 production has begun, but I don't think the first one will be done until 2025.
They’ve been in production since 2022 (the parts more precisely) but don’t know about assembly. Tranche 5 will be a 2030+ thing the earliest unfortunately and afaik it’s mostly a Germany+Spain thing.
Everyone else is just upgrading tranche 2 and 3
Might be, Italy and the UK focus mostly on F-35s and their 6th gen. Arabs probably buy the newer ones tho.
speaking of which, Sauds might buy Typhoon T5
Would be a good investment over the tranche 4 because of the incorporation of the advanced maneuverability kit + all the upgrades of the tranche 4.
T4: new radar, new avionics, new wienerpit, replacement of copper cables with fiberglass, improved engines and some other stuff iirc
T5: all the T4 upgrades + airframe modification
What makes the T4-5 better than the T3?
Surely the most important part is the Radar.
> Surely the most important part is the Radar.
That's part of it, but also other software and computer upgrades.
The UK has announced they're upgrading 40 T3 with the Mk2 radar, and they might upgrade ~67 of the T2's to Mk2 radar as well, so even though the Mk2 radar is the primary advantage fo T4 aircraft, it's clearly possibly to upgrade T2/3 for the same radar, tho though might be more limited in other ways since they don't have the full T4 hardware/software setup.
>might be more limited in other ways since they don't have the full T4 hardware/software setup.
It's probable that they will upgrade the avionics as well.
the RAF Mk2 radar variant is the most powerful of the CAPTOR set so they will want to get full use out of it.
I'm sure they'll do SOME upgrades, but I'm not sure how much they're going to upgrade and if it'll be 100% equivalent to a T4 aircraft built from the ground up for the Mk2 radar.
>not sure how much they're going to upgrade
yeah, all they'll tell us is that they wanted the best radar capabilities. so it's reasonable to figure that they'll drop in the necessary power, cooling, software, etc for the Mk2 to deliver that capability.
other unrelated T4 upgrades, maybe, maybe not
>Typhoon can beat F15
>Russia has nothing better than F15
Nah, it's fine.
>Serbia is poised to sign a deal to buy Dassault Rafale multirole fighters, the country’s president confirmed today, saying that “concrete agreements” had been made to purchase of 12 of the jets.
France is so desperate to sell Rafale, it’s willing to sell it to Serbia.
Serbia has/had a close military relationship with Russia.
Serbia has close military relationship with China.
Serbia constantly threaten its neighbours.
Serbia refuse to recognise Kosovo and constantly threatens military intervention.
What could go wrong!
You must be 18 to post on PrepHole
The frogs have sold their weapons to enemies of the West since before the revolution.
S*rbs are screeching how they can totally buy Rafale because Croatia bought a dozen AND it's election season in S*rbia. By the way, Vucic, who said that they're buying Rafale, said in that same interview that Belgrade will have flying taxis in 2027
The US sold the F-35 to Singapore, which has a close relationship with China
>What could go wrong!
France has been equipping the enemy in conflict the west engaged in since like napoleon, at least now the bombs might kill some muslims instead
Everyone does that, your example is also shit
>Everyone allies with the fricking Ottoman scum and throws "Sun King" chimpouts.
Toot de la smore, Frog.
I can't believe 12 dinky little planes cost 3.6 billion dollars.
War has become too expensive, frick.
It's not 12 planes
it's 12 planes
spare parts for those planes
training for the various maintenance procedures and other training needs
and of course, all of the armaments FOR those planes.
Sometimes these deals also include long term support contracts for long term sustainment. But it's fluid and depends on the airforce, their existing capability, and how friendly their relations are with the supplying country.
The price is still absurd.
Croatia spent $1B on 12 used ones.
So ~$3B for brand new airframes + large quantities of weapons isn't a horrible deal.
Without knowing what the contract entails and the final price (since they're still negotiating) its really impossible to say how "good" or "bad" of a deal it is.
As a Croat Im fricking pissed we didnt buy some Eurofighter or Gripens or North Koreans FA-50 like Poland did.
Its the usual good old croatian business of corruption and mito in play. First they wanted to send MIG-21 to rebuild to Ukraine a couple of yrs ago and once it was all over newspapers they stopped the deal, now we are buying useless baguettes and its going into someones pockets.
Maybe we could even get a discount from Trump.
Damn shame.
Hvala bogu da ih nisi ti kupovao jer si moroniran
seems like a good deal imo
Pissed that the Serbs are coming for sloppy seconds from dassault tho?
Gripen would make sense though as yall probably have a lot of still austere runways and/or highways
We got lucky with procurement to be honest. There were 4 offers:
>F-16 block 70 for 1.7bln€ (LM wanted to offer F-35 but it didn't meet the requirement for a twin seater)
>Baraks refurbed to block 50 for 1.2bln€
>old stock rebuilt Gripens C/D for 1bln€
>used Rafale F3-R for 1bln€
Barak deal sucked ass as these were fatigued airframes that would need to be sent back to US to get them downgraded. Gripen would mean dealing with swedish autistic tantrums and, contrary to SAAB shills, by far highest operating costs for an objectively underpowered aircraft (26k€ per flight hour compared to 20k€ for F-16 and Rafale).
Block 70 and Rafale were the most modern and capable offerings, but Rafale was at almost half the price, and most importantly, deliverable before the current fleet loses all resources.
Now it's turning out the aircraft being delivered are not even particularly old with most being manufactured around 2010-2013. On top of that since VAT is known to be ~125mil€ and VAT is not paid for used equipment, it turns out that the package has 500mil€ worth of weapons and parts. On top of all that, it's likely that along with regular weapons (MICA, mark bombs, HAMMER), these Rafales seem to also come with Brimstone missiles.
Anyone who claims that frogs didn't do us a solid is wrong.
This aged like fine milk, considering Macron is actively shoving the Srebrenica massacre resolution down their throat
Geopolitics is weird. France wants to spread its influence on Balkans and Serbia is the go-to destination for that. Croats and Slovenes are historically in German camp. US getting more isolationist is leaving Albania and Kosovo stranded, Germany waning has caused problems in Bosnia, and MonteBlack and Serbia, after Russias road trip to Ukraine are slowly flirting with the west. Albania and MonteBlack will probably fall into Italy sphere of influence which leaves Serbia Bosnia and Kosovo up for grabs. Serbia would be a safe bet for French aspirations, but, other two countries are majority muslim and Turks are eyeing up the Balkans once again. So, France will probably try to court Bosnia and Kosovo and Serbia at the same time. How effective that will be and wether just pucking one strong ally instead of 3 compromised ones will be better, your bet is as good as mine
You do realise how much Russian ammunition they've sold to Ukraine, right?
Kek.
S*rbs are Russian aligned in propaganda so they can stay independent but they certainly don't actually give a shit about Russia.
Look up the Novi Avion, which was to be a Yugoslavian version of the Rafale
Are there any targeting pods for the Eurofighter?
I mean, it has IRST without a targeting pod.
But yes, it can also fit the Damocles targeting pod, LITENING III and LITENING 5 targeting pods, and the Sniper advanced targeting pod.
It can use the French DAMOCLES pods as well as US LITENING and SNIPER pods
>Any reason they didn't do so?
Because the Rafale is frog trash. They unironically suck at building airplanes.
Rafale is a top tier plane as is the EF, are you a mad MIGer?
Yeah
I love fighters and I love having variety, but the way the tech has gone economies of scale make it so that we'll probably see a world where most air forces are just, or almost all F-35s, with a few of the next gen air superiority fighters lumped in. Anyone who can't get the F-35 will probably buy the J-31/35. I don't think Russia is capable of mass producing a high quality fifth gen fighter any time in the near to medium term. So for multirole you'll probably just see those two.
>Anyone who can't get the F-35 will probably buy the J-31/35
The chinese won't export their stealth aircraft because they know the second they get used it'll be outed as cargo cult trash. If they keep it to themselves however they can just lie about the capabilities indefinitely without anyone being able to prove otherwise. Even then you had Indian Su-30s easily detecting J-20s a few years back.
Well, they seem to be planning to export it, so IDK. They certainly have a huge opportunity to become the major non-US aligned arms dealer in the world with Russia funneling all it has into Ukraine.
If we thought the J-20 wasn't really an LO aircraft that would have leaked by now. But consensus seems to be that it is, albeit one with many compromises and one which will be easier to detect than the F-35 and F-22. It's has some assets though, particularly the long range.
>Any reason they didn't do so?
would you want the Fricking Frogs holding your balls in a vice?
What if the Frogs surrender, again, and give your jets factory to the enemy?
After reading this thread would the conclusion end up being:
'Jolly Cooperation until the Frogs and Everyone Else realized that they ended up wanting two different things for the end result, also influenced by nationalistic dickwaving especially over engines and where they come from. This resulted in two similar (because they had a single starting point where everyone was vaguely on the same page) aircraft that ended up being two different aircraft. So... brothers then? Both were/are great aircraft that did exactly what they were supposed to do and every airforce that used their respective plane loved them.
And insofar as the 'Typhoon dead lmao' why in fricks name would they keep producing it (rather than just upgrading it) when the UK is getting F-35's? Both aircraft have a large export list, which means other air forces have looked at them and gone 'yep, thats pretty fricking great, we'll have them thanks.'
This whole thing seems like 'Tard trying to shit on the Bongs while wearing Frog camo.
Eurofighter sales: 600
Rafale sales: 290, even though France is willing to sell to everyone
>Eurofighter sales: 600
likely 700+ but several customers waiting on Tranche 4 and 5. Might even hit ~750-800 if enough customers commit to Tranche 5 buys.
>Eurofighter sales: 600
151
The original manufacturing countries of the Eurofighter Typhoon include the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and Spain. Any order from these countries therefore does not constitute a sale to a foreign customer, but a domestic order. Any attempt to demonstrate the contrary is vain, especially since in the near future the United Kingdom, arguably the program's most important technological partner, will operate fewer typhoons than Spain, and already operates around as many as Italy, due to the early scrapping of most of Tranche 1 Typhoons.
So far, 181 Typhoons have been ordered by Germany, 160 by the UK, 96 by Italy, 118 by Spain.
That's 555 domestic orders.
15 Typhoons have been sold to Austria, 72 to Saudi Arabia, 12 to Oman, 28 to Kuwait, and 24 to Qatar.
That's 151 export sales.
>Rafale sales: 290
311
>even though France is willing to sell to everyone
Only vatniks believe their own lies more than you do.
France refused to talk about Rafale sales with Turkey, France gave up on a sale to Iraq despite requests, France is also relinquishing on a sale to Serbia at the moment. The list goes on.
France has so far ordered a total of 234 Rafales, 24 of which were recently sold in used condition.
That's 210 domestic orders, consolidated.
Then France sold 55 to Egypt, 36 to Qatar, 62 to India, 80 to the United Arab Emirates, 42 to Indonesia, 24 to Greece including 12 used airframes,12 used airframes to Croatia.
That's 311 export sales.
Rafale has been exported twice as much as the Typhoon.
Nobody sent F-15s to the scrapyard after a production lot went through an average of only 2500 flight hours, which is what the UK and German Tranche 1 Typhoons are going through.
With about a third of the export numbers of the F-35 for about a tenth of the F-35 domestically ordered by the USA, I think the Rafale is doing just fine.
>Any attempt to demonstrate the contrary is vain, especially since
Rafalegay is a congenital idiot and terminal francophile homosexual
>anyone who likes the rafale is the same person
Have you considered some people might just genuinely like the rafale? I think it's prettier than the eurofighter. In capabilities it's common knowledge that they're roughly even, with the rafale having better ECM/Radar/Stealth abilities depending on which block/upgrade you've got on. There's no need to get all seethey about it.
oh no, I have no major issues against either the Rafale or the French
but that particular guy is the frog equivalent of warriortard, there's no point taking him at all seriously
>equivalent of warriortard
My dude, you're being trolled. It IS armatard/warriortard. He uses the same spurious reasoning, desperate reframing of arguments and cherrypicking of tiny irrelevant technical details or outright making shit up in order to claim he has actual autismo subject matter knowledge (he doesn't) and it's all in the name of sewing discord between western allied nations, with the bonus that the UK is technically on the side he's 'against'.
It's just taken this long to out him because nobody expects him to actually be shilling for a western nation, but notice he's completely ignored every post in the thread that he can't twist to make it look like the eurofighter is somehow 'failed' and tries to carry on samegayging to make it look like there's some sort of consensus? Yeah.
I'm quite sure rafalegay is a different person because he has his distinct autistic style
>domestic eurofighter sales don't count towards the total number
>of course domestic rafale sales do count towards the total number
glad to see you make it obvious to ignore your opinions.
>France has so far ordered a total of 234 Rafales
But have only received ~180 with 54 left to be delivered supposedly by 2030.
and then 218 export sales some of which are used airframes. With ~122 of those 218 still to be delivered.
So that's ~275 total produced and delivered with another ~175 still to be produced and delivered with more than half being domestic orders.
You ever just look at a post format and can immediately tell it's not worth reading?
>Then France sold 55 to Egypt, 36 to Qatar, 62 to India, 80 to the United Arab Emirates, 42 to Indonesia, 24 to Greece including 12 used airframes,12 used airframes to Croatia.
I don't get why they buy the Rafale, when the gripen exists.
Rafale = 2 engines = more expensive
Gripen = 1 engine = less expensive
Gripen can do everything the Rafale can, and it is cheaper.
Because the Gripen is more American than it is Swedish.
Didn't they send already the mk1 of the Typhoon to the scrap yard?
What a piece of shit no?
Most them, the rest of the UK's tranche 1 Typhoons will be scraped for spare parts by the end of 2025.
Are EU planes made of paper?
How come the USAF is still flying those F-5 Tiger II as agressors?
Because the US invests a fair bit of money into keeping them flying, the UK would rather save the money and invest it into their newer, more advanced airframes. It's not like the RAF has an excess of fighter pilots at the moment, even if you gave them another 30-40 Typhoons I doubt they'd be able to use them fully.
Airframes weaken with time on all aircraft when put through heavy G's, hell with just low G regular use, moron. You can get more flight hours in a year on an aircraft than some older ones get in decades, it depends on how much you use them and how often you strip them down and rebuild them back up on new parts.
Plenty of US aircraft need entire engine refits after a while, are their engines made of paper? No, of course not.
This thread reads like our local shill.
>What a piece of shit no?
they've also scrapped F-15s, does that make the F-15 a piece of shit?
F-15s are much older.
>a few years
which useless fricking jobsworth intern made this slide
What is it with Euros and canardy delta wings? I sometimes forget that the Rafale/Typhoon/Gripen are three different planes.
sweden did canards before it was cool
>its the 1980s (2000s), start of a brand new decade, field is wide open for next generation fighter sales. Time for Europe to catch up with America!
>A British-German-Italian consortium, Panavia (Eurofighter GmbH), after much toil and setbacks, has finally produced an advanced multirole combat aircraft, the Tornado (Typhoon), which meets all the partner nations' diverse requirements. Hopefully some of the cost of its convoluted development can be recouped with foreign sales
>Meanwhile, Dassault is certain that its own offering, the Mirage 2000 (Rafale) will enjoy the same export success as its predecessor the Mirage F1
>prospects are looking good for Euroboys, many countries are looking for a low cost, high performance light fighter to keep up with the latest generation of scary Miggers (Sukhois)
>Yes yes, well done, Europoors, well done. HOWEVER
>USA has just unveiled the F-16 (F-35), meant to be a less advanced, affordable export-friendly version of its primary air superiority fighter, the F-15 (F-22) .... but it still mogs the shit out of everything else
>the Israelis just tested it over Lebanon (Syria), no better advertising required
>oh fugg, everyone is lining up to buy it
>Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands, which France and the consortium had been hoping to capture, are the first in NATO to place orders
>sells just as well with third world countries and proceeds to utterly dominate the market for cheap Western fighters over the next two decades .... sales which should have rightfully gone to the Tornado (Typhoon) and Mirage (Rafale)
>EuroTurkey ends up being bought only by Saudi Arabia due to UK political bullshittery, only breaks even due to initial orders by the partner countries
>Mirage does slightly better outside Europe thanks to an extensive overseas bribery campaign by Dassault, but not as good as expected
>Still better than the Viggen (Gripen) I guess.... lel
How does this keep happening? Why does this keep happening?
>all jumped into the Rafale wagon
the rafale is a fricking incomplete thyphoon you moronic frog
The rafale is one of the most, if not the most, beautiful fighter jet ever designed. I also think it occupies quite a nice niche between fifth gen (too expensive for anyone but NATO or china, russia does not have a fifth gen fighter) and fourth gen (nearly obsolete to anyone who isn't a thirdie). It's also beautiful. I have been lucky enough to see it in person multiple times, it's a fricking dragon of a machine. Also M E T E O R
Why does /k/ seem to dislike it?
The Rafale, is fully the equal of the F-35, Su-57 and J-20 as a fifth generation fighter. Like the KF-21, it is a 4.5 gen with development potential to be further upgraded to fifth gen. That is why many countries, such as India, Indonesia, Qatar and the UAE which have requested F-35s or were looking at other fifth gen options like the Su-75 and KF-21, are now Rafale users.
The Eurogay Typhoon meanwhile remains a 4-4.5 generation aircraft with no further development potential, and the countries who are using it primarily (UK, Italy, Spain etc) are all F-35 users and have no incentive to develop it further
>The Rafale, is fully the equal of the F-35
nope
Radar absorbing coating, internal weapons bay, and higher electrical output for more advanced computers/radars.
Oh it that guy again and his autistic screeching
https://desuarchive.org/k/search/image/YRLWHo1iUkPvK1W4izCgkw/
Doubt he's french, more likely an indian with buyers remorse
>Was the Typhoon a big fricking waste of money?
Yes
>The EU should have all jumped into the Rafale wagon
No. Wouldn't work, the french would be hesitant to outsource production of Rafale parts to other euros.
The Gripen, on the other hand, would be a good choice for a low maintenance workhorse doing its job alongside the F-35. And the swedes are actually able to cooperate with others too, so the costs would go down. Also, there's no reason for the alternative to the F-35 being nuclear capable too, if the euros were using both. (And disregard the French, they'll use their own shit anyway).
It's really a shame how Gripen got fricked over. It's a great aircraft for semi-professional armies, like the countries with some form of conscription. It's a great plane for a prolonged conflict where the number of sorties is high. Not alone, of course, but together with proper fifth gen fighters it would truly shine.
Problem with Gripens is that you have to be on Britain's good list to get them. That's why Argentina tried and got told to frick off by BAE.
I'm sure there'd be no issue for the nations in the Eurofighter program ofc but there's more to the platform other than nation of origin.
That said, Gripens were definitely a decent choice for every single nation in Europe and there's been no reason to have Eurofighters over them in hindsight.
Just alot of money wasted to line the pockets of MICs. France's nationalism was forgivable on that alone.
>France's nationalism was forgivable on that
lol no
the ideal Eurofighter solution would have been for France to allocate workshare fairly and pay for its own navalized version instead of insisting others bear the costs as well, and the resulting Anglo-French-Italian congolomerate telling Germany to ram it up their kraut arsch. in the 21st century, only the bongs and frogs have proven willing to spend consistently on defence so any program that doesn't have both these nations working together is bound to be have to fight tooth and nail for funding
instead the frogs had to go do frog things and Eurofighter was saddled with the krauts as a result. their unwillingness to fund continuing development of the Eurofighter airframe is what's causing its delays. fundamentally the Eurofighter is every inch as capable as an F-15, the development paths are there, just not funded.
>the Eurofighter is every inch as capable as an F-15
The Eurofighter FGR4, is fully the equal of the F-15E
Im glad that after billions of dollars and years upon years of development Europe has finally managed to match a plane America farted out in the 70's.
>F-15E
>70s
kys
have a nice day warriorshart.
Did it serve its purpose? Is it serving its purpose? If the answer to both of these questions is yes, it was not a waste of money.
No, its an extremely capable frame, its development was slowed because various partners were slow to pony up the cash but its extremely capable A2A and very capable A2G and the sensor upgrades starting to roll out blow anything the rafale carries or is planned to carry out of the water.
the only advantage Rafale has is slightly more total weight carried of a slightly less varied and effective selection of weapons.
2 more years until we get an AESA radar Typhoon-sisters!
Typhoon failed because of Germany. Germany is a cucked country and therefore fcas and mgcs will also fail.
No wonder GCAP went with Japan.
(you)
Hey guys, i like france for the cheese and the bussy. If i move there do i have to become a rafael shilling moron or can i enjoy my state mandated daily baguette in peace?
Loving the Rafaël and its delicious freshly baked ASMP-Baguette missile is mandatory. But don't worry, it just comes naturally, much like a universal law of the universe.
Yeah, its a pretty 4th gen, not as sexy as the f35 but its still pretty
The F-35 looks much more high-tech, but it is pudgy, and no amount of 'muh sexo belly' spam will hide that.
Some pics I took au bourget
Rafale static display from le bourget please
>Was the Typhoon a big fricking waste of money?
Yes. It was made to compete with the planes that were flying at the time it was designed and first flown. This is almost as bad as fight-the-last-war syndrome. You need to build your weapons for a hypothetical future and correct your mistakes with costly refits when that future arrives and isn't anything like what you anticipated.
Because the Typhoon is flat out superior to the Rafale.
Also Bongland Typhoons have state of the art phased array radars.