Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

The Rafale probably performs better, but the SH might have a more powerful AESA.

There's a bigger reason,though, why UK would prefer SH. They are in the Eurofighter partnership, after all. There's no carrier version of the Typhoon, artists' conceptions notwithstanding. UK certainly isn't going to come up with the money to develop and produce Sea Typhoon on its own (Sweden could afford to do Sea Gripen for a customer because a lot less work would have to be done given the nature and design of the Gripen NG).

So, if they buy a few SH, no big deal, everyone understands, it's irrelevant to future marketing of typhoon. But if they bought Rafales... Can you imagine how Dassault marketing would run with that? "Even the people who build the Typhoon buy the Rafale"! "Let me tell you about another satisfied Rafale customer, one of the Typhoon partners". "How good can their plane be if they have to come to us for our plane"? "They sell the Typhoon, but they buy the Rafale". And so on.

Of course, the RAF would be happiest if the whole thing collapses and the CVFs become the world's largest helicopter carriers.

F-16.net Sponsor

I admit that post made me laugh aloud. IMO Hornets could be resold to...basically anyone, but Rafales seem to have a little more trouble finding buyers. SH would probably make the most sense, given its compatibility with more RN weapons, but Rafale is a close second.

southernphantom wrote:

I admit that post made me laugh aloud. IMO Hornets could be resold to...basically anyone, but Rafales seem to have a little more trouble finding buyers. SH would probably make the most sense, given its compatibility with more RN weapons, but Rafale is a close second.

Well Rafale just won a competition for 126 aircraft, and SH has never won a competition, it usually doesn't even make it to the finals. The Australian buy never went out to competition, they looked at what it offered and how compatible it would be with their existing infrastructure and bought it as an interim aircraft pending the delivery of F-35 (same as the original justification for SH, interim aircraft pending the arrival of A/FX).

SH would come with all kinds of reselling restrictions, whereas if you've got the cash, you too can have a Rafale. Possibly some lower time F/A-18C/Ds could be picked up for a good price. "Trade you these Harriers for your Hornets--oh, wait; too late". Another possibility would be the Sea Gripen, UK already has a relationship with the aircraft, it wouldn't cost that much to make a carrier version, Sweden would probably kick in some of the financing for the prestige and to make it more competitive elsewhere and it wouldn't embarrass the Typhoon sales effort.

On a side note, the most cost effective F-35 solution would be to go back to the F-35B, but that would involve a reversal of a controversial decision and gov'ts just don't do that.

aaam wrote:

The Rafale probably performs better, but the SH might have a more powerful AESA.
There's a bigger reason,though, why UK would prefer SH. They are in the Eurofighter partnership, after all. There's no carrier version of the Typhoon, artists' conceptions notwithstanding. UK certainly isn't going to come up with the money to develop and produce Sea Typhoon on its own (Sweden could afford to do Sea Gripen for a customer because a lot less work would have to be done given the nature and design of the Gripen NG).

No, the only reason why UK would prefer SH is POLITICAL..RN flying a French fighter?
come on ! We know that the Rafale bested the SH during an exercise between the US navy and the French Navy. US pilots were extremely impressed with the Rafales Flight Control System, which gives better carrier landing performance than any other aircraft ,including their overweight brick, the SH .Today ,the SH has a better radar and longer range AA missiles but Rafale has allot of room to improve. Rafales will probably be carrying an impressive AESA radar by 2013 and METEOR by 2015 which will give them an unprecedented BVR capability. After 2015 ,I would bet my money on Rafale..

aaam wrote:

Another possibility would be the Sea Gripen, UK already has a relationship with the aircraft, it wouldn't cost that much to make a carrier version, Sweden would probably kick in some of the financing for the prestige and to make it more competitive elsewhere and it wouldn't embarrass the Typhoon sales effort.

You make a good point about the Gripen with it's British components. I don't know that the competition point has much merit since all of these aircraft have been in competition with the Typhoon.

duplex wrote:

aaam wrote:

The Rafale probably performs better, but the SH might have a more powerful AESA.
There's a bigger reason,though, why UK would prefer SH. They are in the Eurofighter partnership, after all. There's no carrier version of the Typhoon, artists' conceptions notwithstanding. UK certainly isn't going to come up with the money to develop and produce Sea Typhoon on its own (Sweden could afford to do Sea Gripen for a customer because a lot less work would have to be done given the nature and design of the Gripen NG).

No, the only reason why UK would prefer SH is POLITICAL..RN flying a French fighter?
come on ! We know that the Rafale bested the SH during an exercise between the US navy and the French Navy. US pilots were extremely impressed with the Rafales Flight Control System, which gives better carrier landing performance than any other aircraft ,including their overweight brick, the SH .Today ,the SH has a better radar and longer range AA missiles but Rafale has allot of room to improve. Rafales will probably be carrying an impressive AESA radar by 2013 and METEOR by 2015 which will give them an unprecedented BVR capability. After 2015 ,I would bet my money on Rafale..

Regarding SH vs. Rafale AESA, Rafale will be penalized by its smallish antenna and SH has the advantage of years of operational AESA experience. By the time Rafale actually gets Meteor, SH will have AIM-120D, so it'll be interesting to see how the range numbers fall out.

That said, I like Rafale a lot, I think it's a better a/c, even if SH might have some sensor advantages. I just can't see the UK buying Rafale for the reasons I mentioned, especially if we're talking an interim a/c until F-35.

destroid wrote:

aaam wrote:

Another possibility would be the Sea Gripen, UK already has a relationship with the aircraft, it wouldn't cost that much to make a carrier version, Sweden would probably kick in some of the financing for the prestige and to make it more competitive elsewhere and it wouldn't embarrass the Typhoon sales effort.

You make a good point about the Gripen with it's British components. I don't know that the competition point has much merit since all of these aircraft have been in competition with the Typhoon.

My point here is that potential customers won't look at an RN purchase of a Sea Gripen as a knock against Typhoon. A small RN purchase would be seen as an expedient stopgap to meet a unique UK need for which there is no Typhoon variant, not a lack of faith in the Typhoon itself. A purchase of Rafale, though...

You are aware the Sea Gripen exist only on paper right? SAAB has absolutely no experience whatsoever of carrier ops. Sure, it´s a bit beefed up for short runway landings but that's not nearly the same stress as a cat and trap. That said, if you had to turn a land based fighter into a ship based one you'd probably be best of going with the Gripen but it'll cost bucketloads of cash in an austere budget environment. And that's before things start to go wrong and the schedule slips.. Never gonna happen.

As an interim solution, the Rafale is just too much of a reach for interoperability reasons (though it is probably a better fighter than the SH). If it comes down to the wire and the F-35C seems unlikely to be ready, I would suggest that the RN look into leasing a small number of SHs to avoid having an embarrassing white elephant on their hands. Of course, there's the matter of where they would get the planes. Are the RAAF SHs carrier compatible? The F-35A should already be entering service in Oz by then.

How about a lease-swap of the Swiss F/A-18C's or D's? The Swiss airframes average around 1700 hours on them. Plenty of Typhoons collecting dust in the RAF. The government should try to work out some kind of an exchange.

madrat wrote:

How about a lease-swap of the Swiss F/A-18C's or D's? The Swiss airframes average around 1700 hours on them. Plenty of Typhoons collecting dust in the RAF. The government should try to work out some kind of an exchange.

EF-2000s collecting dust? Do elaborate; I'm curious.

aaam wrote:

The Rafale probably performs better, but the SH might have a more powerful AESA.

There's a bigger reason,though, why UK would prefer SH. They are in the Eurofighter partnership, after all. There's no carrier version of the Typhoon, artists' conceptions notwithstanding. UK certainly isn't going to come up with the money to develop and produce Sea Typhoon on its own (Sweden could afford to do Sea Gripen for a customer because a lot less work would have to be done given the nature and design of the Gripen NG).

So, if they buy a few SH, no big deal, everyone understands, it's irrelevant to future marketing of typhoon. But if they bought Rafales... Can you imagine how Dassault marketing would run with that? "Even the people who build the Typhoon buy the Rafale"! "Let me tell you about another satisfied Rafale customer, one of the Typhoon partners". "How good can their plane be if they have to come to us for our plane"? "They sell the Typhoon, but they buy the Rafale". And so on.

Of course, the RAF would be happiest if the whole thing collapses and the CVFs become the world's largest helicopter carriers.

Actually the RAF would be happiest if the F-35Cs get delivered then they argue that keeping up the skills for carriers are too costly and they end up with their Tornado replacement.

1st503rdsgt wrote:

EF-2000s collecting dust? Do elaborate; I'm curious.

Less than half of the UK's order will be used due to massive cuts in spending, thus their need to sell off Typhoons to other nations.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... -navy.html

The best solution for the RN would be to abandon the ill-fated F-35 program and build 120 or so Rafale's for two QE class carriers in the UK under licence.
The RN would get a state -of -the -art- fighter with an impressive performance 4-5 years earlier and most important of all, cheaper.

120 Rafales would cost more than 120 F-35s AND be less effective.

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

Rafale or Super Hornet for the Royal Navy ?