F-16 Reference
5th Gen Fighters
|
| Author |
Message |
|
tod
|
Posted: Dec 05, 2006 - 04:40 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast

Joined: Sep 24, 2006 - 05:36 PM
Posts: 26
Status: Offline
|
and i have an article about tiger meet; The first rafale F2 deploymernt.
The NATO Tiger Meet is a NATO exercise that every year brings together squadrons that all have a tiger as an emblem. The 2006 event, which ran from September 25 - 30 on the Spanish base of Albacete, showcased some fifty combat aircraft from eleven nations. Among these were a dozen or so French combat aircraft, including two F2-standard Rafale two-seaters from the 05/330 "Côte d'argent" squadron.
"Our presence satisfied a twin objective," explains lieutenant-colonel Norbert Pages, commander of the 05/330. "This involved checking the operational added-value offered by the aircraft in an inter-ally context while validating the transfer of the maintenance files via a Syracuse satellite link."
This second part of the mission was a perfect success, with the results obtained by the self-testing of the aircraft being sent every day to the Rafale maintenance IT server in Saint Dizier (the Amasis IT system). The aircraft were 100% available throughout the week of exercises, and the M88-2 engines from Snecma (Safran Group) came through with flying colors across a wide range of missions: from supersonic interception at high altitude to low-altitude raids. The Rafales were engaged daily in two missions: aerial defense in the morning and offensive raids in the afternoon. An indisputable sign of their versatility was the fact that the two aircraft and their crews were able to switch seamlessly from one mission to the next.
Total consistency
"The first lesson to be learnt from these flights comes from the remarkable quality of the weapons system," underlines lieutenant-colonel Pages. "We were able to verify that the sophisticated sensor fusion and the use of the L16 data link enabling the exchange of digital data without the use of the radio offered us significant superiority for understanding tactical situations." The Frontal Sector Optronics (FSO), for which the infrared channel is supplied by Sagem Défense Sécurité (a branch of the Safran Group), is particularly appreciated by the crews, since it allows them to obtain positive identification of their targets from a far greater distance than with other aircraft and, in this business, distance is synonymous with safety.
"The NATO Tiger Meet provided confirmation that the scope of the Rafale's means of identification is totally consistent with the scope of its weaponry, particularly as far as the AASM guided missile on air-to-ground missions is concerned." explain the pilots.
The AASM Modular Air-Ground Missile, fitted with a hybrid GPS/inertia guidance kit from Sagem Défense Sécurité and a solid-propellant range enhancement kit, will enter into service with the French Air Force at the start of next year. However, the Rafale F2 fire controls already make it possible to simulate their use in complex air-to-ground scenarios. The operational flexibility and far superior range of the AASM compared to the JDAM (a GPS-guided bomb) and to laser-guided weapons surprised, if not to say disconcerted, more than one observer at Albacete. "With its modular weaponry, along with the possibilities offered by the sensor fusion and the data link, there is not much that we cannot do with this aircraft," is the conclusion of the French crews. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
Posted: Feb 12, 2012 - 1:27 PM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
 |
|
idesof
|
Posted: Dec 05, 2006 - 06:41 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: May 29, 2006 - 11:59 PM
Posts: 638
Status: Offline
|
|
tod wrote:
and i have an article about tiger meet; The first rafale F2 deploymernt.
The NATO Tiger Meet is a NATO exercise that every year brings together squadrons that all have a tiger as an emblem. The 2006 event, which ran from September 25 - 30 on the Spanish base of Albacete, showcased some fifty combat aircraft from eleven nations. Among these were a dozen or so French combat aircraft, including two F2-standard Rafale two-seaters from the 05/330 "Côte d'argent" squadron.
"Our presence satisfied a twin objective," explains lieutenant-colonel Norbert Pages, commander of the 05/330. "This involved checking the operational added-value offered by the aircraft in an inter-ally context while validating the transfer of the maintenance files via a Syracuse satellite link."
This second part of the mission was a perfect success, with the results obtained by the self-testing of the aircraft being sent every day to the Rafale maintenance IT server in Saint Dizier (the Amasis IT system). The aircraft were 100% available throughout the week of exercises, and the M88-2 engines from Snecma (Safran Group) came through with flying colors across a wide range of missions: from supersonic interception at high altitude to low-altitude raids. The Rafales were engaged daily in two missions: aerial defense in the morning and offensive raids in the afternoon. An indisputable sign of their versatility was the fact that the two aircraft and their crews were able to switch seamlessly from one mission to the next.
Total consistency
"The first lesson to be learnt from these flights comes from the remarkable quality of the weapons system," underlines lieutenant-colonel Pages. "We were able to verify that the sophisticated sensor fusion and the use of the L16 data link enabling the exchange of digital data without the use of the radio offered us significant superiority for understanding tactical situations." The Frontal Sector Optronics (FSO), for which the infrared channel is supplied by Sagem Défense Sécurité (a branch of the Safran Group), is particularly appreciated by the crews, since it allows them to obtain positive identification of their targets from a far greater distance than with other aircraft and, in this business, distance is synonymous with safety.
"The NATO Tiger Meet provided confirmation that the scope of the Rafale's means of identification is totally consistent with the scope of its weaponry, particularly as far as the AASM guided missile on air-to-ground missions is concerned." explain the pilots.
The AASM Modular Air-Ground Missile, fitted with a hybrid GPS/inertia guidance kit from Sagem Défense Sécurité and a solid-propellant range enhancement kit, will enter into service with the French Air Force at the start of next year. However, the Rafale F2 fire controls already make it possible to simulate their use in complex air-to-ground scenarios. The operational flexibility and far superior range of the AASM compared to the JDAM (a GPS-guided bomb) and to laser-guided weapons surprised, if not to say disconcerted, more than one observer at Albacete. "With its modular weaponry, along with the possibilities offered by the sensor fusion and the data link, there is not much that we cannot do with this aircraft," is the conclusion of the French crews.
Ah, yes, all that unprecedented French technologie... |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
skrip00
|
Posted: Dec 06, 2006 - 05:42 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Jul 04, 2006 - 12:15 AM
Posts: 557
Status: Offline
|
| As for F-14s having trouble "locking-on"... I mean... those things are OLD! So dont expect much technological capability from them. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
toan
|
Posted: Dec 06, 2006 - 08:47 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Nov 27, 2004 - 04:14 PM
Posts: 535
Status: Offline
|
1. Rafale is designed for replacing Mirage III/V, Mirage F-1, Jugar, F-8P, Super Etendard, Mirage 2000C/-5F, Mirage 2000N, and finally, Mirage 2000D. Most of these fighters must retire and be replaced before 2012, while the FOC time schedule of JSF for foreign customers will be no early than 2018 according to the estimation of Royal Navy this year. The time schedule of F-35 to enter service today can just only chase up the retirement of the final few batchs of productional Mirage 2000C and D.
2. If FAF and/or FN introduce F-35, it will need two totally different logistic and training systems for maintaining and operating Rafale and F-35, which shall mean much more cost and man-power requirement instead of saving money.
3. There is also a big problem in weapon choice if FAF and / or FN introduce F-35:
a. Buy American weapons such as AIM-120, AIM-9X, JDAM, JASSM, Harpoon and so on for F-35. However, this choice will cause difficulties in logistic and training system, and serious threat to the life of French domestic defense industry so that it is unlikely to be acceptable.
b. Incorporate French weapons such as MICA-FR/IR, AASM, SCALP-EG, Exocet and so on into its own F-35. However, this choice:
(1) It needs USA's cooperation to give France such a kind of authority in software revision for incorporating French weapons.
(2) It costs a lot of additional price. Taking my country (Taiwan) for example, a few years ago, we had tried to put our domestic BVRAAM (TC-2) onto the weapon list of our own 150 F-16 A/B MLU. USA government agreed this plan with an amazing costs: 400 million USDs. So the plan was cancelled finally. Let's image how much money will France have to pay in order to incorporate its MICA, AASM, SCALP-EG, Exocet, and so on into its own F-35..........
(3) The internal weapon bays design of F-35 may cause additional difficulties for incorporating French weapons, since none of the French fighter's weapons today is designed for internal carriage.
4. It should be true that F-35 will be more stealthy than Rafale. However, will USA let France, the country that USA dislikes, or even hates most in the Western world, to share its most valuable techonology????
5. As for French Navy, the two carriers it will own after 2015 shall be 42,000 tonnes and 58,000 tonnes class, and F-35B & C are much bigger and heavier (14.0 to 14.5 tons class) than Rafale M (9.8 to 10.5 tons class). Shall the French carriers be able to bring enough F-35Bs or Cs and operate them safely and effectively at that time??? I think there might be some problems.
6. Many Frenchmen earn their livings in French defense industry, and France-made weapons have earned a lot of money in exporting market for its country. In 2005, France was the 2nd biggest country for weaponary exportation, which had earned even more money of weaponary sale than USA at that year....................If France chooses JSF and its weapons instead of buying more Rafale and its domestic weapons, then these independent defense achievements will be threatened, and many Frenchmens' job would be endangered. |
Last edited by toan on Dec 22, 2006 - 05:52 PM; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
 |
|
duplex
|
Posted: Dec 22, 2006 - 01:54 PM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Apr 14, 2005 - 05:30 PM
Posts: 302
Status: Offline
|
|
toan wrote:
6. Many Frenchmen earn their livings in French defense industry, and France-made weapons have earned a lot of money in exporting market for its country. In 2005, France was the 2nd biggest country for weaponary exportation, which had earned even more money of weaponary sale than USA at that year....................If France chooses JSF and its weapons instead of buying more Rafale and its domestic weapons, then these independent defense achievements will be threatened, and many Frenchmens' job would be endangered.
TOAN,
Sorry can't agree with this statement .France has lost its position as the second or even third largest exporter of defence products long time ago. Nowadays even the UK employs more people in defence and aerospace industries than France .This was actually the reason for Chirac's recent decision to set up a special commission to investigate and ascertain the problem and devise a solution which would put France back into her previous strong position in world defence markets.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bi ... ele=jdc_34
As far as the big ticket items are concerned,France can only rely on few submarines and frigates which are being manufactured under licence by customers in their own shipyards..(Pakistan and India).Rafale doesn't sell and Mirage 2000 production line shut down leaving only the Eurocopter as a major player and France owns only the half of the company..
France would never opt for JSF simply because their national pride wouldn't allow it.On the other hand,the US would under no circumstances make such a superior technology available to a nation which they dislike so much and never trust. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Pilotasso
|
Posted: Dec 22, 2006 - 02:15 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Oct 29, 2006 - 03:35 AM
Posts: 519
Status: Offline
|
Its also sufice to say that Frances requirements are different than those fullfilled by the F-35 and that the Rafale reflects them. The French want to be able to carry loads the F-35 wont, at least for the medium term.
The rafale is a bit too expensive but by no means its underpowered. I've allways find some comments funny saying it is crap when those peaople are only amateur aviation fans, that could only make someone on the inside of the program laugh out of his assumptions. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
toan
|
Posted: Dec 22, 2006 - 04:02 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Nov 27, 2004 - 04:14 PM
Posts: 535
Status: Offline
|
|
duplex wrote:
toan wrote:
6. Many Frenchmen earn their livings in French defense industry, and France-made weapons have earned a lot of money in exporting market for its country. In 2005, France was the 2nd biggest country for weaponary exportation, which had earned even more money of weaponary sale than USA at that year....................If France chooses JSF and its weapons instead of buying more Rafale and its domestic weapons, then these independent defense achievements will be threatened, and many Frenchmens' job would be endangered.
TOAN,
Sorry can't agree with this statement .France has lost its position as the second or even third largest exporter of defence products long time ago. Nowadays even the UK employs more people in defence and aerospace industries than France .This was actually the reason for Chirac's recent decision to set up a special commission to investigate and ascertain the problem and devise a solution which would put France back into her previous strong position in world defence markets.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bi ... ele=jdc_34
As far as the big ticket items are concerned,France can only rely on few submarines and frigates which are being manufactured under licence by customers in their own shipyards..(Pakistan and India).Rafale doesn't sell and Mirage 2000 production line shut down leaving only the Eurocopter as a major player and France owns only the half of the company.
http://www.ploughshares.ca/libraries/mo ... ons05c.htm
In 2004, France was the No3 arms exporters in the world.
http://english.pravda.ru/russia/economi ... _weapons-0
In 2005, France was the No2 arms exporters in the world who had earned 6.3 billion USDs from this business (0.1 billion USDs more than USA's arms exportation at that year).
About the anticipation of French arm deal with Saudi Arabia in the near future..............
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bi ... le=feature
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
wimpy
|
Posted: Dec 22, 2006 - 05:44 PM
|
|
|
Newbie

Joined: Dec 22, 2006 - 04:32 PM
Posts: 1
Status: Offline
|
With my experience as a fighter pilot i would like to give opinion on the topic too.
Let's evaluate both fighters on facts and take a conclusion afterwards.
RAFALE
In one of the early replies "skrip00" talks about the poor results of the rafale during A2A combat exercise. Well since 2002 several European nations deployed fighters at Landivisiau (the Franch Navy's Rafale airbase). The Rafales froved to be very efficient against every fighter. We can't say that the Rafale is unable to win A2A fights. I think the Rafale is a very capable aircraft for A2A missions.
There were problems with the Rafale's radar indeed. And that can be one of the main reason of the failure to sell it to other countries. But don't forget these problems can be solved. The French AF recently decided to buy less airframes in order to develop a better (new) radar. And I'm confident that the French have the technology the develop a radar with the same performance as the American radars.
To talk about the Rafale's A2G capabilities I'll start by saying that the Rafale is capable to cary laser designation pods. She's also capable to fire A2G missiles so every body who said that she wasn't able to perform any A2G mission was wrong. The use of the SCALP/EG cruise missile and the multi-purpose AASM A2G missile will be certified in the near future.
For now I disagreed with most of the negative comments about the Rafale. But I have to agree with the fact that the Rafale didn't perform that good in international fighter replacement competitions. But it's not true that the failure was based on it's so called poor capabilities. I'm sure that politics are involved too.
F-35
Before talking about the F-35's I have to admid that the JSF is a "better" fighter than the Rafale. It was developed a decade after the Rafale so it's not more than logical that F-35 will be a more capable aircraft. But, like the Rafale, she's experiencing some trouble too.
The F-35 will be delivered later than originaly planned. That might be a problem for nations using older fighters wich need urgent replacement. Denmark for instance, they want the new fighter to be deliverd by 2010. Since the F-35 can not be delivered before 2014 that's a serious problem.
Norway has a similar problem and both nations are looking more than just interested at both the JAS-39 and the EF-2000.
Another problem is the cost of the F-35. Almost every nation participating in the JSF program complained about the increasing cost. Despite the fact that the Netherlands already singed for the next phase the treasure published a report in which it complaind about the high cost of the JSF program. The lack of sufficient progrom ofset causes equal problems.
About the weapon capabilities that not much to say for the moment since the F-35 did not start testing weapons in flight yet (that will not happen before 2009 I suppose).
France: Rafale or F-35?
I think the answer on this question is pretty simple to guess. If we look at the relative popularity of the Rafale in France itself we can say that a possible "replacement" of the aircraft by F-35s is unlikely. France invested a lot of money in the project. And it's amongst the best fighters in the world.
I see no good reason why France should abandon it's Rafale in favor of the F-35, even if it is a slightly better fighter. Let's not forget that in today's wars the rafale is superior to any Russian or Chinese fighter in use or in development.
Eventually, after a few years of service both aircraft will have, more or less, the same capabilities.
Politics
I think we should abandon the discussion about the political differences between the US and France. After all, both nations work closely together int he war against terrorism .
I understand that the American sometimes anoy the Franch and the other way around but they look at the world in a completely different way. It would be better to put these differences aside and that both nations accept that they are different. As a neutral person (neither French nor American) I can say that both countries and the people are wonderfull. But I'll stop talking about politics and stuff. I just wanted to show that this is a forum about aviation and that we should not start discussing about other things and forget what this is all about.
Both aircraft are pieces of art. Try to enjoy the beauty of both rather than breaking them down.  |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
duplex
|
Posted: Dec 22, 2006 - 07:47 PM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Apr 14, 2005 - 05:30 PM
Posts: 302
Status: Offline
|
Conventional Arms Transfers to Developing Nations, 1998-2005
Source: Congressional Research Service (no public website)
Ref: Order Code RL33696
Issued Oct. 23, 2006
98 pages in PDF format
In its annual report to Congress, the Congressional Research Service found that developing nations continue to be the primary focus of foreign arms sales activity by weapons suppliers. During the years 1998-2005, the value of arms transfer agreements with developing nations comprised 66.8% of all such agreements worldwide.
The value of all arms transfer agreements with developing nations in 2005 was nearly $30.2 billion. This was a notable increase over 2004, and the highest total, in real terms, for the entire period from 1998-2005. In 2005, the value of all arms deliveries to developing nations was $17.7 billion, the lowest total in these deliveries values for the entire 1998-2005 period (in constant 2005 dollars).
Recently, from 2002-2005, the United States and Russia have dominated the arms market in the developing world, with the United States ranking first for 3 out of 4 years in the value of arms transfer agreements, with Russia ranking second for 3 out of these same four years. From 2002-2005, the United States made $33.3 billion in arms transfer agreements with developing nations, in constant 2005 dollars, 35.2% of all such agreements. Russia, the second leading supplier during this period, made $21.8 billion in arms transfer agreements, or 24.3%. Collectively, the United States and Russia made nearly 60% of all arms transfer agreements with developing nations during this four year period.
In 2005, India ranked first in the value of arms transfer agreements among all developing nations weapons purchasers, concluding $5.4 billion in such agreements. Saudi Arabia ranked second with $3.4 billion in such agreements. China ranked third with $2.8 billion.
Sorry Toan,according to my sources,France has never been the number two.
Besides,as I already pointed out,the Eurocopter contracts doesn't belong France alone. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
OPIT
|
Posted: Dec 23, 2006 - 12:03 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast

Joined: Sep 02, 2006 - 02:01 PM
Posts: 32
Status: Offline
|
"In 2005, Russia ranked first in arms transfer agreements with developing
nations with $7 billion or 23.2% of these agreements. France was second with $6.3
billion or 20.9% of such agreements. The United States was third with $6.2 billion
or 20.5%."
source |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
idesof
|
Posted: Dec 23, 2006 - 03:33 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: May 29, 2006 - 11:59 PM
Posts: 638
Status: Offline
|
|
OPIT wrote:
"In 2005, Russia ranked first in arms transfer agreements with developing
nations with $7 billion or 23.2% of these agreements. France was second with $6.3
billion or 20.9% of such agreements. The United States was third with $6.2 billion
or 20.5%."
source
The operative word here is "developing." If you include arm sales to developed naions, the U.S. is far, far ahead of France and Russia. Remember, too, that France sells arms to nations the U.S. would never sell weapons to, and the same is true of the Russians (need I mention Iran?). Sorry to say, but France is a bit whorish when it comes to what country it will sell arms to. If offered enough money, France would sell its own mother. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Corsair1963
|
Posted: Dec 23, 2006 - 05:16 AM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Dec 19, 2005 - 04:14 AM
Posts: 1830
Status: Offline
|
|
idesof wrote:
OPIT wrote:
"In 2005, Russia ranked first in arms transfer agreements with developing
nations with $7 billion or 23.2% of these agreements. France was second with $6.3
billion or 20.9% of such agreements. The United States was third with $6.2 billion
or 20.5%."
source
The operative word here is "developing." If you include arm sales to developed naions, the U.S. is far, far ahead of France and Russia. Remember, too, that France sells arms to nations the U.S. would never sell weapons to, and the same is true of the Russians (need I mention Iran?). Sorry to say, but France is a bit whorish when it comes to what country it will sell arms to. If offered enough money, France would sell its own mother.
So, we know the Russians are selling to Iran. But, who are the French selling to.............  |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Neotopia
|
Posted: Dec 24, 2006 - 11:10 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast

Joined: Sep 27, 2006 - 02:12 AM
Posts: 67
Status: Offline
|
|
idesof wrote:
OPIT wrote:
"In 2005, Russia ranked first in arms transfer agreements with developing
nations with $7 billion or 23.2% of these agreements. France was second with $6.3
billion or 20.9% of such agreements. The United States was third with $6.2 billion
or 20.5%."
source
The operative word here is "developing." If you include arm sales to developed naions, the U.S. is far, far ahead of France and Russia. Remember, too, that France sells arms to nations the U.S. would never sell weapons to, and the same is true of the Russians (need I mention Iran?). Sorry to say, but France is a bit whorish when it comes to what country it will sell arms to. If offered enough money, France would sell its own mother.
Nevermind that the US domestic defence market is a large as the rest of the world combined... |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Corsair1963
|
Posted: Dec 24, 2006 - 11:30 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Dec 19, 2005 - 04:14 AM
Posts: 1830
Status: Offline
|
| Still............what about the French??? |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Wildcat
|
Posted: Dec 25, 2006 - 06:50 PM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Nov 11, 2003 - 12:49 PM
Posts: 289
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
Remember, too, that France sells arms to nations the U.S. would never sell weapons to, and the same is true of the Russians (need I mention Iran?). Sorry to say, but France is a bit whorish when it comes to what country it will sell arms to. If offered enough money, France would sell its own mother.
Well, sadly, it is absolutely true that France has a long habit of selling sophisticated weapons to states that should not get them. However, one can hardly say that the US sells weapons only to pure and innocent democratic countries.
Selling weapons to the wrong people is common among most of Western countries.  |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|