Forum: F-16 versus XYZ

F-16 versus Rafale



Search Search  Register Register  Private Messages Private Messages
guidelines Forum Guidelines
Post new topic   Reply to topic   1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Author Message
Mambo
PostPosted: Aug 11, 2003 - 05:20 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Guest





Which is better? And why?
  Send private message  
 
Sponsor
New postPosted: Sep 03, 2010 - 3:41 AM Back to top
F-16.net Sponsor





  Send private message  
 
Normsta3
PostPosted: Aug 12, 2003 - 07:00 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 10, 2003 - 03:08 AM
Posts: 136

Status: Offline
This is a tough call, mainly because the 2 fighters have a great deal alike. I'd have to say that Lieven summed it up pretty well.

In that particular exercise, one Rafale took down 2 Falcons. Now, that would surely say something important, right? Maybe. Everyone on this board knows that its the training of the pilots that's important, and since we don't know who was the better trained pilot, it's hard to tell.

And then there's the cost of the aircraft. If the F-16 were say half as expensive as the Rafale, then that encounter could be considered a draw. Of course, to the Air Force, that wouldn't mean jack cuz they just lost 2, not 1, but 2 of their pilots, so it really all depends on how you look at things.

Check out the following links for info on the Rafale. Hopefully, you and anyone else who cares about this topic will be able to reach some sort of conclusion.

http://drs.yahoo.com/S=2766679/K=Rafale ... ts/rafale/

http://drs.yahoo.com/S=2766679/K=Rafale ... ts/rafale/

http://drs.yahoo.com/S=2766679/K=Rafale ... rafale.htm

Some of these links don't have the highest quality sites, but they should offer at least some decent - quality data. But anyways, let's just get down to the nitty - gritty, is the F-16 better than the Rafale?

Assuming you're talking about the newest versions (Block 50 & up), then in turns of speed and range, definitely. However, the Rafale is noticeably stealthier and more maneueverable. Both seem to be equal in terms of payload diversity, both being capable of lifting a very wide range of weaponry into the air, though I think the F-16 can care more weapons than the Rafale. So basically, I think it's a toss - up, depending on what one thinks makes a fighter better than another. I'd love to say the F-16 like Lieven, but he & I both know it's not quite that simple. Peace.

P.S. - Of course, if it was my baby the F-16XL, then of course it'd be better. Smile
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Normsta3
PostPosted: Aug 12, 2003 - 07:11 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 10, 2003 - 03:08 AM
Posts: 136

Status: Offline
My bad on putting one link twice. LOL. anyways, here's the other link that was supposed to be there.

http://drs.yahoo.com/S=2766679/K=Rafale ... afale.html
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Commando
PostPosted: Aug 16, 2003 - 02:53 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Aug 14, 2003 - 07:39 PM
Posts: 67
Location: Qatar
Status: Offline
Yet again people compair fighters in different classes. Crying or Very sad
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Normsta3
PostPosted: Aug 16, 2003 - 05:04 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 10, 2003 - 03:08 AM
Posts: 136

Status: Offline
While they may be in different classes, both fighters share a few common characteristics, and so it would make for a very interesting match - up. Not to mention, that's the fun of a discussion board, to talk about stuff like this. Very Happy
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Commando
PostPosted: Aug 17, 2003 - 06:11 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Aug 14, 2003 - 07:39 PM
Posts: 67
Location: Qatar
Status: Offline
There still in different classes...Sad
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Normsta3
PostPosted: Aug 17, 2003 - 05:30 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 10, 2003 - 03:08 AM
Posts: 136

Status: Offline
In the end Commando, you're right, no matter what I say, they are indeed in different classes. However, in combat, aircraft may not always be matched up against other aircraft of the same class, so these topics do hold some value to them. Granted that I don't see the U.S. going to war with Great Britain any time soon Very Happy , I still think such discussions are quite interesting. Look at Top Gun (both the movie and the actual fighter school). Some of the best pilots in the USN have to go up against F-16s simulating MIG-29s, and while they're only in F-14s! That sounds like a pretty big mismatch in close-range combat, don't ya think, especially considering how the F-16N isn't weighed down by anything really, meaning it can show some of the true potential of the F-16. Those simulations should be quite a challenge for the pilots, and yet, the fighters are definitely in noticeably different classes, aren't they? I'm guessing so, though I'm not quite sure what you mean when you talk about the class of a fighter. In the case of a F-14 vs. F-16, do you mean a fleet defender against a multi-role fighter? Confused , lol, lol, cuz I'm not quite sure. The point is, for some reason the Navy thought for a while (not anymore I don't think) that matching up fighters in different classes held so merit or importance, so the same could technically be applied to this thread. Wink
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Commando
PostPosted: Aug 17, 2003 - 05:56 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Aug 14, 2003 - 07:39 PM
Posts: 67
Location: Qatar
Status: Offline
Well, War and Classes are different, a Rafale should go up against a F-22, and a JF should go up against a Gripen, in the UN bombings over Kosovo, F-16s Shot down MIG-29s, not MIG-29s shot down F/A-18s Smile
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Normsta3
PostPosted: Aug 17, 2003 - 06:21 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 10, 2003 - 03:08 AM
Posts: 136

Status: Offline
Good point there Commando, but aren't those classes supposed to prepare the pilots for possible war scenarios? If not, then what is the point of the classes, because that is what I thought their purpose was. But your matchups do seem pretty accurate, so frankly I don't know what to think, Confused , lol, lol, lol.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Commando
PostPosted: Aug 18, 2003 - 01:37 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Aug 14, 2003 - 07:39 PM
Posts: 67
Location: Qatar
Status: Offline
lol!...I'm saying that it ain't smart to send a F-16 up against an SU-30 alone one-on-one...In the bombings they knew that Yuguslavia had MIG-29s and lower aircraft, thats why they sent F-16s to fight them instead of F-15s, the threat wasn't that large in air-to-air battles.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Normsta3
PostPosted: Aug 18, 2003 - 09:01 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 10, 2003 - 03:08 AM
Posts: 136

Status: Offline
Ok, I see your point, but umm . . . . what is a Su-30? I only know of the more famous members of the Su family, such as the as the Su-27 and up (35, 37, etc.). Is the Su-30 a really good fighter? More detail would be welcomed.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Commando
PostPosted: Aug 19, 2003 - 05:22 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Aug 14, 2003 - 07:39 PM
Posts: 67
Location: Qatar
Status: Offline
The SU-30 is the Russian version of the American F-15E, like the F-15E it is a two-seat multi mission aircraft, India already has it, Pakistan is trying to get it along with F-16s at the same time. The SU-35, and SU-37 will be there to counter the F-22, Rafale, Tyhpoon, etc
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
ysslah
PostPosted: Aug 19, 2003 - 10:09 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Aug 18, 2003 - 01:37 PM
Posts: 84

Status: Offline
Ok..... I think they are in the same class. I don't think Rafale is bad. However, I don't think those French missles, such as MICA or Magic, are as good as AIM120C or AIM9X. Unless they face each other with no missles at all, I think Falcon's gonna send Rafale driver to heaven(may be hell?lol).
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Commando
PostPosted: Aug 19, 2003 - 05:03 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Aug 14, 2003 - 07:39 PM
Posts: 67
Location: Qatar
Status: Offline
If you say so........
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Normsta3
PostPosted: Aug 20, 2003 - 06:29 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 10, 2003 - 03:08 AM
Posts: 136

Status: Offline
I'm kinda feelin' ysslah on this one; I also don't really have a great deal of confidence in those French AA missiles. Granted that the Rafale may very well use a combination of the ASRAAM & AMRAAM missiles, but if not, then I think the Rafale has a problem.

The MICA & Magic just don't seem all that impressive to me, that's all. Of course, the obvious reason is probably my lack of knowlegde on them, but I just don't hear those missiles mentioned as being as deadly as say the R-73 Archer or Sidewinder family (AIM-9L and up that is). And not to diss the French either, cuz I know they make some good missiles. Anyone every seen what a Exocet can do, Laughing
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:     
Jump to:  
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Copyright © 2010 Lieven Dewitte and Stefaan Vanhastel