f4u7_corsair wrote:It's not a great secret that Canadian and Belgian competitions (among other) put much more weight on the political factor, beyond pure strategic partnership and technical requirements. We have two countries that have an extremely tight bond with the US (EPAF for BE, NORAD and other very close cooperation for CA). Dassault is a small company with limited financial ressources, and for the political factors stated above, the French government is very well aware that it stands little chance and that it's not very productive to try to weigh with politics. Dassault has been fucked in the butt a couple of times when technical evaluations were very favorable for the Rafale, but political considerations led to reevaluation (SK, SG...). It's a purely rational decision and not some unhappy, angry kid move as some of you like to believe.
To be honest I tend to agree with your post with the exception of the paragraphs that I'm quoting above and below which while I don't completely disagree I also don't completely agree.
For instance, I trend to disagree (or "disbelieve" is probably a better word?) with you that there were instances (South Korea and/or Singapore) where the Rafale was at a clear advantage but due to some "conspiracy" they ended up losing.
But yes, I fully agree with you that regarding Canada which is historically, politically, military closed tied to the USA that the chances of a non-US aircraft to win there are very, very slim but don't forget that this also and equally affects the Typhoon and Gripen NG (which by the way, they are still on the "race").
Regarding Belgium I don't agree much. You know that Belgium operates lots of French military equipment, right?
Belgium also historically operated French aircraft like for example the Mirage 5. So the US and French are IMO pretty much tied when it comes to military ties (pun intended) with Belgium.
And what to say about Brazil for example?? A country that has a clear and very close military ties with France, where it historically purchased lots of equipment from it such as Mirage III and Mirage 2000 and currently helicopters such as the Cougar and in the future Submarines (Scorpène-class), etc...
Yet here the Rafale also lost while being considered by many/most the favorite contender of all 3 finalists (Rafale, Super Hornet and Gripen NG). What was the excuse for that?
The fact (it seems) is that the Rafale is a quite expensive aircraft and apparently second only in terms of being expensive to the Eurofighter Typhoon and this alone makes a huge diference regarding potential export successes (or failures).
Moreover let's look at the Rafale exports. They were only exported to Egypt, Qatar and India. The first two where pure and simply political purchases where there wasn't any sort of a proper competition while regarding India the only "competition" where the Rafale managed to win was basically the "text book" on how
NOT to perform a competition (riddled with corruption, ever changing requirements, etc...).
So and please don't get me wrong but I find very puzzling when someone defends that Dassault dropped the Canadian and Belgium competitions and lost the vast majority of competitions due to "political meddling" when the same Dassault only managed to win (with the Rafale) due and directly due to some "real and direct political meddling"...
Perhaps it's time to admit what while the Rafale is indeed a great looking aircraft (IMO, between my favorite 4th gen fighter aircraft) the fact is that other competitors have been generally better where depending on the competition, the competitors ending up being either cheaper or more capable or both (when it comes to the F-35 for example).
f4u7_corsair wrote:It greatly contrasts with the FI procurement process, which seems (to me) to be the most balanced evaluation, more than I believe we have ever seen. Dassault has no reason to withdraw from it, as it (and France) has serious arguments in its favor - likewise for other contenders. The very recent book Paras hävittäjä Suomelle (Best fighter for Finland) offers some great insight about it.
When/if the Rafale loses in Finland than I wonder what would be the excuse? (my guess is that they'll be more the same - "more sort of political meddling"...)
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.