F-35 Lightning II vs Dassault Rafale

Are you trying to dispute that the F-15/F-16 were more advanced than the Mirage 2000?

I have not dug enough into the Phantom and the III/5/50s to comment about it.. and the whole point of this thread is the Rafale, so...

However, depending on the mission, the timeframe, and the versions considered, the answer is a resounding yes, the 2000s were (are) more advanced than the Viper & Eagles in some significant aspects.

The 2000N had a better ECM then the F-16 at the time.

But that's about it.
For all else, I'd climb in an F-16 any day, any time.

PS1; I love the 2000 but it is certainly is not better then a good old solid F-16. (from A to V, take your pick)

PS2; A Mirage 2000 with a P&W or GE engine? ? ? ? Now that would have been a "beast".

PS3; At the time, Dassault always did the same thing.
Build a fighter, then add a tiny cockpit and shrink the pilot into it. (This happened up to and including the Mirage F-1.)

It's probably safe to say that in 1973, the Mirage F1 was better than any Russian jet (Mig-21,23,25 or Su-15), Draken, or other indigenous European designs.

It's probably safe to say that in 1973, the Mirage F1 was better than any Russian jet (Mig-21,23,25 or Su-15), Draken, or other indigenous European designs.

Indeed.
But it definitely wasn't more advanced than the F-14 (which entered in service in 1974) and hence my point.

The 2000N had a better ECM then the F-16 at the time.

But that's about it.
For all else, I'd climb in an F-16 any day, any time.

PS1; I love the 2000 but it is certainly is not better then a good old solid F-16. (from A to V, take your pick)

PS2; A Mirage 2000 with a P&W or GE engine? ? ? ? Now that would have been a "beast".

PS3; At the time, Dassault always did the same thing.
Build a fighter, then add a tiny cockpit and shrink the pilot into it. (This happened up to and including the Mirage F-1.)

2000-5 had more advanced radar and ecm suite than any F-16 till block 52. Not to mention good old 15 before modernization which didn't even have FCS but was a potent adversary until the RDY/mica combo.... Losing to a F-16 was considered as a humiliation inside M2K pilots community...

https://hushkit.net/2016/10/13/mirage-2 ... cakeslice/

The 2000N had a better ECM then the F-16 at the time.

But that's about it.
For all else, I'd climb in an F-16 any day, any time.

PS1; I love the 2000 but it is certainly is not better then a good old solid F-16. (from A to V, take your pick)

PS2; A Mirage 2000 with a P&W or GE engine? ? ? ? Now that would have been a "beast".

PS3; At the time, Dassault always did the same thing.
Build a fighter, then add a tiny cockpit and shrink the pilot into it. (This happened up to and including the Mirage F-1.)

Exactly.
And regarding the F-15 I should have pointed out the F-15E Strike Eagle which is more of contemporary to the Mirage 2000 compared to the F-15C.

But I admit that regarding the Mirage 2000 comparison I should have pointed out the F/A-18A Hornet instead (of the F-15/F-16) which is indeed a true contemporary of the Mirage 2000. Is someone going to dispute that the Hornet was/is more advanced than the Mirage 2000??

I think if anything, the Mirage 2000 had RSS, FBW while the F-15 and F-14 did not. So in that aspect, yes, it was superior. However, given the testimony of many F-16 pilots on this forum (and from the ones that I have spoken to since the mid 1990's((mostly ANG aviators)) -WVR, the 2000 was never better than the F-16. What it did have was a better ITR, and to a degree better AOA ability (but not equal to the Hornets). The F-16 had the better T/W and STR. Both probably equal in roll. (having equal pilots, it would be a good fight).

The Mirage 2000 always was equipped with a radar missile. It was not until the F-16ADF that the Viper had AIM-7 and -120 ability.



One thing I will say, is that the Rafale certainly is the most advanced of the Eurocanards. The Eurofighter is a bit behind, and the Gripen is far, far behind.

The way I see it the F-16/F-18 are "4. gen" fighters whereas the Typhoon, Rafale, and SH arrived a bit later at at the stage and are 4.5 gen fighter, and if you look at the evals being done, the Rafale, Typhoon and SH score higher than the F-16/F-18, mainly due to better avionics, better ECM, ECCM, integrated IRST, sensor fusion, etc. ec.


I would expect this pattern to repeat itself, and that a German/French fighter launched in 2040 can perhaps be described as "5.5 gen fighter", being "half" a generation after the F-35. However by that time the F-35 will be supplemented by a US "6. gen fighter".

Just like Rafale/Typhoon in many ways are superior to F-18/F-16 (but vastly inferior to the F-35) I would not be surprised if the next German/French fighter will be superior in some respect to the F-35, but inferior to the 6. gen US fighter that will be launched at that time. It will perhaps be more "all-aspect, broad-band" stealth, and perhaps also include supercruise.

I am sure all will be superior to whatever Russia, Turkey, India or Korea can come up with, however I would be concerned about China around 2035-2040...

France has basically always led Europe as far as advanced aircraft design (Mirage F1, Mirage IV, Rafale) and with their knowledge and experience they will continue to do so.

2000-5 had more advanced radar and ecm suite than any F-16 till block 52. Not to mention good old 15 before modernization which didn't even have FCS but was a potent adversary until the RDY/mica combo.... Losing to a F-16 was considered as a humiliation inside M2K pilots community...

https://hushkit.net/2016/10/13/mirage-2 ... cakeslice/

Be my guest ; show me in the provided URL the sentence supporting your assessment in bold.

2000-5 had more advanced radar and ecm suite than any F-16 till block 52. Not to mention good old 15 before modernization which didn't even have FCS but was a potent adversary until the RDY/mica combo.... Losing to a F-16 was considered as a humiliation inside M2K pilots community...

https://hushkit.net/2016/10/13/mirage-2 ... cakeslice/

You should know better - the Block 50/52 were in by 1992 with AMRAAM, the M-2000-5 wasn't in till the late 1990s and was probably comparable to the F-16AM up until they stopped upgrading the Mirage because of the Rafale (As Ian Black mentions).

If you meant the M-2000C S5 (Late 1980s) that was most likely closest to the F-16A ADF overall after it got the 530D - they both had a few things they could do better than the other.

I expect an F-16 pilot losing to a Mirage 2K was an embarrassment as well.

In the article he linked to, the pilot admitted that the F-16 is better than the Mirage-2000!

There is an article somewhere in which either a RNAF or Danish F-16 MLU pilot was interviewed. (Sorry, I can't seem to find the link.) He said that once the Mirage 2000 attempts to turn with any significant G load, it "starts to fall out of the sky". Which ironically corresponds to its EM diagram. Once at 9G, if he attempts to sustain it, he generates some very high negative Ps.



found the interview:

http://www.f-16.net/interviews_article24.html

As far as the Greeks are concerned. People have to remember the structure of the air force in question. Here in the states, nearly ALL F-16 units are 60% or more structured (train) for the Air to Ground mission. I think it is actually over 2/3 or 70%. Meaning that they are not specifically tailored to the Air to Air mission as the F-15C units here are.

I suspect that in the Hellenic AF. The F-16 units overwhelmingly train for the Air to Ground mission. While the Mirage 2000 chaps train nearly 100% for the Air to Air mission.

2000-5 had more advanced radar and ecm suite than any F-16 till block 52. Not to mention good old 15 before modernization which didn't even have FCS but was a potent adversary until the RDY/mica combo.... Losing to a F-16 was considered as a humiliation inside M2K pilots community...

https://hushkit.net/2016/10/13/mirage-2 ... cakeslice/

Be my guest ; show me in the provided URL the sentence supporting your assessment in bold.

LOL!
That comment from monkeypilot is so preposterous that I simply refused to reply.

And actually by reading monkeypilot's link/site, one can read the following:

How would you compare the aircraft to an F-16?

“I’d say the F-16 has the edge – whilst the M2000 evolved from the RDM – RDi to RDY versions they were pretty small upgrades in terms of airframe performance – The latest Block F16s are a world apart from the original F-16As. Part of the Mirage 2000’s problem was the arrival of Rafale, which pretty much stopped any further development.”

I rest my case...