Rafale

[Daryl J.]

For the Revell Rafale M revised tooling with bombs: 

Swedish splinter for a summer training session with the Scandihooves; retains French markings.  Land based ops.

[GTX_Admin]

What about a Vietnamese Rafale?

[Volkodav]

To counter Chinese threat, apparently the Chinese media are pushing for the use of non-peaceful measures against Vietnam and the Philippines over South China Sea territories.  Fools don't they realise that western map makers calling a body of water "something China something" gives them automatic ownership hundreds of years later.

[Old Wombat]

I think you may mean:

To counter Chinese threat, apparently the Chinese media are pushing for the use of non-peaceful measures against Vietnam and the Philippines over South China Sea territories.  Fools don't they realise that western map makers calling a body of water "something China something" doesn't give them automatic ownership hundreds of years later.

I wonder if they want to take China Lake by "non-peaceful measures"?

[Old Wombat]

I wonder what the visible differences would be if the Rafale was upgraded with F-35 compatible avionics, targeting & defensive systems, & what improvements that might bring to its performance?

Anyway, separate to the above wondering,, I'm looking at either a RAN or RAM Rafale build.

My assumption is that Australia has at least one real carrier from which to launch the Rafales &, while the RAAF go with the F-35, the RAN takes the cheaper option & buys the Rafale for itself & the RAM.

[GTX_Admin]

the RAN takes the cheaper option & buys the Rafale for itself & the RAM.

You might want to check that…the Rafale isn't necessarily the cheaper option anymore…just ask the Indians.

Anyway, I still look forward to seeing a RAN FAA Rafale M

[Volkodav]

Me too

[Old Wombat]

I guess I should have said cheaper & immediate, as of about 10 years ago - the RAN being wary of cost blow-outs on in-development projects.

To replace its old carrier aircraft (A-7's & either F-4's or, more probably, F-8's) as it upgrades its carrier/s.

PS: You may be waiting a while at my current build rate!

[GTX_Admin]

Here's something to inspire you to move faster:




More here.

[Cliffy B]

If only 

[Volkodav]

Outstanding, that one of yours Greg?

[dy031101]

I have long dreamed of Taiwan being the export launch customer for Rafale (thank you, BlackOps, for the fulfilling my request):



Thank you, "Mr. Democracy", and thank you, Lawyer Ah-Bian, for spearheading administrations that utterly ruined that possibility...... I don't know if Taiwan will have a shot at it again......

[kitnut617]

So what is exactly wrong with the Rafale, it's certainly not lighting any fires with other Governments ---

[Old Wombat]

In my opinion, nothing.

It just happens to be the "last" of the Gen4 fighter designs & was a bit too early for many of the fighter renewal acquisition programs. So, it lost out to the "first" of the Gen5 fighter designs (F-35 JSF).

Greg has pointed out that the Rafale is no longer much cheaper than the F-35 to buy. My feeling is that this is largely a matter of scale, there are so many countries buying the F-35 (& who have already invested so much in it that they can not afford for it to fail) that the ginormous development costs are able to be amortised across a vastly greater number of aircraft.

If the Rafale had been purchased in similar numbers & upgraded as required, I still think the cost per unit would have been much cheaper than the F-35.

I, also, still think that the Rafale would be a better choice for many countries spending their dollars/yen/pesos/etc. on the F-35.

Other opinions may be available.

[dy031101]

So what is exactly wrong with the Rafale, it's certainly not lighting any fires with other Governments ---

Also in the case of a certain self-proclaimed democracy off the coast of the PRC that I know of, there is also a matter of "your (as in previous administration, even if led by a different clique in the same party) arms procurement channel, not mine!"

[kitnut617]

So what is exactly wrong with the Rafale, it's certainly not lighting any fires with other Governments ---

Also in the case of a certain self-proclaimed democracy off the coast of the PRC that I know of, there is also a matter of "your (as in previous administration, even if led by a different clique in the same party) arms procurement channel, not mine!"

sorry I'm not following you, what's PRC for starters -- and what is your arms procurement channel ?  But that is not telling me why if the Rafale was really as good as what some people are saying, why it's not being bought in droves, it's not any different to the Typhoon though  --  is it?

[Volkodav]

Another way to look at it is a Rafale buy in the early 2000s could have provided the purchasing nation with a state of the art combat aircraft delivering better performance and greater capability than any upgraded 4th generation aircraft while completely avoiding the issue of sustaining aging, hour limited airframes waiting for the F-35 to be delivered.  For example had Australia opted for an early Rafale buy there would have been no need for the SH buy, or the legacy Bug HUG and the F-35 buy could have been pushed out to the early of mid 2020s.

[kitnut617]

Stalling on a 5th generation buy though, wouldn't be helping you much, look at world events right now --

But in my last post I said the Rafale isn't any different to the Typhoon, except there is one -- Typhoons are selling ---

[dy031101]

sorry I'm not following you, what's PRC for starters -- and what is your arms procurement channel ?  But that is not telling me why if the Rafale was really as good as what some people are saying, why it's not being bought in droves, it's not any different to the Typhoon though  --  is it?

What I mean is that in some cases there are political reasons for Rafale's chance to be ruined before it could begin.  And sometimes those reasons can be more petty than people expect.

PRC stands for People's Republic of China, btw, as opposed to the ROC that stands for the Republic of China (Taiwan).  I merely refered to what people simply called China in a more specific way.

Taiwan pretty much demolished the French connection established with the La Fayette frigate and Mirage 2000-5 sale all by her lonesome- not because a Taiwanese official died in the scandal that went with the sale but because the French connection was not developed by the then-current administration.  Petty, and you ain't seeing nothing yet.

Just addin' to a previous comment that there is technically nothing wrong with Rafale itself.

[Volkodav]

Stalling on a 5th generation buy though, wouldn't be helping you much, look at world events right now --

But in my last post I said the Rafale isn't any different to the Typhoon, except there is one -- Typhoons are selling ---

Or don't delay the 5th gen buy and only keep the Rafales for 15-20 years instead of 20-25 and on sell them to NZ

[kitnut617]

OK PRC didn't connect there --

I was looking at which countries operated the Mirage because I thought maybe there would be a selling advantage for the Rafale.  It would appear that out of all the countries that did use the Mirage, none are using, or going to use the Rafale.  Countries like Israel and South Africa, maybe Australia, had a home grown industry to update or improve the Mirage and they're not even giving the Rafale a sniff.  So there has to be a reason why it's not selling, apart from the political side ---

As to 'our' procurement channel, we're in a different situation here in Canada.  A large proportion of our national product goes to the USA (as much as 80%), a huge amount of jobs are created to do that, and the aircraft industry isn't immune from it.  Canada is already producing parts for the F-35 and produced a lot of parts for the aircraft they have and still do operated.  Canadian Air Force has never operated a French made aircraft though ----

[jcf]

Rafale is not the 'last' of the Gen4/4.5 designs, it is 'older' than both Gripen and Typhoon.

Sales have been hampered by Dassault's disinclination to deal on price and lack of
coordination between Dassault and the French government, particularly on the foreign
trade side.

[Logan Hartke]

Canadian Air Force has never operated a French made aircraft though ----

Dassault CC-117 FALCON

Cheers,

Logan

[taiidantomcat]

Another way to look at it is a Rafale buy in the early 2000s could have provided the purchasing nation with a state of the art combat aircraft delivering better performance and greater capability than any upgraded 4th generation aircraft while completely avoiding the issue of sustaining aging, hour limited airframes waiting for the F-35 to be delivered.  For example had Australia opted for an early Rafale buy there would have been no need for the SH buy, or the legacy Bug HUG and the F-35 buy could have been pushed out to the early of mid 2020s.

Thats a very expensive option. Like a lot of money.

In my opinion, nothing.

It just happens to be the "last" of the Gen4 fighter designs & was a bit too early for many of the fighter renewal acquisition programs. So, it lost out to the "first" of the Gen5 fighter designs (F-35 JSF).

Its not quite that simple.

Greg has pointed out that the Rafale is no longer much cheaper than the F-35 to buy. My feeling is that this is largely a matter of scale, there are so many countries buying the F-35 (& who have already invested so much in it that they can not afford for it to fail) that the ginormous development costs are able to be amortised across a vastly greater number of aircraft.

If the Rafale had been purchased in similar numbers & upgraded as required, I still think the cost per unit would have been much cheaper than the F-35.

indeed but thats not the scenario, Rafales won't be produced in the thousands with JSFs in the hundreds. That was the whole concept of the JSF pool resources, get a massive serial production to build a superior fighter while keeping the cost low, IE getting the most of your money. The problem with euro-canards is they are built in small numbers and sold piecemeal. the "ginormous" costs are also still less than the Rafale additional cost unless your country start with a "U" and ends with "SA" and we weren't going to buy anything french so its moot. Rafales are very expensive for what you get.

When was the last time a european built fighter sold in quadruple digits and what was it? serious question-- does anyone know?

Gripen under 360
Rafale 126 so far (India brings it to 252)
EF typhoon under 571

Tornado is damn close with 992.

Another interesting sub-question in Europe itself what is the break down of european vs american fighter aircraft? Norway, denmark, Romania, portugal, netherlands, Greece, Belgium, poland and Turkey all fly F-16s? Are there more american fighters flown in europe than european built?

In order to get big numbers for the eurocanards (and this is good what if territory) Euro aircraft manufacturers would have to band together, steal away some of the American fighter operators in europe, generate other international interest and then deliver on a low cost high production machine with sound industrial performance, it would also help if the cold war didn't end because that put a lot of the eurocanards on the back burner.

so France, stays in the Eurofighter in the 1980s, and it would help if you could get the Swedes on board too.

One of the problems with the Eurocanards has been them infighting and under cutting each other, so Typhie wins some, rafale some, Gripen others... If it was just one airplane from all of them you drive up the numbers and lower the cost. but its always just a few here, a few there. The only competition F-35 has had from the US is the Super Hornet, and only the USN was really unto it and that was predating JSF, people who signed JSF are staying JSF.

I, also, still think that the Rafale would be a better choice for many countries spending their dollars/yen/pesos/etc. on the F-35.

Countries spending on the F-35 are getting not only a better and more advanced plane, but better industrial participation over more units and a longer period of time. For Example Canada is looking to make their money back building JSF parts that will make up the cost of buying them. Uncle sugar is footing a large majority of the R&D cost as well. So if you are a foreign country you are getting a superior plane, superior offsets, upgrade tracks for decades, and all you have to do is pay the JSF program fees and wait to buy while your factories start employing people.

Even if the Rafale is better on paper, things like logisitics and sustainment must be looked at, and the French have screwed that up badly on several occasions and have earned a reputation that is not easily forgotten.

Rafale is not the 'last' of the Gen4/4.5 designs, it is 'older' than both Gripen and Typhoon.

Sales have been hampered by Dassault's disinclination to deal on price and lack of
coordination between Dassault and the French government, particularly on the foreign
trade side.

^this^

sorry I'm not trying to RW anyone to death, But there are a lot of issues with the Rafale not all of them a fault of the plane itself. If everything was equal, price, upgrades, sustainment, logistics, offsets, politics etc, Rafale would be doing better but that isn't the world we live in.

[kitnut617]

Canadian Air Force has never operated a French made aircraft though ----

Dassault CC-117 FALCON

Cheers,

Logan

D'oh!  forgot about that one (even got a kit of it in the stash) and of course there's the CC-150 Polaris.  But to be fair, they're not really 'war' planes are they ---

[taiidantomcat]

D'oh!  forgot about that one (even got a kit of it in the stash) and of course there's the CC-150 Polaris.  But to be fair, they're not really 'war' planes are they ---

I love the look of the Polaris, You Canadians have great taste in schemes --same with that Falcon 

[kitnut617]

I love the look of the Polaris, You Canadians have great taste in schemes --same with that Falcon 

specially this one  (sorry for the thread drift)

[Silver Fox]

The Falcon looked better in this scheme from the 80's. Of course, it is possible  am *slightly* biased.

On topic though, the Falcon came closest to being a warplane. The three EW birds were tasked with VIP transport in time of war due to their equipment fit and greater survivability.


Trying to remember any highly successful Euro birds in the post-war era. I can't think of any that would make 4 digits, maybe the Mirage III?

[taiidantomcat]

The Falcon looked better in this scheme from the 80's. Of course, it is possible  am *slightly* biased.

On topic though, the Falcon came closest to being a warplane. The three EW birds were tasked with VIP transport in time of war due to their equipment fit and greater survivability.


Trying to remember any highly successful Euro birds in the post-war era. I can't think of any that would make 4 digits, maybe the Mirage III?

according to wiki you are correct, but it also looks like they are including other variants like the V and cheetah? This could get messy  When is a mirage not a mirage?

F-15s are 4 digits (and still in production)
F-18s are 4 digits (super hornet now in production with nearly 600)
F-16s are 4 digits (and still in production)

What was it that one French guy said about "divide and conquer" ??

[mrvr6]

The Falcon looked better in this scheme from the 80's. Of course, it is possible  am *slightly* biased.

On topic though, the Falcon came closest to being a warplane. The three EW birds were tasked with VIP transport in time of war due to their equipment fit and greater survivability.


Trying to remember any highly successful Euro birds in the post-war era. I can't think of any that would make 4 digits, maybe the Mirage III?

how many hunters were sold?

[taiidantomcat]

The Falcon looked better in this scheme from the 80's. Of course, it is possible  am *slightly* biased.

On topic though, the Falcon came closest to being a warplane. The three EW birds were tasked with VIP transport in time of war due to their equipment fit and greater survivability.


Trying to remember any highly successful Euro birds in the post-war era. I can't think of any that would make 4 digits, maybe the Mirage III?

how many hunters were sold?

nearly 2,000

[GTX_Admin]

Perhaps this (translated) comment from Dassault CEO Charles Edelstenne from 2012 sheds some light on Rafale's issues:

"...The market for the Rafale, it is countries that do not want or can not buy or American countries who want to have a second source while buying American...”

If that is truly what they are thinking then they already have a problem in that many of these countries also will struggle to afford the Rafale.

Now couple that with price issues (which have long been rumoured in the industry, and came out recently in India); coupled with a history of submitting low initial prices which then grow later on; questionable aftermarket sustainment support and also the delays in getting to full capability it is no wonder there has been less than stellar success with exports.  The French sales team have also lost some deals which were long rumoured to be theirs "to lose" (e.g. UAE, Brazil, Mororoco) which makes me really wonder about their abilities.

[GTX_Admin]

I wonder if things would have been more successful if France hadn't broken away from what went to become the Eurofighter program?  Perhaps then you would have seen a European fighter that cracked the 1000 acft mark...

[GTX_Admin]

BTW, I have seen a price of €152M per acft reported for the Rafale.  Certainly not cheap!

And before anyone asks "than why has it won in India" let me highlight two points:

• There is thrill no contract signed...despite some 2.5yrs now since its down select; and
• I would question just how much the offsets aspect influenced the decision here.  Remember that Dassault were desperate for a win...

[GTX_Admin]

I have long dreamed of Taiwan being the export launch customer for Rafale

I think you will find the Mirage 2000 experience diminished the prospects.

• The Taiwanese Mirage2000s have reportedly struggled to achieve satisfactory operational availability due to the high cost of parts and components and relevant technical maintenance problems;
• France was not keen to upset mainland China and thus risk getting shut out of a potentially far more lucrative market.

[Rickshaw]

I wonder if things would have been more successful if France hadn't broken away from what went to become the Eurofighter program?  Perhaps then you would have seen a European fighter that cracked the 1000 acft mark...

Dassault's pride (or arrogance) prevented that, Greg.  Marcel believed only his planes should equip the French Air Force.   I wonder, has anybody done a Eurofighter in French colours?   

[Jeffry Fontaine]

I wonder if things would have been more successful if France hadn't broken away from what went to become the Eurofighter program?  Perhaps then you would have seen a European fighter that cracked the 1000 acft mark...

Dassault's pride (or arrogance) prevented that, Greg.  Marcel believed only his planes should equip the French Air Force.   I wonder, has anybody done a Eurofighter in French colours?   

That sounds like an excellent idea for someone willing to expend the time and resources on such a project. 

While you are at it may as well build an F-18E or F-18F in Aeronavale markings to add more salt to those open wounds :)

[taiidantomcat]

I wonder if things would have been more successful if France hadn't broken away from what went to become the Eurofighter program?  Perhaps then you would have seen a European fighter that cracked the 1000 acft mark...

I think it certainly would have been close if it didn't meet or exceed it. With Aircraft sales "the rich get richer" The more you sell, the lower the cost, the better the sustainment and logistics -- upgrades become more palatable as well. The less you sell the more expensive to buy the more rare and expensive they are to maintain.

Had they stuck with together you are looking at over 800, maybe more deals in the middle east, south america, africa. at the very least you turn it into "US vs Europe" in western contests, it would actually tilt the scales. instead there is a lot of duplication of effort and one winning somewhere doesn't help much.

What if land is fun  Maybe a joint euro Fighter from the 1980s gen 4.5? Carrier version and land based version? maybe even include a "lightweight version" with a single (but same) engine, similiar cockpit, radar avionics, so you offer the "lite" version (gripen like) to those who can't afford the regular land version?

One of the reasons Norway did not opt for the Gripen NG was the idea that Saab may be out of the airplane business in 15-20 years, thus making them the owner of some very expensive collectors items, despite the advantages the NG may have offered.

Honestly Europe missed their shot. The idea of the EU coming together to create an F-35 competitor is incomprehensible to me at least. Its about getting as many eurocanards offloaded until the end now. unless they try a 5.5 gen fighter in the future, but there would have to be a serious perception of a need for such an airplane and the willingness to come together, pool resources, and stay together. and many nations will have already spent billions on F-35s that are expected to last for decades.

  I wonder, has anybody done a Eurofighter in French colours?   

Now that would be funny 

[GTX_Admin]

Some profiles I found here

[GTX_Admin]

I wonder, has anybody done a Eurofighter in French colours?   

I love this idea! :)

[Silver Fox]

Getting around US arms and technology restrictions was the selling point Dassault was counting on. Given the reliability issues suffered by many French designed systems it was a bad call. Essentially they drew attention to one of their worst weaknesses in order to differentiate them from the rest.

Similar to the Soviets trying to market the Lada a couple of decades ago by telling you it will get great has mileage if it starts. :)

[Volkodav]

What the Rafale really needed was to be available a decade earlier when the F-35 project hadn't started up yet, that way it would have been competing against F/A-18C/D and earlier blocks of the F-16C/D. 

[GTX_Admin]

What the Rafale really needed was to be available a decade earlier when the F-35 project hadn't started up yet, that way it would have been competing against F/A-18C/D and earlier blocks of the F-16C/D.

Unfortunately for Rafale its development was protracted (~14.5yrs from first demonstrator flight to initial service deliveries) - here is a comparison with the F-35 (which has only had ~10.75yrs for same interval despite greater complexity):

Technology Demonstrator First Flight:	4 July 1986 (Rafale-A)	24 October 2000 (X-35)
Proper Prototype First Flight:	19 May 1991 (Rafale-C)	15 December 2006 (F-35A)
First Delivery to Service:	December 2000 (Rafale-M to Aéronavale)	July 2011 (F-35A)
IOC Declared:	June 2004 (Rafale-M with Aéronavale - 6 acft only)	Planned: 2015 (F-35B with USMC), 2016 (F-35A with USAF)
Number Produced To Date:	126 (Rafale C, B and M)	100+ (there are around 114 in production at the moment across F-35A, B and C

[dy031101]

I think you will find the Mirage 2000 experience diminished the prospects.

Logistics is always a problem with anything military in Taiwan because spares and ordnances are WAY less understandable than whole vehicles to Taiwanese politicians.  F-16 has that problem, too, but at least ROCAF is relatively familiar with American systems and American trainings.

And then we are back to the old problem of new administration demolishing old channel and trying to build anew...... with every new administration comes the same mess being repeated.

France is seen by the PRC as a gateway to the rest of the Europe.  At this point France only has a real business chance with the PRC when it is in a consortium with other Europe countries, and otherwise PRC already considers France to have outlived that purpose.

[Weaver]

I wonder if things would have been more successful if France hadn't broken away from what went to become the Eurofighter program?  Perhaps then you would have seen a European fighter that cracked the 1000 acft mark...

Dassault's pride (or arrogance) prevented that, Greg.  Marcel believed only his planes should equip the French Air Force.   I wonder, has anybody done a Eurofighter in French colours?   

Dassault didn't really want the Eurofighter to start in the early 1980s (when early discussions were taking place) because their commerical and military cycles were out of step with the other partners. Britain, Germany and Italy didn't have an agile air-to-air fighter to sell and urgently needed one for their air forces, but France had the Mirage 2000, and they didn't want to make it obsolete before they'd sold all they could by developing it's replacement too soon.

Dassault and the French government therefore did what they'd done several times before: they joined the party in order to spoil it, demanding that Aeronavale weight limits had to take priority over all other requirements and Dassault should get 50% of the contract by value due to their experience with deltas (never mind the fact that they'd never built a canard delta  ). In the 1950s and 1960s that had worked several times, but it had left a bad taste in others' mouths (particularly Britain's) and by the 1980s, Britain, Germany and Italy were already successfully building the Tornado together, so they had the experience and confidence to tell the French to get stuffed.

Dassault went off in a huff and developed the Rafale separately, but with only the French budget to pay for development and the French national requirement as guaranteed sales, it's always struggled. ironically if the Aeronavale had accepted the higher weight of the Eurofighter, they'd have had to make the Charles de Gaulle bigger, which would then have enabled it to operated E-2Cs as designed, instead of having to have an embarrassing flight deck stretch after it had been built.

[Rickshaw]

Never built a canard delta?  What about the 4000?

Anyway, you could argue all Dassault's delta wing products were canards. 

[jcf]

Brian, that was punishing. 

[Rickshaw]

Thank you, Jon, that is a high compliment from you.   

[GTX_Admin]

Taking the combined Rafale/Typhoon common Eurofighter theme further, what about Rafales in the real world Typhoon schemes?

[Old Wombat]

Taking the combined Rafale/Typhoon common Eurofighter theme further, what about Rafales in the real world Typhoon schemes?

I'm thinking of melding the two into a single aircraft of the theory of "what if France & Dassault had played nice on the Eurofighter concept & had an input into its design".

If I do, it'll be in my usual kitbash scale of 1/72nd (because I can't afford that level of plastic surgery in 1/48th).

Still thinking about how to meld the two & keep their best aspects in the one fuselage.

[GTX_Admin]

Interesting.  I will be interested to see what features you combine.

[Old Wombat]

So will I!

One main point will be the ability to carry standard NATO weapons fits. :)

[Volkodav]

How about an Australian Rafale with US Avionics and weapons, basically a SH Block II shoehorned into the superior Rafale airframe as a replacement for the F-111 during the mid 2000s as an alternative to the SH lease / buy.  Say a joint Raytheon, Dassault project to win RAAF business.

[GTX_Admin]

I find the mention of the Suez Canal in this story quite bemusing given the British and French attacked Egypt following the nationalisation of the Suez Canal...

Egypt Close to Order for 24 Rafales

PARIS --- Egypt is close to signing a long-rumored order for 24 Dassault Rafale combat aircraft and one FREMM frigate, a package which according French media reports is worth €5 to €6 billion.

The order looks imminent as the French and Egyptian governments are reported to have reached a tentative agreement this week on the related financing package, during a visit here by an Egyptian government delegation. Rafale maker Dassault Aviation declined to comment on the deal, AFP wire service reported.

The agreement, reported Feb 05 by Paris business daily Les Echos, primarily revolves around the French export credit bank, COFACE, as cash-strapped Egypt does not have the money to pay for the entire package. COFACE will guarantee 50% of the deal’s value, down from the initial 80-90% requested by Egypt, and financing will be provided by a pool of French banks and possibly Saudi Arabia. Egypt has reportedly agreed to make a down payment of €500 million.

Egypt wants to have its first Rafales in service by August, for the inauguration of the expanded Suez Canal, and also wants early delivery of the frigate, which requires agreement of the financing package and contract signature in a matter of weeks.

The French government, whose multiyear defense budget depends on Rafale exports, has agreed to give Egypt an initial batch of Rafales already in service with its own air force, as well as the French navy’s llatest FREMM frigate, which is currently completing sea trials.

Meeting the delivery deadlines requested by Egypt depends, however, on whether and when it will make the down payment.

-ends-

[Volkodav]

Very interesting.  this will make for some great notional schemes, but the obvious whiff is Typhoon, Gripen, or SH instead of Rafales once we know what the Egyptian scheme is

[dams301]

Grey with national insignia ?

But before that, contracts need to be signed... Too many deception from contract which are close to be signed and for which we are still waiting (UAE, India, Qatar) or go for USA or another country (Morocco, South Korea, Singapour, Brasil, etc...)

[Old Wombat]

I have 2 x 1/48 Rafales (B & M) which will become either RAN or RAM.

If RAN, will get 2-tone grey/blue-grey wrap-around with low-vis insignia.

If RAM, will get 3-tone grey-green/grey-brown(tan?)/blue-grey wrap-around with low-vis insignia.

Have similar plans for a 1/48 Gripen (when I finally buy it) which will be navalised.

Not sure which aircraft type to use for RAN or RAM. Both have features useful to both services.

The main question is; which would be the best mud-mover & which would be the best interceptor/CAP aircraft?

[Volkodav]

I have 2 x 1/48 Rafales (B & M) which will become either RAN or RAM.

If RAN, will get 2-tone grey/blue-grey wrap-around with low-vis insignia.

If RAM, will get 3-tone grey-green/grey-brown(tan?)/blue-grey wrap-around with low-vis insignia.

Have similar plans for a 1/48 Gripen (when I finally buy it) which will be navalised.

Not sure which aircraft type to use for RAN or RAM. Both have features useful to both services.

The main question is; which would be the best mud-mover & which would be the best interceptor/CAP aircraft?

You have a RAN FAA and a RAM fixed wing air combat capability, does your alt also have a RAAF and army air combat force?

Probably have the Gripen as CAS and battlefield air superiority while the Rafale looks after interdiction, SEAD and long range strike as well as air superiority.

[Old Wombat]

Thanks, mate! Good answer! That generally puts the Gripen in the RAM & Rafale in the RAN FAA.

Well, there is a RAAF & there is an Army but I haven't at this stage given (& probably won't give) much thought to their outfitting as I'm solely focused on the RAM with a touch of RAN on the side - coz they're related services.

I'm also in favour of an Army air wing for CAS, near-battlefield strike & SEAD, recce/observation & helicopter support.

I see the RAAF as air superiority, long range/strategic strike, long range SEAD, logistics support & reconnaissance.


I've probably missed some elements, but you get the general gist.

:)

[elmayerle]

if both the Rafale and the Gripen are in Australian service, would it be a Gripen variant sharing an engine with the Rafale in order to reduce logistics costs?  Or would it be the other way around with the Rafale using the Gripen's engine?  The later would have the advantage of more support world-wide as the RM12 is derived from the F404/F412/F414 series of engines.

[Old Wombat]

I hadn't really thought about the engines but, having had a quick study, I'd probably go with the EJ200, with options to upgrade to EJ2x0 Stage 1 & Stage 2 as they became available.

Reason 1: EJ200 is bigger than the Snecma M88 by 17.5" length & 1.5" diam but is smaller than the Volvo RM12 by 2.0" length & 6" diam.
Reason 2: EJ200 is only 92kg heavier (dry) than the M88 but is 66kg lighter than the RM12.
Reason 3: EJ200 puts out more thrust (both wet & dry) than either the M88 or the RM12 while being less thirsty than either of them.
Reason 4: EJ200 has a thrust-to-weight ratio of 9.31:1, as compared to the M88's 8.5:1 & the RM12's 7.8:1

Alterations to the Rafale would be quite considerable, but less than for the RM12, & the EJ200 could be slotted into the Gripen with only minimal modification.

Hmmm, have to think about how to achieve that in plastic.

In my RAM universe I see both types being built under licence by the CAC, which still exists, & the engines being manufactured by the latest incarnation of the GAF, CAST (Commonwealth AeroSpace Technologies).

[elmayerle]

Sounds like a good choice.  Modifying the Rafale to take the EJ200 could make for an interesting design exercise but I wouldn't expect it to be an insurmountable problem.  I suppose it depends on the engine bay structure of the Rafale.  Too, in the real world you'd likely need to re-design the engine mounts and that leads to a structural reanalysis and that can get "interesting" (speaking from experience here on something far simpler).

[Old Wombat]

Chances are I'll just build the models with stock engines, as I get the feeling that modifying the Rafale for different engines would be a considerably bigger task than re-engining the F-86 (which was pretty much a completely new aircraft when fitted with the Avon).

The 1.5" increase in diameter isn't too bad, & the extra mass & thrust can be dealt with by reinforcing the engine bay.

The biggest issue, that I see, is dealing with the considerably greater length, followed by distributing that extra 184kg around the CG.

[Logan Hartke]

France confirms sale of Rafale fighter jets to Egypt

Dassault Aviation confirmed today the Arab Republic of Egypt’s decision to equip its air force with the Rafale fighter jet. “This decision is a continuation of our cooperation that dates back to the 1970s, and has seen the Mirage 5, the Alpha Jet and the Mirage 2000 fly in the colors of Egypt.” Dassault commented. The Egyptian decision marks the second international selection of the French fighter, following the Indian selection of Rafale in 2012.

The Egyptian order will cover 24 aircraft, part of which will be delivered this year. The order worth about 3.6-4 billion Euros is expected to be signed on February 16, the Elysee Palace said in a statement.

The Rafale is the first completely omnirole fighter capable of accomplishing all the missions assigned to combat aircraft (air-air, air-ground, air-sea). It first came into active service with the French Navy and the French Air Force in 2004-2006, gradually replacing seven types of aircraft belonging to the preceding generations. It was deployed in Afghanistan (2007-2012), Libya (2011), in the Sahel-Saharan strip(since 2013) and in Iraq (since September 2014). It was chosen for the Indian Army’s request for proposal for 126 aircraft. Negotiations surrounding the Rafale are currently underway with several governments.

Cheers,

Logan

[GTX_Admin]

[The Rafale is the first completely omnirole fighter

And people say Marketing folks have no sense of humour...

[GTX_Admin]

if both the Rafale and the Gripen are in Australian service, would it be a Gripen variant sharing an engine with the Rafale in order to reduce logistics costs?  Or would it be the other way around with the Rafale using the Gripen's engine?  The later would have the advantage of more support world-wide as the RM12 is derived from the F404/F412/F414 series of engines.

I would tend to go with either the F404 or F414. 

That said, prior to Saab's selection of the F414G for the latest Gripen variants, both the SNECMA M88 and the Eurojet EJ200 were under consideration for the Gripen.

From the Rafale's pov, remember that the early versions did fly with the F404.

[Old Wombat]

Cool!

I haven't looked at the internal structure of the Rafale but given what you've said, Greg, there is every chance that the EJ200 could almost slot straight into either with only minor mod's.


Ni-ice! :)



PS: I would have gone the F404/F414 route, except the EJ200 is a newer, lighter engine with better performance figures & a potentially longer development path ahead of it. (Obviously I'm not a government department.)

[Volkodav]

if both the Rafale and the Gripen are in Australian service, would it be a Gripen variant sharing an engine with the Rafale in order to reduce logistics costs?  Or would it be the other way around with the Rafale using the Gripen's engine?  The later would have the advantage of more support world-wide as the RM12 is derived from the F404/F412/F414 series of engines.

I would tend to go with either the F404 or F414. 

That said, prior to Saab's selection of the F414G for the latest Gripen variants, both the SNECMA M88 and the Eurojet EJ200 were under consideration for the Gripen.

From the Rafale's pov, remember that the early versions did fly with the F404.

Yes the Rafale A development aircraft used the F-404 but I believe it was a physically larger and heavier aircraft than the production models.  I have the Heller kit of it somewhere.

[Volkodav]

I like the concept of a heavy strike / light attack fighter combo going back to WWII, i.e. Beaufighter / Kittyhawk, Meteor / Vampire, CA23 / Sabre (FJ-4B) Phantom / Super Tiger etc.  Each service would have their own tailored iteration of this tactical strike wing, maybe with a medium or attack bomber squadron and a specialised support squadron (SEAD, ISR / Rec, ECM, FFAC) as well.  You could have Rafale as your Heavy fighter (single seater) as well as your attack bomber and the basis of your support types, five versions in an expeditionary strike wing.

[GTX_Admin]

I was reading yesterday that during the mid 1980's around the same time as France left the original Future European Fighter Aircraft that eventually led to the Eurofighter Typhoon, they were also encouraging Spain to do the same (Spain did leave but then re-joined).  What if they were successful and then co-developed the Rafale?  Imagine a Rafale in this sort of scheme:

[ChernayaAkula]

And then Spain is all.....

[Volkodav]

I was reading yesterday that during the mid 1980's around the same time as France left the original Future European Fighter Aircraft that eventually led to the Eurofighter Typhoon, they were also encouraging Spain to do the same (Spain did leave but then re-joined).  What if they were successful and then co-developed the Rafale?  Imagine a Rafale in this sort of scheme:

I worked with a bloke during my Automotive Industry R&D days that we had head hunted from BAE. He was an expert on composites, structural testing and strain gauging etc. and had strain gauged an entire Nimrod MR4 wing set.  Anyway, back on topic, he told me that losing Spain had placed the entire Eurofighter project at risk as none of the other members at the time had suitable facilities in a suitable climate to cure the composite components the project required.

[ChernayaAkula]

That's a sweet Rafale whif, but it may not be for very much longer:

Greece to Buy 10 Rafale Jets, Receive 8 More as ‘Donation’ from France

LINK!

More pics of the Rafale pictured above HERE on ARC.

[GTX_Admin]

[ysi_maniac]

^^^^
Love this. 

[ysi_maniac]

Mixing Rafale and Mirage F1. (top view fits with first side view)

[GTX_Admin]

[Old Wombat]

That would be very nice!