Rafale News

[Sancho78]

Another interesting DSI article especially about the convergences and differences between the Air force and the Navy. For example:

Air force:
- HMD is essential.
- A2G: want more AASM.
- want to use Exocet.

Navy:
- HMD is optional.
- A2G : want more GBU49
- believe being the only one qualified to use Exocet
- Meteor is not essential
...
More (in french) :
http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/236/dsi5.jpg
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/6738/dsi6.jpg[/QUOTE]

Can you explain these points, why is HMD important for the air force, but not for the navy and why does the navy se Meteor as not essential? In any possible war scenario, aren't the navy Rafales the first that could see air combats?

[Olybrius]

About the RBE2 and co, i have no problem to say that all these radars should have an equivalent range.

Regardless UAE, full GMTT/GMTI modes were planned for the F4 standard:
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...=1#post4943320

About the OSF, The OSF-IT will be more compact but for now the only solutions planned to boost the radar performance are to increase the power and to use new materials (GaN).

About the tender, i don't know, these are only speculations, i guess many other factors must come into play.

About the second DSI article above, detailed answers are given in the scans but in French, i'll translate it when i'll have time.

[Martel]

Can you explain these points, why is HMD important for the air force, but not for the navy and why does the navy se Meteor as not essential? In any possible war scenario, aren't the navy Rafales the first that could see air combats?

Well, for the HMD, Navy as a culture of Air to Ground assault. Protection of the carrier group is done but Frigate. That might explain why Navy doesn't seem to want Meteor. These are pure guesses.

[Slenke]

Well, for the HMD, Navy as a culture of Air to Ground assault. Protection of the carrier group is done but Frigate. That might explain why Navy doesn't seem to want Meteor. These are pure guesses.

Do the Navy have an equivalent to the Meteor? Or do they prefere within visual range combats, or more medium range combats?

[kovy]

Well, for the HMD, Navy as a culture of Air to Ground assault. Protection of the carrier group is done but Frigate. That might explain why Navy doesn't seem to want Meteor. These are pure guesses.

This is sad.
There is no point of maintaining a separate group of 80 pilots/rafale just for the navy.
The rafale M should be operated by the french air force in 2/3 dedicated squadrons (like the FAS)

Like that, there would be no pointless divergences caused by cultural (military) origins.

[JoaMei]

Well, it is pretty unlikely that the carrier will be used against an enemy which has a decent airforce that is a threat.

And if you are in a limitide budget you will take what is most important.

[filochard]

Well, it is pretty unlikely that the carrier will be used against an enemy which has a decent airforce that is a threat.

And if you are in a limitide budget you will take what is most important.

very true but imo the navy should get the know how with HMD and Meteor so those stuff could be transfered from the AdA to the Navy very fast.

Just in case, who knows, Canada could get a dictator that would try to invade St Pierre et Miquelon

More seriously, Kovy's idea is quite .. well .. revolutionaire, but probably a good one.

[xav]

No Meteor? No air combat?

Might as well sell the Hawkeyes back

[Olybrius]

Better to be two
DSI Special Edition, August 2010

[...]
Beyond the ETR, the sharing, at the scale of the Rafale, affects also the orders for spare parts. The Navy, which for its initial spares packages, had apparently made a more important investment effort than the Air Force, has accepted the sharing of the stock of consumables and the loan , in both way, of repairable spares (electronic cards, miscellaneous equipment) and some equipment (Damocles NG pod or OSF)

Some differences persist

The willingness to work together is well established. It is illustrated by the recent introduction of a Rafale workgroup . And it’s no more the time, henceforth, of a "confrontation" with an Air Force wanting to take under his wing the Navy’s Rafale. Everyone is working together to elaborate the military feature sheet for the MICA air-air missile successor.
However, tensions may still exist between sailors and airmen. Thus, with the Exocet. The Air Force today strongly expresses its willingness to use the Exocet. The sailors considers this as very special mission - the flight at very low altitude over the sea requiring a very specifical experience - which must belong exclusively to them. They also asserts the reduced level of the stocks of missiles AM-39. The pilots continued qualification requires regular strikes. As a result, broaden the ability to the Air Force would mechanically consume more missiles. In addition, the Navy has acquired the “3787” beams used to fire the AM-39 and the analogic to digital retrofit kits for carrying AM-39 Block 2 missiles.
Differences also exist as to the priority given to acquire some equipment or weapons. Thus, there is now a debate between the Navy, preferring the 250 kg laser-guided/GPS GBU49 and the airmen frankly opting for A2SM. The sailors do not want either the laser guided rockets that the Air Force wants to integrate on the Rafale hardpoint 3. The guiding technology does not seem they mature for them. [...]
Regarding the Meteor long range air-air missile , it is far from being considered by the sailors as a priority. It is considered by them as primarily intended to intercept heavy aircraft, like AWACS or tanker in a context of unstable conflict concerning more the Air Force than the Navy, the latter occurring rather in the context of an entry zone and facing threats flying at low altitude. In addition, for the sailors, the Meteor, if it can act effectively at long range against old fighters, will not be able to cope with F-22 or Typhoon [at long-range]. These modern missiles won’t be fired at 120 km but much closer! In this context the MICA appears well enough to them.
Similarly, sailors , unlike airmen, does not consider the HMD as an essential equipment. They note that it can bring a "plus" in very specific and limited combat cases but it is fragile and heavy, a 2 kg overweight over the head of the pilot would be difficult to manage for cervical vertebrae during catapults and would not permit, due to cervical fatigue, ensuring long flights. And for the MICA, firing into corners with the HMD would require integrating Mode 3 and set a specific liaison aircraft/missile. Despite these slight differences, sailors and airmen readily acknowledge it’s more comfortable to defend together the Rafale case facing the CEMA [chief of staff of the armed forces]. Particularly , because of the lack of export, when to find additional funding to order the 11 Rafale/year promised to Dassault.

Captured and google translated from:
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/6738/dsi6.jpg

[Slenke]

Do the Navy have an equivalent to the Meteor? Or do they prefere within visual range combats, or more medium range combats?

No one? Olybrius, Xav? Anybody?
Edit: I just read the article posted above by Olybrius. The Navy seem to settle with MICA due to Meteor being ineffective against Typhoon (?!) and F-22 at range?

[flanker7]

MICA covers both the BVR and VR combat, though the Meteor has a greater max range

[Olybrius]

Not directly related to the Rafale, but here is a very interesting book about the French Air Force 1912-1976, (based on official documents):



http://www.ladocumentationfrancaise....782110077608/#
(Only in french)

[Olybrius]

Spanish F1 and Rafale at Kesckemet 2010:





More here :
http://www.spottingzone.com/forum/ph...c10482-45.html

[Olybrius]

Few month ago, Ueli Maurer was campaigning for a postponement ...

Swiss Defence Minister wants to continue with 22 new fighter jets
R euters Deutschland, August 18

The Swiss Defense Ueli Maurer now wants to hold on as originally planned in the procurement of 22 new fighter jets.

According to a report on Swiss television, Maurer expects a massive increase in the cost of the project. Instead of the originally planned 2.2 billion Swiss francs budgeted, the Ministry of Defence , in a new army report ,estimates a sum of five billion francs (€ 3.7 billion) for the entire defense project.
[...]
The decision on the purchase of new fighter planes had been suspended last fall. Since then, various options were discussed, including the purchase of only twelve machines or the cancellation of the entire project. The decision of Switzerland is considered as pointing the way for the aircraft industry as currently a number of European countries are looking for a successor for their obsolete fighter aircraft. There are also extensive tender Brazil and India.

Google/babelfish translated from:
http://de.*******.com/article/worldN...67H06R20100818

For the record:
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...=1#post5088190

[Martel]

Interesting, it's the first time I see a "fake canopy" painting on a F-1.