Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Rafale Proves Itself
SYSOP    8/7/2011 7:59:23 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54   NEXT
heraldabc    They picked Gripen...    11/30/2011 6:39:41 PM
That's ALL that matters. So your skewed and inaccurate presentation is WORTHLESS.
 
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
 
Hamilcar.
 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       11/30/2011 6:55:52 PM
its not a presentation, its official results from armasuisse
 
source Basler zeitung
 

Switzerland, Armasuisse officialy ranks the Rafale first

A few days before switzerland makes its final choice, the main operational results of the Armasuisse evaluation have been released.

Armasuisse made a first evaluation of the Gripen, Rafale and Eurofighter in 2008. Several Air to Air and Air to Ground trials were performed by the 3 contenders, in Switzerland,  in order to assess their relative efficiency in different roles.
A second Evaluation was done between March and August 2009 to take into account the upgrades and improvements of the 3 fighters in their "2015 form". This evaluation was based on data provided by the manufacturers or simulated flights. This final Armasuisse report, with updated rankings was released in November 2009 and is recommending the Rafale for the Swiss Air Force (confirming the rumors heard during the last 2 years).

In this report, each capability is ranked on 9 points, 6 points being the minimum score to meet the Swiss Air Force requirement (We understand that the 6 points benchmark would be the F/A-18C score)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-UllaAXo7QnY/TtaTpBS5UWI/AAAAAAAACHs/rk5-LU3C3JA/s320/armassuisse_eval.png" height="214" border="0" width="320" alt="" />
©Basler Zeitung November 30, 2011
Basler Zeitung has published the scores for 2 main mission types (see above) : Air defense and Ground attack mission. The green scores refers to the 2008 evalaluation while the red scores refers to the final 2009 evaluation including 2015 improvements.
  • The Rafale is ranked first with 7.28 and 7.41 points, 
  • The Eurofighter second with 6.49 and 6.54 points,
  • The Gripen is third with 5.68 and 5.62 points. Therefore it does not manage to pass the threshold of 6 points.

Various quotes from the report :

"Rafale and Eurofighter showed generally better performance than the F/A-18, Gripen worse" 

"The performance of the Gripen in air-air engagements as well as attack missions was insufficient"


"The most limiting factors of the Gripen design were the operating time, the flight performance and the maximum weapon load"

"The Rafale is the only aircraft that has met the requirements of the Air Force in all types of applications"
 
So the report is quite clear regarding the capabilities of the 3 aircrafts:
1- The Rafale is the best technical performer and thus recommended as the Tiger replacement.
2- The Rafale was ranked above the Eurofighter in both Air defense and ground attack missions.
3- The Gripen has serious weaknesses and is considered as a step back compared to the F/A-18 operated by the Swiss Air Force.


Sources:
Basler Zeitung
Bazonline.ch...
 
SO YOUR BELOVED F 18 resigned, and EFA was ranked behind Rafale (as usual) but i guess you are going to explain me you are more expert then armasuisse in fighter planes. Grippen won (well not finished many swiss politicians disagree) on low cost and offically stated that they intently do not want to bring swiss to top europe airforce standards....
Read a bit before getting a headache while stupid laughing. This analysis is the official one from a neutral country that did deep insight inquiries about the three planes. They finally choiced Gripen as low cost fighter and quoted Rafale by far AHEAD of EFA.
 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc    Andf I don't care, Kumquat.    11/30/2011 7:11:55 PM
Its meaningless noise published like the same crap that came out of the UAE, South Korea and even Brazil. As in it doesn't matter, what the French say about results. Bottom line where it counted (MISSION COSTS and reliability), the Rafale FAILED.
 
So....BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
 
Hamilcar
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/1/2011 2:19:08 AM

having actually done platform assessments - for 3 countries let me add a little reality check here.

platform assessments are not "graded" in such simplistic terms.  they are certainly not subsets out of a total of 10.

the last major asset assessment I was involved in ran to 550 pages and included 15 major areas of assessment (there is no adding up of all the vectors, and there is a classified section in all reports which does not get released into the public domain, and the breakdown is not even discussed with the competing vendors that were less successful)

I would add that the assessment data released to the companies was approx 12 gig of material - technical material, not pictures and photos, but actual performance data.

whatever that output is, it is certainly not the actual assessment and if anything is but a fraction of the actual results.

its basically meaningless. airforces do not pick platforms just because they are the cheapest, it includes interoperability issues, it includes maint and sustainment issues, it includes the training components, it includes the ILS issues, it includes through life costs, it includes future development costs, it includes weapons integration, it includes extant systems integration with other service elements.

anyone claiming that this is the summary of results has no idea of how we actually do a platform assessment.





 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       12/1/2011 3:48:24 AM
Of course it is extracts! And not from french source, but swiss (Basler Zeitung diary essentially, a swiss german speaking journal). Still swiss MoD stated during his conference that swiss woud intently not go to the top of european airforces level and that price had taken a major part of the choice.
In days before, Basler zeitung obtained a copy of the two reports. They pointed that Rafale was the only plane to have fully complied with swiss requirements and that Gripen had failed on several minimum requirements (EFA scoring between).
You cant expect swiss journalists to post an article of one thousand pages!
 
Some other statement  : 
Fernand Carrel, the former commander of the Swiss Air Force, regretted the choice of the Federal Council. "All experts know that the Rafale is the best," he said on Radio Suisse Romande.
 
Last sentence of 2009 report : 
n the end-2009 report, are taken into account modifications and improvements planned for the period between the practical flight test phase in 2008 and the planned delivery in 2015. The report ends with the request: "The Rafale produced by Dassault is proposed as the new combat aircraft of Swiss Air Force.” Best alternative to it is the Eurofighter.
You should go check on their website before posting when a source is given.
 
Two evaluation campaigns were held in 2008 and 2009. Here is the way the second one was organized :
 
30% Air Defence Capability
12% AtoG Capability
12% Recce Capability
6% Growth Potential
15% Operational suitability
17.5% Industrial offsets/Tech Transfer
7.5% Military cooperation

 I suggest you to go for a little browsing on swiss press before posting again (or simply stupid bashing from aussie). They ALL say Rafale had won tech evaluation , EFA second, Gripen third but financial considerations led the national commitee to propose the Gripen. And one of these journals could obtain a copy of the armasuisse reports (and  a credible diary).
 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       12/1/2011 3:52:00 AM


 

So....BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

 

Hamilcar

 
Quote    Reply

giblets       12/1/2011 4:41:04 AM
Ground attack being the 'offensive' graph.....so according to this graph/report, in 2008, when the Typhoon was only cleared to drop the paveway II (and unable to self designate), it was considered in trials as STILL superior to the F-18 as an a2g platform? Even as a self confessed Typhoon fan, I find this hard to believe!
 
The report also contradicts itself "The Rafale is the only aircraft that has met the requirements of the Air Force in all types of applications", yet the graph clearly shows that the Typhoon also meets the requirements (ableit only just). The Swiss Government also publicly stated that ALL THREE meet all the requirements, well before it got to the final stage.
 
It is not official, it is an alleged leak of an official document. 
Let's think about it, the RFP was for an aircraft to replace the F-5, and not the F-18. I am guessing that the Swiss Air Force were slight more capable of writing an RFP that did more than just compare the competitors to their F-18!
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/1/2011 4:43:09 AM

I have evaluated and selected french gear so it has got nothing to do with the french or their equipment.

get a fucking clue you halfwit.  you don't spread out a platform assessment over two years and rate its performance like presented in those extracts.  what you have is an uncontrolled extract released to the public.

platform assments are not presented in such a fashion - and I have seen french and german assessment reports so know their layout.  

countries don't make selections based solely on financial outlay - especially when the french were prepared to deliver that asset at an almost cost negative initial procurement price because the swiss would have been used as a reference site.  in the trade they're referred to as "gold clients"

grow up



 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc       12/1/2011 10:24:48 AM

I have evaluated and selected french gear so it has got nothing to do with the french or their equipment.

get a fucking clue you halfwit.  you don't spread out a platform assessment over two years and rate its performance like presented in those extracts.  what you have is an uncontrolled extract released to the public.

platform assments are not presented in such a fashion - and I have seen french and german assessment reports so know their layout.  

countries don't make selections based solely on financial outlay - especially when the french were prepared to deliver that asset at an almost cost negative initial procurement price because the swiss would have been used as a reference site.  in the trade they're referred to as "gold clients"

grow up

More politely expressed, but correct. One more thing to consider is:
 
The Swiss use a mix of American, British and GERMAN guided aircraft weapons and avionics for which Gripen and EF Typhoon is coded, and fitted. The Rafale does NOT and is not. AMRAAM does not like the lousy RBE2 radar for example. 
 
That is one of those 'factors' not reported in this release. 
 
H.
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

halloweene       12/1/2011 11:43:30 AM
Once again, if you were a journalist, could you publish a 550 pages report? No. You have to sum it up. If you had read carefully you would have noticed the journal copyright under the graph.
Yes of course its a leak, The Basler Zeitung stated that they could get the confidential reports...But i guess you dint even try to go and have a look. Please do it, surf a bit on swiss press sites...They are, whatever language and political opinion,  unanimous to say that Rafale had won the tech eval.
Btw this journal is not  a tabloid. If the Washington post or the New york times stated they could get a copy of a confidential report would you trust them? Yes.
If a former USAF commander said "every professionals knew X plane was the best would you trust him? Yes again.
If US Press was unanimous to say that one plane had one the eval tech qould you trust it? Probably yes
 If you had chosen a plane as government would you say it fits? Yes
If a foreign client head of govenment stated that financial issues were primary issue in its choice would you trust it? Yes.
 
I just said that Rafale had won eval tech, quoting sources instead of opinions.
The only answer i got is that an evaluation report doesnt look like a diary article (what a surprise!) and the usual rafale/french bashing from the blues brothers duo (aussie and herald).
 
@giblets are "offensive" ground attacks? Probably partly, plz nuance...And note that (i) second evaluation was simulated for Tranche 3B...And in 2008 Typhoon was cleared for GBU12 And self designating...(happenned in 2008 precisely btw).
 @herald its not my presentation, but a swiss journal one. Once again Read before talking...Btw Korean press recently (but of course it will be a dumb leak for you) that Rafale HAD won the tech eval in Korea...Not "internet crap" (are you talking about you?)
Which GERMAN guided weapon? MBDA is not german lol (infact the M is for Matra)
About Rafale, it is stanag compliant and shot hundreds of US bombs in Lybia (and some more are implemented atm like GBU49)...Please give elements to say amraam would not like Rbe 2 "loosy" radar? (i intently said would instead of do).
 
Now yes i love that plane for some reasons and i'm disappointed it wasnt sold to Swizterland. I dont bash Gripen (a very good plane imo), i just say, with elements that it was the last in the competition. Yes it was a failure for rafale program, yet even more for EFA that was quoted under Rafale as both lost contest.
 
Now is the failure at exporting a failure of the plane? Dont mix everything please! A combat fighter is here to do his job, its intinseque qualities must not be judged by export records...Rafale is a very good bird (way better then F18-SH for ex) and is doing its job quite well. Btw i hear an awesome silence about the great rafale/euro tactics slayers about  Lybia, how is so?
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics