Thats interesting, they tell me that the Rafale is too expensive and they are going to by J7's. Anyway. I'll finish this before the thread becomes hijacked. :)) Sorry Folks for the temporary hijack.

Jacques i would get back on the so called weaknesses you pointed out for AL Khalid. Before that let me put the record straight Pakistan did lose a war with India in 1971 but other two wars were a stalemate, neither India nor Pakistan were able to achieve their war objectives. Now coming to Rafale deal. Pakistan has shown interest to buy Mirage 2000-5 and not Rafale. and you are right that price is an issue thats why the deal couldnot be finalised. Pakis tan is developing J7 but it is a third generation fighter and Pakistan still needs fourth generation planes in its inventory. Negotiations are also underway to buy F-16s from Belgium but it is subject to the clearance from USA. Pakistan's order for 60 F-16s was cancelled by USA because of the sanctions imposed on Pakistan by USA to stop it from developing nuclear weapons.

So you are saying that parts and upgrade for around 600 LECLERC will be cheaper than parts for over 8,800 M-1 series or over 3,000 Leopard 2? And with France being the only one(UAE if you are lucky) footing the WHOLE R&D bill, while both of the other types have multiple users to spread out the cost. And the big IF for you is if noone else buys your LECLERC, 10 years from now who is going to be willing to spend the money to develop upgrades for 600+ tanks that will only be bought by 2 countries AT MOST? With little over 600 built, after attrition there is little hope of much secondary market sales to countries that can AFFORD upgrades. I am not saying that your LECLERC is a hunk of junk, just that the economic model you espouse is flawed on many levels regarding the operating costs and ease/expense of upgrades. My biggest personal concern is the armour, and how it will stand up in combat. I have not seen convincing evidence that it is up to current threats. Low production= high costs, and you cannot be sure that your gov't will be willing to eat those costs on it's own in the future. That is the pig of reality that you seem to try to hide with extra lipstick.

" So you are saying that parts and upgrade for around 600 LECLERC will be cheaper than parts for over 8,800 M-1 series or over 3,000 Leopard 2? And with France being the only one(UAE if you are lucky) footing the WHOLE R&D bill, while both of the other types have multiple users to spread out the cost. And the big IF for you is if noone else buys your LECLERC, 10 years from now who is going to be willing to spend the money to develop upgrades for 600+ tanks that will only be bought by 2 countries AT MOST? With little over 600 built, after attrition there is little hope of much secondary market sales to countries that can AFFORD upgrades. I am not saying that your LECLERC is a hunk of junk, just that the economic model you espouse is flawed on many levels regarding the operating costs and ease/expense of upgrades. My biggest personal concern is the armour, and how it will stand up in combat. I have not seen convincing evidence that it is up to current threats. Low production= high costs, and you cannot be sure that your gov't will be willing to eat those costs on it's own in the future. That is the pig of reality that you seem to try to hide with extra lipstick " Nowadays, we have around 6 or seven versions ( complete ) of LeoII, 3 of M1, and between 9 and 12 of Leclerc, or the Leclerc is by far younger. And be sure that the french government will continu to support the Leclerc upgrades ( like we do for planes, that a usual thing in france ), so the price will be moderate because of this, and you will see many other upgrades in the few next years. i would not worry on this point.

>>Nowadays, we have around 6 or seven versions ( complete ) of LeoII, 3 of M1, and between 9 and 12 of Leclerc, or the Leclerc is by far younger.<< And how is the fact that you have had to amke so many changes so rapidly in so new a design a good thing??? I just cannot understand how illogical French 'logic' is. If it worked well, you would not need 'between 9 and 12 of Leclerc'. And what happened to upgrding the modular design? If it truely is modular, you should only have one type, no? Since there are less than a 1000 of them, they should all easily be of the most current 'modular' mark at this point. Do you not see how your own words show the hollowness of your own claims? It is a good tank, no doubt, but the best? When it has survived combat, it can make a claim, but until then, the claim is undounded.

The several versions havent been made because the previous ones didnt work but more to perfect t the tank. When GIAT found some other equipment to add to the tank ( like the suspension, new armor in the future .. ), they create a new tank version and we upgrade the actual tanks to keep them at the top of the GIAT research.

Leclerc is the newest tank out there that is the reason why not too many coutires are buying it. As times goes by more and more countries will see how good it is and they would want to buy it. These are the reasons 1. It is most sophislicated eletronic suite 2. Well armed 3. Good armor 4. Excellent mobility 5. Excellent transportability 6. Users friendly 7. UPGRADABILITY !!!!!!! number DO matter .....if you add up all the numbers then the Leclerc come out top.

The indian are operating Mirage 2000-5 right now. Their crews are getting better at it as they accquire more times in that airframe. The latest version of Mirage 2000 is Mirage 2000-9 which is only marginally better than the Mirage 2000-5. Pakistan doesn't have the resource to compete with indian quantitavely. They need something that will outperform the Mirage 2000-5 that indin are operating by a wide margin. Also their reason for choosing the Rafale is base on their strategic deterrent doctrine. The need a credible nuclear weapon delivery platform. These are their reasons for choosing the Rafale. 1. The Rafale is a semi stealth aircraft. The next best thing to a true stealth platform. 2. The Rafale has proving time and time again beating the F16 in aerial combat, both BVR battle and close in dogfight. 3. The Rafale could escort itself on long range strike mission. Its radar could perform ground avoidance mapping and look up sweep simoutaneously. In another word LOOK UP SHOOT UP while flying nap of earth. 4. The Rafale could be fitted with conformal fuel tank and give it the necessary range to strike anywhere target in India while itself being based anywhere on Pakistan territories. 5. Dassault has made up with the Apache weapon delivery platform custom made for the Rafale. It will give the Rafale the long range reach stealthily. Apache is 100% stealth weapon platform. 6. Dassault has already successful introduced the Petit Duc stealth UAV as a remote control extension for the Rafale. The Petit Duc is a 100% stealth platform. It could fly ahead of the Rafale and send back threat information to Rafale. It could also perform fighter escort role for the Rafale. It could also strike high risk target for the Rafale while the Rafale stay out at a safe distance. The Petit Duc is being controlled by the navigator/weapon officer who sit in the rear seat of the Rafale 2 seater version. Pakistanis decision to buy the Rafale is more than just a replacement aircraft for the F16. It's more than just a need to match indian air force Su35, Mig29, Mirage200 and Sea Harrier fleet. It is to answer their need to maintain an aerial supremacy over the indian air force as they had been in the past. The J7 is merely there to defend bases where the Rafales will be operating from. Just like the German use Me109/Fw190 to defend bases where the Me262s were operating from during World War 2.

Pakistan has already indicated that the Rafale is too expensive for its needs. They are looking at more low cost platforms with high end weapons systems.

We can discuss about the Rafale in the "SU35 versus anything in the west forum" Overthere, we can go into the topic more thouroughly. This is a tank forum