It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

☆Typhoon vs Rafale☆ which one is more smashing

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 09:14 AM
link   
I got mes. which said chinese will import Rafale, although there are some mis. in it maybe. but the compitition of thus two type in the international weapon market also is very aboil. this arguement was happening in china too! www.war-sky.com...
who will be interested in?




posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 09:52 AM
link   
To boil it right down to basics the Rfafale is essentially an all-French, smaller, lighter, cheaper and less capable equivalent to the Typhoon. For instance if you wanted the ultimate modern fighter you would buy Raptors (if you could) if you wanted pretty much a similar level of capability at a lower price you would buy Typhoon, taking it one step further if you wanted the best fighter out there thats cheaper still and/or had a carrier to equip you would buy Rafale. Of course there's more to the argument than that but thats the basics.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
To boil it right down to basics the Rfafale is essentially an all-French, smaller, lighter, cheaper and less capable equivalent to the Typhoon. For instance if you wanted the ultimate modern fighter you would buy Raptors (if you could) if you wanted pretty much a similar level of capability at a lower price you would buy Typhoon, taking it one step further if you wanted the best fighter out there thats cheaper still and/or had a carrier to equip you would buy Rafale. Of course there's more to the argument than that but thats the basics.


I thought Eurofighter was cheaper than the Rafale.
Or at least the same level. And which one has smaller RCS? I originally thought Typhoon was more stealthy but one French on some boeard claimed Rafale has smaller RCS.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Rafale is cheaper because of two things, it is smaller lighter and less capable overall than Typhoon, added weight and capability always = added cost. Also purely national programmes tend to be less expensive for various reasons, one of which is that things get done more quickly as there's less 'committee time' wasted on decisions and no duplication of effort. The trade off on International ventures is that they are less expensive to the individual partners, ie Rafale is less expensive than Typhoon but is more expensive to France than Typhoon is to Germany (or any of the other individual partners). This is offset to a degree by the fact that many more Typhoons are scheduled to be built than there are Rafales so that brings the costs down. This is not a failing on the part of the Rafale programme it is merely a reflection of the fact that France and the UK had very different requirements and the UK wanted an air superiority fighter while the frenchj wanted a smaller tactical fighter that could replace the carrier borne Super Etendard, it was the incompatibility of these requirements (as well as French greed) that resulted in two separate fighter programmes being started. Interestingly Germany, Italy and Spain all had the choice which programme to join and tellingly ALL elected to join Typhoon, with only Spain even coming close to joining the Rafale project before having a rethink, one in the eye there for France. Though the Rafale is still an excellent aircraft in its design role.

As to RCS, I have no idea which is the greater and I suspect that nobody else does (outside the relevant corporations) as I very much think that such information is classified, therefore any such claim by either side of the argument on a messageboard such as this can be nothing more than wishful thinking.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Here I go again. Perhaps the Rafale is cheaper because the maker is getting support to keep the line open and offer it at below costs to keep the factory going?

More capable or not, the Typhoon is being produced in large numbers while the Rafale I think (I looked at my AWST source book) is under like 75. That alone should dictate a staggering unit costs. Thats why the B-2 cost so much instead of spreading out the costs over 100 bombers it was 5 the same pricipale applies here too. Or it should.

The Rafale has not scored one export sucsess despite low costs and agressive marketing by the French government, while the Typhoon has a multi national purchase in effect.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Here I go again. Perhaps the Rafale is cheaper because the maker is getting support to keep the line open and offer it at below costs to keep the factory going?


This might be of interest to you FredT.


Rafale Mk 2 development will cost an estimated $730 million. No state finance will be directly involved, but Dassault, Snecma and Thales will no longer be required to provide 25% of the $1.9-billion cost of developing AdlA and Aeronavale Rafales to F2 and F3 standards. Nor will Dassault suffer financially from Aeronavale's decision last year to switch 40 of its planned purchase of 60 Rafale Ms to two-seat BM combat versions.


The French government is committed to purchasing 294 aircraft, but as of 2001 only 61 had been actually ordered.

www.aviationweek.com...



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Thanks, that is interesting to say the least. SO who foots the bill if they do not purchase the 294? and how long can the stretch the production line out? Maybe they never intened to buy so many and will make up the difference down the road?



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 05:21 PM
link   
But that arrangement is no different, from what I can see, to the one with the Typhoon and, come to that, the Raptor where most of the aircraft intended to be built have not yet been ordered. I can't see where much can be read into the fact that less than 100 of the near 300 required have been ordered so far. I read that production is intended to run until 2018, that seems a long time to me.



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Hypothetically speaking, would the Typhoon ever be offered to China?

And as for the Rafale, it seems to be a light fighter, i don't think China is look for a light fighter unless it's capabilities are ahead of the J-10 by a long, long margin.

This could change if the French are willing to help China build a carrier.
j/k



posted on Mar, 26 2005 @ 10:10 PM
link   
I doubt it, the US would be alarmed by a deal like that, and the Typhoon would be redundant, as the Chinese have already spent gobs of time and money developing the J-10.



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 01:03 AM
link   
because of the taiwan problem, I think chinese gov. will more care with the amount of load for a fighter. many persons think typhoon's capability of intercept is better than Rafale maybe, its bomber load do is less than Rafale. since chinese mainland put the Su-27 as a dogfight intercepter, so who is going to buy an aircraft which has more load. but everyone suspect typhoon's load of weapon less than rafale. Chinese army worried about this very much certainly. could someone can prove typhoon's load is as well as rafale at least by ecidence, or more than rafale?


[edit on 27-3-2005 by emile]



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 02:23 AM
link   
if you want cheaper - then look to the grippen - which has been sold to SA



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 06:44 AM
link   
sorry I don't think price is a problem because first when we are talking about the capability of fighter, the price was premised already. on the hand price is a condition of publicity in the market, whereas this is ATS, so I care about something which we can catch directly



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 08:54 AM
link   
China's JH-7A has seemingly passed the tests by the Airforce since more Su-30's still havent being ordered.

The JH-7A was only previouely ordered by the Navy but the Airforce has ordered several hundred i think. That will replace the Q-5 attack crafts.

As for load, I thought since the Typhoon was bigger, it should be able to carry more right?



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 09:06 AM
link   
It can carry more in weight but it has fewer hardpoints. of course one hardpoint doesn't = 1 bomb.

In real terms comparing the Rafale and Typhoon is a bit like comparing the Spitfire and Bf 109.

[edit on 27-3-2005 by waynos]



posted on Mar, 30 2005 @ 03:39 AM
link   
Rafale's got to be way cheaper!..
Anybody got price tags??
And is the Euro arms embargo on China over? Its got to go very soon..



posted on Mar, 30 2005 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
is the Euro arms embargo on China over?


- No not yet.


Its got to go very soon..


- It's due for discussion soon in the coming year.

It seems (from the apparant US point of view) that only Israel and the USA can actually export arms and high-tech to China right now (without a word being said) whereas Europe even considering it is tantamount to slaughtering every 1st born son in the USA.

Can you say 'hypocrisy'?




top topics



 
0

log in

join