All memes aside, how good is the Rafale when compared to its competitors?

It can operate on carriers thats the only reason shit stain wants it.

Depends on what you want from them, but mostly the Typhoon is way too expensive for what it is.

>India said “we want Rafael, but we want it made here in India, but we want all of your guarantees and warranties to still apply as though you had built them”.
That sounds EXACTLY like what an Indian would say. Fucking scammer and cheats, the lot of them.

I think it needs more powerful engines, and a handful avionics touch-ups.

With its direct competitor being the Typhoon: It has a better pylon layout for long range deep strike thanks to the five wet points, and has a carrier variant. However it is kinematically inferior and falls behind on BVR due to its older datalink style, while also having a small fixed radar by modern A2A standards (as opposed to Typhoons much larger traversing one) and a poor pilot helmet compared to more modern ones. It also lacks a low-collateral CAS weapon (although one IS coming in a few years).

Both are about even at general A2G these days and have comparable A2A missiles (bar the datalink issue with Rafale). They both have comparable defense. Rafale has a bit more active ECM, but Typhoon has a lot more physical aids (decoys especially with Britecloud) Rafale is not a slouch. It's a good plane, but things it previously was ahead due to have stagnated and are waiting for better upgrades to be announced.

It's better than the Gripen in most areas, however the Gripen also has that two-way datalink and also has a better radar on the E model, plsu its cost performance.

It's objectively inferior to the F-35.

The Super Hornet is also ahead of it. Much cheaper, better radar than Rafale, broader range of weapons, better ECM and suchlike.

Exports and sales mean NOTHING ffs. It's all about political pressure and other shady crap, everyone knows this.
I'm not even defending the rafale. Just calling you out on your low intelligence.

I think the Indians should be aggressively pursuing the Super Hornet. Super Hornets supported by Growlers will be plenty capable vs Pakistan and put them (nearly) on par with China.

Do U.S. regs stand in the way of this happening, or are the Indians not interested?

Attached: FA18EF Super Hornet weapon pod.jpg (1600x1066, 175K)

>on par with china
China could have mig 17s with airsoft gun cannons and India would still manage to crash all their planes.

Just give me one time where the Rafale has been defeated by the Eurofighter in duel

I laughed audibly

I might be wrong, but AFAIK the Growler is one of those things that you have to be a close friend to us to get.

Maybe they should focus on infrastructure and more toilets.

>He actually thinks random WVR training annecdotes from inconsistent vague sources is an accurate representation of full combat

So by your logic the F-4 is better than the Rafale then.

All that i know is that it is cheaper and better than the Eurofighter and it was created because the French disagreed with the Eurofighter program direction.

?! The Rafale has been upgraded several times just like the Eurofighter was and the current versions are more modern than the Eurofighter at every level. Heck the Eurofighter still uses a PESA while almost all French Rafales already have AESA.

>length 10.3m
lel
>max speed 1,389km/h
top fucking kek

of the eurocanards its between the typhoon and gripen.

typhoon has slightly less payload but a broader range of weapons, better agility and speed/thrust weight ratio, better A2A performance and better radar.

gripen is marginally worse in everything but datalink

converting freedom into communist units is hard, okay?

I know, right?

Attached: mars-exploration-family-portrait-version3.jpg (984x191, 53K)

Fighter jets are not ranked by some video game metric where you can strictly rank one as better than the other. There are so many factors that are hidden from us mortals that it would be accurate to say that it’s mostly in the fog of war.

Yes we can tell that the Rafale is bigger and has more payload than Gripen for instance but that’s not to say that one is better than the other.
What do we know about the pilot workload? How much advantage does Gripens more advanced AESA radar and two way data link provide?
What are the true RCS in various wavelengths? ECM and ECCM? Ease and cost of maintenance? Emission stealth? Ground support systems?
I could fill out the character count with known unknowns alone and there’s probably equally many unknown unknowns that only people with clearance knows anything about.

Then there’s the most important question, who can provide the juiciest economic kickbacks, counter buys and assurances to the buyer, which is why Sweden will always lose and the US reign supreme while Dassault and Eurofighter fight for the scraps. Being the worlds top economy and biggest super power does come with benefits.

>Being the worlds top economy and biggest super power does come with benefits.
>cook meat before eating it
wow, i didn't that either

>Put it this way, the reason the Rafale deal originally fell through was because Rafale explicitly did not want to be held responsible if India fucks up the usage/production.

It goes deeper than that, and that makes the Rafale the absolute best deal for most countries.

France doesn't aim to sell turnkey, off-the-shelf planes, they sell the project. People often joke the Rafale really is two trucks full of documents and DVDs, because that's exactly what it is. The official tagline in adverts is "no red tape, no strings attached". France helps countries build a factory so they can produce their own planes independently, and sell ALL the technology with it. For any non-first world country, that's an incredible deal, because while the Rafale is a fully functional plane, it could also serve as the basis for developing your own platform and give your country a huge technological kick in the ass. Basically what the Chinese struggled to do for decades, retroengineering shit, except it comes on a platter, disclosing everything, and wah more than even Russians do with their stuff.

But then a country also has to commit to it. Sadly many these days have this Amazon mentality of ordering something and just expecting it to be delivered.

Attached: rafale.jpg (519x391, 27K)

>cook meat before eating it
Steak tartare, pleb.

looks the best out of all the new euro planes
>those canards

>chicken tartare best tartare
yum

Attached: 1564321518017.png (237x212, 76K)

India doesnt generally buy American. They leaned towards the USSR during the Cold War. And we dont generally sell EWar planes of any kind unless your countries name is "Japan, Canada, South Korea, or England" or similarly close ally

Besides India will be a superpower in less than half a year so it's not like they need to buy any foreign hardware.

But they bought a bunch of US equipment recently. Apaches P-8 Posidons, etc

Best Eurocanard for A2G, Typhoon's better for A2A
Because of the scale of production, it's always going to be more expensive than a comparable american or russian airframe

Just look up the Su-30MKI track record.
It was pretty much the same deal as what the original MMRCA envisionned : total tech transfer contract, with the first few batches French-built, then local assembly from knock-down kits, then gradual move towards fully localized production.
As a result, the whole fleet was grounded three times because of crashes, on one occasion the Indians called a team from the Russian designer to investigate a crash but what they thought was a design flaw turned out to be a pilot error, and the most recent crash happened during pre-delivery trials, right after coming out of the Indian assembly line.

That's called tech transfer, and it's not exclusive to the Rafale. If anything, Saab is even more aggressive on that point when offering the Gripen.

>the whole fleet was grounded three times because of crashes
It's truly amazing that Indians believe they will be a superpower when incompetence permeates their entire society.

It's comparable, only as or more expensive, and harder to support.

>harder to support.
how

There are many fewer of them and a much smaller and narrower supply chain.

Well of course it's on a smaller scale, that doesn't mean they can't provide enough spares for their customers.

They bought French as well in the past.
Their inventory is a mess.

Fucking outstanding. Super power by 2020!!!

>The Rafale has been upgraded several times just like the Eurofighter was
What a vague statement that doesn't actually counter what was said at all.

>and the current versions are more modern than the Eurofighter at every level.
Except for that the Typhoon is still better kinematically, has better air to ground weaponry, a traversable radar (while Rafale is still stuck with forward only) and a two-way datalink and more advanced helmet cueing system. Not to mention the Rafale is STILL not integrated with hugely popular missiles like AIM-120 and AIM-9.

And "at every level" is just laughable.

>Heck the Eurofighter still uses a PESA while almost all French Rafales already have AESA.
Not almost all, only a portion of the fleet. And the Typhoon AESA models are already about to enter service in Kuwait.

> which is why Sweden will always lose
Except Gripen has sold better than Rafale.

>Best Eurocanard for A2G
Depends what you want to do in A2G. It's better at lugging lots over long distances, but it has a VERY limited selection of munitions to choose from. Super Hornet outclasses all of the Eurocanards in A2G right now.

Most excellent indeed. JAI HIND!

Attached: 5396730.jpg (600x800, 91K)

Attached: 1292374901062.jpg (3000x2400, 1.31M)

Friendly reminder that the Rafale's main selling point isn't any of its specs, but rather that it's ITAR free