Is Rafale dead?

"Paul F Austin" wrote in message ...

"WaltBJ" wrote
IS the Rafale dead? Nobody answered the question.
BTW the US armed forces, with the exception of the Navy, didn't have
anything to fight with in 1941, let alone 1939. Look it up.

It's not dead but it is very ill, for lack of foreign military sales. France
alone can't manage Rafale procurement at a rate that would give them a
viable force in reasonable time, not when she is funding the A400M, a new
carrier, procurement of the fourth Triomphant.. All those things are also in
competition with social security funding as the French population ages.

It seems very unlikely that the Rafale will *ever* have a foreign
military sale. The best chance is 25 years from now when France wants
to upgrade, and the planes are both used and cheap. Or maybe politics
can force someone like Taiwan to buy them (but I doubt it).

Seriously, it's hard to imagine the nation that would pick the Rafale
when the Typhoon and the F-16/18 are available.

Mike wrote:
Those aditionnal 100 are not so speculative.

Until they're included in a current budget cycle, I'm inclined to call them
speculative. Plenty of planned systems have not been bought under similar
situations.

Please note that my skepticism has nothing to do with France or Rafale in
particular.* It's just the nature of defense procurement worldwide that
anything in the outyears, especially past five years, is always subject to
change. To assume anything past the current five-year budget cycle for any
military is a certainty is unwarranted optimism, IMO. And even the
five-year plans are never cast in stone.

* Indeed, I'm disgusted by the anti-French bigotry (verging on racism)
displayed by some posters here.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message ...
"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...

IS the Rafale dead? Nobody answered the question.

Rafale is alive, but the French are more or less skipping
the first 'series' of Rafales. Only a dozen production aircraft
(two for the air force, ten for the Navy) were built to 'F1'
standard, basically air-air capability only. Just enough to
create a naval 'Flotille' for the 'Charles de Gaulle' and
support further development.

The main production is now planned to be of upgraded
versions. Rafales to the 'F2' standard, with air-ground
capability, will enter service in 2004, with initial operation
capability in 2006.

This is a pretty horrible procurment strategy. It's basically ...

Research a new design
Build 13 of them
Let the design age for ten years
Update the radar software (and possibly uprate the engines)
Go into series production

Boy, I hope someone in France is regretting not signing onto the
Eurofighter deal. Almost anything would be better than the current
Rafale situation.

The final 198 Rafales for the air force
and 35 for the Navy are to be to the final multi-role 'F3'
standard, delivered from 2008 onwards. Then, all older
Rafales will be upgraded to 'F3' standard.

So the entry in production of Rafale is shifted into the future;
the Mirage 2000 will serve longer. Some of the delay can be
caused by requested modifications (significantly, after the 1991
Gulf War, the French decided that the majority of the Rafales
will have a seat for a WSO) but the main motive is probably
purely financial, the French budgettary situation isn't very
healthy at the moment.

But I suspect that this is a pattern we will see more and more
in combat aircraft development. The time when an air force
could afford to buy models with limited capability and put
them in stock or upgrade them afterwards, is past.

BTW the US armed forces, with the exception of the Navy, didn't have
anything to fight with in 1941, let alone 1939. Look it up.

True. On the other hand the US Congress actually refused to
sell weapons to Britain and France at a very critical moment.

--
Emmanuel Gustin
Emmanuel.Gustin -rem@ve- skynet dot be
Flying Guns Page: http://users.skynet.be/Emmanuel.Gustin/

I don't think it is just in defense procurement. In nearly all aspects
of corporate life. Though with a shorter horizon.

Thomas Schoene wrote:

Please note that my skepticism has nothing to do with France or Rafale in
particular.* It's just the nature of defense procurement worldwide that
anything in the outyears, especially past five years, is always subject to
change. To assume anything past the current five-year budget cycle for any
military is a certainty is unwarranted optimism, IMO. And even the
five-year plans are never cast in stone.

* Indeed, I'm disgusted by the anti-French bigotry (verging on racism)
displayed by some posters here.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)







--
AL
New anti-terrorism tool, "Fly naked"
http://www.alfredivy.per.sg

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
...

"Paul F Austin" wrote in message
...

"WaltBJ" wrote
IS the Rafale dead? Nobody answered the question.
BTW the US armed forces, with the exception of the Navy, didn't have
anything to fight with in 1941, let alone 1939. Look it up.

It's not dead but it is very ill, for lack of foreign military sales.
France
alone can't manage Rafale procurement at a rate that would give them a
viable force in reasonable time, not when she is funding the A400M, a
new
carrier, procurement of the fourth Triomphant.. All those things are
also in
competition with social security funding as the French population ages.

It seems very unlikely that the Rafale will *ever* have a foreign
military sale. The best chance is 25 years from now when France wants
to upgrade, and the planes are both used and cheap. Or maybe politics
can force someone like Taiwan to buy them (but I doubt it).

In the case of Taiwan, politics are what would prevent any possible sale of
Rafale. IIRC the French said "uncle" after their last sale of Mirage 2000's
to Taiwan (back when the US was reluctant to provide the F-16) provoked the
ire of the PRC. ISTR France decided then to promise not to sell further
advanced weapons to Taiwan lest they lose out on (potentially) more
lucrative sales of goods to the PRC.


Seriously, it's hard to imagine the nation that would pick the Rafale
when the Typhoon and the F-16/18 are available.

I suspect that part of Rafale's problem is the perception (mostly
unjustified) of lukewarm interest in it from the French forces themselves,
which is really more of a budgeting problem. It is not a bad airplane, but
the sluggish pace of development, coupled with past overly-optimistic and
premature pronouncements regarding its capabilities (i.e., trying to sell it
as a first-rate multi-role platform when it was still just emerging as a
single role performer) during sales attempts to various nations, have
repeatedly left it in the "also ran" category. Add to that the fact that a
couple of the nations where it has been marketed were more interested in
acheiving/maintaining interoperability with US forces than they were with
French forces. I'd guess that Brazil was their best hope for an export sale,
but last I heard that competition has again been delayed due to money
concerns.

There has been some high-level talk in the recent past of India entering
into a coproduction deal with Dassault on the Mirage 2000-9. If you take the
recent reports of Indian dissatisfaction with the Su-30 into account, and
the potential impact upon plans to coproduce those aircraft in India, the
possibility of the Indians changing horses midstream and maybe looking at
Rafale as its premier future platform is a bit intriguing--rather unlikely
as of yet, but still...

Brooks

nemo wrote:

Your stuborness...

Let's see. You call yourself "nemo". That must be from a brightly
colored fish that flaunts itself and then yells help and retreats from
danger to the arms of a sea anemone for protection. Um, that sounds
french. It sure isn't a fictional submarine captain with some ethics.
As, that wouldn't be french.

--
Jim

carry on




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Okay with you,it often happens like that...
But in this particular case,I don't think it will be.
Relations between the govt and Dassault are very special in France.Most of
the time (everytime),
the initial number of fighters ordered have been purchased to the last
one;Mirage 2000,F.1,III,and even more in some cases.
It is not rare that the budget changes everything as years go by,in France
like anywhere else.But very rare for Dassault.
The reduction from +/-320 to +/-285 has already been made.Dassault refused
to reduce it more because of the unit cost,
threatning to abandon the program...What I think S.Dassault could have
done.He has received all the guarantees that the number
won't be lowered.And it won't be unless a very strong economic crisis.
Still,the Armée de l'Air needs them,and the Marine seems to need even more
of them if its new carrier is larger than the CDG,and it
could be.

(Thank you for the precisions about "France bashing",it is useful here...
and sorry for my english...!)



"Thomas Schoene" a écrit dans le message de
news: et...
Mike wrote:
Those aditionnal 100 are not so speculative.

Until they're included in a current budget cycle, I'm inclined to call
them
speculative. Plenty of planned systems have not been bought under similar
situations.

Please note that my skepticism has nothing to do with France or Rafale in
particular.* It's just the nature of defense procurement worldwide that
anything in the outyears, especially past five years, is always subject to
change. To assume anything past the current five-year budget cycle for
any
military is a certainty is unwarranted optimism, IMO. And even the
five-year plans are never cast in stone.

* Indeed, I'm disgusted by the anti-French bigotry (verging on racism)
displayed by some posters here.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

Bla bla bla...


"Jim Herring" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
nemo wrote:

Your stuborness...

Let's see. You call yourself "nemo". That must be from a brightly
colored fish that flaunts itself and then yells help and retreats from
danger to the arms of a sea anemone for protection. Um, that sounds
french. It sure isn't a fictional submarine captain with some ethics.
As, that wouldn't be french.

--
Jim

carry on




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption
=---

"Jim Herring" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
nemo wrote:

Your stuborness...

Let's see. You call yourself "nemo". That must be from a brightly
colored fish that flaunts itself and then yells help and retreats from
danger to the arms of a sea anemone for protection.

No, that must from the latin "nemo" for "nobody".

Um, that sounds french. It sure isn't a fictional submarine captain with
some ethics.
As, that wouldn't be french.

A smartass devoid of any cultural knowledge which has to retreat to cartoon
movies to find arguments. Um, that sounds american.

Don't worry Jim, I'm sure some day Disney will make a movie which will
enable you to learn a few latin words.

Cheers from Paris,
--
Pierre-Henri Baras
___________________________
French Fleet Air Arm
http://www.ffaa.net

Encyclopédie de l'Aviation
http://www.aviation-fr.info

On or about Tue, 16 Dec 2003 01:03:31 -0600, Jim Herring
allegedly uttered:

nemo wrote:

Your stuborness...

Let's see. You call yourself "nemo". That must be from a brightly
colored fish that flaunts itself and then yells help and retreats from
danger to the arms of a sea anemone for protection. Um, that sounds
french.

Uhh no. Nemo is a US written and produced picture.

It sure isn't a fictional submarine captain with some ethics.
As, that wouldn't be french.

And again you're of the mark - you may not be aware, but the author of
20k leagues under the sea was, in fact, French. And one of the most
successful author of his time.

But don't let that get in the way of your blind hatred of the French,
not your ad homeneim attacks based on a posters posting name.

---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - Drink Faster