Are we comparing models to a full flying drone here ? I’m not sure if i’m understanding this correctly.
They managed to put 1.5x the amount of T/R module on a radar with a 70cm diameter radar against 60cm for the RBE2, while being in 2023 while the RBE2 AESA came inline in 2012 ? Am i supposed to be impressed ? Almost as late as the russians
I’m just saying, at the time it seemed unconceivable that france would go alone.
As for going in partnership, if you are unorganized, build one wing in one country, the other wing in an other, and your logistics are a mess, you may end up paying more while still being more to participate in the project (wink wink again eurofighter)
Yep. The fact that they can be shot down, doing what makes it almost impossible to shootdown is very impressive. Speculation recently has suggested this is why they’re now being forward deployed to the contact line because they need a short time to target to survive.
What does that have with know-how on stealth coatings?
Germany’s EADS/DASA (which became Airbus) was also the primary developer of Eurofighter’s RAM coating… so once again, stating they have no experience is a flat out lie.
They managed to put 1.5x the amount of T/R module on a radar with a 70cm diameter radar against 60cm for the RBE2, while being in 2023 while the RBE2 AESA came inline in 2012 ? Am i supposed to be impressed ?
ECRS is a much earlier development yanno, almost as if Germany (and UK with their Mk.2 radar) took their time to mature them into pieces of tech that will carry their jets into the future (seeing as Mk.2 will also be a basis for Tempest’s radar, and Mk.1 will undergo an MLU by 2030s to sort-of-ish Mk.2 status).
Delivery dates also got nothing to do with it, simply put, they created a radar that outperforms what is available to the Rafale.
I’m just saying, at the time it seemed unconceivable that france would go alone.
Okay? My point still stands. Developing a 4th generation aircraft is nowhere near as troublesome as developing a 6th generation aircraft (have you noticed that all 6th gen projects, that aren’t American, are being done via an international collab?).
and by this time, the RBE2 will already be upgraded.
6th gen isn’t even really defined yet. But much of it has to do with remote carrier connection and networking. Rafale F5 is already planned to take such things into account. What generation does it belong to ? not 6th, it lack the 5th characteristics still, but not really 4th either. This generation thingy is quite pointless imo.
As for FCAS, future will tell if we can do it alone or not, or maybe with more reliable partners, so discussing it further is quite pointless at this point
TBH they break the bank when buying them, Rafale is not a miraculous plane, it’s good but it comes with a price. The maintenance however is quite cheap
6th gen isn’t even really defined yet. But much of it has to do with remote carrier connection and networking. Rafale F5 is already planned to take such things into account. What generation does it belong to ?
So does Eurofighter Tranche 5, but that still makes them 4th++ gen (or maybe 4th +++), since they lack full stealth coating of 5th generation (one of the defining features). Neither will receive VCE either.
As for FCAS, future will tell if we can do it alone or not, or maybe with more reliable partners, so discussing it further is quite pointless at this point
If you believe India is more reliable, you’ve got my blessing and go on your merry way.
Ok Airbus has experience in stealth coating, so yes i can admit i was wrong on that one
Still, Dassault also has experience in stealth coating and stealth shaping (a bit of rafale and Neuron), which means making airbus manager on this pillar is still a bad decision imo
Yanno, if we think like this… why was Nexter even allowed to develop the cannon for MGCS instead of being flat out denied the opportunity?
EADS/DASA/Airbus obviously has the necessary know-how & experience, considering they’ve been put in charge of this development aspect. It’s almost as if, shocking I know, the project has a primary developer, and a secondary developer for technologies (!!!), where both share their research, evaluate it and mature it together. In this case Airbus was judged to be ahead, same with the VCE for the NGF… but Dassault is still the primary developer. Why is it such a foreign concept?
KNDS was supposed to develop the tank entirely. That was the original deal. KMW was in charge of the hull, Nexter the turret. Then Rheinmetall went in uninvited (which i can understand from their POV, it’s fair game after all)
IMO france should also get out of MGCS and sort of focus on light tanks and artillery. That being said, ASCALON has some new tech involved (like telescoped ammunition). While Rh130 is an upscaled Rh120. It’s more reliable and proven, but maybe not as future proof.
In both programs, both countries should go their own way, there’s simply too much redundancy.
