Shatack wrote:aircraft carrier kicking ass of taliban and typhoon each exercise seems to me a good operational experience!
Wrong again. Dropping a few bombs on some talibans during total air-superiority isn't something to brag about. That could even be done with a Tucano. Exercises isn't the real deal either, especially not dog-fighting WW2 style which isn't a big issue nowadays. Today it's more about BVR, and in that the Typhoon will kick Rafales ass with it's bigger AESA radar and supercruise ability.
Uk and Italy are cutting 2/3 of T3 with no real upgrade on their own "final" product, UK sells even thiers to Saudies, and they don't get the rid of F35B who is as costly as typhoon, and less capable on the paper! countries that doesn't support their own design phylosophy looks suspect!
it seems you are asking yourself wrong questions!
"The Eurofighter project is a disaster of unknown cost, since the MoD ceased releasing figures once they passed £20bn. Only four Typhoons (as the plane has been rebranded) have ever been deployed outside Britain: to the Falklands, where they safeguard sheep and penguins. That is about all they are good for, since they were designed three decades ago to fight the Soviets."http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... wrong-wars
seems the Uk is getting rid of tranche 3A in nice price deal with oman!http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... 0To%20Oman
No tranche 3B, no AESA, No TVC, no no no....
You still don't understand that the F-35B are for STOL aircraft carriers, where neither Typhoon or Rafale can operate.
Rafale is an 90's product priced as a 5th gen. And yes, Gripen is A LOT cheaper and it doesn't mess about trying to be a 5th gen when it isn't, and you could operate as many as 3 Gripens for every Rafale. If the Rafale, as it is today, came around in late 90's-early 2000 it would have been a hit, but today it just isn't. And that it something that zero export confirms. They may win the deal in Brazil, but it's because of pure political pressure at a very discounted price. It's a good plane, but not good enough to justify that ridicously high pricetag and operating costs. And I promise you that if I dug around a bit in french newspapers i would find a ton of negative critics of Rafale, but since I don't speak french I won't. For now. It's not even one bit of value for money. When the F-35 comes around, even though it will probably handle like a pig and if it costs more than Rafale, it will still be a damn lot more value for money.
If you call the EF project a failure, on what grounds, without also calling the Rafale a failure?