Now from Michal Fizer a retired polish airforce pilot also point out the rafale having a lower RCS :The cost of the advance
Claudio Dantas Smith and Octavio Costa
It takes the government to decide which game will equip the Air Force delays plans for defense of the country and threatens the credibility of the negotiations with the three finalists
FIGHTING Factory Dassault: 36 fighters would cost $ 10 billion
The competition for the purchase of 36 fighter jets by the FAB, estimated at $ 10 billion, seems an endless novel. In the latest chapter, the Defense Minister Nelson Jobim announced further postponement in the selection of fighters, this time to January 2010. It said the reasons for and command of the FAB remain silent so as not to break the hierarchy. The cost of this uncertainty is enormous, because it affects not only the credibility of the negotiations and delay the defense plans of the country, which sees its airspace vulnerable. "You can not stay in this litany. Whether the political criterion, either by coach, you need to resolve them, "said retired Colonel Geraldo Cavagnari, the Center for Strategic Studies at Unicamp. He explains that, once decided to purchase, will run six months until the contract is signed. For the analyst of international security Gunther Rudzītis is necessary to prevent a repeat of the failure of the FX program, held over the last year of the Cardoso government, and finally canceled in 2003. Brazil is in urgent need of a generation of fighter aircraft to ensure the safety of the heavens and their wealth in the territorial sea. ISTOÉ obtained confidential details of the offers of the finalists: the French Rafale from Dassault, the American F-18 Super Hornet, Boeing, and the Swedish Gripen NG, the Saab.
The report shows the FAB strengths and weaknesses of each plane using a color code (blue, yellow and red) instead of notes.
Of the three, the French jet introduced technology package more comprehensive and Swedish appears at first sight, had the best price. Your unit value, without the package of armaments and maintenance costs, is U.S. $ 50 million. It would be a good deal, not for the Gripen NG only one project in development. This makes it impossible to calculate their real costs and ensure compliance with deadlines. Despite the expectation of development together with Embraer, the dome of Defense knows that choosing the Gripen NG would be like signing a blank check. FAB this item marked in red. "You can not buy what is on the drawing board," warns Cavagnari. In fact, the historical records of the airline industry in the world attest to the instability of estimates on a plane is not yet operational. The F-18 Super Hornet, for example, showed average growth of 100% between the amount originally planned pelosfabricantes and the final cost of the project, which reached U.S. $ 9.5 billion.
SHADOWS The French Rafale is a fighter with more ability to remain invisible to enemy radar
Nevertheless, the U.S. fighter is offered today at a stable price of $ 55 million. In the case of the Rafale, to be fully operational, it took 7.5 billion euros (U.S. $ 10.9 billion), a difference of 50% over the initial estimate. Your unit price without arms and support was 94 million euros ($ 136 million) when he began to be sold, but then fell to 54 million euros ($ 78 million). This is the value offered to Brazil in the last proposal and even practiced by Dassault with the French government. Besides the price issue, raised by President Lula during the visit of French counterpart Nicolas Sarkozy ABrasilia in September, is at stake in the term. According Cavagnari, the defense sector is in the process of dismantling advanced, which began in 1995. "We have immediate needs of air power that must be addressed," he explains. Then there is another problem. FAB to receive the first aircraft in 2014. Who guarantees to deliver the request in a timely manner? Dassault is in the production line of Rafale heated by new orders from the French government, which gives security to meet the deadlines. The Boeingtradição punctuality in sales of F-18. Already a Saab should take eight years to make their hunting operation. For example, the radar that will equip the Gripen began to be developed this year alone.
"To have an idea, Saab develops radar Caesar for the Typhoon fighter for five years and forecast to be ready is 2016. Now they say they can develop a similar radar, the Raven, to equip the Gripen NG, 2011. I find it unlikely, "said the expert Pedro Paulo Rezende. Another important point in the analysis of FAB is the cost of flight-hours. An airplane that consumes too much is not feasible in the long term. The time of flight of the F-18 is $ 11 thousand, while that of the Rafale is U.S. $ 14 mil. Since the Gripen, according to Saab, it would be $ 4 mil. But the Technical Committee of the FX-2 (Copac), from calculations based on data extrapolated maintenance Gripen C / D (prior to version NG), found a very different value: U.S. $ 8 mil. Similarly, Norway and the Netherlands, to assess the Swedish hunting, came to U.S. $ 10 mil. The divergence of information led to the FAB mark this item Gripen in yellow attention. The F-18 won blue for that matter, but reddened under "radar signature", which means tracking by enemy radar. The Rafale, according to official figures, the game is more "invisible" among competitors.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/archiv ... 51379.htmlThe requirement for stealth led to redesigning the fuselage, which produced the Rafale's present characteristic shape. A single air intake was split into two side-mounted intakes that were carefully shaped to prevent an enemy's radar from observing Rafale from the front hemisphere by getting returns off the moving parts of compressors. The vertical fin was made of electromagnetic (EM)- transparent composites. The RAMs initially used caused the black color of the Rafale C prototype, but special EM-transparent paints were later developed so the aircraft could receive any color scheme. All of those undertakings dramatically reduced the radar cross-section (RCS) of the Rafale, especially from the front. It is very difficult to assess the Rafale's RCS due to the high level of classification, but sources have unofficially said that Rafale has a much lower RCS than the Typhoon, a fighter of roughly the same size.
finally from air&cosmos..also leading to the same conclusion :
Extract (full article posted on previous page) :
On paper, the Typhoon has some undeniable advantages: more powerful than M88, its two reactors give it a better weight/thrust than the Rafale. According to the Eurofighter pilots, this additional power would be particularly appreciable during simulated combat below 20,000 ft, where the density of air allows the engines to be fully expressed. In the battle beyond visual range (BVR), the Typhoon also has an greater "extension" than the Rafale. This is because of the the physical characteristics of the radar, which antenna "sees" futher than the RBE2-PESA, but also because of the dynamic performance of the American missile AIM-120 AMRAAM . Designed exclusively for medium-range interception, it certainly does not have the versatility of the Mica, but it is superior in terms of range. Facing a Rafale, these theoretical advantages, however, must be nuanced.
In BVR combat, although the lengthening of the radar and missiles of the Typhoon are superior, the french Rafale fighter's radar signature is, according to many pilots, much less important than the Eurofighter's one. It is therefore an asset. Even better: the sensors fusion which enjoys the Rafale is also a crucial advantage in BVR combat, because it offers the pilots a much better understanding of the tactical situation during combat, and this, 360 degrees around the aircraft.
Once the "merge" is reached (when BVR combat turns into short-range), the Rafale has still strong chances of victory against the Typhoon. In the opinion of French pilots who have confronted the European aircraft, it's above all the quality of the electric flight controls [FBW] of the French fighter who makes the difference. In dogfight, Rafale can quickly point its nose to the threat, while less degrading its energy than the Eurofighter does. And this partly because the maximum angle of attack of the Rafale is "clamped" around 300, which allows it to evolve in a controlled manner even at low speed.
This difference in terms of maneuverability is also illustrated by the position of the canard on the two planes: placed well in front of the fuselage on the Typhoon, they play the role of an additional control surface used to "steer" more quickly the nose of the plane to take the incidence.
Conversely, the Rafale ducks are located very near the delta wing and are used primarily to pick up the airflow to slow up the loss of lift on the wing, thus giving the pilot a full control of the aircraft at low speeds.
. 
