By: Rob L
- 4th June 2005 at 09:19Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ah, okay! Thanks. I'll try to clarify the eurofighter R&D. :D
New
Posts: 318
By: PILOTGHT
- 5th June 2005 at 14:51Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
To Kovy:
I doubt your figures very much: UK R&D cost is 4.4 Billion pounds = 6.6 Billion Euros (1998), German R&D is 7 Billion DM = 3.5 Billion Euros, together that is 10.1 Billion Euros for 66% of the total R&D -----> that makes it a total of 15.3 Billion Euros. http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk//Eurofighter/history.html
Also I heard very often, for example FlugRevue that French industry paid 25% of Rafale R&D, whereas your figure is only government R&D so it might well appear less, but in fact it might be very similar.
"A: The bill for Britain's order of 232 aircraft to replace the RAF's Tornado F3 and Jaguar has risen over the years from £7bn ($10bn) to £15.9bn ($22.7bn). "
it was the cost in 1999, and without the cost grow of the last 8 years!
somes rafales new :
Lt. Cmdr. Jason Rimmer was one of three Ike crew members, in addition to eight Carrier Air Wing 7 representatives, who flew over to De Gaulle to experience how their French ally conducts carrier operations, and to offer assistance regarding the launching and recovery of several U.S. Navy aircraft, including an F/A-18 Hornet, E-2C Hawkeye and C-2 Greyhound.
This was the first time an F/A-18 landed aboard De Gaulle.
“I thoroughly enjoyed my trip to the Charles De Gaulle and the chance to participate in joint operations with the two navies,” said Rimmer. “Their commanding officer put it best, saying that he hoped this exercise would prove our interoperability and readiness for tasking wherever and whenever. The French were excellent hosts and extremely professional operators.”
By: Sens
- 5th June 2005 at 16:47Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The offers to Singapore gives a clue about costs for the Rafale compared to Typhoon.
The 10% smaller Rafale have to be 10% cheaper at least, by similar development costs and operating costs.
New
Posts: 318
By: PILOTGHT
- 5th June 2005 at 19:33Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The offers to Singapore gives a clue about costs for the Rafale compared to Typhoon.
The 10% smaller Rafale have to be 10% cheaper at least, by similar development costs and operating costs.
well, i don't think that the electronic suite is the same, and the abilities too!
By: Arthur
- 5th June 2005 at 19:40Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A bit off-topic, for those who are in to cheap French pulp music (not necessarily gay): the video to Nadiya's song Si loin de vous has lots of Rafale footage, some of it CGI.
Visual compensation apart than the Rafale is catered for in the video. The music is absolute, total crap.
By: glitter
- 6th June 2005 at 14:35Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Between that crappy clip + the movie SKY FIGHTERS, it seems that the french army is into marketing berserk rage.
New
Posts: 4
By: Archibald
- 7th June 2005 at 15:46Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
hello!!
a list of the french airplanes who reached mach 2
SO 4050 Trident (january 1957)
Nord Aviation Griffon (27th october 1958)
Dassault
Mirage III (24th october 1958)
Mirage IV (1959)
Mirage III V (september 1966) (the only VTOL to reach mach 2 )
Mirage F2 ( december 1966)
Mirage F1 (january 1967)
Mirage G (december 1967)
(4 airplanes at mach 2 within 18 month a VTOL two swept wing and one variable geometry airplane !! )
Mirage G8 (1972)
Mirage 2000 (april 1978)
Mirage 4000 (april 1979)
Rafale (??)
By: F-18RN
- 7th June 2005 at 20:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi to everyonne,
I have a question to you military aviation buffs: why is it that the French pulled out of the EF project and proceeded to develop their own plane, the Rafale?
I have read a couple of things on this on the web. English sites argue that this is simply due to french arrogance. I have no reason to doubt english assessments of the French ( :D ), yet I was wondering what other factors may have led the French to take that decision: were they mostly of a political nature, were they due to conceptual/technical considerations, were they of a military nature.....??!
Thanks for the response/info!!
It may already have beeen mentioned, but one of the reasons is that the French wanted to develop an aircraft that could operate from a carrier, but no-one else in the Eurofighter consortium needed one. We having gone down the route of V/STOL with the Sea Harrier. Of course, if back in the 80s when the french withdrew, we had known that the Cold War was about to end and that when the Invincible Class was withdrawn we'd replace them with big carriers, it might have been a whole lot different...
New
By: Anonymous
- 8th June 2005 at 03:27Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The French always want to lead and have the biggest share.................Which, sometimes doesn't set well with partners :eek:
Posts: 629
By: Rob L - 4th June 2005 at 09:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ah, okay! Thanks. I'll try to clarify the eurofighter R&D. :D
Posts: 318
By: PILOTGHT - 5th June 2005 at 14:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
don't be fool, in playing exchange money rate!
Planes ares sold in dollars
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1818077.stm
"A: The bill for Britain's order of 232 aircraft to replace the RAF's Tornado F3 and Jaguar has risen over the years from £7bn ($10bn) to £15.9bn ($22.7bn). "
it was the cost in 1999, and without the cost grow of the last 8 years!
somes rafales new :
Lt. Cmdr. Jason Rimmer was one of three Ike crew members, in addition to eight Carrier Air Wing 7 representatives, who flew over to De Gaulle to experience how their French ally conducts carrier operations, and to offer assistance regarding the launching and recovery of several U.S. Navy aircraft, including an F/A-18 Hornet, E-2C Hawkeye and C-2 Greyhound.
This was the first time an F/A-18 landed aboard De Gaulle.
“I thoroughly enjoyed my trip to the Charles De Gaulle and the chance to participate in joint operations with the two navies,” said Rimmer. “Their commanding officer put it best, saying that he hoped this exercise would prove our interoperability and readiness for tasking wherever and whenever. The French were excellent hosts and extremely professional operators.”
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_002455.shtml
11 rafale C will be produced this year!
Charles de gaulle visit to Newport:
"Launched in 1994 and operational in 2000, the de Gaulle is the largest, most powerful warship ever built in Europe. Its departure date was not announced.
"
http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/dp-23940sy0may27,0,5708334.story?coll=dp-news-local-final
http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=86969&ran=152770
Posts: 11,742
By: Sens - 5th June 2005 at 16:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The offers to Singapore gives a clue about costs for the Rafale compared to Typhoon.
The 10% smaller Rafale have to be 10% cheaper at least, by similar development costs and operating costs.
Posts: 318
By: PILOTGHT - 5th June 2005 at 19:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
well, i don't think that the electronic suite is the same, and the abilities too!
the difference in price ares around 1/5 1/4....
Posts: 7,877
By: Arthur - 5th June 2005 at 19:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A bit off-topic, for those who are in to cheap French pulp music (not necessarily gay): the video to Nadiya's song Si loin de vous has lots of Rafale footage, some of it CGI.
Visual compensation apart than the Rafale is catered for in the video. The music is absolute, total crap.
Posts: 1,403
By: Kovy - 6th June 2005 at 07:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
indeed :o
Posts: 1,842
By: glitter - 6th June 2005 at 14:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Between that crappy clip + the movie SKY FIGHTERS, it seems that the french army is into marketing berserk rage.
Posts: 4
By: Archibald - 7th June 2005 at 15:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
hello!!
a list of the french airplanes who reached mach 2
SO 4050 Trident (january 1957)
Nord Aviation Griffon (27th october 1958)
Dassault
Mirage III (24th october 1958)
Mirage IV (1959)
Mirage III V (september 1966) (the only VTOL to reach mach 2 )
Mirage F2 ( december 1966)
Mirage F1 (january 1967)
Mirage G (december 1967)
(4 airplanes at mach 2 within 18 month a VTOL two swept wing and one variable geometry airplane !! )
Mirage G8 (1972)
Mirage 2000 (april 1978)
Mirage 4000 (april 1979)
Rafale (??)
Posts: 251
By: F-18RN - 7th June 2005 at 20:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It may already have beeen mentioned, but one of the reasons is that the French wanted to develop an aircraft that could operate from a carrier, but no-one else in the Eurofighter consortium needed one. We having gone down the route of V/STOL with the Sea Harrier. Of course, if back in the 80s when the french withdrew, we had known that the Cold War was about to end and that when the Invincible Class was withdrawn we'd replace them with big carriers, it might have been a whole lot different...
By: Anonymous - 8th June 2005 at 03:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The French always want to lead and have the biggest share.................Which, sometimes doesn't set well with partners :eek: