Read the forum code of contact
By: - 26th April 2005 at 18:45 Permalink - 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!!
The French arrogance bit is nothing more than sources who tend to be Francophobe.
The reason why the French pulled out is because intense disagreements over the French wanting to use a female voice for the computer. The Germans kept insisting to use a masculine German man named Rudolf for the voice, but the French wanted zero of that and left
By: - 26th April 2005 at 19:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Obviously that is the real reason, but the story which is the "official" one is that the French wanted to be design leader and some other parties didn't like that.
By: - 26th April 2005 at 20:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Obviously that is the real reason, but the story which is the "official" one is that the French wanted to be design leader and some other parties didn't like that.
that is indeed the reason and probably dissagreement on the workshare division
france did have a point for teh design leader as they had alot more experience with high performance fighters then any of the other participants
well they did the same as the other 4 togheter iin less time, a worthy achievement and a way way better looking aircraft ;)
By: - 26th April 2005 at 20:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The French arrogance bit is nothing more than sources who tend to be Francophobe.The reason why the French pulled out is because intense disagreements over the French wanting to use a female voice for the computer. The Germans kept insisting to use a masculine German man named Rudolf for the voice, but the French wanted zero of that and left
LOL!!! :D :D
By: - 26th April 2005 at 20:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"france did have a point for teh design leader as they had alot more experience with high performance fighters then any of the other participants"
Not being funny or anything but thats about the most BS I have heard in a long time. No way do the French have more experience than the Brits with high performance fighter design. You are talking cr@p. No offense meant.
Phil
By: - 26th April 2005 at 21:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How many Mach-2 aircraft have the British designed? I count one, the Lightning, maybe 2 if you count the multinational Tornado.
How many has France designed? Mirage III, Mirage V, Mirage IV, Mirage 2000, Mirage 4000, Mirage G, Mirage F-1...
How can you say Britain has more experience in high performance fighter design?
By: - 26th April 2005 at 22:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
English sites argue that this is simply due to french arrogance. I have no reason to doubt english assessments of the French ( ),
:D You're right. In the 80's, after a meeting about the european fighter program, a Dassault chairman's councillor said: "the brits invited us as they do to invite a turkey for a Christmas dinner".
More seriously, the needs between countries were different.
By: - 26th April 2005 at 22:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It was not French arrogance, They already had a good aviation Industry. I am not saying Britian does not have one. But the french did have the Mirage-2000 which was competing with F-16 and It is a fact what ever one says. After the tornado, the british started spending less on new plane design and technologies and i dont know for whatever reason they placed less importance on new fighters. If one takes a british airforce of early 1995. The whole force is full of tornados and Jags. both of them vintage. One equals the F-111 and other equals Mirage F.1. without NATO. RAF was not a very formidable force.
By: - 26th April 2005 at 22:30 Permalink - 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.
When PILOTGHT steps into this thread and writes a couple of posts it will get much clearer to you. Believe me. :D
By: - 26th April 2005 at 23:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No way do the French have more experience than the Brits with high performance fighter design
However, they did. With the mirage 2000 (fly by wire and delta wing) and with the mirage 4000 (fly by wire, delta / canard)
How many delta wing FBW fighter jets did the british design before the eurofighter ? zero. (concorde does not count sorry)
Just look at how long it took for the eurofighter consortium to design their flight control system while on the other hand the rafale one was ready immediatly. At the time the first BAe eurofighter (DA2) was making its first timid flight, the rafale was making its first carrier landing trials on the Foch. That shows very well how late the eurofighter was, compared to the rafale.
If the Eurofighter developpement was so expensive and slow at the begining, it is because it lacked the expertise of Dassault.
By: - 26th April 2005 at 23:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
BTW, the british did everything they could in order to make the french leave the program...and the french industry did everything it could to leave too...So eventally, everybody was happy until the first technical and financial problems :rolleyes:
By: - 27th April 2005 at 05:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
On the other hand the French wanted to put in the least investment and at the same time take full development lead and the lion's share of the work 50% if my reading is correct. That left Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain with the scraps and still paying out the same amount of cash as the French in investment. It wasn't just the British who thought this was unacceptable and despite your dismissal of British (and for that matter German, Italian and Spanish) aviation design the French demands were indeed arrogant, politically motivated and designed to slow down the development of the Eurofighter whilst they worked on the Rafale. They succeeded.
The French had no intention of going ahead with their involvement, they knew their demands would be unacceptable and they knew it would delay the R&D phase whilst they moved ahead on their own design. The other partners fell for it hook line and sinker, its just another example of politics hampering the Eurofighter project, rather than technical difficulties. What the French did not bargain for is that the Eurofigher consortium would go ahead anyway and build an aircraft that would be competing with the Rafale. This p!ssed off the French as will be evidenced by PilotGHT when he butts in with his own xenophobic two'peneth.
Also. Why does the Concorde not count and why not mention the Jaguar? Is it because that as an example they screw your argument that the British don't want to work with the French? They are quite happy to work with the French, the French don't like working with the British is all. The Jag is a perfect example. The French did not want the Brits butting in on their sales drives and said that BAe would not get a penny from their exports. BAe said fine, same goes for us. When BAe sold more Jags than the French, :dev2: ( the French did not sell any) the French suddenly, though understandably, changed their minds. They got ever so upset when BAe and the British government told them to stuff it. One of the reasons the French Navy was not allowed a navalised Jag rather than the Super Etendard was because it was 'too British'. Stuff that up your jet pipe.
Phil :)
By: - 27th April 2005 at 05:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
When PILOTGHT steps into this thread and writes a couple of posts it will get much clearer to you. Believe me. :D
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
"How many has France designed? Mirage III, Mirage V, Mirage IV, Mirage 2000, Mirage 4000, Mirage G, Mirage F-1...
How can you say Britain has more experience in high performance fighter design?"
'nuff said.
Resident Yanks will be pleased to know the the Euro-Muddle that resulted in two very similar planes will soon be repeated in the upcoming Eurotrainer requirement. Instead of going for the M346 we'll again see n amount of designs being proposed. Bizness as usual :(
I look forward to the day when we get our sheet together as regards procurement. Resident Yankee imperialists are cordially invited to roll on the floor with laughter :( :(
By: - 27th April 2005 at 06:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Puffadder the problem is that the USA and Brussels see 'Europe' as a single political entity. It is not. The Brits, the French, The Germans, Dutch, Poles etc etc all have their own agenda. Europe is not a country and if NATO can't standardise what makes you think Europe can?
Phil
By: - 27th April 2005 at 06:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How many Mach-2 aircraft have the British designed? I count one, the Lightning, maybe 2 if you count the multinational Tornado.How many has France designed? Mirage III, Mirage V, Mirage IV, Mirage 2000, Mirage 4000, Mirage G, Mirage F-1...
How can you say Britain has more experience in high performance fighter design?
I did not say Britain had more experience stop putting words into my posts.
Phil :)
By: - 27th April 2005 at 09:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"france did have a point for teh design leader as they had alot more experience with high performance fighters then any of the other participants"Not being funny or anything but thats about the most BS I have heard in a long time. No way do the French have more experience than the Brits with high performance fighter design. You are talking cr@p. No offense meant.
Phil
Phil, nationalism aside, you are not being objective this time.. Brits only had several high-performance aircraft of their own design, all being obsolete by the time, Lightning, Buccaneer, TSR-2. I shall leave subsonic Vulcan, Harrier and Hawk out. All other projects were multinational cooperations, where Brits had their development share, be it cca 50% of Concorde, 50% of Jaguar, some 40% of Tornado or 30% of Eurofighter, plus some ridiculous % of Spey-powered Phantoms FGR1 and FGR2.
French had machines of all kinds, Mirage III, Mirage V, Mirage F1, Mirage G-8, Mirage 2000, Mirage IV, Mirage 4000, Rafale A/B/C/M, 50% of Concorde, 50% of Jaguar plus some experimental machines. Subsonic-wise they additionally got 50% of Alpha Jet and Etendards.
French win this hands down, admit it.. Still being spooked by history? I really wonder..
By: - 27th April 2005 at 09:50 Permalink - 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!!
Besides political and nationalistic reasons which might have played a key role in the project, French abandoned EFA due to overweight and oversize issues. After hearing German and British comments the aircraft had been slowly becoming too big and too fat to fit on the new French carrier proposal, which was later built as Charles De Gaulle. Another issue were engines and radar, where SNECMA and THALES would not have played the key role over Rolls-Royce/MTU/Finmechannica and Ferranti/FIAR in overall design.
It was a politically and financially challenging decision, but I guess it was right, as long as French were able to complete the project by themselves. Well, they obviously were and the thing is comparable to EF any day of the week, my hat is down.. I don't think that having two comparable fighters can really harm Europe, just look at the States.
By: - 27th April 2005 at 13:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Why does the Concorde not count and why not mention the Jaguar?
Concorde ? such a great fighter indeed.
JAguar, max speed Mach2, is it that ?
Is it because that as an example they screw your argument that the British don't want to work with the French?
Could you quote that exact statement from his posts ?
They are quite happy to work with the French, the French don't like working with the British is all.
According from waht I know, it's more or less true :p
The French did not want the Brits butting in on their sales drives and said that BAe would not get a penny from their exports. BAe said fine, same goes for us. When BAe sold more Jags than the French, :dev2: ( the French did not sell any) the French suddenly, though understandably, changed their minds.
I fear you're totally wrong on that.
Dassault bought Breguet and said that they didn't to have anything to do with the jaguar.
One of the reasons the French Navy was not allowed a navalised Jag rather than the Super Etendard was because it was 'too British'.
Certainly that Dassault pushed for a 100% french solution but the navalised jaguar wasn't a great success.
By: - 27th April 2005 at 14:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I did not say Britain had more experience stop putting words into my posts.Phil :)
What's this then?
"No way do the French have more experience than the Brits with high performance fighter design."
By: - 27th April 2005 at 15:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Come on Sean, stop being so unreasonable. Phil quite clearly meant that, in his opinion, the French and the British are exactly equally experienced in making high performance fighters. :dev2:
Posts: 352
By: sekant - 26th April 2005 at 18:37
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!!