Know Your 'Rafale'

[BON PLAN]

Where did I say SH is a bettet fighter than EF? Is your eyesight that bad? And I know, according to you Rafale is the all time great, what if few countries think it of as a fighter plane.

The original post was from SASUM.... you were out of there.

Please don't take all against you. and read carrefully.

 

[BON PLAN]

The Data what they did not put (or left incomplete) seemed to be the sealed financial bids which were without some datas and those were then given by then ACM NAK Browne. It was not performance data I assume because IAF evaluated them, since the Cost Negotiation Committee was calculating the L1 and the financial bid by Dassault was incomplete at that point Dassault should get disqualified. How can you send an incomplete financial bid?

hum hum....

but at the end Rafale was L1 and India is only negotiating seriously with Dassault.

Boieng, Saab.... are outsiders, just there to keep pressure on DA

 

[BON PLAN]

FINALLY DID WRITE THAT BIG POST, I DOUBT ANYONE IS GOING TO READ THAT ALL

You are too hard with yourself.....

 

[BON PLAN]

You don't know anything. Mirage 2000 was inducted into IAF in 1982. All the full-fledged wars in 1948, 1962, 1965 and 1971 were fought with British and Russian planes.

Before Mirage (I don't write 2000), there was Ouragan. You use it.

 

[gadeshi]

honestly MiG-23 was the lost gem of the Soviets. oh what a fighter it could have been. it's swing-wing design in addition to engine troubles, inadequate radar and non-existent fly-by-wire spelled trouble since its inception. the preference given to MiG-29 since 1970's sounded its death knell. its last variant the MiG-23MLD had ironed out most of the early problems but alas it was too late. even though its cockpit visibility was limited i was always fascinated by this single engine swing wing stinger. damn i'm spending too much time on DFI. need to get a life.

It is really a stupid post of yours.
1 - Please try to remember any other tactical fighter (except F-4 Phantom) whos radar could detect 3m2 target on 50km? Who could shot it down on 25-30km?
2 - What FBW are you talking about for a G3 fighter??? FBW has been invented by Sukhoi for T-4 (100) Mach 3 bomber in 1967, but first time used by General Dynamics on F-16A in 1974.
3 - There were no engines problem on ANY MiG-23 variant since the first MiG-23S. The most problems were 2 ones: wing consoles strength on 5G + maneuvers and centerbody tank sectionimpermeability (with wing consoles sweep mount). All of them were solved on MiG-23M/ and its MF/MS export versions.
4 - If we speak about MiG-23ML (and moreover this MLD), then we should mention the unique Sapphire-23ML radar that could detect its targets on up to 75km, could track 5 of them simultaneousely and the most part - it could detect and track them on the surface background. Even G4 fighters like F-15A/B and F-16A/B could not do so. F-15 has got several targets tracking and targets detection/tracking on the surface background only when F-15C has came to stage. The same for F-16, which has got the same abilities from F-16C Blk 25.

So you should read some true stories and then wright something sane but not write BS without knowing the subject.

 

[Tactical Frog]

"In the past, whenever India has entered into a into conflict, she has used French aircraft: namely the Mirage from Dassault" —— Eric Trappier.
How patronising this statement is, as if Sukhois & Migs played no role in India's 4 wars.
http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/06/france-greatly-lowered-rafale-price-for.html?m=1

He is not saying India has only used Mirage

You don't know anything. Mirage 2000 was inducted into IAF in 1982. All the full-fledged wars in 1948, 1962, 1965 and 1971 were fought with British and Russian planes.

Wrong ... there were Ouragan (Toofani) , Mystere IV , and Breguet Alize too.
i think Trappier was just simplifying for the French audience .. he knows all about this.

http://www.rafale.co.in/history.php

is interesting

 

[gadeshi]

The stupid Guy say :
Israelis used those time Chieftain and Patton. Not Leopard2 or Abrams... Patton was never a cutting edge tank....
T72 with 125mm gun ! Patton only 105 and Chieftain 120. One of the T72 asset was its mobility.
But despite a heavy gun, and mobility : they were smashed. It's a fact thats all.
Kisses from the stupid Guy bro.

A stupidity again...
All of Syrian T-72 lost were destroyed by Skyhawks with LDGP bombs and cluster munitions, not Pattons or Chieftains. Those old Post- WW2/Korean War tanks simply could not penetrate T-72 armour even without ERA.
The second scorers were ATGM crews. All as usual.
Moreover this, all of the big tanks and planes losses were not Syrian (which will and can fight), but Egyptian shit eaters cause. There were even such a humiliative cases when they simply flee and leave their tanks and vehicles just hearing a helicopter sound.

 

[PaliwalWarrior]

Against a non cutting edge west product? YES. But even then they loose....

OK so tell tell what was the cutting edge western tank at the time you claim Patton was non cutting edge

 

[manutdfan]

It is really a stupid post of yours.
1 - Please try to remember any other tactical fighter (except F-4 Phantom) whos radar could detect 3m2 target on 50km? Who could shot it down on 25-30km?
2 - What FBW are you talking about for a G3 fighter??? FBW has been invented by Sukhoi for T-4 (100) Mach 3 bomber in 1967, but first time used by General Dynamics on F-16A in 1974.
3 - There were no engines problem on ANY MiG-23 variant since the first MiG-23S. The most problems were 2 ones: wing consoles strength on 5G + maneuvers and centerbody tank sectionimpermeability (with wing consoles sweep mount). All of them were solved on MiG-23M/ and its MF/MS export versions.
4 - If we speak about MiG-23ML (and moreover this MLD), then we should mention the unique Sapphire-23ML radar that could detect its targets on up to 75km, could track 5 of them simultaneousely and the most part - it could detect and track them on the surface background. Even G4 fighters like F-15A/B and F-16A/B could not do so. F-15 has got several targets tracking and targets detection/tracking on the surface background only when F-15C has came to stage. The same for F-16, which has got the same abilities from F-16C Blk 25.

So you should read some true stories and then wright something sane but not write BS without knowing the subject.

yeah live in your stupid dreamland and keep your retarded half ass opinion to yourself DUB.
when 2 Indians are discussing something no matter diametrically opposite their views are; keep your stinky boiled potato eating mouth shut.
i bet in your delusional dreamland the Russians didn't kick your ass did they?
whatever i've posted is a summary of the Indian Air Force's operational experience. you think your gypsy air force is better than ours?
get this in your dumb mentally challenged brain- I'm a big fan of MiG-23 but like it or not it has many deficiencies which were not sufficiently addressed.

 

[smestarz]

"Bon Courage" no, It was "Bon Euro" that convinced him. Just before the new govt came to power NAK Browne was made Ambassador of Norway. with the investigations on, he would feel its too hot there too.
You can say its on track, does look grounded in a way.

So... "Bon courage" to him.

The fact is : Rafale emerge as L1 and is always on track. Despite all attacks.

 

[smestarz]

In none of the conflicts that India fought, no french aircraft was the show stopper (Show stopper means Star)
1971 it was the Hunters which created the most impact at Longewal, We did use French planes, but they were like the nameless extras in movie.

Everyone knows that Mirage 2000 had to be escorted by MiG-29 so as to avoid F-16 humping Mirage 2000
Try not to give the turkish example.. where Mirage 2000 shot down F-16 trainer aircraft .

He is not saying India has only used Mirage

Wrong ... there were Ouragan (Toofani) , Mystere IV , and Breguet Alize too.
i think Trappier was just simplifying for the French audience .. he knows all about this.

http://www.rafale.co.in/history.php

is interesting

 

[gadeshi]

yeah live in your stupid dreamland and keep your retarded half ass opinion to yourself DUB.
when 2 Indians are discussing something no matter diametrically opposite their views are; keep your stinky boiled potato eating mouth shut.
i bet in your delusional dreamland the Russians didn't kick your ass did they?
whatever i've posted is a summary of the Indian Air Force's operational experience. you think your gypsy air force is better than ours?
get this in your dumb mentally challenged brain- I'm a big fan of MiG-23 but like it or not it has many deficiencies which were not sufficiently addressed.

You don't know me and my activity on this forum, don't you?
So you are trying to lay your crap on a person you don't even know.
It is a sign of ill manners and bad education.
If you cannot operate the facts, than why do you believe your oppinion worth something?
You should more read than wright just like our frenchie friends

 

[sasum]

You don't know me and my activity on this forum, don't you?
So you are trying to lay your crap on a person you don't even know.
It is a sign of ill manners and bad education.
If you cannot operate the facts, than why do you believe your oppinion worth something?
You should more read than wright just like our frenchie friends

I gave up on him. He is an unwashed, demented slum-dog. Doesn't even deserve a response.

 

[manutdfan]

well look at these two traitors ganging up. didn't know that you were anti-national. go on suck the french's and kogut's dicks will you.

 

[BON PLAN]

It is really a stupid post of yours.
1 - Please try to remember any other tactical fighter (except F-4 Phantom) whos radar could detect 3m2 target on 50km? Who could shot it down on 25-30km?
2 - What FBW are you talking about for a G3 fighter??? FBW has been invented by Sukhoi for T-4 (100) Mach 3 bomber in 1967, but first time used by General Dynamics on F-16A in 1974.
3 - There were no engines problem on ANY MiG-23 variant since the first MiG-23S. The most problems were 2 ones: wing consoles strength on 5G + maneuvers and centerbody tank sectionimpermeability (with wing consoles sweep mount). All of them were solved on MiG-23M/ and its MF/MS export versions.
4 - If we speak about MiG-23ML (and moreover this MLD), then we should mention the unique Sapphire-23ML radar that could detect its targets on up to 75km, could track 5 of them simultaneousely and the most part - it could detect and track them on the surface background. Even G4 fighters like F-15A/B and F-16A/B could not do so. F-15 has got several targets tracking and targets detection/tracking on the surface background only when F-15C has came to stage. The same for F-16, which has got the same abilities from F-16C Blk 25.

So you should read some true stories and then wright something sane but not write BS without knowing the subject.

Two times in 2 days you say to a forumer he made stupid post.... please some respect. You are not the only one to have some learnings in aerospace.

You have the right not to agree, but you don't have all the answers.

Russian planes are not the world wide technical success you want us to believe.

 

[Tactical Frog]

In none of the conflicts that India fought, no french aircraft was the show stopper (Show stopper means Star)
1971 it was the Hunters which created the most impact at Longewal, We did use French planes, but they were like the nameless extras in movie.

Everyone knows that Mirage 2000 had to be escorted by MiG-29 so as to avoid F-16 humping Mirage 2000
Try not to give the turkish example.. where Mirage 2000 shot down F-16 trainer aircraft .

Sorry , but the Mystere IV was not a nameless extra in the 1965 war with Pakistan. And Mirage 2000 was a decisive asset in Kargil war, period.
Dassault has a long standing relationship with India, whether you like it or not.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Galleries/Aircraft/Vintage/Fighters/Mystere/

 

[gadeshi]

Two times in 2 days you say to a forumer he made stupid post.... please some respect. You are not the only one to have some learnings in aerospace.

You have the right not to agree, but you don't have all the answers.

Russian planes are not the world wide technical success you want us to believe.

Calm down friend!
I just want people to respect facts, not Russia whatever it takes (this time ).

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk

 

[BON PLAN]

A stupidity again...
All of Syrian T-72 lost were destroyed by Skyhawks with LDGP bombs and cluster munitions, not Pattons or Chieftains. Those old Post- WW2/Korean War tanks simply could not penetrate T-72 armour even without ERA.
The second scorers were ATGM crews. All as usual.
Moreover this, all of the big tanks and planes losses were not Syrian (which will and can fight), but Egyptian shit eaters cause. There were even such a humiliative cases when they simply flee and leave their tanks and vehicles just hearing a helicopter sound.

Oh you're right ! it's not Chieftain, it's Centurion GB tank used by israel. with only a 105mm gun !

And excuse me, a T72 is easily penetrated by a 105mm L7 gun ! AMX30 in irak fired with success T72.

 

[BON PLAN]

OK so tell tell what was the cutting edge western tank at the time you claim Patton was non cutting edge

Centurion was .

 

[gadeshi]

Oh you're right ! it's not Chieftain, it's Centurion GB tank used by israel. with only a 105mm gun !

And excuse me, a T72 is easily penetrated by a 105mm L7 gun ! AMX30 in irak fired with success T72.

AMX-30 had modern gun with high ballistics and modern cumulative and solid rod penetrators. So this is not the case to compare. Modern Russian high ballistic 57mm gun can easily penetrate AMX-30, but WW2 tanks cannot.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk