NOTÍCIAS DO RAFALE

[Carlos Mathias]

Cada um com sua doença USAntiago, cada um com a sua.

[tflash]

USAntiago, nós merecemos é F-5 forevis mesmo, por escrever coisas como essa que você escreveu, que pedimos avião de merda e por isso não nos ofereceram F-15.

Meeeeeeeu Deus!

Algo como:

- Vocês querem merda? Toma aí um balde cheio de F-5 e F-18!

- Nakajima, Kim Jiun Tang, Ahmed Kalifa e Blaunstain, vocês querem alguma coisa que preste?
- Toma aí, F-15E!
- Voltem amanhã que vai ter F-35 e quem sabe, dependendo da inda aqui, F-22 capado!!!!

- Quem? Aquele phudido, aquela bugrada da porra? Manda uns F-16MLU prá eles que você vai ver, vai ter gente rindo de orelha a orelha!
Pobre é uma merda mesmo, ainda mais pobre capacho!


E assim vamos sonhando com M-1, OHPs e F-15...

cheguem-se à frente com a grana que eles vendem f15. Cheguem muita grana e já tem F35. Se querem dado ou quase dado é F5 e F16 (o MLU é pago à parte). Só pergunto: Isso não é lógico?

[Carlos Mathias]

Não meu caro, não é assim que banda toca não.
Quisemos F-4 e íamos pagar por isso, ou você acha que gente é mendigo prá ficar pedindo as coisas de graça?
Você acha que o prosub é de graça? As escoltas? Os blindados?
Esmola pros índios?
Você acha que o Rafale virão de graça? Mais esmola pros índios?

Só pergunto: Isso não é lógico?

E desde quando política é lógica?

[Penguin]

Postado por Beschara no FBM.
Muita informação interessante.




Awaiting the UAE
DSI special edition , August 2010

With the general Alain SILVY
Deputy Chief Plans within the Staff of the Air Force.

The french government took the pledge with the Rafale manufacturer to ensure, whatever happens, a minimum annual rate of 11 aircrafts. A rate estimated by the manufacturer as the floor below which it would not be possible to go without calling into question the economy of the program, including the unit cost of these aircrafts. The LPM (Law of Military Planning) not providing matching funds for the purchase of these machines for the years 2013 and 2014, either export allow very opportunely to keep the commitment to the industry, or export is lacking and the french state must find the necessary budgets by reducing or eliminating other programs. Is this commitment based on obtaining export orders a dangerous bet?

Alain Silvy: Let’s be honest. This “bet”, to use your word, on short-term obtaining of export orders for the Rafale, has nevertheless allowed to complete the LPM allowing the planning of a big hole in the shipment for the Air Force and the Navy without questioning the production rate, already reduced to the minimum industrially acceptable by Dassault Aviation. Deliveries to the French armies should be reduced to only 2 or 3 machines per year for a time, the export bringing the complement to reach the threshold of 11 Rafale produced per year. In case of absence of export order, the situation would become obviously complicated.[…] We would have to find a substantial funding of several hundred million euros. […]

But how to find the hundreds of millions euros in question?

The 3 armies have all benefited from the choice made by the planners of the LPM to reduce to a very low level the Rafale deliveries. The amount saved have been reallocated to the 3 armies. I think nobody questions it. We should have to find the funds by making new balancing within the LPM […] we must now hope that will come very quickly a first export order. […] But export is not neutral. Potential customers, including UAE, have specific requirements with developments leaving the French standards – and therefore with budget not taken into account by the LPM – they want cofinanced by the French state. That could require for France to find further funding for the Rafale program […]

What would be the cost for France of these additional co-development to fund with a potential UAE customer?

One hears everything and its opposite. Everything depends on what one includes. Personally, I do not give precise figures. But this is obviously something like several hundreds of millions of euros paid by the french state.

Is the Air force interested by some of the UAE requirements ?

From my point of view, it depends where. We could be potentially interested by the M88-X with 9 tons of thrust because it would be, in the circumstances, an open field. But, on the other hand, we have not yet reached the stage of maturity – which requires about 150,000 flight hours – with the current M88 with 7.5 tonnes thrust. This means that with the M88-X, even if it should presumptively enjoy a good community with the existing M88, we would have to accumulate even more hours to reach the stage of maturity of the engine.
Very clearly, in my opinion, the M88-X is not for the Air force an immediate need. In order to sell the Rafale to the UAE, the Defense may ultimately be asked to acquire the M88-X in a quantity and on terms still to define. And we’ll maybe even happy to use it. But today we have no technical or operational reasons to make it available for us.The gain expected from the arrival of a more powerful engine is lower than the risks we would go with the technical immaturity of new modules and the management in parallel – so complicated in terms of logistics and operational employment of aircraft with different performances –of two relatively different parks of M88. All this must be thorough.

Would it be possible to see Safran manufacturing M88-X for UAE and continue to deliver “classic” M88 for the french Rafale? And this notwithstanding that the french government would have co-funded the development of the M88-X

It is not forbidden to imagine it. On condition, however, that to maintain the parallel production of two versions of M88 does not cost more than producing a single model. The support costs must not explode. Safran must tell us very quickly and very frankly what it would be. And again, nothing force us to equip the whole fleet of Rafale, Air and/or Marine.

And about the UAE demand to have a more powerful RBE2 radar, could it answer to some expectations for the Air force?

The Air Force is interested in having a RBE2 with an active antenna. It is now established with the powerful AESA antenna which will equip our tranche 4 Rafale. What the Emirians are calling for is much more complex. They want, in addition to the AESA, to have new functionalities on their Rafale, such as GMTT / GMTI (detection and tracking of moving ground target), interlacing between air/air and air/ground modes, etc.. Even if this is not for us an urgent need, the operational ‘plus’ obtained could nonetheless eventually interest us. However, the key Emirian demand is about the range of the RBE2. And, with the same antenna diameter, the only way to achieve the 10% range increase (compared with the Basic AESA F3 “roadmap”) that wish to obtain the Emirians, is a big boost to the power of the radar.

But more power to the RBE2, could it be a risk to generate serious electromagnetic interference (EMI) with the SPECTRA receptors ?

There is indeed a very real EMI risk to treat. This is the case whenever we want to change aircraft emission systems. There are solutions, obviously, but this will require to reexamine SPECTRA. But the biggest problem we have identified is about electric generation, which could be insufficient. To increase the maximum range of a few nautical miles, we would have to deeply review the electrical generation system of the aircraft.
In short, to conceive what it could be a Rafale-9, that is to say a new aircraft moving away from the similarity you want with french Rafale. The Emirati experts participating in negotiations are well aware of the problem. But they are also used to have very high quality weapons systems. They want to avoid any regression with the Rafale, at least on the radar range, compared to the F-16 Block 60, the Rafale having also many other qualities. The Emirians don’t have AWACS and therefore want – it is a fundamental requirement – that the Rafale can see very far. Beyond the radar, they are showing fairly strong requirements into SPECTRA development with, for example, the expansion of some frequency bands, an increased sensitivity, adding functionalities; in short, they want we push up the current technologies. Of course, to improve the electronic warfare of our Rafale faster than originally planned could be an additional operational advantage for the Air force. However, our current approach is to consolidate the features implemented in SPECTRA, to make them more robust and make it easier for operators and programmers before wanting to go further into addition of new capabilities. The current SPECTRA is working well and even very good. In sum, what separates us, about Spectra, is a matter of timing and calendar […]. In a more general way, we share the same wishes about capabilities, but with very different maturities calendar sometimes. Budgetary constraints remain a dimensioning factor.

The Emirians want a viewfinder-HMD …

It’s true. And ourselves, one way or another, we will. For various reasons, we agreed in the past to not use it initially, but this equipment is now an almost indispensable element for modern combat aircraft. Besides various prospects of the Rafale – the UAE, Brazil and Switzerland – also want it, confirming this analysis.

In the end, what about the eventuality of a Rafale order by the UAE?

Very sincerely, and seen from my place, I think we’re really not very far from being able to reach a common ground with our UAE friends. The only pertinent question to be asked is whether the will of similarity expressed by the Emirians will prevail over their performance requirement If performance is what counts, in fact we’ll get two quite different Rafale – as with the Mirage 2000-9 – because the french state can not or do not want to follow it. If the community is paramount, the Emirians will have to reduce their ambitions with regard to performance. The choice is now in their hands. They must see if their operational necessities allow them or not to settle for a weapon system fairly close to the F3 “roadmap” French standard. They must decide whether they consider more important to work very closely with us. I know they have already expressed the wish, in case of order, to be able to send their pilots very quickly in our Rafale units where they could train, learn the Rafale and our tactical employment. To obtain a rapid operational rise of their own Rafale squadron. in that case their Rafale configuration and ours must not be very different. But it remains to be seen … That is where we are I think
.
How long would require the additional developments required by the UAE?

It is difficult to answer precisely this question, especially since I do not have all the elements of the problematic. The first UAE aircraft would not be delivered before 2014. This period should be sufficient to finish to develop a 9 tons M-88. About the radar, we would not probably have in 2014 all the capabilities and performance expected, but they would, I think, nevertheless be already very close to the target. The problem of electric generation requires also time to be processed. This will be a heavy operation for the aircraft. In the case of an order signed this year, we would therefore have some years to develop the additional features. These years should not be wasted. In any case, I think the discussions with Emirians take place on a sound footing. Their negotiators are experts who know exactly what is fighter plane and are aware of the state of the art and of various constraints. Talking to people at this level is very pleasant for the Air Force. However, now the order must materialize.

What about the UAE Mirage 2000-9 ?

The French authorities have been very clear on this subject. Once the Rafale ordered by UAE, the Mirage 2000-9 will be taken back by France which will issue them to a defeasance agency in charge of their resale export. This means that in this hypothesis, it is not envisaged that they equip the French Army.

But would it be interesting for the Army because these are recent cells with advanced weapons systems ?

We can not say that we feel no interest in these machines, because their weapons system displays really astonishing performance. The Air Force could certainly benefit. However, the indispensable work for NATO compatibility on these weapons systems would be very heavy with a cost probably exceeding the one – 700 millions euros – planned for the renovation of our Mirage 2000D, which is a priority for us.

If the UAE buy the Rafale, could the Rafale Transformation Squadron (ETR), which will be created in Saint-Dizier, be relocated at Al-Dhafra to help UAE pilots and benefit from the excellent local weather conditions ?

Why not? but we are not there yet. […] To install the ETR – as a whole or just a part – at Al-Dhafra could be an asset. Our first participation, last autumn, to the ATLC (Advanced Tactical Leadership Course) organized by the UAE Air Warfare Center, has once again demonstrated the richness of such exchanges. If the UAE order the Rafale, we may have to quickly take charge, in a way or another, of the transformation of their pilots on our weapon system. Doing it at Al-Dhafra would be – and this is only my opinion – interesting.

Interview by Jean-Louis Prome

[PRick]

Postado por Beschara no FBM.
Muita informação interessante.

Awaiting the UAE
DSI special edition , August 2010

With the general Alain SILVY
Deputy Chief Plans within the Staff of the Air Force.

The french government took the pledge with the Rafale manufacturer to ensure, whatever happens, a minimum annual rate of 11 aircrafts. A rate estimated by the manufacturer as the floor below which it would not be possible to go without calling into question the economy of the program, including the unit cost of these aircrafts. The LPM (Law of Military Planning) not providing matching funds for the purchase of these machines for the years 2013 and 2014, either export allow very opportunely to keep the commitment to the industry, or export is lacking and the french state must find the necessary budgets by reducing or eliminating other programs. Is this commitment based on obtaining export orders a dangerous bet?

Alain Silvy: Let’s be honest. This “bet”, to use your word, on short-term obtaining of export orders for the Rafale, has nevertheless allowed to complete the LPM allowing the planning of a big hole in the shipment for the Air Force and the Navy without questioning the production rate, already reduced to the minimum industrially acceptable by Dassault Aviation. Deliveries to the French armies should be reduced to only 2 or 3 machines per year for a time, the export bringing the complement to reach the threshold of 11 Rafale produced per year. In case of absence of export order, the situation would become obviously complicated.[…] We would have to find a substantial funding of several hundred million euros. […]

But how to find the hundreds of millions euros in question?

The 3 armies have all benefited from the choice made by the planners of the LPM to reduce to a very low level the Rafale deliveries. The amount saved have been reallocated to the 3 armies. I think nobody questions it. We should have to find the funds by making new balancing within the LPM […] we must now hope that will come very quickly a first export order. […] But export is not neutral. Potential customers, including UAE, have specific requirements with developments leaving the French standards – and therefore with budget not taken into account by the LPM – they want cofinanced by the French state. That could require for France to find further funding for the Rafale program […]

What would be the cost for France of these additional co-development to fund with a potential UAE customer?

One hears everything and its opposite. Everything depends on what one includes. Personally, I do not give precise figures. But this is obviously something like several hundreds of millions of euros paid by the french state.

Is the Air force interested by some of the UAE requirements ?

From my point of view, it depends where. We could be potentially interested by the M88-X with 9 tons of thrust because it would be, in the circumstances, an open field. But, on the other hand, we have not yet reached the stage of maturity – which requires about 150,000 flight hours – with the current M88 with 7.5 tonnes thrust. This means that with the M88-X, even if it should presumptively enjoy a good community with the existing M88, we would have to accumulate even more hours to reach the stage of maturity of the engine.
Very clearly, in my opinion, the M88-X is not for the Air force an immediate need. In order to sell the Rafale to the UAE, the Defense may ultimately be asked to acquire the M88-X in a quantity and on terms still to define. And we’ll maybe even happy to use it. But today we have no technical or operational reasons to make it available for us.The gain expected from the arrival of a more powerful engine is lower than the risks we would go with the technical immaturity of new modules and the management in parallel – so complicated in terms of logistics and operational employment of aircraft with different performances –of two relatively different parks of M88. All this must be thorough.

Would it be possible to see Safran manufacturing M88-X for UAE and continue to deliver “classic” M88 for the french Rafale? And this notwithstanding that the french government would have co-funded the development of the M88-X

It is not forbidden to imagine it. On condition, however, that to maintain the parallel production of two versions of M88 does not cost more than producing a single model. The support costs must not explode. Safran must tell us very quickly and very frankly what it would be. And again, nothing force us to equip the whole fleet of Rafale, Air and/or Marine.

And about the UAE demand to have a more powerful RBE2 radar, could it answer to some expectations for the Air force?

The Air Force is interested in having a RBE2 with an active antenna. It is now established with the powerful AESA antenna which will equip our tranche 4 Rafale. What the Emirians are calling for is much more complex. They want, in addition to the AESA, to have new functionalities on their Rafale, such as GMTT / GMTI (detection and tracking of moving ground target), interlacing between air/air and air/ground modes, etc.. Even if this is not for us an urgent need, the operational ‘plus’ obtained could nonetheless eventually interest us. However, the key Emirian demand is about the range of the RBE2. And, with the same antenna diameter, the only way to achieve the 10% range increase (compared with the Basic AESA F3 “roadmap”) that wish to obtain the Emirians, is a big boost to the power of the radar.

But more power to the RBE2, could it be a risk to generate serious electromagnetic interference (EMI) with the SPECTRA receptors ?

There is indeed a very real EMI risk to treat. This is the case whenever we want to change aircraft emission systems. There are solutions, obviously, but this will require to reexamine SPECTRA. But the biggest problem we have identified is about electric generation, which could be insufficient. To increase the maximum range of a few nautical miles, we would have to deeply review the electrical generation system of the aircraft.
In short, to conceive what it could be a Rafale-9, that is to say a new aircraft moving away from the similarity you want with french Rafale. The Emirati experts participating in negotiations are well aware of the problem. But they are also used to have very high quality weapons systems. They want to avoid any regression with the Rafale, at least on the radar range, compared to the F-16 Block 60, the Rafale having also many other qualities. The Emirians don’t have AWACS and therefore want – it is a fundamental requirement – that the Rafale can see very far. Beyond the radar, they are showing fairly strong requirements into SPECTRA development with, for example, the expansion of some frequency bands, an increased sensitivity, adding functionalities; in short, they want we push up the current technologies. Of course, to improve the electronic warfare of our Rafale faster than originally planned could be an additional operational advantage for the Air force. However, our current approach is to consolidate the features implemented in SPECTRA, to make them more robust and make it easier for operators and programmers before wanting to go further into addition of new capabilities. The current SPECTRA is working well and even very good. In sum, what separates us, about Spectra, is a matter of timing and calendar […]. In a more general way, we share the same wishes about capabilities, but with very different maturities calendar sometimes. Budgetary constraints remain a dimensioning factor.

The Emirians want a viewfinder-HMD …

It’s true. And ourselves, one way or another, we will. For various reasons, we agreed in the past to not use it initially, but this equipment is now an almost indispensable element for modern combat aircraft. Besides various prospects of the Rafale – the UAE, Brazil and Switzerland – also want it, confirming this analysis.

In the end, what about the eventuality of a Rafale order by the UAE?

Very sincerely, and seen from my place, I think we’re really not very far from being able to reach a common ground with our UAE friends. The only pertinent question to be asked is whether the will of similarity expressed by the Emirians will prevail over their performance requirement If performance is what counts, in fact we’ll get two quite different Rafale – as with the Mirage 2000-9 – because the french state can not or do not want to follow it. If the community is paramount, the Emirians will have to reduce their ambitions with regard to performance. The choice is now in their hands. They must see if their operational necessities allow them or not to settle for a weapon system fairly close to the F3 “roadmap” French standard. They must decide whether they consider more important to work very closely with us. I know they have already expressed the wish, in case of order, to be able to send their pilots very quickly in our Rafale units where they could train, learn the Rafale and our tactical employment. To obtain a rapid operational rise of their own Rafale squadron. in that case their Rafale configuration and ours must not be very different. But it remains to be seen … That is where we are I think
.
How long would require the additional developments required by the UAE?

It is difficult to answer precisely this question, especially since I do not have all the elements of the problematic. The first UAE aircraft would not be delivered before 2014. This period should be sufficient to finish to develop a 9 tons M-88. About the radar, we would not probably have in 2014 all the capabilities and performance expected, but they would, I think, nevertheless be already very close to the target. The problem of electric generation requires also time to be processed. This will be a heavy operation for the aircraft. In the case of an order signed this year, we would therefore have some years to develop the additional features. These years should not be wasted. In any case, I think the discussions with Emirians take place on a sound footing. Their negotiators are experts who know exactly what is fighter plane and are aware of the state of the art and of various constraints. Talking to people at this level is very pleasant for the Air Force. However, now the order must materialize.

What about the UAE Mirage 2000-9 ?

The French authorities have been very clear on this subject. Once the Rafale ordered by UAE, the Mirage 2000-9 will be taken back by France which will issue them to a defeasance agency in charge of their resale export. This means that in this hypothesis, it is not envisaged that they equip the French Army.

But would it be interesting for the Army because these are recent cells with advanced weapons systems ?

We can not say that we feel no interest in these machines, because their weapons system displays really astonishing performance. The Air Force could certainly benefit. However, the indispensable work for NATO compatibility on these weapons systems would be very heavy with a cost probably exceeding the one – 700 millions euros – planned for the renovation of our Mirage 2000D, which is a priority for us.

If the UAE buy the Rafale, could the Rafale Transformation Squadron (ETR), which will be created in Saint-Dizier, be relocated at Al-Dhafra to help UAE pilots and benefit from the excellent local weather conditions ?

Why not? but we are not there yet. […] To install the ETR – as a whole or just a part – at Al-Dhafra could be an asset. Our first participation, last autumn, to the ATLC (Advanced Tactical Leadership Course) organized by the UAE Air Warfare Center, has once again demonstrated the richness of such exchanges. If the UAE order the Rafale, we may have to quickly take charge, in a way or another, of the transformation of their pilots on our weapon system. Doing it at Al-Dhafra would be – and this is only my opinion – interesting.

Interview by Jean-Louis Prome

Não sei quais as informações novas, tudo que foi dito acima já foi falado por aqui, agora, existem informações erradas, hoje o Radar RBE Pesa já tem essas capacidades, de rastrear ao mesmo tempo ar-ar e ar-superfície.

Existem várias outros problemas nessa entrevista do mesmo tipo, creio que entrevistaram a pessoa errada, ou escreveram sem saber o que estavam fazendo.

[]´s

[Penguin]

Prick,

O artigo é deste mês, saiu em uma revista francesa e o entrevistado é o Général de brigade aérienne da l'armée de l'air Alain Silvy.

Vc quer saber mais do que ele?

Desta vez vc não pode jogar a culpa na imprensa anglo-saxã.

Essa matéria está repercutindo nos fóruns pelo mundo.

[]s

[Carlos Mathias]

USAntiago , e você mais uma vez, lendo a página de futebol, deparou com essa matéria que, coincidentemente, está jogando dúvidas sobre as capacidades do Rafale.

Realmente, um anjo inocente como pintaram aqui um tempinho atrás.

Ah!
Foi você que achou aquele artigo falando que o radar do F-18E não funciona?????

[AlbertoRJ]

Eu não acho que a matéria joga dúvidas sobre as capacidades do Rafale. Os EAU são experts em aviões "personalizados" e até exclusivos, vide o -9 e o bl60. Não que o -5 ou o bl52 fossem limitados mas ficaram realmente melhores.

[]'s

[Penguin]

USAntiago , e você mais uma vez, lendo a página de futebol, deparou com essa matéria que, coincidentemente, está jogando dúvidas sobre as capacidades do Rafale.

Realmente, um anjo inocente como pintaram aqui um tempinho atrás.

Ah!
Foi você que achou aquele artigo falando que o radar do F-18E não funciona?????

Karlovski_CCCP (ou seria Charleux_Chatotorix?)

Pois é, os caras estão na 3a geração de radares AESA, orçamento gigante, e ainda têm problemas.
Imagino o que não passarão aqueles que estão produzindo radar AESA pela primeira vez.

No mundo ideal tudo é lindo.

[]s

[PRick]

Prick,

O artigo é deste mês, saiu em uma revista francesa e o entrevistado é o Général de brigade aérienne da l'armée de l'air Alain Silvy.

Vc quer saber mais do que ele?

Desta vez vc não pode jogar a culpa na imprensa anglo-saxã.

Essa matéria está repercutindo nos fóruns pelo mundo.

[]s

O que não quer dizer muita coisa, entreviste o Comandante Saito, e verá o que ele vai falar sobre FX-2. Vou repetir, existem erros crassos no que fala essa entrevista, quer dizer parece que se trata de coisa não especializada ou estão querendo fazer sensacionalismo barato, existem reportagens e reporcagens, essa está fraca, não soma nada de novo, e fala umas besteiras, além de alguns boatos já espalhados pela mídia mafiosa.

Existe uma enorme diferença entre a entrevista de fato, e o que escrevem a respeito do que outros dizem, infelizmente, essa parece ser o caso.

Vou repetir, escreveram bobagens sobre o radar, porque já possui hoje algumas das capacidades que teriam sido pedidas pelo EAU. Agora, não seu se foi o entrevistado que falou a bobagem, ou se foi o reporter que não tem capacidade para escrever, essas coisas não ocorrem somente aqui.

[]´s

[Penguin]

Eu não acho que a matéria joga dúvidas sobre as capacidades do Rafale. Os EAU são experts em aviões "personalizados" e até exclusivos, vide o -9 e o bl60. Não que o -5 ou o bl52 fossem limitados mas ficaram realmente melhores.

[]'s

Eu também não. Achei-o honesto e bastante realista.
Mas Prick e Karlovski tiveram mais uma crise de hipersensibilidade...
Fazer o que?

[]s

[AlbertoRJ]

Eu não acho que a matéria joga dúvidas sobre as capacidades do Rafale. Os EAU são experts em aviões "personalizados" e até exclusivos, vide o -9 e o bl60. Não que o -5 ou o bl52 fossem limitados mas ficaram realmente melhores.

[]'s

Eu também não. Achei-o honesto e bastante realista.
Mas Prick e Karlovski tiveram mais uma crise de hipersensibilidade...
Fazer o que?

[]s

Seria bom ler a entrevista completa pois parece que alguns trechos foram suprimidos. Tem um link para a mesma?

[]'s

[Penguin]

Eu também não. Achei-o honesto e bastante realista.
Mas Prick e Karlovski tiveram mais uma crise de hipersensibilidade...
Fazer o que?

[]s

Seria bom ler a entrevista completa pois parece que alguns trechos foram suprimidos. Tem um link para a mesma?

[]'s

Um cara postou no MP.net:

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/3477/dsi1w.jpg
http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/3805/dsi2b.jpg
http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/1533/dsi3.jpg
http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/7561/dsi4.jpg

[]s

[PRick]

Eu não acho que a matéria joga dúvidas sobre as capacidades do Rafale. Os EAU são experts em aviões "personalizados" e até exclusivos, vide o -9 e o bl60. Não que o -5 ou o bl52 fossem limitados mas ficaram realmente melhores.

[]'s

Alberto, o problema não é esse, mas a salada que fizeram na reportagem, além de alguns dados errados, ela trata como novidade coisas antigas, e tenta fabricar uma oposição, uma dicotomia inexistente, além do cara falando o que os EAU querem ou queriam, ele não é a pessoa indicada para saber o que os EAU querem, parece que está com picuinha com o fato de o UAE querer modificações no Rafale que deixariam a versão melhor que a usada na França. Se isso é criação do reporter ou se partiu do entrevistado não sabemos.

Outra coisa é colocar como problema os obstáculos normais no desenvolvimento de novos sistemas, ou mesmo não ver isso em perspectiva, todos os caças são assim, os sistemas vão evoluindo, e a plataforma vai sendo melhorada. Isso não é problema, mas algo normal na vida de um caça.

O EAU querem uma versão mais avançada, diferente do que foi oferecido para nós por exemplo, que deverá ser uma versão similar ao F-3+. Agora, dizer que serão melhorados sistemas e fazer conjecturas sobre o que quer o EAU, isso é coisa entre o EAU e a Dassault.

[]´s

[Carlos Mathias]

USAntiago, foi você que achou a reportagem falando que o radar do F-18E não funciona?