I will give you an interesting challenge. Look for the F15sa, its speed, its radar range, and let me give you a hint. The plane has two radars. Look for the stealth features and the weapons that it can carry, and the maximum range to carry missiles or bombs, or both, and then make a video about it for information The only country that owns this plane is my country Saudi Arabia I think it deserves a video of its own What do you think ? بتوفيق :-)

I think you are french and, don't get me wrong the Rafale is a great plane, but I don't like the way France just joins an international joint effort to create a plane, investigates if they can do it and then copy some things of the design. The only relief with the next plane, FCAS, is that it's waaay too expensive for the french government to go alone, they can't screw Germany and Spain and whoever joins the effort again

and that is weird since you collaborated in really good terms with my country for example, Spain, making Scorpene submarines. Probably because the design is exclusively french and we couldn't say much in it. so, yeah. The sense of "I sell them to you and i don't care what you do", its maybe a bit too much for me but i get it, and its not like the US does the same with Saudi Arabia but your reluctance to collaborate with European allies, it's soo weird. Lets see if with the next tank and plane we can do it and make great pieces of technology. Probably the War on Ukraine will help with that edit: what the brits and the germans did to you was dirty, that is true, spcecially with a country with that amount of experience in the aviation industry

Is it possible to land and launch Rafale on American aircraft carriers?

@@kingkillzxz7719 2 radars??? no, only 1: the APG-63(v)3 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, the only plane with 2 radars is a Russian plane!!

Doesnt have many differents aircraft to make all the missions and, to have juste 1 (because he is omnirole), give the cost of everything cheap. It's also for that they build the Rafale.

Omni-rol is french marketing for multi-rol

@@moRaaOTAKU no there are technical specificity, you can switch from air to ground to air air immediately and still be able to detect insignificant ground target while on air air mission as demonstrated in evaluations in the UAE when the f22 was mostly clueless about the smaller ground targets that rafale picked up anything on the ground (it was more than a decade ago i won't be too specific if it was mortar dug out or whatever but nothing much for a radar to sniff out)

omni role is pretty abstract . f-18 is omni role and many others

@@jonathanzentelin2815 how stealthy Rafale is a open question. about the rest it can do everything. idk where you get the stuff... yes it is not universaly compatable with all the air based rockets but no plane is

​@@mrpicky1868No... The F-18 is NOT omnirole, it's multirole. For you it may be the same thing but it's actually not

But it turned out to be a great aircraft

@georgebarnes8163 unfortunately not as good as the Rafale, international tenders revealed it several times...

Rafale's plan was set before the Euro Fighter program right

@@LeoDas688makes sense sneaky French lol

most advanced system in general from radar ,sam plane, .system..

As long as there is a Red Flag Maneuver in place the NATO-Members have nothing to fear. The Commis have nothing compareable. Ahh and BTW I think the Gripen would eat this Froggything alive.

Hit on your keyboard " Dassault Rafale Dogfight " an see 5 different figth all win by Rafale ! F22 include.

@@clouetjp769 training exercises... le Rafale n'a aucune victoire aérienne tout comme beaucoup d'autres avions, même la F-22 a pour seule victoire aérienne celle contre le ballon espion chinois

@@diegoc.8518il parle d’exercices à mon avis

F4 coming soon, and it's a very good one to be honest. Good thing it's pretty much plug-and-play to do the updates on this awesome plane.

@@stitch77100 Are you sure that upgrade from F3r to F4 is so easy? As I understand it is not so, and some older plains wouldn't be able to upgrade to full F4.2 but only F4.1.

@@tomislavsokic3141 only some of the old version of the first French planes, not the ones for Croatia. And even if its only f4.1, it is still a very powerful configuration, and a very capable plane, especially inside an upgraded squadron.

@@stitch77100 Thank you. So upgrade from F3r to F4 is easy and not abnormally expensive? I thought that radar needs replacement.

Ahah, france 4⁰generation air Force and NAVY of 4⁰generation ahah.italy with 60 f35a for air Force, 30 f35b with NAVY, navy is 5⁰generation because CAVOUR IS A SHIP WITH MIND OF F35, IS IMPRESSIONANT . ALSO ITALY WITH AIRCRAF 4⁰+: 120 EUROFIGHTER, 90 HARRIEL STOVL...BECAUSE NO ACQUISIDED F35? ITALY IN NEXT FUTURE DESTROYER EASY FRANCE ,THEY ARE STEALT S,ITALY DANGER, INVASION OF THE FRANCE IS NEXT ,AFTER THE SHIT S INGLISH S....OK? 5 MILION S OF BAGUETTE S FOR NO INVASION FRANCE AHAHAH BIDET S USE

All of those were terrible choices for Greece though...

@@johanlassen6448 why were they had choices

@@okobongdinko4606 In general, French weapons and systems cost far more while offering more limited capability. Granted that Mirage 2000 was a decent deal at the time (80s, early 90s) because it could carry Exocet (while F-16 *at the time* could only carry Penguin) but in retrospect Greece never got to use those capabilities and F-16 is now better for anti-ship missions due to its compatibility with Harpoon, NSM and LRASM (while Mirage 2000 is still limited to only ancient Exocet missiles which the French themselves now admit are obsolete). As it looks today Greek Mirage 2000s have no possibility for upgrade since France is not interested in them anymore. So no AESA, no modern targeting pods, no modern cruise-missile capability, no SEAD/DEAD-capability. Essentially they will be stuck in late 80/early 90s technology until they are retired. And they can only carry 4 A2A missiles. Meanwhile the F-16 (another plane in Greek service) has a clear upgrade path for the next 10 years, at which point it could easily be replaced by F-35A. As for Rafale and Belhara. Rafale 1) Greece paid an exceptionally high amount of money per plane (150+ million euros per plane, and that is *just* for the plane, not the weapons), 6 of which are *used*. 2) The number of Rafales in Greek service are exceptionally low (at the moment 6, planned for 24 i.e. only 1 squadron). 3) Rafale does not bring anything that F-16V can't replicate vis-á-vis the Turkish air force A. F-16V with SABR AESA radar and AIM-120D is about equivalent to Rafale F3R/F4 with RBE2-AA AESA radar and Meteor, considering Meteor has better range but SABR is better than RBE2-AA B. F-16V can carry Harpoon, NSM and LRASM (all superior to Exocet) C. F-16V is fully compatible with Patriot batteries D. F-16V can carry Rampage and AGM-158 series (as well as ADM-160C i.e. MALD decoys) E. F-16V can carry Harm (Rafale has no SEAD/DEAD-capability at all) Meanwhile Rafale is still as vulnerable as ever to S-400, HISAR etc... from the Turks. In fact it is more vulnerable because unlike F-16V it can't carry anything like MALD. And Greece already has F-16 in service. Even looking at Greeces actual upgrade of the 83 F-16s to the V standard, it costs only a fraction of what Greece is paying for 24 Rafales (6 of which are used). So upgrading 83 F-16s to F-16V is cheaper than buying 24 Rafales (25% of which are used) while offering similar or in some cases better capability. etc... So you end up in a situation where Greece paid a ridiculous amount of money for no real increase in capability but an increase in logistical complexity. Greece would have been much better off investing in F-16V earlier (alongside weapons deals to equip them) and locking down an F-35A contract, which would *actually* have changed the balance of power in the Aegean in favor of Greece (what with F-35 having far superior sensors, sensor fusion, data fusion, ECM, and stealth). Belhara Essentially, Greece paid once again a ridiculous amount of money for 3 ships (Greece needed 4) that will be produced in France (original idea was for production in Greece), no upgrade for MEKO 200 frigates (part of the original plan but scrapped because France could not provide it) that uses a closed CMS (i.e. much more difficult to integrate, if it is at all possible, with Patriot and F-16+F-35 which all are or will be in Greek service) while carrying 1. No ECM 2. No CIWS 3. No IR/EOS system integrated with the CMS 4. A very limited 32 ASTER missiles (too expensive to be economically viable against UAV swarms) 5. No ability to quadpack missiles (so again, limited to only 32 missiles even if it could pack something less expensive like ESSM/CAMM-ER, which it can't carry anyway) 5a. By comparison Constellation (the American offer in the same tender) has 32 Mk.41 VLS cells, which can be quadpacked, and capability to carry both long-ranged and medium-ranged missiles so it can carry a total of 128 missiles, compared to Belharas 32 - notice that carry capacity is incredibly important when fighting at sea). 6. Can only carry ancient Exocet missiles for anti-ship warfare (which again the French recently admitted are obsolete) 7. Only uses a CODAD engine (ancient technology) 8. Can only carry 2 torpedoes and can't reload at sea 9. Is not compatible with MH-60 (anti-submarine helicopters in Greek service, the Australians use the same and could not integrate them with their own French ships) And what does Belhara bring to the table that other ships like Constellation do not? Nothing. They have equivalent radar and equivalent sonar. But the others can carry decoys, which Belhara *also* can't carry. Greece essentially paid well over market price for ships that will serve as nothing other than target practice for the Turks. It was a terrible decision, borne out of a vain idea that it could buy French political support (which is as fleeting as the wind) and as someone who supports Greece in her conflict with Turkey I am deeply disappointed and concerned with the Greek procurement.

@@johanlassen6448 thank you so much this was very comprehensive

@@okobongdinko4606 No problem.

Firstly it's the man behind the machine that matters PAF is far more experienced and competent air force than indias and dogfights are no longer relevant with PL15 type missiles and BVR matters basically its whi strikes you first

@@MohammedShafiq-id5ov PL 15 doesn't have ramjet it's a inferior missile compair to the meteor

@@siddharthsingh4575 lol if it was inferior just because it doesn't have ramjet US wouldn't about it

@@MohammedShafiq-id5ov Do you really think the U.S is worried about anything from china they are atleast 50 years ahead of China & i am not even talking about the Black projects

Rafale is the most powerful contender in mmrca2.0

Well said, you are explaining very well why it's difficult to win against usa. Can't believe Germany is taking the F35 instead of European Rafale only because otherwise they can't use the usa H-bomb. Shame!!!

​@@LaurentGaillardMuret dès le depart on était sûr que aucun des pays participant au projet eurofighter n'achèterait le Rafale par la suite. Ca en fait un petit paquet en moins.

l'europe de la défense est une chimère ! frexit

The French really aren't known for air craft. Its very good but if countries can they'll always go with buying an f-16 or whatever the Germans usually provide.

@@yourtrappedinmygenjutsu Really? because the Germans produce planes themselves? M-109s? maybe? because Germany is an obedient vassal of the United States and only buys American fighters (including the much controversial F-35)

@@yourtrappedinmygenjutsu Are you serious ? France build aircrafts since it exists and has always been . Airbus is a french company in the beginning (Aérospatiale) and Dassault build successful aircraft designs since the 20's. You're probably a Brit or an american to think that, forgetting that defence is more about politics, influence and alliances than about pure performances. Look at how well Lockeed Martin sells its F35 , when even the US defence Commity and the Senate say the plane and the program didn't reach its objectives, have cost, maintenance and durability issues

@@yourtrappedinmygenjutsu loooool!!!!! Airbus is 50% french. Rafale is the only one Omnirole, the best for competition for selling. If they dont sell at all the world it's also because USA make pressure for economic business on the buyer countries. Perfectly reliable, able aircraft carrier, able to sell, able to update during again 80 years, able to take nuclear weapons, 90% stealthy. Lost just 5-6 vs f22 (who is now old and not able to update many things). The France is the best with USA for aircraft. Mostly with less money!!

@@remistiegler5302 The reason the F-35 sells well is because it exceeds expectations and completely demolishes all opposition, including the Rafale. You can't be serious when you are suggesting that its "politics". Politics did not determine the winner in the Finnish evaluation, or the Swiss one, or the Canadian one, or the Belgian one, or Denmark, Norway, Poland, Italy, South Korea, Japan etc... These are all serious countries with serious air forces. Stop being ridiculous.

I think India can't sell Brahmos missile because they develloped it in cooperation with russia with strict export rule and fall under the american CAATSA law, but, in 2030, the FC/ASW (or Perseus missile) will be avaible, and it is unlikely that Greece will order and receive F4 Rafales before 2030. The FC/ASW is an Exocet size missile (800 kg - 5 m length against 1 500/2 300kg - 7/9 m length for the BrahMos) with BraMos capabilities (300 km range - Mach 3).

The Rafale could not carry the Bramhos, maybe if they build a lite version. Scalp is sufficient.

Gripen is equally good. For a country like India, they also need an air-superiority fighter. It used to be Su30 , but at present none

Gripen is also good yes but it seems SAAb owners dont give much in flexibility F@@train_xc

@@same-fm1qu also politically India has more trust in France than that of UK, Germany or Sweden. This trust factor is very important, as in case of war you don’t have to worry about the supply of parts. Probably this is the reason why India never bought US jets like the F15 for the IAF or F18 for the carriers, though they were superior to others in the market. You just cannot trust the US

I'm trusting in the f35

I'm trusting in NGAD.

@@spartanx9293 LOL, even the US defence Commity and the US Senate start to not trust is anymore XDDD

@@remistiegler5302which is Why they are offering increased funding to the F-35 and why the majority of potential Rafale customers have gone with the F-35

@@spartanx9293 That is two different things. They have to continue with the F35 in some way because they invested 1,5 Tr$ in it. And please, don't make us believe that defence competitions involving the F-35 are even close to fair, the US pressure their allies to buy it, even if the don't need a complicated and specialized aircraft like the F35. This is also for the US the only way to make the huge investment for the F-35 at least profitable some day At which moment countries like the Netherlands, Belgium or Switzerland need an expensive stealth aircraft for deep strikes behind enemy lines ?

Désolé mais il a prouvé haut la main sa capacité Omnirole !!

Same here, must be the video, unless we have the same defective ear piece.

a retractable pole is additional complexity, and imagine if the pole doesn't come out and there is no place to rest? ... even chosen for internal refueling systems without an external pole ... I can imagine very well that in the event of unpredictable movements during refueling there is a risk of the head of the fuel pipe being torn off from the tanker plane.... with all the consequences that go with it...🤔🤔🤔

ally chrisna rafille

You mean the foreign systems India buys from other countries for it's own use? Or you mean domestic systems made in India? Like Tejas or Arjun? Because yeah, domestic Indian made systems suck. Even Indian military prefers the foreign made designs.

You mean the foreign systems India buys from other countries for it's own use? Or you mean domestic systems made in India? Like Tejas or Arjun? Because yeah, domestic Indian made systems suck. Even Indian military prefers the foreign made designs. Also, even domestic Indian designs like Tejas or Arjun are made up of mostly foreign parts, like foreign engines, radars or avionics, even bullets and missiles, along with explosive armors or armor piercing antitank shells.. Basically everything advanced is foreign. Not much Indian there to even talk about as like 80% or more is foreign, even in domestic Indian made weapons like the above.

@@ex0duzz I see You are very nicely brainwashed but the reality is that indeed India is not expert in such type of high tech development but we are in advanced stages of maturing such technology and amount of limited info you have is evident that you are saying the products are crap and not used by Our forces.... just look at the safety record of Tejas and it’s order and our different missile systems and know our INS Vikrant

@@ex0duzz Yes in terms of engine we are still very much dependent on other countries but in terms of radar missiles and anti tank shells we are very much independent for use on our indigenous products for example Astra BVR , Uttam Aesa radar and indigenously developed antitank shell for Arjun and many more but there are certain limitations and compatibility issues to implement these techs or weapons on product developed by other countries that are currently in our arsenal

The worst thing about Indian defence is the bureaucracy that is involved in every defence project or deal

I believe the reason Australia rejected both these 'oh so pretty' weapons systems was when they saw that both had the French 'automatic white flag deployment system' standard equipment.

@@lawfulldick4158 oooh you poor fragile thing, you learned the 2003 BS Uncle Sam propaganda well. Good boi, you'll get a cookie ! Plus a US harbour and a US airbase, in order to "increase" your sovereignity :DDDDD

@@lawfulldick4158 what do you think of the white flag of the usa in vietnam, iraq, afganistan ? 😂

@@lawfulldick4158 Correct. France is all talk and very little action. Australia did not pull out of the submarine deal because of pressure but because the French ran into massive delays, cost overruns, and could not deliver. Meanwhile, the political climate had changed and the Australians correctly identified the need for nuclear propulsion.

Australia did pay extra to cancel the sub deal. Government has signed a contract and changed its mind :"we prefer to pay a fee and have no sub at all".

just 36 more Rafales. 100+ Tejas.

To be fair, that was an old test, the Gripen E is probably more on-par with recent Eurofighters than they were at the time

lol stop your import lobbying.

There's a difference between multi-role

@@spartanx9293 In practical terms, how is it different? "Omni-role" sounds like something that the marketing wanks created to sell more planes. There are not enough hardpoints to carry everything that would needed for all those different roles at the same time.

@@HomercidalOne its not i should have put down a question mark

@@HomercidalOne no the point is, it can do anything. It can't do everything at once. But the load out is easy to change. Even on a deck of a aircraft carrier.

@@murphy7801 Just like some other multi-role planes. I ask again, what is the difference between "omni" and "multi"?

*destroys a tank with an Aim9* What about that bitchhhh

Garuda 1, mission change, new target.... 5 mins later, garuda 1, mission change, new target 😆 love ace combat. rafale is an exceptional aircraft. I would like to see the F4 variant go up against the F-16V 70/72 model. (Im a F-16 fanboi lmfao) i do thing the supercruise ability gives it the advantage (hate to say) over the F-16 but hey, only time will tell right?

😂👍 😋🥖Agree

Nope but highly likely F4 version will be purchased which will be delivered from 2026 if India sign MOU now

Ghanta still on lol. There will be 36 more Rafales , yes..but over 120 Tejas mk2, apart from the 123 Tejas mk1/A already ordered.

@@rohitb5834 acha so you are the new airforce chief ohh sorry dint know you made all the decisions for the country.....carry on carry on you should not be disturbed !!!!! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

@@sagarkochar lol nah, but i dont talk about things that dont exist. i also know how to burn import lobbyists ;)

Il est omnirole et non multi rôle avec une option Marine c'est est une grande différence

36 more will be bought. thats it. Tejas will be the backbone of the IAF in future, along with the existing fleet of MKIs.

Inutile, tu peux pas comparer l'incomparable! ça serait comme comparer un camion avec une F1!🤣🤣

Sachant que le j10 c est un vieux camion!

@@marc9080 Wait till the first encounter happens between J10C of PAF with IAF then will see what happens

Brazil : price and politics (the relationship was not at its best at the time) India : did they need Rafale M at the time ? They don't have a compatible carrier yet iirc.

India will buy more Rafal about 36 more and maybe another 36, taking the number to 108, The Indian government wants these Rafal to be the last foreign aircraft it buys before replacing with indigenous systems mainly the Tejas MK2.

@@homijbhabha8860 I though that the Tejas was supposed to replace aging aircrafts, Mig 21, Jaguar in Indian in inventory, and being the low end, while Rafale would be the high end front line fighter?

@@chefchaudard3580 Yeah that's the job of the Tejas MK1A, the Tejas MK2 is meant to be a full fledged 4.5+ gen Multi role fighter, it'll fly in late 2022 or early 2023, The Indian Air Force wants the Tejas MK2 to be it's mainstay 4.5+ gen fighter.

@@chefchaudard3580 Mig 21 will be replaced by Tejas mk1 and mk1a meanwhile Rafale is for ominrole to replace ageing jaguars and someday mirage

"politics in India has always undermined defense requirements & compromising national security in the process" wait shouldn't it be the other way around?

@@hatanokiripres congress is the biggest black hole of india still people believe that dynasty party

@@davidbilla8063 I dont have much knowledge about India's internal politics but what I meant was, shouldn't be India now focus on human index developing rather pushing budgets on defense? I think India has already a powerful military, right?

@@hatanokiripres bro learn India's external threats by pakistan china.today india is Biggest victim of pakistan cross border terrorism,China occupying Indian lands forcefully and china deployed 50K+ soldiers in their border as of today.so india needs to be ready to face 2 front war against Pakistan and China

@@davidbilla8063 China is India's threat is mostly a western ploy, for distraction and to buy more weapons from them! I've some idea about the extreme corruption in politics of South Asia, more or less every country still faces the same problem there and seeing the current Indian firepower, defense power its enough to counter terrorism as well as a country like Pakistan for the next 10 years or so. Remember, a good country's policy will be always betterment of the people at first then war or other things and India's growing number of poor people, living standard isn't pleasant to watch which indicates there's something wrong with the policy.

The figures generally announced are: $35,000 per flight hour for an F-35 and $16,000 for a Rafale. Or more than 2 times less expensive. As for predictive maintenance, it works perfectly on the Rafale and is still not developed on the F-35 (not to mention the 800 problems still not solved on the F-35) which could be very very expensive

@@olivierpuyou3621 actually latest GAO report from nov 2022 says F35 flight hour has gone up to $42k per hour. Meanwhile Columbia currently in neociations to renew its Kfir fleet said Rafale cost $13k per flight hour.

Eurofighter also employs a lot of RCS refusing design features as well as RAM .... don't talk about things you know nothing about

@@xyzaero chill out ponny, yours Eurofighter is less effective almost in every feature

@@spartan-s013 try again in a known language.

no thanks.

a max of 36

@@georgebarnes8163 thanks for the reply but i think much more. What makes you go for this assessment?

@@rudys3649 Because it is what the Indian government have clearly stated

@@georgebarnes8163 stated when?,

Aukus 😏 on a perdu assez de temps comme ça avec l'Australie. Faites donc vote petite affaires avec vos maîtres US.

@@Fabio-om4kb AUKUS is a really dumb idea and I wished we hadn't done it. :(

@@nicholasbradshaw Sorry to say that man, but you Aussies, are the puppet of the US... and England...

It's sure! you are exactly right with the F35...😉

When you're in business, more sales = more success.

Your comment didn't age well, the order book of Dassault for the Rafale will be soon completely full until 2031 :D And remember that defence is more about politics and influence than about searching superior specs of the product. Look at the F-35, still many issues according to the US defence commity but all the US allies/NATO members buy it, how surprising XD

@@remistiegler5302 Yes many issues that you have inside it but I want you to tell me right now what capabilities to rafale has over the f35 it has none inferior electronic warfare systems inferior radar inferior irst slower combat loaded speed and a much higher RCS

@@spartanx9293 the F4 version of the Rafale will decrease the gap between the two aircrafts, and until today, it costs Dassault only 50 B$. I read a good joke about Lockeed and Dassault : "If the French company had the budget of the US one, France would have X-wings at the moment"

you speak with the help of your acquaintances? all rafale can use a nuclear missile including navy ones. , the nuclear forces alone integrate more than 50 nuclear-capable rafale only for the air force (there are also some in the navy) when it comes to exercises and tests, there are several dozen a ye

Old ? 😂

Thanks for your interest. Of course, we are always open to discussing our arguments. But, there is a misunderstanding here. Before we said, "The Egyptian Rafales absolutely cannot act like the French ones in the Israeli airspace", we underlined that "There were no severe adversaries against the French in these battles". The French Rafales fought over Mali, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. So, we mean fighting over these countries is not similar to fighting over Israel. It does not mean that the French pilots are superior to the Egyptians. Even if the French Air Force fights over Israel, its job would be much more challenging than what happened in Mali, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria.

Note : 75kn per turbojet, the Rafale has two engines

Yes it does it is the difference between multirole and omnirole

It can. It's interesting to hear from the pilots how easily the Rafale ( at least from F3 ) can switch between two different roles in the same fligjt, in a snap , with instant switch in the screens and commands.

@@philv3941 the hornet/f16 even the harrier does that since 1984, this is not what differenciate them from the rafale.

@@bertrandbarbe245 but not with the same number of roles without external intervention

@@philv3941 The F/A-18 and F-16 don't need "External Intervention" to toggle between their fight modes, it is the same as a Rafale, with a single switch. Also, they are frequently deployed with mixed Air to Air and Air to Ground weapons- but can be fitted with only either if the mission requires. This is also the exact same with the Rafale.

No

Best way to give many targets to ur opponent. Rafale do not need anyone to protect himself.

Imagine the cost of maintenance!!!

cost of maintenance, training of pilots and mechanics on different planes, interchangeability of pilots on different machines if necessary with the reflexes and automation that go with it, the spare parts and the logistics that go with it.. .France made a choice which corresponds to concerns about costs and efficiency... a Cartesian choice... and it is logical, since Descartes was French...🤔🤔🤔

can't compare twin engines to single engines

@@sigma_frenchie4075 j'aime

Irrelevant!

to the all french guys: we'll see

Can't compare, F16 is far inferior to Rafale