Far from it. EADS isn't going to support the Dassault bid anymore than Boeing is going to pitch for the F-16.
It is already with combined deals of EADS (Eurocopter) and Dassault (Rafale) in Brazil and as I said, the French Gov directly is a shareholder of EADS, so no doubt about support for me.
I think we've strayed from the original line of debate. My original assertion was that politically France(along with Sweden) was the worst choice, yielding little benefit.
France is a veto power in the UN, just like US, Russsia, or Britain and one of the leading countries in the EU. So it is not comparable to Sweden, the only problem is that France already supports India. That's why I said, F18SH for IAF would mainly be a political decision, to get the US on our side for a permanent UN seat.
Well from Brazilian point of view Gripen and SH are pretty competitive offers. And a complete ToT isn't feasible for a production run of only two squadrons worth.
It's not only for the speculated 36 fighter, the real need of Brazilian air force is nearly equal to the MMRCA tender around 100 fighters. That's why so much ToT and other benefits are in the game, even from Boeing.
Well one could argue on the same lines that offering India a place in the four nation EF consortium is a lost advantage to Dassault. It doesn't really work that way though.
EADS already said that India can't be an equal partner, but could be a partner in production of avionics. That of course is still a point for EF, because it means more experience for our industry, new contracts and new jobs in India. Boeing offered similar things with production of of some F18SH parts in India, but these are not really equal to a real partnership, or even a co-development, because Brazil (or India) will benefit way more like that, than with producing minor parts of a fighter.
Upgrading the Mirage-2000 is very important. While no longer cutting edge, its still a very fine aircraft, and in view of the IAF's threat perceptions, its got a lot of potential unlike ... the MiG-21M/MF or the MiG-27.
True, but technically it will be inferior to LCA MK2 and the upg per fighter cost more than buying a new LCA MK2.
It replaced the aging Sea Eagle AShM on the Jaguar.
Has it? I know that there was a RFP issued and Harpoon and Exocet are the contenders, but never heared that they bought it.
And this does not apply to the Rafale because ......
Because the Rafale is not primarily a stealth air superiority fighter! F22 techs like stealth, supercruise, TVC, long range radar are nearly useless in Afghanistan and you don't need a $300 million dollar fighter, if F15s and F18s can to the same too.
The only need for fighters their are for strike missions and because the Rafale can do this kind of missions now it is there and EF is not.
Like I mentioned before the Eurofighter starting with block 15 of Tranche 2 can employ the Storm Shadow, AGM-88 HARM, ALARM, Taurus, Brimstone, JDAMs and Paveway IV.
And as I told you that is not correct, most of it only in testing stage.
Please check your information again. The Captor AESA radar under the CECAR program made its first flight on the Eurofighter in mid 2007. In contrast, the flight testing of the RBE2 AA started in April this year.
CESAR was only a tech demonstrator of the coming Captor E which is not developed now! Even the Gripen NG Demonstrator had a AESA tech demonstrator for a long time, but now they made the first flight of the new Selsex AESA radar. As you can see, the EF is even behind the Gripen NG in this field and as long Italy is against the AESA development, it will be more delayed.
About RBE 2 AESA:
Thales launched the development of an AESA derivative for the Rafale in 1997, the program began developmental testing with Rafale aircraft in 2003 and 2004.
AESA for the RAFALE
That's 3 years before the Cesar tech demonstrator made its first flight in the nose of a test aircraft.
Also, they brought the AESA for trials because the RBE2 PESA is very easily outperformed by every other production(existing) radar in the competition(except perhaps the PS05/A on the Gripen).
As simple as it is, they brought AESA to the trials, because the competiton is for fighters with AESA radars and they have their radar ready!
also the issues that seem to be delaying the Captor are to do with production rather than development. In the event that India orders the EF, it will be delivered with an AESA.
Even Euro Radar officials has stated, if the final decision about the Captor-E won't be taken till dec, it will be more than difficult to have the radar ready for export customers like India and that the first versions for the consortium members could only be ready by 2013.
That's why I said, the EF is a great fighter, but way too delayed in development that IAF can't take the risk and pay such high costs. Rafale instead is more mature now and offers good performance in all roles where IAF needs it. It might be inferior to EF in air superiority missions, but for this role IAF already has MKI and is developing FGFA.
IF we get two fighters we need to reduce the number a little. The few billions saved could be used for associated logistics.
