Avec moins de moyens financiers, Dassault est arrivé a construire un avion multirole qui se vend très bien a l export! Et ce serait une fierté pour la france que l US Navy en acquiert ! Bonne journée
Such a good looking bird. I wish Canada chose it instead of the F35. Don't get me wrong, the F35 is a great aircraft but the Rafale is better suited for our needs. Just the fact it has 2 engines makes it better than the F35 to patrol the northern parts of our country. Good to have redundancy when flying far from a base.
C’est Dassault pas Dassaualt 😉. Content et fier de ces échanges. Rafale sur vos porte-avions et F18 sur le notre. Nous n’en avons qu’un nous ne sommes pas riches 😂
Hi, nous sommes très fiers de notre Rafale mais nous savons aussi que les Etats-Unis sont une très grande nation aéronautique et qu'elle possède de merveilleux avions.
Us should buy a few squadrons for ourselves, amazing pc of kit. Love watching an Allie’s airplane take off from one of our carriers, I wonder if the f18 can take off From the Charles de Gaulle? Yep there’s video of a few f-18s doing touch and goes and then landing on the de Gaulle, awesome
Yes the F18 can land and take of without problems on the Charles de Gaulle, it's only a bit more challenging to land because the CdG is much smaller as US carriers. At end from the F8 crusaders out of potential (1987) , did the french navy considering buy or rent F18 for the old Foch carrier, but the french government say no (to preserve french jobs) , so was the Crusaders deep overhauled and a bit modernized to wait the Rafale, who was introduced, first in navy version, in 2002, but only in urgently launched F1 version, F2 upgrade with extended capability was only introduced in 2005...Actual version is F3R, and next year F4 who allow similar capabilities as the F35 (except stealth)
@@phillipbanes5484 You mean on the glass paper? But on the real life, we still waitting to see fail35 only on the sky. We don't expect to see in combat for longtime.
@@leroiarouf1142 Hmmmm🤔... À mon plus grand regret, il ne me semble pas que Dassault ait tué, ni même égratigné, le F35... Par contre, le F35 est bel est bien en train de tuer l'économie de défense de tous les pays européens qui ont trempé ne serait-ce que le bout de leur doigt dans ce magnifique gouffre financier....
@@ragnaarlobrok2543 Non... 🙃 Peter Collins Royal Air Force "Simply the best and most complete fighter jet I've ever flown on. If I had to go into combat, whatever the mission, against anyone, I would choose the Rafale without hesitation"
Would be best to cross train allied pilots and crew on the deck, for full access and cooperation when needed. I wonder how long it took to train the pilots and crew to handle diff aircraft. on landing and take off.
looks like the manufacturers went out of their way to make sure these aircraft had enough similarities to operate from both french and american ships, and probably others most carriers were american at one time anyways
I’m not sayin that because I’m French but that is true, Rafale is beautiful. I want to say that the F18 is beautiful too. F18 Super Hornet version is my favorite US fighter jet…….off course it comes right after the legendary Tomcat.
France uses 200 naval aeronautics aircraft divided into 15 flotillas and 3 squadrons, or 4000 sailors, anchored in 4 aeronautical bases. France has 4 nuclear ballistic missile submarines, 6 nuclear attack submarines
How do you guys generally feel about the Rafale ? It seems to be well liked. In France there's a lot of salt in military enthusiasts circles because countries usually choose F-35 against Rafale as they come in a package with more benefits on the side with access to US influence, information, strategic networks, etc. compared to France's more "give the keys and forget about it" approach. It creates some rivalry as people don't really appreciate the difference of package and just stop at "this plane is better than that one" kind of thinking. Is there a similar sentiment in the US ?
As a Dutchman, I'm salty about the Netherlands choosing an American plane over a European built one. Be it the Rafale, Gripen or Eurofighter. Its not just about a plane being better, but also supporting Europe's own defence industry and not having to ask the US for permission to use the planes ( yes, permission has to be asked from the nation of origin to deploy or sell the aircraft).
@@Twiggy163 It makes sense for the providing country to keep a right to allow or not deployments of aircrafts to attack other countries. When it's defensive or air safety mission, I don't think permission has to be asked. The main problem is that the european defense ecosystem isn't nearly as developed as the American one because Europe is not cohesive enough to develop a european-level defense program. It would be awesome though indeed but that would require individual countries to give up some of the "sovereignty" everyone wants today. That would probably also fix the current arms market where countries like France sell to whoever because their "plug and play" offer cannot compete with the US. Unfortunately it's only during crisis that people realize European defense is important instead of always relying on the US. Typically Germany has been filling its pocket off Europe's back for 30 years and their army is almost non-existent. Very bad decisions were made and Russia profited from them.
@@Huriel97 I know it makes sense, but that doesn't change the fact that it adds a layer of restriction. Europe wanted a more independent defence industry, but the US didn't approve. They'd lose billions in unsold hardware. The European ''reliance'' on the USA is an absurd situation. On the one hand, the USA keeps telling Europe to "spend more" and "do more" but when the EU tries to apply a unified response... the USA objects (and has done since the 90's). This is part of why Europe's defence industry remains so splintered. The USA wants a Europe that spends more under NATO, not become a military powerhouse on its own under the EU. Even though they are not exclusive. The US defence industry is worried about potentially being shut out of the European defense market and lobbied the Trump administration to oppose EU efforts. The US warned the EU of retribution if it did not include the United States or third parties to participate in PESCO projects. It is also a weird thing to say Europe relies on the USA, when European nations have been fighting in American-led (and started) wars for decades now.
@@Twiggy163 They wouldn't really lose anything because it's not produced yet. Reliance isn't so absurd as post-WW2 Europe was in absolute shambles, it was much needed so Russians don't keep gnawing westward. But it left some of Europe very sleepy on this topic. There cannot be a unified response because Franco-German duopoly still leads the dance and they put their own personal interests first, and most countries are not ready to give up sovereignty and leadership to a unified European body. So in that context US defense services in Europe are still essential (and that's also why Germany is so attached to it, they're dumb for leaving their own defense to rot and propping up Russia but not that dumb). This problem is an hydra with a lot of heads, from economic (from US defense industry among others yes), political to strategic interests. France trying to sell Mistral-class to Russia in 2014 also shows you why there's a need for countries to be able to influence this market too. I cannot imagine if 2022 invasion saw Mistral-class on the black sea while Macron is here trying to seduce Zelensky. The US leading position is legacy from WW2, it's hard to be mad at them for that, especially since they've been the diplomatic powerhouse for a long time (with reserved success), while Europe focused mostly on itself. Taiwan illustrates this perfectly, Europe realized Asia actually exists in some other form than a big factory to import stuff from a few years ago only. Given this, most EU countries didn't reach the NATO %, also knowing that the US wouldn't let EU get destroyed because it'd be against their interests, Russia-backed Trump changed everything and exploited that attitude. Now that Ukraine is getting invaded they all throw tons of cash into defense thinking that it'll fix it overnight but it takes decades to build. Some European countries participated in US-led war but I'm not sure that's enough to say the US also relies heavily on its allies. It could either work 2 ways, both defense industries merging into one or with the US one giving some space to the EU one and with a lot of collaboration. I'm sure the US will prefer the former. Both comes with their load of issues too though, defense companies would gouge countries budgets even more in the first case and countries would get less for much more $$, while the latter would probably see a lot of renewed diplomatic tensions. It's an enormous, very complex mess
as long as we are the lackeys of the americans, it is obvious that a european plane of very good quality cannot be for use only by european countries. the rafale is the world's finest fighter aircraft, far better designed for the many missions that high-value american aircraft are unable to sustain. A versatile aircraft, it is both air force and navy. With extraordinary maneuverability, it outclasses the F35 and the F 22 in its gesticulation. only the stealth side is unknown on this device. it is only that which is missing..
I try but I can't. I can't get used to this pole which breaks the line of the Rafale. The Mirage 2000 already had this problem. J'essaye mais je n'y arrive pas. Je ne peux pas me faire à cette perche qui casse la ligne du rafale. Le 2000 avait déjà ce problème.
Il ne faut pas oublier que ce n'est pas un concours de beauté, une perche de ravitaillement rétractable, n'a d'utilité que sur un avion furtif, sir le RAFALE, qu'elle soit fixe, permet de gagner du poids, et il n'y a pas de risque qu'elle ne sorte pas...
@@Lol-rx7sx Perso je ne me restreint pas: j'aime traiter les avions sous tous les points de vue: concours d'efficacité et de beauté. La perche non rétractable a beaucoup davantage. Mais en plus de casser la ligne esthétique de l'avion, elle doit aussi avoir des inconvénients techniques vu le nombre d'avions militaires, pouvant ravitailler, sans cette affreuse affreuse solution technique: (F18, F14, F16, jaguar, super étendard). J'en connais au moins un: la traînée qui fait baisser la vitesse de pointe.
