📣 We'd love to hear from you! Drop a comment below with your thoughts on the Dassault Rafale's impressive maneuvers amidst the breathtaking Swiss Alps. What was your favorite moment? Let's get the conversation flying! ✈🏔
@@ikendewereld7886 not the Rafale, but it would be possible that Ukraine receives Mirage 2000s, despite their age, they are still clearly superior to Russian planes
@@zyoungson215 5th gen means nothing. It's only an American thing to classify fighters. When overall, the rafale have better capabilities than a F-35 and is a better Multi-purpose fighter. USA only called it a 4.5 fighter for marketing purpose, but the rafale should be listed in the 5th gen. A j-20 is considered a 5th gen, but it's a piece of trash.
@@robertarmour43675th gen is defined by : supercruise capability, sensor fusion, high maneuverability, and data link. I’m not sure stealth is a strong point because it rely on détection capability of your oponent . When we will produce radars able of detecting « stealth » aircraft, the y won’t become sudenly 4th gen aircraft.
yes that was Bubu, had the chance of a meal with him and his team...A really nice guy. He's gonna be coach now for "mimouss" the new RSD pilot for the next 2 years.
@@eliseereclus3475ça signifie "toutes choses considérées" et ça colle parfaitement à ce qu'il dit, donc je ne pense pas que ton commentaire soit pertinent.
Voilà le vrai oiseau de feu : j’habite sur le chemin d’un de leurs nids et parfois je ne l’entends pas arriver, le ciel se dechire et il n’est déjà plus là
Marcel Dassault's motto was: A beautiful plane is a plane that flies well. Rafale is certainly a beautiful bird, but all Dassault aircraft fly well. The Rafale F4 concentrates all the latest technologies. It is not only a beautiful aircraft; it has proven itself for more than 18 years in all combat zones in Africa, the Middle East, and Afghanistan. Our pilots aren't bad either.
Le rafale est un gage de qualité mais le f35 est aussi un très puissant avion de chasse mais oui contre un rafale F4 le F35 aurait beaucoup de difficultés , le rafale est un avion incroyable qui gagne presque tout le temps contre un F35 , il abat aussi des F22 raptor après il est certain que le F35 a une technologie plus développé 😉, je suis très fier de notre rafale ❤❤
I'd rather have any 4.3 or 4.5 or 4.78 th gen fighter (whatever it means) as long as it ensures strategic autonomy which is crucial in term of defense and is systematically overlooked.If any future president of the US decides that you don't deserve your spare parts anymore or that you don't pay them expensive enough then your 5th gen capabilities are nailed on the ground. French have always been very picky on this issue but the recent developments of American domestic policy prove them right.
@@__Slingy__ if a future president of the US decides that we don't deserve spare parts anymore we have Eurofighter too. This is the advantage of having two different fighters produced by two different companies. We also have an F-35 assembly factory and we are part of the program from the beginning so we had know how transfer for future projects. Last but not least today World is too complex to compete alone, cooperate with allies like in the F-35 or in the Eurofighter programs is needed.
@@FlightVideoPhoto Having an assembly plant and being able to build F35s from scratch and maintain them completely autonomously are 2 very different things. I stand by my point: if the United States, at some point, decides to stop providing what keeps your F35s combat ready, then they will never leave the tarmac. Period. That said and precisely for this reason, I agree with you, future collaborations between Europeans are essential. Furthermore, weapons programs are today so expensive that no country has the means to manage them alone, including France. But for now, Europeans still prefer to buy from American shelves. They make a short-term calculation: it is cheaper, less time-consuming and less difficult than developing your own know-how and industrial capacity, and less hassle in dealing with other European partners. All this means that there will be a huge cultural change to take place, it will take a lot of effort from everyone to abandon old habits, and not just from France.
Waaah ! Le pilote c'est un taré.. les G qui dois ce prendre à faire à figure comme ça... et la deco est terrible ! Ça lui ça trop bien... Et quoi que l'on disent. Largmenet meilleurs que n'importe quelle avion russe❤
F-35 can fly too, unluckily I have not yet publish the USAF F-35 demo in Athens but it was impressive the power of that plane with a single engine instead of two and it is 5th generation. The goal was not to impress spectators of airshow but hit enemies from hundreds kilometers far. Russian fighters are impressive in airshow but...
@@user-kp9vj2cj7h I suppose that Lockheed Martin, the US MoD and the other members of the JSF program have enough skills and knowledge to correctly evaluated the needed number of engines. All of them have a long experience in using fighter jets in real operations with both one or two engines. The Pratt & Whitney F135 has a thrust and 43,000 lbf (191 kN) with afterburner; the Snecma M88 has 75 kN (17,000 lbf) with afterburner that means a total of 150kN. Plus maintenance costs of a single engine are lower than two and modern engines are more affordable than old ones.
@@FlightVideoPhoto SNECMA M88-9 has a thrust of 91 kN with afterburner. All modern military airccraft have 2 engines for obvious reasons (breakdown, damage, ...). But the F-35 is a rather old design now.
@@user-kp9vj2cj7h 91 kN x 2 = 182 < 191 . A lot of modern fighters has one engine (Mirage, Gripen, F-16, F-35) and they do their work. In the case of the F-35 one engine has more power then many fighters with two and if you watch how it can fly that is clear plus it has the advantage of maintenance costs of one engine not two. BTW we have also one fighter with two engines and a combat line with two fighters of different constructors means resilience in case one type will be grounded for any kind of issue.
Much easier to twirl with a few tons less equipment under the wings, indeed. Mass (empty): 10.2t Mass (full loaded): 24t By the way, do you know many "fighter" jets that can drop and fire more than their own weight?
Dassault est une entreprise formidable, avec tous ses avions de chasse et le superbe avion Concorde, c'est un grand Maître de l'industrie française, je ne suis pas pilote et à mon âge encore moins, mais lorsque je vois un ou deux Rafales en patrouille, je reste ébahi
I don't agree. F35 is more advanced, its power is impressive with a single engine. As all complex projects it needed bug fixes. It is the only 5 generation fighter you can buy now.
@@alainbrochet5610 On peut aimer ou pas, mais dans une économie capitaliste, c'est le marché qui décide des vainqueurs. Jusqu'en 2023, 259 Dassault Rafale ont été produits (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale), tandis que plus de 1.000 F-35 l'ont été à ce jour (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II). De plus, les Suisses sont libres de dépenser leur argent comme ils le souhaitent.
Très beau spectacle, mais à quoi ça sert ? Avec les drones pilotés à distance, les missiles intelligents, les ... je ne sais quoi ! Mais après tout, j'adore.
Je vous réponds que ..par exemple. Dans l aviation civile bien des catastrophes on été évitées par les pilotes alors que l ordinateur de bord avait perdu les pédales..
@@christianfrison6381 A vrai dire, la plupart des catastrophes sont dues aux pilotes ! Et je suis pilote. Et tout à fait prêt à monter dans un avion sans pilote car les pilotes de ligne me font peur.
@@christianfrison6381 Tiens, un spécialiste ayant des attaches au BEA ! 😁 Et qui n'a probablement jamais entendu parler des couillons de pilotes du vol Rio-Paris.
@@FlightVideoPhoto they call it Cevape. And honestly those Russian fighter jets are really beautiful as well. In terms of aesthetics solely I would prefer a SU-57 to a F-22 or F-35. But yes, the US got the technological advantage and that's not deniable at least at the moment.
Well, to me, Switzerland made a bad choice selecting the F-35 for their future combat aircraft. Way too expensive and with too many problems... this choice will be very expensive for their budget.
So in your opinion the Swiss aren't capable of dealing with money correctly? The Swiss? Now repeat it, but without laughing... 😂 Do you kindly have a link that shows that the costs of the Rafale are lower than those of the Lightning II? Exactly what problems are you referring to? I mean still not solved problems. Thanks
Voir la lune !!! Pour les plus rageux !!! Je ne fait que raporter ce que l'ont ma dit ... a crans montana .... bien doter en abris , si la france avait cela !!
Last real dog fight? Arial warfare is now about early detection and Beyond Visual Range engagement. Even very long range engagement, over 100 miles is now a real thing. So, these low speed maneuvers give you very little advantage.
The Rafale is a multirole fighter, and so it can also do air policing which require to be able to flight at low speed when chasing narcotraficant planes, and it's also usefull for escorting missions.
Stealth and detection is also a lot in electronic suites to jam/lure radars. Agility allow you to flight at low altitude safely to break radar contact/missile lock. One of the technique to dodge missiles is, when you are lock or think you may have been targeted even if nothing is detected (from dozens miles away, not at the last time), is to drag the missile into low altitude to expend it's fuel faster, limiting it's speed and maneuverability. Soa maneuverability allow to go cold quickly, do more maneuvers to expand the missile fuel. The Rafale is also buit to chase down big juicy soviet planes with huge motors and heat, so it have a long range thermal camera/detector, and the new MICA-IR range is a huge improvement on BVR infra red missiles. (I do not have the exact numbers in mind but it shoule be easy to find the official ones.) And you also need to take in account the fact that it's an omnirole fighter, wich mean close air support. I bet maneuverability is pretty important when you're providing support to a ground unit stuck in close fight in valleys or mountains.
Lorsque le Canada a abandonné le projet Avro et son chasseur Haro. Plusieurs ingénieurs ont été travaillé à la NASA et en Europe dont entre autre Dassault. Contribuant ainsi au Concorde et au Rafale. Observez bien le desing et vous trouverez la même technologie. Ce chasseur était des années avant son temps et révolutionna l'aviation pas sa conception. Sans le Canada oubliez vos avions à ailles delta.
@@gagounet83 C'était un peu le sens de ma réponse, ça m'agace qu'on s'accapare ce que nous faisons de bien dans ce pays au titre qu'un ingénieur a vaguement travaillé chez Dassault ! 🤬
the F35 is expensive to purchase, very expensive to maintain, if you use your F35 against a country friendly to the USA, you will have problems with the USA, the F35 is slow (mach 1.4 see, 1700 km/h maximum, a Rafale flies at 2200 km/h) the F35 is too heavy (14600 kg F35B with 1 single engine, a Rafale C weighs 9850 kg with 2 engines) the F35 has a limited flight autonomy (2200 km F35C, both other versions A and B are significantly less) l the F35 carries little armament (2800 kg maximum internally or 6800 kg internally and externally maximum, a Rafale carries 9500 kg of armament and 14650 kg in armament and fuel, i.e. 2 .7 tons more than an F35!! LOL) its passive stealth is expensive since to remain stealthy, its paint must be impeccable, a liter of this paint costs $50,000 per liter, it takes 3 liters to make an F35! it fears hail, it doesn't like the rain (short circuit problems), it doesn't like the cold (engine starting problem) its maintenance lasts 2 to 3x longer than that of a Rafale, the F35 still suffers from more than 800 failures! in the USA an old F16 made a fool of him in combat, the pilot of the F35 was disappointed, unable to regain the energy lost during the maneuvers, the F16 recovered each time in these 6 hours (behind the F35!!) its duration lifespan is limited to 2200 hours, the lifespan of a Rafale is over 8800 hours and it takes up to 11G+, the F35 does not exceed 9G+!! LOL expensive plane and incapable of carrying out the slightest mission without risk for the pilot's life!!
le F35 coute cher à l'achat , coute très cher en entretien , si vous utilisez vos F35 contre un pays ami des usa , vous aurez des problémes avec les usa , le F35 est lent ( mach 1,4 voir , 1700 km/h maximum , un Rafale vole à 2200 km/h ) le F35 est trop lourd ( 14600 kg F35B avec 1 seul moteur , un Rafale C pèse 9850 kg avec 2 moteurs ) le F35 a une autonomie de vole limitée ( 2200 km F35C , les deux autres versions A et B font nettement moins ) l le F35 emporte peu d'armement ( 2800 kg maximum en interne ou 6800 kg en interne et externe maximum , un Rafale emporte 9500 kg d'armement et 14650 kg en armement et carburant , soit 2,7 tonnes de plus qu'un F35 !! LOL ) sa furtivité passive coute cher puisque pour rester furtif , il faut que sa peinture soit impeccable , un litre de cette peinture coute 50 000 $ le litre , il en faut 3 litres pour faire un F35 ! il craint la grêle , il n'aime pas la pluie ( problèmes de court circuit ) , il n'aime pas le froid ( problème de démarrage du moteur ) sa maintenance dure 2 à 3x plus longtemps que celle d'un Rafale , le F35 est toujours atteint de plus de 800 défaillances ! aux usa un vieux F16 l'a ridiculisé en combat , le pilote du F35 était dépité , incapable de reprendre l'énergie perdue lors des manoeuvres , le F16 se remettait à chaque fois dans ces 6 heures ( derrière le F35 !! ) sa durée de vie est limité à 2200 heures , la durée de vie d'un Rafale est de + de 8800 heures et il prend jusqu'à 11G+ , le F35 ne dépasse par 9G+ !! LOL avion cher et incapable de réaliser la moindre mission sans risque pour la vie du pilote !!
As an American I can confirm that you are full of shit, I have seen dozens of air shows in the US and the F18 doesn't move like this Rafale, physics just doesn't allow it. To be honest, the most impressive part of the F18 for me is the sound, hence why they call it the "growler". The F18 is still a very capable airplane, but no American aviation enthusiast will tell you that an F18 is more impressive than this Rafale. The F22 is a different story, that plane is mesmerizing at an air show.
A F18 would have crashed between the mountains because it's twice as heavy and the turn radius is a far cry from the rafale's... Even a F18 pilot can admit it
du point de vue suisse le partenaire americain est bien plus important que la france meme si nous partageons la meme frontière et une certaine proximité culturelle. de plus la suisse n'est pas en guerre abec ses voisins et ne s'engage jamais dans des conflits extérieurs. donc pour eux ces avions sont des gadgets, leur cahier des charges est tres petit (police du ciel uniquement) le f35 sera largement suffisant pour cette mission basique
