Talk:Dassault Rafale

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Dassault Rafale has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
February 6, 2013 Good article nominee Listed
March 13, 2014 WikiProject A-class review Not approved
January 14, 2015 WikiProject A-class review Not approved
Current status: Good article

Supercruise to Mach 1.4?[edit]

There is no link that supports Mach 1.4.Z07x10 (talk)

I looked at Rafale here... but no speed is specified and one of the two links there appears to be mort. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:40, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
The Mach 1.4 text in this article may be covered by the 2 sources at the end of the paragraph. However, the text indicates that the test Rafale used one M88 and one F404 to supercruise at Mach 1.4, which seems questionable. So I tagged that sentence as needing a cite. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:13, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Supercruise at Mach 1.4, again[edit]

This is the quote from Williams page 92,

However, in May 1990, a Snecma M88 turbofan replaced the port-side F404 and 'supercruise' in dry thrust was achieved with the new power plant when the aircraft flew at Mach 1.4.

I'm not sure why the claim was removed; perhaps I have overlooked something important? Could someone clarify this? Thanks, Sp33dyphil (talk) 20:45, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

My edit summary seemed clear enough. I checked my Williams Superfighters book twice and it does not support the supercuise part. There's nothing on that page saying supercruise, without afterburners, or dry thrust, etc. for the Mach 1.4 flight in 1990. Supercruise is covered in this article's Design section and cited by other sources. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
And the other ref after this article text is a page; a translation of that page only mentions Mach 1.4 for the first Rafale M flight in 1991. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:33, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Strange, I don't know if my eyes are deceiving me, but the quote above is lifted straight from page 92. My edition's ISBN is 978-1-880588-53-6 (1-880588-53-6). Sp33dyphil (talk) 06:00, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
The 1990 flight is for the Rafale A, which is a substantially different airframe than the production models (B/C/M). Also, what a test aircraft can do does not always mean the production versions can do it too, even for the same airframe. - BilCat (talk) 06:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)t
I agree. It's just that my book says the prototype supercruised at Mach 1.4, while Fnlayson's doesn't. Sp33dyphil (talk) 10:54, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
  • My book is dated 2002 and could be a different printing or there's related text on another page. It just seems questionable for the Rafale A equipped with 2 different engines (F404 & M88) engine to do a supercruise flight in testing. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:50, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

WP:MILHIST Review[edit]

There is an A-class review for this article underway at WP:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Dassault Rafale/archive2.

Review comments and other input there is appreciated. -Fnlayson (talk) 00:35, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Malaysia interested with Rafale but you all don't understand[edit]

So who deleate the Malaysia Interstred Rafale.then i will do it the sorces. (talk) 06:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Did you actually read the source that you added earlier that says Dassault are not interested? MilborneOne (talk) 10:37, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

It's not me.You got the worng Sorces,Malaysia interstred Rafale.but you got a wrong sorces,so i will gave you a (talk) 11:05, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

The website was created a number of years ago when the MRCA program was started, this comment is from March 2014 BAE Systems plc, Boeing Co and Saab AB are said to be part of a shortlist of five companies that have been identified by the government to be possible candidates for the RMAF Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA) programme. One of the two companies in the shortlist, Sukhoi Aviation Holding Co of Russia, has not indicated any interest while Dassault Aviation of France, the maker of the Rafale jet, has said it would not participate in any leasing programme.. Do you have any references dated after March 2014 that the game has changed again? MilborneOne (talk) 11:16, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

NO,This is silly qusetion.My Friend said That Rafale was in the list but some was Change out.Malaysia intersterd with Rafale but the not intersterd With Gripin they said. (talk) 11:40, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

WP can only use what is in reliable published sources, not what some friend told you. - BilCat (talk) 14:01, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes, we need reliable sources, not vague rumors.--McSly (talk) 14:47, 23 December 2014 (UTC) has violated the WP:3RR rule and I have warned the user for being involved in edit warring, rather than resolving the dispute by discussion the quality of the sources here on the talk page. AadaamS (talk) 16:41, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
User deleted the warning from its talk page. AadaamS (talk) 16:45, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Calm Down Everyone You Guys don't uderstands.I Was Too Dificlule to know Why Those Rafale was delete.And i read the Wrong sorces.That could be,So i find read another Page.That's i found why those are not avalable.So I Change A New Link.BTW,If You Don't Understand.Please Read at http://rafalemalahttp:and // Thanks. (talk) 17:12, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • As noted above, sources have to meet Wikipedia's criteria for reliable sources at WP:Identifying reliable sources. You need to have a basic understanding of this to contribute constructively on Wikipedia. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:04, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Change of publishers[edit]

Hi, there has been a change to the publisher of Flight International. I suspect that IPC was the publisher up until the start of the 1980s, when Reed took over. In any case, the publications page of issue 3850, volume 123, lists IPC Transport Press as the publisher. Could anybody else verify or clarify this discrepancy? Cheers Sp33dyphil (talk) 07:17, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Looks like an IPer changed that with explanation or clear reason. I suspected it was a change as you mention, but the publisher was not listed on one Flight page that I checked. -Fnlayson (talk) 13:40, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
According to Reed Elsevier it changed from IPC to Reed in 1970. MilborneOne (talk) 17:49, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks. It looks like 1983 is the oldest Flight International cite. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:05, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Is the French Air Force version available for nuclear missions ?[edit]

I find articles saying the French Air Force has the Rafale available for nuclear strike missions since 2010. Yet this article is not clear on this. It does state "Starting in 2008 onwards, Rafale deliveries have been to the nuclear-capable F3 standard". Are they actually available to deliver nuclear strikes ? Nothing about this in section Variants. Rcbutcher (talk) 07:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Nuclear mission is done by the 1/91 Gascogne squadron (on Rafale since 2012). (talk) 15:29, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

$172 million each[edit] "By buying 36 Rafales instead of 126, I have saved the cost of 90 Rafales," Parrikar said, adding that this amount was around INR900 billion (USD15.51 billion).

That's $172 million each in large quantities. Please correct the article's price. Hcobb (talk) 15:11, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Those figures are for planned production in India, which would include contributions for licence fees and establishing the production line, however, and does not necessarily correspond to the cost of purchasing a similar number of aircraft from the already established French production line.Nigel Ish (talk) 15:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Tailhook confusion ?[edit]

"...larger tailhook between the engines" is quoted for M (naval) version. Larger ? than what ? I would assume that only the naval version would have a tail hook. Surely the word is inappropriate here ? Rcbutcher (talk) 14:57, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

The other Rafales have also have a tailhook but it is smaller as it is only designed for airfield arrester systems not carriers. MilborneOne (talk) 15:12, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
You can just see the tailhook underneath on a "B"
Thanks, I learn something every day ! Rcbutcher (talk) 15:22, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Helmet mounted display does not work[edit]

Correct this error in the article? Hcobb (talk) 22:51, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

It's an opinion piece. If it's a real problem, better.sources should be available. - BilCat (talk) 00:25, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Dassault Rafale. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:09, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

5th generation aircraft[edit]

On December 2015, French government unclassified the fact that it was decided to make the Rafale a stealth aircraft as soon as 1988, thus, different ways were considered than those Lockheed used : backed-in radar absorbent materials added to active cancellation of radar waves, the goal being sacrificing nothing in flight characteristics and being able to carry external ordnances like a classic aircraft without them helping detection. If the radar cross section of a F-22 is about the size of a tennis ball, Rafale's RCS is the size of a seagull when active cancellation is off. When "on", Rafale is known to have flew just over a modernized Russian S-300 battery with the last generation radar without being noticed at all. Since such facts have been made public, it would be a good idea to upgrade the article, Rafale being the only "combat proven" 5th generation aircraft. Sorry to not remember where I red this but I really did so and there was a French govt communiqué about this. We can assume that the habitual secretive way Frenchs have about anything military (the army is nicknamed "the big mute") has seriously damaged the foreign sales although, had it been made public that it was actually a 5th generation fighter-jet, the alleged too high price had became justified, especially if compared to the unexported F-22 or even the proposed 5th gen. other aircraft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:16, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

We dont use the "generation" terminolgy in these articles as outside of company marketing and fighter aircraft fans it is meaningless. MilborneOne (talk) 16:55, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Have you more reliable source about the new 5th generation?.--Bolzanobozen (talk) 14:16, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


The source for price doesn't mention anything about the Rafale or its price. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:07, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Nor sure why this is a request for comment but you are right, but it is on the next page (I have corrected the link). MilborneOne (talk) 15:24, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Im not sure about the price!.--Bolzanobozen (talk) 14:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Appearance in fiction[edit]

Should it be listed in Aircraft in fiction? as it's commonly used in the Transformers franchise: at least eleven transformers in total turn into this jet. (talk) 04:13, 19 January 2018 (UTC)