Fonck

Actuellement la deuxieme photo me fait honneur en ce qui concerne l'aerodynamique du Typhoon. Les canards sont braques a piquer, tout le bord de fuite aussi. C'est pris a basse vitesse, du a un niveau eccessif d'instabilite, les cannards ne servent qu'a contrer l'instabilite, pas a augmenter la porteee. Bien vu Dassault... Dans la meme config, les canards du Rafales pouraient augmenter la portee de l'aile a souhait...

glitter Fonck a écrit: You're the propagandiste here. ANYONE seeing your actual signature in the WAAF can see that. A L.I.A.R too. And ? And WHAT???Does this sort of things make you feel like Rob is a crediteable source and reasons to claim what he is claiming?????? "I prefer to missed things that exist instead of you, seeing things out of thin air." Taking things that personally sure doesn't make you smarter. Poor boy you deserve each other really. Same level of intellectual deshonesty and personal matters before accuracy. You're a laugh. Fonck a écrit: In 2003 Dassault aviation stated that the company mastered the stealth technology. Sources ? Needs breast feeding at your age??? Or R U simply too lazy to do your home work and simply keep been an ennoying troll??? Because so far you keep writing manure instead of anything interesting because you simply won't bother informing yourself properly. Fonck a écrit: Dassault are not only way ahead pf BAe design and technology wise they sure don't NEED 6 UAV (wrongly propagandated by yourself as being UCAVs in the WAAF) to keep up with their concurents. That argument is pathetic. You're the pathetic one here. There are industriasl realities which you conveniently ignore. "Does the idea that BAE wanted to test more areas than DAssault reach your brain ?" Does ONERA and Dassault work since 1999 ring a bell to the brainless flame you are??? Does the idea that BAe chairman is actually ASKING MoD for the dosh to develop design skills further eludes you? "2005 BAe chasirman stament: "The emphasis for this TDP, at the core of which would be a manned flying test-bed, "because of the need to master the stealth issue" Does the idea that the reasons are lack of fully home designed programmes since Sea Harrier is the reason for their lack of experience and expertise escape your poor IQ? "The emphasis for this TDP, at the core of which would be a manned flying test-bed, "because of the need to master the stealth issue" Does the whole list of expensive design FUCK-UPs resuliting on these fact seems as alien to you as 2+2=4??? Nimrod AEW Nimrod Mr4 Tornado F-3 centre fuselage plug Harrier II Rear fuselage EFA Wings Astute design. "Who did the version of CATIA that can do that ? not dassault aviation :p " Dassault did mate. As all the industry knows not little "frappes" of your kind bubling about whatever they don't know about. Now i'm TIRED of completing your low level education. You're a WASTE of forum space and a pure flammer, a troll, take a hike i don't do breastfeeding. >>>>> Who fucked-up: Nimrod AEW Nimrod Mr4 Tornado F-3 centre fuselage plug Harrier II Rear fuselage EFA Wings Astute design. Who developed CATIA and can produce aircraft without going through of the prototyping stage, a unique capability in the world? Who needs 6 UAV and a TDP to try to keep up with SAAB and Dassault??? There is NO UCAV in the UK the UCAV TDP is still NOT launched by MoD. "The emphasis for this TDP, at the core of which would be a manned flying test-bed, "because of the need to master the stealth issue" They did their home work on bits and bobds and design skills certainly not to the level attained by Dassault who are world leader in design with CATIA. Last BAE couldn't apply CAD design to ASTUTE and it cost MoD £26 million to pay the US Electric Boat to sort them out.... Again: Who fucked-up: Nimrod AEW Nimrod Mr4 Tornado F-3 centre fuselage plug Harrier II Rear fuselage EFA Wings Astute design. Is this propaganda? Do you also WANT a source for these??? Is this not REAL history and recent one for most? Is this not the real difference in technology and design capabilities between Dassault/SAAB and BAE? Have a nice day.

ZedroS "Je sais qu'il faut que je révise mes classiques, mais là j'ai comme un gros trou... " Apparament t'est pas le seul. En plus de Dassault tu devrais visiter le site de l'ONERA.... Quand a ceux qui ecrivent sans savoir encore une fois vos motivations ne sont pas les bonnes. Me dis surtout pas que j'ai pas divulgue ces infos dans ce topic, choisir de les igonrer c'est un fait, nier la realite un autre.

"Don't get me wrong I'm not saying the UK in general is better at UAVs than France, to decide this I don't know enough about both UAV industries. What I'm saying is that BAe is ahead of Dassault. Some French poster brought the other French companies in to this not me. I'm just correcting the propaganda that is being spread by NungesserC." You're talking Shrite as usual. You're the propagandiste here. ANYONE seeing your actual signature in the WAAF can see that. A L.I.A.R too. WHO is a PROVEN LIAR and a piss taker here??? As for glitter he is a total funnie on that one, uncapable to see things as they really are. >>>>> To be ahead of anyone they should be ahead designwise and they lag behind. Proof? Who can't even put the wing of a maritime surveillance aircraft together wihout screwing the poutch? You're the only one with your head deep enoughup your @ss to keep ignoring facts. But this plus your usual level of hypocrisy and lack of intellectual honnesty and explains the whole thing. So keep writing W.H.A.T.E.V.E.R, it's just a stupid attitude and this driven by the wrong motives. >>>>> Reality strike: The budget finaly allocated to NEURON, of an amount of eu 405 millions, more than originally planed, allows to equip it with a modular bay in which wioulod be instaled a laser designator amd a bomb that rthis designator would guide, which would give it a totally auronomous strike capability. The choise for the Dassault company for main contractor role have been made easy by the industrial initiative developed by this company since 1999 under the term "logiduc": Logic of UCAV developement. Dassault logiduc programme: The first realisation of this programme is named "Petit Duc" or AVE-D (Experimental validation Aircraft - Discretion i.e stealth or Low Observability). It is a two engine aircraft of 50 kg and 2 m in wingspan, radio controled and entirely made of Furtive material. The first flight date is July 2000, after work marked by the will to reduce the aircraft RCS and IR signature. Then appears in July 2001, the Moyen Duc, weighting 500 kg, which is capable of flying at 60 m/s for surveillance missions and 200 m/s for recce missions. Its autonomy is up to four hours. It is a tactical reconaissance Drone answering to the need of the French Army post SDTI. Grand Duc was aiming at demonstrating operational combat mission, while developing Low observability, furtivity and flight control. >>>>>>>>> In 2003 Dassault aviation stated that the company mastered the stealth technology. >>>>>>>>> This is issued from the French Senat Session ordinaire of 2005-2006 i.e Information Report. No bulls No gimmick no need for lies and general exagerations and inexactitudes. The real thing. Note that they aslo say that stealth technology will be further developed with the NEURON programme which is to be expected as it would be stupid not to but it is not the main goal of the programme. So there you go: Two petit Ducs and a Moyed Duc under their belt, with no technologica or design issues there, as they are world's top in the area and stealth technology developed with vehicles as heavy as 500 kg. As i was saying, the Petit ducs (Both being of a different design, the second AVE-C, a tail-less instable aircraft and Moyen Duc which apparently flew in 2001 were designed to get to ther point where BAe are now. With a main difference. Dassault have NO such issue as technology and design expertise to solve and doesn't NEED to put six UAVs together to achieve that on top of the Logiduc main goals.... More to it, apparently as main architects and lead design the French Senat at least atributes the conceiptual design to Dassault NOT SAAB which are tasked with structural design. Still, there a limit to what French politicians are capable of understanding in terms of aerospacial matters, i have to validate a couple of these infos to make sure but other sources seems to be corroborating these. Dassault are not only way ahead pf BAe design and technology wise they sure don't NEED 6 UAV (wrongly propagandated by yourself as being UCAVs in the WAAF) to keep up with their concurents. Who fucked-up: Nimrod AEW Nimrod Mr4 Tornado F-3 centre fuselage plug Harrier II Rear fuselage EFA Wings Astute design. Who developed CATIA and can produce aircraft without going through of the prototyping stage, a unique capability in the world? Who needs 6 UAV and a TDP to try to keep up with SAAB and Dassault??? There is NO UCAV in the UK the UCAV TDP is still NOT launched by MoD. "The emphasis for this TDP, at the core of which would be a manned flying test-bed, "because of the need to master the stealth issue" They did their home work on bits and bobds and design skills certainly not to the level attained by Dassault who are world leader in design with CATIA. Last BAE couldn't apply CAD design to ASTUTE and it cost MoD £26 million to pay the US Electric Boat to sort them out.... Again: Who fucked-up: Nimrod AEW Nimrod Mr4 Tornado F-3 centre fuselage plug Harrier II Rear fuselage EFA Wings Astute design. Is ythis propagande? Is this notREAL history and recnt for most? Is this not the real diffewrence in technology and design cap[abilities between Dassault/SAAD and BAE? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL Have a nice day.

Faut tout de meme remarquer quelque chose. Ceux des journalistes Anglo-'americain qualifies pour voler sur Rafale n'en on dit que du bien... Parmis eux l'ex-chef pilote d'essais d'Eurofighter. Y'a pas photo tand au niveau competence qu'a la motivation d'informer les gens honnetement.

"D'accord, d'accord, mais force est de constater que jusqu'ici Dassault était expert pour vendre ses appareils et là on peut pas franchement dire que ça soit une réussite mondiale" Faut voir dans quelle conditions il a ete jete dans le marche. De plus les M-F1 etaient seulement intermediares on devrait se rendre compe qu'en fait le "vrai" Rafale est toujors au CEAM pas encore en service actif. Le marche des avions de combat est tres deprime, ca joue dans les mains des US et d'une certaine facon D'Eurofighter aussi. Patiente il ve se vendre.....

La ou ca devient interessant c'est dans la possibilite de recycler les cellules de MICA ayant ateint un nonbre d'heure limite; ca peut causer un ecces de cout. Un fois reconditiones ils sont bon pour le tir et ca permet un sacree economie d'echelle.

Il est clair que le Rafale a beaucoup souffert de l'obsolescence prématurée de son radar faute de financements suffisants pour avoir une antenne AESA dès 2008. C'est un enssemble de boites noire dont les composant ne sont plus produits, ce phenomeme a touche tous les avions au temps de developement long meme le F-22. Pour Rafale c'est un cadeau des dieux, ils sont en nombre top limite pour empecher un retofit pour des raisons de prix. Comme la cellule est aerodynamiquement la plus avancee qu'il y ait le reste ne demande qu'a etre tremis au gout du jour. C'est sur ces bases que la DGA et le GIE sont tombes d'accord. Rafale est le seule concurent serieux du F-35 dans le future. Je ne m'en fais pas trop pour la vente a l'export avant cinq ou six ans...

Avec une difference: Concorde etait Franco-Britanique. Ca leur ferait plaisir en fait ils en revent de voir Dassault et l'inductrie aerospaciale Francaise se casser la gueule. Ils ecrivent que c'est le dernier avion de Dassault depuis le Mirage F-1... Un fantasme tres Anglo-americain on peut comprendre pourquoi. Surtout que techniquement c'est le seul concurent serieux au F-35.

Elle a change sa course pour personne. Quand a vendre le Rafale apres seulement deux ans de mise en service actif, et paniquer (ou se rejouir comme les concurents) ca fait peut si on considere que le 2000 peut encore se vendre apres tout ce temps...

The Falcon 7X engineering leveraged the use of Dassault Systems CATIA software as the foundation to create complete virtual definitions of the aircraft. Utilization of this process ranged from the smallest components (i.e fasteners), through to the re-creation of the complete aircraft environment itself. Imagine the power of foresight realized through every engineering detail and possible vision. Now imagine that power harnessed and shared with a team of Dassault Engineers and program partners in real-time. All working together to create the next generation of Falcons through a world we refer to as the Digital Mock-up Universe (DMU). For the first time, the reality of production can mirror precisely the vision created in digital, virtual form. Thus, ensuring the highest levels of quality control, precision and pro-active address of issues during the critical engineering and design stages. The digital mock-up ensures the following benefits: • Design : Complete design realization from Day 1, allowing for maximum leads times to address design issues and optimize performance results. • Manufacturing: Digital models are validated immediately through to operations and production. Hence ensuring feasibility and efficiency of implementation. • Maintenance: Digital simulations provide foresight ability to modify design in accordance to maximized ease of use and access critical to the maintenance and operation of the aircraft. In reality, the Digital Mock-up Universe ensures the creation of a living representation of the aircraft from concept through to production. Creating yet another class of Falcon excellence. I thought i would help making your education here...

glitter "Le petit duc a servis à Dassault à maitriser le vol d'un tel engin déja. Sur le AIRFAN, on parler de "controle par glissade", mais je n'en sais pas plus." Peut etre parceque tu ne comprends pas le mot instabilite ni les raisons deriere le dessin des deux petit Ducs.... "Bref, certainement du même niveau technologique que le petit duc, chacun défrichant des domaines différents, ben ca roule non ? " Parfaitement. C'est ou en etaient Dassault en 2002. Le petit duc has been use to test that aerodynamic configuration. Anyway, the british UCAV doesn't seem more advanced but not less advanced too. And since each is a test for several different aspects of the problem, what's your point ? My point is CLEAR: you ignore two facts: First of all the Logiduc process was not only about aerodynamic arrangement and flight laws for them, but more to the point and firstly: Stealth technology implied in the two configurations and design tested. "NEuron ne peut pas être consideré comme une preuve de maitrise de la furtivité par Dassault, car déja le Neuron n'est qu'une maquette à l'heure actuelle." They don't NEED to prove anything to anyone they are the most advanced in the EUs and world top as for design and conceiption. Just in case you choosed not to ignoe reality as usual. They already master the technology and are far more advanced than BAe and most other aircraft manufacturers in the design/manufature process. Not the case of BAE wich long list of technical and design problems are well known to the rest of the world and the reason why they need to practice their design skills with 6 UAVs. Just in case you still don't get it. ASTUTE design was a problem to BAe as a CAD application, same for NIMROD MR4. Totally different ballgame from a company leading the world in design tooling as well as production tooling. To remind you and Rob L Dassault are the only aircraft manufacturer in the world to be able to go straight from design to production without the need for protoyping. Not BAe case and this is the reasons why Turner said they needed these programmes but also the UCAV TDP to be launched. Clear? Or you want to rewrite history too? The master the technology since 2002 and just incase you wan to stop your basic revisioninsm, they applied stealth technology to Rafale to make it the 4th gen aircraft with the lowest RCS/ This is also valid for SNECMA. Second AGAIN Ducs were designed to explore material/design and shape for stealth APLICATIONS. SAAB and Dassault have been there 4 years ago "And of course you can prove it. Of course, your pathetic arguments are a waste of bandwith, nothing more. " Yes i can. Read the recent history of Dassault in terms of design and production, the fact that you are an ignorant doen't make it reality and by the way learn about the industry as well as you can't figure what is needed to apply these technologies to any flying vehicle..... It is your ignorance which is pathetic no more than this. First aerospacial company in the world to achieve the whole process from design to first flight without the need of a prototype = Falcon 7X. Thanks for being informing yourself next time you try that one. Not screwing up the last fundamental and critical designs they had to tackle. http://www.dassault-aviation.com/gb/technologie/ Tools: the digital age Dassault Aviation uses digital modeling for calculating airframes, aerodynamics and the effects of electromagnetic radiation, for computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM), and for research into the operational use of weapon systems. The IT department also creates simulation tools and technical documentation systems used in providing support services to civil and military aircraft. However, the Company continues to use conventional physical resources for design and validation such as test banks for flight control or automatic pilot systems. The entire industrial chain (Product Life Management [PLM]), from design to production and finally support, is based on software developed by Dassault Systèmes (CATIA V4 and V5, ENOVIA VPM and DELMIA), thus ensuring consistent, continuous, secure and effective production. ETC funny rigolos like you keep writing about what they don't know. I'm really having a laugh.

Far from being as advanced as RBE2 DRAAMA technologically speaking.

Des resources il n'en a pas. Vas sur le WAAF et vois ce qu'il fait des UAVs de BAe des UCAVs ma foi pourquoi pas, comme pas mal de jopuros anglais exagerent de la meme facon c'est la tradition Anglaise.... >>>>> Reality STRIKE. Here is the truth BOY and you're more than welcome to try to prove me wrong, i know you're weting your pants 24/7 ast the idea but it's not going to happen on that one..... Who fucked-up: Nimrod AEW Nimrod Mr4 Tornado F-3 centre fuselage plug Harrier II Rear fuselage EFA Wings Astute design. Who developed CATIA and CAN produce aircraft without going through of the prototyping stage, a unique capability in the world? Who needs 6 UAV and a TDP to try to keep up with SAAB and Dassault???

"Ah okay lol. I think you can't cope with the truth, BAe has had a lot of programmes in the last years in the area of UAVs " The truth boy is that /dassault already have the necessary skills without having to cry out to DGA for a TDP to develop them. As i say BAe only can screw up any serious programme and there are as many examples of that as needed. >>>>> Here is the truth BOY and you're more than welcome to try to prove me wrong, i know you're weting your pants 24/7 ast the idea but it's not going to happen on that one..... Who fucked-up: Nimrod AEW Nimrod Mr4 Tornado F-3 centre fuselage plug Harrier II Rear fuselage EFA Wings Astute design. Who developed CATIA and can produce aircraft without going through of the prototyping stage, a unique capability in the world? Who needs 6 UAV and a TDP to try to keep up with SAAB and Dassault???

HaAAA!!! Le nanas au volant.. Vous conaissez la suite, a part que j'en connais qui m'henrument en becane, en bagnole et maintanant en avion. de quoi vous metre les boules...... http://www.defense.gouv.fr/sites/air/base/breves/2006/mars/06032006__les_femmes_pilotes_se_posent_au_bourget/ 06/03/06 – Les femmes pilotes se posent au Bourget À l'occasion de la journée internationale de la femme, le musée de l'air et de l'espace organise une expo-rencontre intitulée "femmes de l'air et de l'espace" avec des femmes pilotes et astronautes au Bourget le 11 mars 2006. Cette rencontre sera marquée par la participation d'avions militaire, notamment, un Mirage 2000-5, un Mirage 2000 N et un C160 Transall. En marge de cette manifestation, la remise des prix lors des 2èmes rencontres de la BD aéronautique et spatiale a eu lieu le vendredi 3 mars 2006. Le grand prix 2006 est attribué à QUINTETT Histoire de Dora Mars par Cyril Bonin et Frank Giroud (Éditions Dupuis) Le prix du meilleur scénario a été attribué à : Frank Giroud pour l'album : QUINTETT - Dora Mars Le prix du meilleur dessin a été attribué à : Romain Hugault pour l'album Le dernier envol (Editions Paquet) Le prix de la meilleure mise en couleur a été attribué à Romain Hugault pour l'album Le dernier envol Le jury était présidé par Michel Polacco, directeur de France Info (radio partenaire de l'événement) et comptait parmi ses membres, le général Richard Wolsztynski, chef d'état-major de l'armée de l'air.

Donc qu'est-ce qu'il y a de si différent entre eux ??? dix annees d'evolution de la formule aerodynamique canard/delta. Rafale est bien plus develope aerodynamiquement.

You dont WANT to understand anyway. You failed to make your point about BAe, so now you try Dassault and play stoopid. The whole WORLD of Aerospacial industries KNOWS that BAe is in tatters and Dassault more advanvced in design capabilities than most other companies in the world. No need for a foto finish. http://www.defense.gouv.fr/sites/defense/base/divers/intervention_de_liga_sandeau_09.02.06/?_&ispopup=1 And learn your shit before daring talking BULLS like you do on the WAAF people are educated here not your usual dumbass bar pilar you got it? La répartition industrielle est la suivante : - Dassault Aviation exerce la maîtrise d’œuvre d’ensemble du programme avec notamment la conception générale, l’assemblage final et certains essais en vol. Thales est chargé de la liaison de données entre l’opérateur et le Neuron. - Le suédois SAAB a pris la responsabilité du fuselage, de l’avionique et d’une partie des essais en vol. - A Alenia, l’industriel italien, revient notamment la responsabilité du système de désignation et de tir. - En Espagne, EADS/CASA est chargé des voilures et de la station de contrôle au sol. - HAI, avionneur grec, est, quant à lui, chargé de la réalisation d’une partie du fuselage. - Le suisse RUAG intervient dans les essais en soufflerie et la fourniture de dispositifs d’emport de l’armement.

Saab is focusing on areas such as: - overall/general design - avionics systems - airworthiness - autonomy - multiload capabilities - structural design and manufacturing - ground/flight Testing That's SAAB Ma poule NOT Dassault. Thanks to do your home work and tell US (Like we didn't KNOW) that Dassault are doing in the NEURON programme. And by the way what sort of expert are you to juge about the importance of each partners role???? You couldn't tell your mother's iron from a Mirage 2000. Ce mec est VRAIMENT Abrtuti par la bierre ma parole... >>>>>> La répartition industrielle est la suivante : - Dassault Aviation exerce la maîtrise d’œuvre d’ensemble du programme avec notamment la conception générale, l’assemblage final et certains essais en vol. Thales est chargé de la liaison de données entre l’opérateur et le Neuron. - Le suédois SAAB a pris la responsabilité du fuselage, de l’avionique et d’une partie des essais en vol. - A Alenia, l’industriel italien, revient notamment la responsabilité du système de désignation et de tir. - En Espagne, EADS/CASA est chargé des voilures et de la station de contrôle au sol. - HAI, avionneur grec, est, quant à lui, chargé de la réalisation d’une partie du fuselage. - Le suisse RUAG intervient dans les essais en soufflerie et la fourniture de dispositifs d’emport de l’armement. http://www.defense.gouv.fr/sites/defense/base/divers/intervention_de_liga_sandeau_09.02.06/?_&ispopup=1

"Oh and btw since Dassault is so much more advanced in UAVs why is much of neurons design and most important parts made in Sweden by Saab?" Sorry who says so??? SHOW us what more important than Dassault role is in NEURON you Flame. That's all you got ignorance to the extreme and total diregard for reality. Take a hike. Dasautl ARE design LEAD, main Architects, and prime contractor with 50% of the workshare. Bye ma poule.

Not because i say so because it IS so. Since you turn blue every time you have a look at Dassault achievements it's not surprising you're still living in coucouland, inventing this TDP for the best part of last year and trying to imply that these unarmed UAVs are actually UCAVS you're a Mytho my friend and a liar.

What did YOU prove i was WRONG about little man? That BAe can't even pout a simple wing together without screwing it up? That Dassault have the most advanced design tools and capabilities in the world? I can prove that any time because this is REALITY not your Disneylandish version of it so keep loling mate. >>>>> Who fucked-up: Nimrod AEW Nimrod Mr4 Tornado F-3 centre fuselage plug Harrier II Rear fuselage EFA Wings Astute design. Who developed CATIA and can produce aircraft without going through of the prototyping stage, a unique capability in the world?

No NEED to. Dassault already posses the design skills, the tools, the technology. This is REALITY and i'm not trying to divert whatever as opposed to YOU... BAE doersn't have neither and NEED these UAVs as well as a UCAV TDP to keep up. Simple. Is this the distraction you're talking about??? Who fucked-up: Nimrod AEW Nimrod Mr4 Tornado F-3 centre fuselage plug Harrier II Rear fuselage EFA Wings Astute design. Who developed CATIA and are years in advance in terms of design capabilities and skill??? Who NEED a TDP and SIX UAVs to keep up with them (If they can)???

Dassault/SNECMA/Thales already applied stealth technology to Rafale long ago = result a RCS 50% lower than Typhoon. As for what they did, they didn't certainly NEED to put more than two petit Duc together because they had design capabilities BAE doesn't have even today. PROOF? Who fucked-up: Nimrod AEW Nimrod Mr4 Tornado F-3 centre fuselage plug Harrier II Rear fuselage EFA Wings Astute design. So this is the real level of BAe design expertise. As for Dassault, they developed the most advanced design tools in the world. Now used by Boeing and such and doesn't EVEN NEED A PROTOTYPE anymore you got that straight???.* So Rob L if you can't even comprehend what technology is about and why BAe need 6 UAVs to try to keep up with even SAAB it's simply because you never bothered learning about the subject in general and that your interest on it is purely a flamer's one. You know the mine's biger syndrome you're suffering from??? BAE are charette (LOL!!!) and try to get MoD to bail them out from the deep they have been diging themself for the past 15 years. The list of major-cluster-sized fuckups above is testamnent of that. 2 Ducs and the best design skills in Eurtope is largely enough for Dassault where BAe needs 6 home made bigger "ducs" and a TDP. This is what Turners says and what MoD says. Develop capabilities that both SAAB and Dassault have never lost. * Just in case you chosed not to notice, Dassault have moved on from conventional design drills. With their latest Falcons, they go straight from CATIA to production. It is a WORLD first and years ahead of any competitors including the US so you bet BAe need 6 UAVS to keep up with them. Keep laughing.

"Que doit -on comprendre de cet article ? PAs très clair mais pour moi, il n'y a pas de programe UCAV à but direct pour la RAF ("no funded UCAV program") alors que l'on dit bien que des projets de recherches sont en cours. " Pas encore. c'est le but de la TDP Technology Demonstator Programme. Leur permetre d'acquerir les capacitees de dessin et conception qu'ils ont etudiees avec les 6 UAV qu'ils viennent de devoiler. Citation: "Not only will it serve to develop U.K. capabilities in this area," This clearly indicate they don't have them right NOW: "No, they have some capibilities but want more. IT's what I understand. Otherwise "Not only will it serve to gain capabilties" would have been use. " Quasiment: Avant de pouvoir determiner ca: Tu devrais savoir que Turner a demande a corps et a cri depuis 1994 l'aide du MoD pour developer ces capabilitees. Ces UAV fait maison ne sont pas plus avances technologiquement que les Duc (petit). De plus ils sont tous destines a un domaine technologique different. Un TDP c'est destine a developer ces capacitees ni plus ni moins et ce dans l'enssemble du domaine technologique d'un UAV. NEURON est destine a developer les capaciteed de combat pas la technologie Stealth ou UAV que SAAB et Dasault maitrisent deja. Citation: The emphasis for this TDP, at the core of which would be a manned flying test-bed, "because of the need to master the stealth issue". Whant MORE? They ask for the same TDP SINCE and STILL don't get it, the very one you kept INVENTING last year remember? It IS STILL NOT lauinched YET so they still NEED it to: Developr the UK capabilities in this area. What? Stealth... "I won't say anything about the visual pollution of yours, but what ? Neither France nor UK are known master of stealth, what's the issue with trying to be one ?" About YOU go stuff yourself with proper INFOs for a change jerk? STFU. Dassault didn't get their role into NEURON without mastering it in fact they sayed so as early as 2003 and get support foprm DGA in this. Now get yourself informed and polluts whatever part of the brain of yours you want with accuracy of information. You have the nasty habbit to open it too wide about what you don't know. Dismissed.