Twenty years after its entry into service, is the Rafale still world-class?
It's always complicated to say that we're the best in absolute terms, but I sincerely think that we offer the best compromise. It's obvious that in an air confrontation with an F-22, it's going to be complicated for the Rafale. But if you want a single aircraft capable of air-to-air missions, reconnaissance, air-to-ground strikes, nuclear strike, and able to operate from an aircraft carrier, I think that the Rafale is indeed the best aircraft in the world, better than the F-35 and much better than all the Chinese aircraft on the market. It perfectly meets the needs of the French armed forces and the countries that have purchased it.
Isn't this "omnirole" character also the Rafale's weak point, good everywhere but best nowhere?
This is the choice the French armed forces made: a single aircraft for all missions, instead of specialized aircraft. The Mirage 2000 was a good aircraft, but many versions were needed: Mirage 2000D for ground attack, Mirage 2000-5 for air-to-air, Mirage 2000N for nuclear strike... The Americans have the means to afford a range of fighters, with air superiority aircraft like the F-22 and the future F-47, and aircraft for air-to-ground missions. France, which does not have a comparable military budget, has chosen versatility. It was the right choice: the Rafale is a remarkable aircraft.
Will the Rafale's future F5 standard, planned for the early 2030s, with increased collaborative combat capabilities and a UCAV, multiply what the Rafale can do?
We had two options. We could have designed a stealth aircraft right away. Given the new threats, significant payload capability was needed, particularly for new missiles, which meant a much larger aircraft. This implies a more powerful engine, required a lot of development and was not compatible with the renewal schedule for the French nuclear deterrent (the ASN4G hypersonic missile, planned for 2035). The NGF (fighter component of the FCAS program) will allow us to build a demonstrator to see what compromises to aim for.
The other option, which is what we chose, was to add a stealth UCAV to the Rafale: the maximum stealth capabilities will be not in the piloted aircraft, but in the drone that accompanies it . We have already demonstrated with Neuron that we know how to make a very stealthy aircraft, in cooperation with 6 countries.
How big will this drone be? It will probably have the wingspan of the Mirage 2000. It will be a fairly massive aircraft, as it will need to carry weapons internally. The size is determined by the size of the missiles it carries.
Combat drones in 2033? We can't go any faster.
Isn't there a temptation to do the UCAV faster? 2032-2033 seems a long way off...
That's what some people say... "just get it done". But I'm sorry, to develop a new weapon like this takes a little time. We need to develop a stealth aircraft the size of a fighter, with integrated sensors and algorithms that will allow it to carry out the operations assigned to it, not simply to fly an aircraft alongside a Rafale. Honestly, seven years to reach an operational standard is already a great challenge! We can't go any faster. Not for something like this.
Some will say that others are doing it, in the United States or in Turkey...
Those who say that don't have the skills. I know many of them. If you look at the Americans, who do have the skills, they also take a long time. The F-35 or the F-22 didn't happen that way. And we'll see how long it will take for the F-47 to come out and be operational, even though the project is already well advanced, it seems.
Safran is offering a more powerful version of the M88, the Rafale's engine, called the T-Rex. Is this a priority?
This is a real discussion. Safran now has a program that allows us to bring more powerful version of the M88 to the Rafale F5 standard. This is an interesting option, because the aircraft will become a little heavier, if only because of the planned weapons and the desire to install CFTs (Conformal Fuel Tanks). With a heavier aircraft, having an engine with a little more thrust is logical. It would also be a technological step towards the future NGF engine, which represents a significant breakthrough.
A study published by IFRI in January warned of a possible technology gap for the non-stealthy Rafale, which is "systematically dominated in air combat" by the F-35, and which could be relegated to acting as an "auxiliary" in a high-intensity conflict...
Rafale's success has made some people jealous; I imagine they are trying to make up for it. The F-35 has a slight advantage because it was designed to be stealthy, which is not the case with the Rafale, since the stealth option was not retained by the French State for budgetary reasons. But there are several limitations. First, F-35's stealth is not 360 degrees . Second, it involves housing weapons in the hold, which greatly limits the payload capacity. The real question is how to get past very dense enemy defenses, how to destroy their radars and air defenses, what aviators call SEAD [Suppression of Enemy Air Defense]. This is not only about the aircraft, but about on-board weapons. We could integrate an anti-radar missile on the Rafale, but there are none in France. As for those who think that, because some countries buy the F-35, French Air Force and Navy will be relegated to the role of auxiliaries, we'll be waiting a long time if we think European countries equipped with F-35s will be leading the way ahead of French Rafales flying support missions...
The American F-35 has more than 650 orders in Europe. With Trump's second term in office, has Europe realized that it must limit its dependence on American weapons?
I'm like Saint Thomas, I'll believe it when I see it. What is factual is that Denmark, after Trump's threats to annex Greenland, told the Americans: "You're going to invade Greenland, so I'll buy weapons from you [additional F-35s]." Unbelievable! Second observation: Belgium, which hosts the headquarters of the European Commission, announced, in the middle of a trade war with the United States, that it will buy F-35s... I note that even the countries that are developing the Typhoon (Eurofighter) are ordering F-35s: the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany.
It's depressing...
It's a fact. I don't believe Europeans are buying the F-35 because, as the very "intelligent" people in Brussels say, there is a fragmentation of the European fighter jet offering, with the Rafale, Eurofighter, and Gripen. Europeans are buying American because there is an American preference in Europe. When I say this, everyone smiles, but it's the reality. Our major partners are elsewhere: in Egypt, the Middle East, India, all the way to Indonesia. It's thanks to them that we exist, in addition to our French customer, of course.
Still, 3 European countries have ordered the Rafale... (Greece, Croatia, Serbia)
Yes, and it's a real success for us. Greece is a traditional customer, which has always bought French aircraft alongside the United States. The other two countries were part of the former Eastern Bloc, with MiGs and Sukhois. They switched to us, which is a very good thing. The Croatians tell us that they are very satisfied with their aircraft.
Is there still potential for more Rafale orders?
I think there are still two or three countries that could join the Rafale club. And it's certain that current customers will need more aircraft. But their priority today is more to replenish their weapons stocks (missiles, munitions).
Emmanuel Macron has mentioned an upcoming new French Rafale order, possibly for around thirty aircraft. When will the contract be signed?
We have a lot of work to do to deliver the Rafale jets ordered for export, but we are watching this French order closely, because it concerns our armed forces. But the question the entire defense industry is asking is whether France has the financial means to place orders at this time. The President of the Republic and the Minister of the Armed Forces want to accelerate budget increases, but my impression is that the €3 billion increase provided for in the Military Programming Law (LPM) is already difficult to meet. Our debt is really holding us back.
Are you convinced by the Commission's plans to strengthen the defence industry, such as the EDIP regulation or the SAFE instrument (€150 billion in joint borrowing)?
If I look at tools like SAFE, they are financial tools for borrowing at a better rate, avoiding VAT, etc. After all, why not? But they are not tools that allow you to build an F-35, an F-47, or a Rafale. If Brussels, instead of creating standards, put in place real support so that states could purchase European equipment, it could be proof that Europe can be truly useful.
What could Europe do smarter?
Instead of creating ultra-complex cooperation schemes with a certain number of countries and manufacturers, with incomprehensible property rights, Europe could help states finance the equipment their armies need. Does France need Rafale jets? Europe could help finance this effort, which would also allow aircraft to be sent to the eastern flank to reassure the countries in the region. I advocate for a pragmatic Europe, which builds on what already exists and contributes to strengthening the military capabilities of states. But if we want to create a European defense system with 27 members, developing equipment that will be operational in 15 years, that is a complete utopia.
The Rafale production rate has increased from one to two aircraft per month since 2020, and is expected to increase to four or even five in the coming years. Can the supply chain keep up?
It's a daily challenge, particularly for aerostructure manufacturers [fuselage and wing parts]. Ramp-up is difficult because suppliers have been hit hard by the Covid crisis, and the increase in Rafale production rates is happening in parallel with that of Airbus.
How do you deal with these difficulties?
There are some parts we remanufacture in-house. Sometimes we bring them back in-house, then outsource them to subcontractors we know well and who are willing to do the work, like Potez. We also send workers, technicians, and engineers to the sites of struggling suppliers to help them get through the crisis. For us, this is more of a destabilizing factor than a stabilizing one, but necessity is the law.