Rafale - concept of operations

[Ainen]

Because we were there at the time and BVR was being emphasised in everything we were told. Shoot BVRAAM, disengage in a supersonic turn, re-engage, shoot BVRAAM, disengage in a supersonic turn, re-engage, shoot ASRAAM from well outside Archer range, and only merge if there is no alternative.

That doesn't mean exceling at WVR combat wasn't valued, but rather that it's far better to have high-end WVR combat capability that you never need because your BVR capability is superlative. This approach wasn't someone's personal flight of fancy, but had been extensively modelled in comparison with other alternative CONOPS.

Remember, there's no 'shortcoming' to defend if you don't value ludicrously high-AoA. The test pilots I talked to considered the idea of deliberately manipulating yourself into a low-energy state to be idiotic - 'if he doesn't get you, his wingman will'.

And let's not forget, the RAF seriously considered removing the gun.

This would be very interesting as its own topic. Of all the jets that were designed at the end of the Cold War the actual intended role and philosophy of the Rafale is something of a mystery to me.

Don't quote me on it this, but from what I understand the design/philosophy deal-breakers for France were carrier capability and emphasis on multi-role from the ground up. Eurofighter design was primarily focused for air-to-air interception with capacity for multi-role.

The industrial/political concerns were probably the major drivers in the split though. France wanted to lead the project with 50% of the workshare, and insisted on using SNECMA M88s as the engines.

The impression I got is that it’s very hornet like, consolidation of several aircraft into one.

How it was mean to be use tactically in a little less clear on, my thoughts are that it was a kind of penetration fighter.

The Rafale requirement was indeed for multirole air superiority and low-level penetration, similar to Hornet or the F-15E (which didn't exist yet).

The air superiority mission is evident in certain design choices, especially in the cockpit (heavily reclined seat and F-16 style side stick to help the pilot fly high Gs). It's not a surprise since the French spent most of the 70s trying to come up with a French F-15 equivalent. The penetration mission was also a core requirement given the need to replace the Jaguar in the tactical role against Warsaw Pact forces... basically the French knew they needed something more like Tornado, with automatic terrain following and better fuel consumption than the Atar engines. You can also see the penetration mission's influence in the Mica missile design, with its high off boresight thrust vectoring capability and mini-IRST surveillance mode to help a striker flying low & fast defend itself in a scenario where it was jumped by enemy fighters.

So the French wanted both air superiority and penetration, which made them probably more aligned with RAF requirements than German requirements (which leaned much more towards air superiority only and high maneuverability for WVR combat). However there was a huge gap in expectations around aircraft size, with the French cost models being based on price per kilo which drove them towards the minimum size for a twin-engine fighter (which they thought was around ~8.5t empty), whereas the RAF wanted something Tornado sized (12t empty). In the end the French Jaguar replacement became the Mirage 2000D (initially intended more as a gap-filler in the strike/penetration role), but luckily the Rafale's multirole design requirement was already pretty set in stone by that point.

For what it's worth, the French histories barely mention workshare as the main problem. From their perspective the disagreements in the working teams were about how to translate design requirements, with 2 competing design concepts.

The French sponsored concept was smaller, cheaper, more multirole and easier to navalize (with the landing gear and intake location in particular helping to transfer structural loads during catapult launches and arrested landings, whereas what would become the Eurofighter design was fundamentally ill-suited from a structural load path perspective). In the end the gap in design choices was insoluble and the working teams from the 3 Panavia countries just decided to ignore the French PoV and sign off on their preferred design concept without finding a consensus design. The French and Spanish had 2 weeks to agree to their partners' design concept - the Spanish agreed, the French didn't.

A long line of quotes from Eurofighter FBW FCS and AOA topic.

Question:
Is it possible to describe AdA CONOPS regarding Rafale in a similar simple way? Especially in A2A domain.
Similar to how @DWG describes RAF views for future Typhoon on A2A combat.

Rafale is a rather unique design within its generation.

Some external observations and a summary of posts from @H_K from above:

- For strike, Rafale is a long-range penetrator, capable of long terrain-hugging flight with significant ordnance. Rafale is also designed with strong emphasis on self-escort. In this capacity, it's overall a "better mirage-2000D".
- Rafale has a visible design focus on a heavy, elaborate self-defense suit(SPECTRA).
- France spent a great deal to develop a full range of armament, suitable for low altitude employment, and its integration into both targeting and self-defense suit(AASM).
- Equally, France spent a significant amount of effort to catch up with the world level in ground targeting pods.
- Rafale is both a terrestrial and a deck aircraft (which made it incompatible with Eurofighter, and led to a separate aircraft).
- Substantial attention to frontal signature management (though arguably that's normal for a 1980s design).

For AA, Rafale has several outstanding features, which are unusual for the generation:

- elaborate optical suit in the form of OSF (unprecedented within generation); perhaps with a certain emphasis on short-medium range performance, visible in best IR/LRF gimbal limits in class. (yes/no?)

- relatively smaller radar, which the French, however, diligently keep updated in time (original PESA, when electronic scan was still rare; earliest AESA at first opportunity).

- Lighter main weapon in the form of MICA (both EM/IR) with very high offbore performance but relatively modest range (Meteor entered the picture later; was there always a plan for a longer range weapon to supplement MICA?). MICA performs as an additional IRST, too.

-Significant attention on datalinked LOAL shots (buddy feed) even beyond the aircraft's own sensory field.

Basically, from the outsider's perspective, it looks like Rafale is the direct opposite of the RAF Eurofighter - an aircraft designed to often fight in low, personal, and in a brawl.

 

[F-2]

Some things about RBE2 pesa design make me think it was made with more of the penetration role in mind

https://breakingdefense.com/2024/06...aded-to-ukraine-heres-how-kyiv-will-use-them/

One of the test pilots was involved in the 1990s development of the Radar à Balayage Electronique 2 plans (RBE2) passive electronic scanning array (PESA) set that was the Dassault Rafale’s original radar. He stated that the RDY was “in several respects superior to even the RBE2 in the air-to-air envelope,” despite being a mechanically-steered array and not fitted with an electronically-scanning antenna. The reason, the pilot said, is the RDY was designed with air-to-air missions in mind, as opposed to the RBE2 which was designed to be multi-role.

“So, there were compromises made in the air-to-air performance to accommodate air-to-ground mission profiles,” he said.

The same test pilots hastened to add that the latest active array (AESA) version of the RBE2 combined with upgrades in the Rafale’s F4 and F5 software releases have “closed the performance gap” that existed 30 years ago. But that “the [Mirage] RDY remains one of — if not the — best radars of its generation.”

Hornetfinn on F-16.net is very knowledgeable on radars and works with them for a living. I sent him these paper o. Radant

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA301940.pdf

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA377694.pdf

He told me this

I've not been thinking about this at all as I've always assumed that these radars use full PESA arrays and not column-row PESA arrays. However this architecture does makes sense in the 1980's fighter PESA system. Full PESA array has a phase shifter in each radiating element, which would mean close to 1000 phase shifters in RBE2 size radar. In Column-Row architecture there would be about 60 phase shifters as there are just about 30 phase shifters in a single row and similar number in a single column. With this you can approximate the behaviour of a full array PESA with much simpler system.

Column-Row architecture actually has the advantage in insertion losses due to much lower number of phase shifters and associated drastically reduced complexity and length of its feed network. Since each phase shifter introduces its own insertion loss, reducing the count significantly lowers the total power dissipated as heat. The longer and complex the feed network is for signal to get from transmitter to the phase shifter, the more it attenuate the signal and thus causes loss of power (more loss). So this architecture is good because it's significantly cheaper, has lower insertion losses and thus also produces less heat to cool. So it's actually less lossy than full PESA array and thus has slightly longer range due to it. But it still has somewhat lower max range than otherwise equal MSA radar.

It does also have drawbacks which is why many other PESA systems use full PESA architecture. Biggest are larger grating lobes (sidelobes), more limited/less precise beam shaping, less capable ECCM due to more limited null steering and higher sidelobes and higher performance degradation at large off-boresight angles. For example AFAIK Patriot MPQ-53/65 has full PESA array but because it has so powerful transmitter and is easily cooled, some insertion losses are not a problem and the advantages of full PESA array far outweigh the drawbacks.

The impression I get is the RBE2 was almost like the B-1 pesa but able to give situational awareness. The drawbacks he mentioned seem like they might be trouble for a full interceptor aircraft but for a sensor contributing to the full situational for a strike craft. The RDX competitor was a full pesa but funny enough based on the mirage 2000D radar.

 

[BonPlan2]

Egypt has issued an RFP for 24 more Rafale. This would bring the fleet to 78 aircraft : 24(-1) + 31 + 24
https://www.latribune.fr/article/de...l-egypte-commandait-24-rafale-supplementaires

Seems that the trainings between Rafale and chinese J-16 were not so bad, independently of now common chinese fake news.

 

[Deltafan]

Seems that the trainings between Rafale and chinese J-16 were not so bad, independently of now common chinese fake news.

Interesting:

+Fact 1: In May 2025, China announces that its Pakistani J-10s shot down four Indian Rafales during Operation Sindoor.

Results:
-In July 2025, four Chinese spies are arrested in Greece for taking photos of Rafales at a Greek base.
-In September 2025, the Indian Air Force recommends purchasing 114 additional Rafales.
-In February 2026, India Navy reportedly considers acquiring 31 additional Rafales.


+Fact 2: China announces that its J-16s beat the egyptian Rafales in exercises held in August 2026.

-Result: in September 2026, Egypt reportedly considers buying 24 additional Rafales.


Long live China's official Public Relations team and all the Rafale haters across the World Wide Web

 

[lancer21]

Recent does not automatically mean yesterday, if you want to be accurate let's find out the actual RFP date. If anything, linking this to the chinese exercise and twisting it to put Rafale in a better light is the propaganda. Plus Egypt is not exactly able to fully make it's own procurement decisions as the Su-35 saga proved.

 

[Ainen]

Seems that the trainings between Rafale and chinese J-16 were not so bad, independently of now common chinese fake news.

Or it is unrelated, and they don't really have a choice.
I mean, whether India had Meteor or not during Sindoor is one thing, but Egypt doesn't even have it on the table.

 

[Deltafan]

Recent does not automatically mean yesterday, if you want to be accurate let's find out the actual RFP date. If anything, linking this to the chinese exercise and twisting it to put Rafale in a better light is the propaganda. Plus Egypt is not exactly able to fully make it's own procurement decisions as the Su-35 saga proved.

RFP can be cancelled. Su-35 or Rafale are not the only fighter available in the world...

 

[lancer21]

As posted above, Egypt has little choice, the americans will only sell them trash while at the same time forbidding them to buy russian planes and likely they will do same to chinese planes, Typhoon is politically complicated, Gripen is weak/american veto, what else is there other than the somewhat independent Rafale? Unless Egypt mans up they are in a difficult situation.

 

[BonPlan2]

Egypt is not exactly able to fully make it's own procurement decisions as the Su-35 saga proved.

It was rumored that Su-35 was not only in the CAATSA lign of sight, but also that it performed badly during a training against.... an egyptian Rafale.

 

[BonPlan2]

Or it is unrelated, and they don't really have a choice.
I mean, whether India had Meteor or not during Sindoor is one thing, but Egypt doesn't even have it on the table.

Uncle Sam wound be pleased to sell some more F16 or even F15.
EF2000 is also on the market.

All west country will always garanteed a technological asset to Israel. What kind of potential opponent may we see for Egypt needed Meteor ? And in case of, it's just a software patch to install and a A400 flight with some Meteor to sent. Easy, and probably already organised.

 

[helmutkohl]

It was rumored that Su-35 was not only in the CAATSA lign of sight, but also that it performed badly during a training against.... an egyptian Rafale.

This was posted years ago before you were a member. But that report was quickly dismissed here as no Su-35s were ever delivered to Egypt.

 

[BonPlan2]

This was posted years ago before you were a member. But that report was quickly dismissed here as no Su-35s were ever delivered to Egypt.

The training was organised with a russian Su-35 sent for the occasion. But I can't give you a source or a proof. Mays be it was a shit news...

 

[Ainen]

Uncle Sam wound be pleased to sell some more F16 or even F15.
EF2000 is also on the market.

Yeah, just without AMRAAM(or meteor, or scalp).
Ready for Bekaa valley.
In this way, Rafale is seriously best western aircraft available to Egypt. It, at least, can do some BVR.

What kind of potential opponent may we see for Egypt needed Meteor ?

I wonder if this question was serious.

The training was organised with a russian Su-35 sent for the occasion.

Su-35se(Stealth, Egypt).

And in case of, it's just a software patch to install and a A400 flight with some Meteor to sent.

France itself has ~1 meteor per Rafale. Not 1 warload, 1 missile.
And around 1 warload of mica(not NG, 1990s rustics; combined IR and EM stock)

 

[BonPlan2]

Rafale is seriously best western aircraft available to Egypt. It, at least, can do some BVR.

Legacy MICA EM has a range of 80km. IR version is a little bit shorter.
MICA NG is said to have 30% more range.

BVR is all over 40 km more or less. so MICA is fully a BVR missile.

And between you and me, how many jets were destroyed in a air to air engagement at more than 50km ? very few in fact.

 

[BonPlan2]

France itself has ~1 meteor per Rafale. Not 1 warload, 1 missile.
And around 1 warload of mica(not NG, 1990s rustics; combined IR and EM stock)

France is not the sole to use Meteor.
France stockpile is around 200. only 20 diverted to Egypt may be enough to deter.

MICA : 1000 were ordered and delivered. Some used in the Gulf to protect UAE.

Meteor is not seen by french air force as the main AA missile. It is usefull to destroy AWACS and tanker, but not fighter as the french air to air rule is to positively identify the target before opening the fire, ie a range in the 40 to 50km. A bit more with OSF.
This is why MICA range is enough. MICA NG will use the advanced OSF, and the second booster mainly usefull to increase pk (probability of a kill). This is why Meteor was not ordered in more Qty.
Meteor Rafale integration was also a marketing move, because it was just impossible to let EF2000 and Gripen with such a missile and not Rafale.

 

[BonPlan2]

between you and me, how many jets were destroyed in a air to air engagement at more than 50km ? very few in fact.

Something interesting : during the irak-Iran war, iraki Mirage F1, with Matra Super 530F medium range missile (officiel range of 25km. probably more as the missile was heavy), succeed in destroying Iranian F14 Tomcat fitted with Phenix long range missile.

So a fighter with MICA may not be so short versus an opponent with let's say AMRAAM....

 

[Titus K]

France itself has ~1 meteor per Rafale. Not 1 warload, 1 missile.

While this is true right now, for Meteor (and MICA) this will change pretty drastically fairly soon…
The figure you're quoting (~160 missiles) refers to the initial 2 lots of missiles, which were ordered by end-2023 and have since been delivered.

Lot 3 was only ordered in 2025, Lot 4 is planned for 2026, and Lot 5 is planned for "after 2026"
Lot 4 alone for example, planned for 2026, is 180 missiles —> https://www.defense.gouv.fr/actuali...perils-doit-nous-conduire-lacceleration-notre

Regarding the amount of ammunition, Catherine Vautrin admits that they are not sufficient, which is why, in 2026, "we will order complex ammunition", including remotely operated ammunition, 660 MMP missiles, 180 Meteor missiles...

Additionally, the new LPM voted this summer increases the number of MICA/Meteor/Comet missiles that are to be ordered over the 2026–2030 period by 55%, and over the 2030–2035 period by 90%.

I would therefore expect the number of Meteor missiles ordered by the end-2030 to be at least 3x the current inventory.

In the picture MIDE=Meteor

 

[Ainen]

Legacy MICA EM has a range of 80km. IR version is a little bit shorter.
MICA NG is said to have 30% more range.

BVR is all over 40 km more or less. so MICA is fully a BVR missile.

And between you and me, how many jets were destroyed in a air to air engagement at more than 50km ? very few in fact.

(moved to a different topic to avoid technical news).
80km is still the same head on range for a cooperative, medium altitude target. It's the same number that gives modern WVRAAMs ranges of around 50km. I.e. realistic bracket for MICA use is more like <30km.
It's a 1990s capability, by 2010s it was outranged by a factor of >2. We're now in 2020s, and this factor is now approaching x3 with MRAAMs, and more like x5 with LRAAMs.
It's still an adequate weapon for low altitude use (where ranges are compressed immensely), but hardly for anything else.

France is not the sole to use Meteor.
France stockpile is around 200. only 20 diverted to Egypt may be enough to deter.

MICA : 1000 were ordered and delivered. Some used in the Gulf to protect UAE.

But only France is under any sort of obligation under Rafale deal. Others will be doing it for free.
The problem is, as usual, straightforward (Egypt case). Israel is small, any modern BVRAAM covers half the country right out of Egyptian airspace.
Which is the main reason Egypt is so thoroughly coerced into not getting anything non-compliant. Mig-29m was a one off mistake.

1000 MICA was the original order. Assuming normal warload of 4 MICA (should be 6 as there's no enough meteor and there are F4 aircraft, but to keep things on the optimistic side), for 200ish force one warload is 800 missiles. Accounting for missiles with spent shelf life under wing (good for MIC VL only), missiles spent in Ukraine (hundreds?) and missiles spent in the middle East(hundreds), my first post was optimistic frankly.

Realistically stock should be is in 500s at best, i.e. France right now has more like 1 meteor and 2 MICA (probably one EM and IR) per Rafale, with leftovers for remaining mirages.

This is not just a country that won't sustain you in a war, it's a country that can't fight anything, as it currently has barely enough armament for 1 nuclear mission.

While this is true right now, for Meteor (and MICA) this will change pretty drastically fairly soon…

Yes, numbers are indeed for now. It'll be better in a few years, but broadly situation is same as Patriots.
I.e. when you're buying into Rafale, you have to be adamant you won't use have a use for them until 2029-2030.
It means that, for example, in the Baltic patrol France has to bluff right now. ME CAPs brought things to a breaking point, not just for Americans.

Meteor is not seen by french air force as the main AA missile. It is usefull to destroy AWACS and tanker, but not fighter as the french air to air rule is to positively identify the target before opening the fire, ie a range in the 40 to 50km. A bit more with OSF.

Yep, I remember that part. The problem is, in recent engagements no one cares that much, as a2a picture was no longer the CW congested classic. You can shoot on launch permission. It can get congested of stars align, but it isn't the norm.

It leads to a situation not unlike 1910s, when the French navy expected decisive range to be like 5000, and the actual combat turned out to begin at 15000-25000, with decisive range being more like 12000-14000m. I.e. french battleships could be rendered combat ineffective or worse before firing a shot.

Modern AWACS and tankers orbit far beyond meteor ranges (it's one of urgent drivers behind their update, 200km mark for 0.1 target is now clearly suicidal, plus not very workable for targets with signatures of ~0.01 etc). Those that can't provide this stand off are already combat ineffective.

 

[BonPlan2]

the RDY was “in several respects superior to even the RBE2 in the air-to-air envelope,” despite being a mechanically-steered array and not fitted with an electronically-scanning antenna. The reason, the pilot said, is the RDY was designed with air-to-air missions in mind, as opposed to the RBE2 which was designed to be multi-role.

RDY and RBE2 PESA used the same TOP (I don't know the english term for Tube à Ondes progressives), but in the PESA antenna the arrays to guide the flow of waves takes some energy. So the range could only be shorter than with a mecanical antenna.

The 2 were studied from scratch to be fully multirole.

 

[galgot]

...

I wonder if this question was serious.

...

If you are implying the obvious potential enemy Egypt would need to use Meteor against is Israel (obvious Egypt neighbour with the same kind of advanced AAM), sorry, but that train as left the station already decades ago. It’s not like Egypt is arming for a potential new conflict with Israel, they know would be disastrous for them anyways, having Meteor or not.

Their interests or concerns are elsewhere, either west in instable Libya, or south in Sudan and Ethiopia.
None of these have such weapons as AMRAAM/Meteor/PL-15 and such.
So yes, MICA is indeed more than sufficient for these kind of threats.

That’s also why the Rafale is well liked by the Egyptian Air Force, it gives them an advanced long range strike force capable of carrying heavy loads of advanced A/G stuff they can use in raids deep south, against Sudaneses RSF or others.

 

[helmutkohl]

If you are implying the obvious potential enemy Egypt would need to use Meteor against is Israel (obvious Egypt neighbour with the same kind of advanced AAM), sorry, but that train as left the station already decades ago. It’s not like Egypt is arming for a potential new conflict with Israel, they know would be disastrous for them anyways, having Meteor or not.

Their interests or concerns are elsewhere, either east in instable Libya, or south in Sudan and Ethiopia.
None of these have such weapons as AMRAAM/Meteor/PL-15 and such.
So yes, MICA is indeed more than sufficient for these kind of threats.

That’s also why the Rafale is well liked by the Egyptian Air Force, it gives them an advanced long range strike force capable of carrying heavy loads of advanced A/G stuff they can use in raids deep south, against Sudaneses RSF or others.

Indeed, Egypt's priority security interests are more to its south and west, and its unlikely they will engage in a new conflict with Israel. But at the same time, there is a desire to reduce the qualitative gap between Egypt and Israel as well.

 

[galgot]

Indeed, Egypt's priority security interests are more to its south and west, and its unlikely they will engage in a new conflict with Israel. But at the same time, there is a desire to reduce the qualitative gap between Egypt and Israel as well.

Lol, thanks, mixed east and west ... corrected.

 

[Deltafan]

As posted above, Egypt has little choice, the americans will only sell them trash while at the same time forbidding them to buy russian planes and likely they will do same to chinese planes, Typhoon is politically complicated, Gripen is weak/american veto, what else is there other than the somewhat independent Rafale? Unless Egypt mans up they are in a difficult situation.

OK regarding Russian or Chinese fighters, but I fail to see why the Typhoon (offered to Egypt by Italy a few years ago) would be "politically complicated" (in a world where additional sales to Saudi Arabia are no longer ruled out and sales to Turkey—including the Meteor missile—are underway. And even without the Meteor, the situation remains identical to that of the Rafale), why the Gripen NG is considered "weak/American veto" (no veto for Colombia [in the Trump era], Thailand, Brasil or South Africa, and if it's "weak", then no problem for Israël...), why, above all, the F-16 Block 70 or even the F-15 are "trash," and why the KF-21 (especially given the existing market for 90–100 FA-50s for Egypt) and the Kaan* supposedly don't exist...

*
https://www.tacticalreport.com/daily/63626-egypt-eyes-joining-turkiyes-kaan-fighter-program
https://www.tacticalreport.com/dail...ent-strategic-role-and-participating-entities

 

[F-2]

RDY and RBE2 PESA used the same TOP (I don't know the english term for Tube à Ondes progressives), but in the PESA antenna the arrays to guide the flow of waves takes some energy. So the range could only be shorter than with a mecanical antenna.

The 2 were studied from scratch to be fully multirole.

Is that true? I was under the impression that Dassault electronics got that part of the work share.

But the problem of choice still remained. After various proposals from industrialists and a last round of consultation in 1988, the DGA chose a definition of radar, based on the Thomson-CSF proposal, with the Radant front assembly "two planes", but taking up certain elements of the proposal from 'ESD, especially the transmitter.

Post in thread 'Dassault Rafale Avionics'
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/dassault-rafale-avionics.942/post-520350


If rbe2 does use the same transmitter then we actually know the average power from the RDY presentation from the Swiss archives.

 

[Ainen]

If you are implying the obvious potential enemy Egypt would need to use Meteor against is Israel (obvious Egypt neighbour with the same kind of advanced AAM), sorry, but that train as left the station already decades ago. It’s not like Egypt is arming for a potential new conflict with Israel, they know would be disastrous for them anyways, having Meteor or not.

Until mid-2010s, Egypt actively procured modern air defenses (including long range ones) and tried to go fighters. I.e. until CATSA block on Su-35se, this was certainly wrong. Egypt tried to become more defensible(and broadly was/is more defended than Turkey for a while), until it all stopped.
Shift to medium range fighter and air defense weapons, unable to target beyond Gaza, was abrupt.

If j-10ce interest was equally stopped dead in it's track, it's very hard to make a point Egypt likes this arrangement. Rather, it has no choice at all, and it exists at a gunpoint.
Israel attacked even nations in the same blue camp. Cairo hosts Hamas as well, for instance.

That’s also why the Rafale is well liked by the Egyptian Air Force, it gives them an advanced long range strike force capable of carrying heavy loads of advanced A/G stuff

SCALP? As you can see, it wasn't sold either. Broadly speaking, Egypt is allowed to buy COIN/CAS capability, but priced in gold.
(note that Rafale can do low altitude penetration in strategic strike role, but this capability is entirely dependent on presence of Meteor and ability to defend from high flying threats).

Egypt is specifically kept at a level below not just Israel, but gulf states as well. I.e. Egypt sits in a dubious group with Turkey and Iran. Difference being, these countries have capable MICs to carve out an alternative path, and Egypt just pays.

 

[galgot]

Until mid-2010s, Egypt actively procured modern air defenses (including long range ones) and tried to go fighters. I.e. until CATSA block on Su-35se, this was certainly wrong. Egypt tried to become more defensible(and broadly was/is more defended than Turkey for a while), until it all stopped.
Shift to medium range fighter and air defense weapons, unable to target beyond Gaza, was abrupt.

If j-10ce interest was equally stopped dead in it's track, it's very hard to make a point Egypt likes this arrangement. Rather, it has no choice at all, and it exists at a gunpoint.
Israel attacked even nations in the same blue camp. Cairo hosts Hamas as well, for instance.

Sorry, who said it was ?

Like SCALP? As you can see, it wasn't sold either. Broadly speaking, Egypt is allowed to buy COIN/CAS capability, but priced in gold.

And specifically kept at a level below not just Israel, but gulf states as well. I.e. Egypt sits in a dubious group with Turkey and Iran, difference being, these countries have capable MICs to carve out an alternative path.

Egypt got some SCALPs :

https://twitter.com/x/status/1356637572374618112

View: https://x.com/mahmouedgamal44/status/1356637572374618112?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1356637572374618112%7Ctwgr%5Eb0bf240074201973b7441ae2740ef13a596ed98e%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.opex360.com%2F2021%2F02%2F04%2Fla-force-aerienne-egyptienne-a-t-elle-recu-des-missiles-de-croisiere-scalp-pour-ses-rafale%2F

 

[Ainen]

Sorry, who said it was ?

Noises from Chinese side.

Egypt got some SCALPs

Touche, I was certain they were blocked away. Then argument is taken away.

 

[galgot]

Noises from Chinese side.

I see, the usual noises.

Touche, I was certain they were blocked away. Then argument is taken away.

They were at some point :
“…What is the solution to this problem? The manufacturer of these missiles – namely MBDA – must invest in research and technology so that it can produce a similar component that would not be subject to ITAR restrictions. “We can do this for this contract because the part can be produced within a reasonable timeframe, even if the customer naturally finds this too long,” commented Florence Parly, the Minister for the Armed Forces, during a parliamentary hearing in July 2018."

Then in 2021 these pictures of SCALPs in Egypt appeared.

 

[BonPlan2]

SCALP? As you can see, it wasn't sold either.

False.
Just after the sale, USA put a component on the ITAR list, blocking for some time the delivery. But MBDA studied another solution to avoid ITAR rules, and ITAR free SCALP were delivered to Egypt.

 

[BonPlan2]

Touche, I was certain they were blocked away. Then argument is taken away.

No.
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/rafale-concept-of-operations.51808/post-939513

 

[BonPlan2]

But the problem of choice still remained. After various proposals from industrialists and a last round of consultation in 1988, the DGA chose a definition of radar, based on the Thomson-CSF proposal, with the Radant front assembly "two planes", but taking up certain elements of the proposal from 'ESD, especially the transmitter.

Thomson CSF and Electronique Serge Dassault (ESD) presented each a prototyp.

One prototyp used PESA electronic scan only for one direction (the other remained mecanically steered), where the other solution was a full PESA one (I don't remember what company made what kind of solution...).

The final choice was a mix of technical and economical considerations : the ESD solution seemed technically better, but with bigger risks and a company size maybe too small for such a project. On the other side it was economically a suicide for Thomson not to give them main part of the final radar. Finally the 2 company merged to create the now Thales.

 

[Titus K]

Egypt got some SCALPs :

Yes, 25 SCALP deliveries to Egypt in 2021 and 25 more in 2022 according to SIPRI.
They also got a ton of AASMs and a dozen Talios pods... If AASM works as well as it does against Russia on ex-Soviet jets, it’s probably good enough for most of Egypt’s potential adversaries.

 

[Ainen]

Yes, 25 SCALP deliveries to Egypt in 2021 and 25 more in 2022 according to SIPRI.
They also got a ton of AASMs and a dozen Talios pods... If AASM works as well as it does against Russia on ex-Soviet jets, it’s probably good enough for most of Egypt’s potential adversaries.

You look at Rafale(the most expensive procurement item in Egypt armed forces, and one of the most expensive in the country) just skipping the only actually dangerous country around.
Which is the point, but not an Egyptian one, as it keeps it in a rather subordinate status against the least predictable neighbor.
It was sort of acceptable until 2025, but now?

AASM works darting to the frontline and back. It is absolutely no deterrence against Israel - and given that Israel is small/dense, and has both stealth aircraft and well proven sead/dead capability, will likely not work either.
Aircraft won't be able to self-escort(no meteor), and even if it'll launch, it will be chased down.

But to actually deter Israel, it'll be required to fly deep into Israel, which, without ability to protect the strike group. It is even less feasible than flying into Russia.

Rest of Egypt potential adversaries are broadly harmless, but in situations where they can bite - Rafale won't be different from other 4th gen aircraft. But more broadly, against these adversaries you can get away with just MALE drones.

 

[BonPlan2]

AASM works darting to the frontline and back. It is absolutely no deterrence against Israel

Egypt is in peace with Israel. Why do you want them to try to threat Israel ?

 

[Ainen]

Egypt is in peace with Israel. Why do you want them to try to threat Israel ?

Everyone is at peace with everyone. Syria and Qatar - w
ith Israel.
But only Egypt is denied AMRAAM(for aircraft) and Meteor. One of a very few nations on earth in such condition, together with a de-facto dependent Iraq.

France is at peace, and there're no threats around France. Should French armed forces be disbanded?

 

[galgot]

Egypt is in peace with Israel. Why do you want them to try to threat Israel ?

I think the point is not Egypt attacking Israel, because they obviously won't do that, but rather having the capacity to defend themselves against possible Israeli raids, which even though unlikely right now, could eventually happen given Israel’s tendency to carry out raids in neighbouring countries whenever it sees fit.

And I suppose the very reason Egypt is denied of Meteors, is for that very reason : Keeping Israel with an edge if it wants to strike any place around.

So indeed Egypt would eventually like to fill that tech gap, I agree with @Ainen on that.

If France can't deliver Meteors (because we don't want to be antisemitic to upset Israel, right ?), while China can deliver PL-15, then that puts the J-10 to an advantage if they look for something specific to fill that gap. Not really a plane Vs plane issue, but the capacity to sell the missile for it or not.

Note, it's was the same when France delivered Mirage III/5s to Egypt and Libya, there weren't delivered wired to carry AIM-9s, cause US didn't want it (they wouldn't deliver any AIM-9s to Egypt anyway, that came later) . If they eventually were, it came later, and first to carry only Russian R-3S.
This to keep Israel Air Force at an advantage.
Wasn't really a problem at the time cause Egypt wanted these Mirages III/5s essentially for striking capability (to replace Su-7s and MiG-17s which had abysmal range/carrying capacity), and China wasn't in the game yet to agree to deliver a AIM-9 equivalent equiped fighter.

 

[Titus K]

You look at Rafale(the most expensive procurement item in Egypt armed forces, and one of the most expensive in the country) just skipping the only actually dangerous country around.
Which is the point, but not an Egyptian one, as it keeps it in a rather subordinate status against the least predictable neighbor.
It was sort of acceptable until 2025, but now?

AASM works darting to the frontline and back. It is absolutely no deterrence against Israel - and given that Israel is small/dense, and has both stealth aircraft and well proven sead/dead capability, will likely not work either.
Aircraft won't be able to self-escort(no meteor), and even if it'll launch, it will be chased down.

But to actually deter Israel, it'll be required to fly deep into Israel, which, without ability to protect the strike group. It is even less feasible than flying into Russia.

Rest of Egypt potential adversaries are broadly harmless, but in situations where they can bite - Rafale won't be different from other 4th gen aircraft. But more broadly, against these adversaries you can get away with just MALE drones.

They ordered 50 SCALP, meaning they could order hundreds of them (like UAE or KSA), the issue is funding not the platform.

As for air-to-air, now that Turkey seems to be allowed to order Meteor, I don't see why Egypt wouldn't be allowed to either.
Finally, since Comet is a 100% French program, they could very well get their hands on those too, along with MICA NG.

The one real missing weapon is a proper anti-radiation missile, and that will remain the case until the mid-2030s when Stratus RS arrives ... In the meantime, AASM-XLR will have to do as a subpar stopgap.

BTW, your idea that Egypt should “deter Israel” is pretty ridiculous… Iran couldn’t do it with literally thousands of ballistic missiles, tens of thousands of shaheds and cruise missiles, proxies all over the region …

 

[Ainen]

BTW, your idea that Egypt should “deter Israel” is pretty ridiculous… Iran couldn’t do it with literally thousands of ballistic missiles, tens of thousands of shaheds and cruise missiles, proxies all over the region …

Iran and Israel actually deter each other quite well, as you can see now.
Israel attacked twice, sure, but it came at a substantial cost. Cost associated with fighting is the definition of deterrence.

Israel attacks everyone else in the region(other than maybe Yemen) without any cost.
Including Qatar, as Doha hosts Hamas delegation. There are other cities in the region, hosting Hamas delegates. One of them is Cairo.

As such, Egypt absolutely wants(needs) to deter Israel. It just isn't allowed to, and the geography works in a way that Egypt able to deter/stop Israel is halfway there to being existential threat to Israel. Or would be, if Israel didn't have nukes.
But in any case, Egypt is denied non-compliant weapons. I frankly missed that Egypt has SCALPs(see above), and this somewhat undermines my position.
But they don't have many (25-50, minus AA, is just a few targets ultimately). Israel is used to being hit, few hits won't dent it.

As for air-to-air, now that Turkey seems to be allowed to order Meteor, I don't see why Egypt wouldn't be allowed to either.
Finally, since Comet is a 100% French program, they could very well get their hands on those too, along with MICA NG.

Btw it's interesting to me how COMET will look like. Original Rafale was very much optimized for low altitude fighting; meteor wasn't part of the original concept, but it added up beautifully.

COMET now seems to be more of a high altitude weapon. Granted, MICA NG doesn't go anywhere and Rafale can keep it's current low altitude capability, but still. I wonder if it's a general shift "upwards".

 

[snne]

As for air-to-air, now that Turkey seems to be allowed to order Meteor, I don't see why Egypt wouldn't be allowed to either.

Because Turkey is your fellow NATO ally that's going to come to your aid and shed blood for you, not some desperate 3rd world country you're doing a favor by selling weapons to...?

---

The only way to conventionally deter an Israel that thinks it's invincible is to have equally strong air power and IADS coverage, along with the means to launch strong retaliatory attacks. None of that alone guarantees safety either -- you also need a competent military and a strong MIC to back it all up...

 

[BonPlan2]

Everyone is at peace with everyone. Syria and Qatar - w
ith Israel.
But only Egypt is denied AMRAAM(for aircraft) and Meteor. One of a very few nations on earth in such condition, together with a de-facto dependent Iraq.

France is at peace, and there're no threats around France. Should French armed forces be disbanded?

All the west country will reduce or limit weapons deal so as to protect israel. We have a debt for the Shoah.

And it's not faire to compare Egypt, a big and direct neighbor of Israel and Syria (a failed state) or Quater (far away and so small).