Greece Air-Force Greek Rafale Program

Kansei

Active member
Messages
126
Reactions
94
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Cyprus
Compared to Exocet not scalp, besides you have limited number of SCALPs.
My bad I was mistaken. But rightfully so? You’re comparing a 50-year old design with a “top of the line Turkish missile” but aren’t even embarrassed by the fact that it has basically only 170km of extra range and has 0.4x the range of a 2002 missile ? I mean I do agree you guys have the advantage that you can produce as many as you want and ours are probably very limited but you’re also forgetting that the number of Delta fighters will remain the same but the number of Scalp missiles will increase that will actually be newer
Edit:Made a mistake
 
Last edited:

Tornadoss

Contributor
Messages
1,329
Reactions
4 2,533
Nation of residence
Czechia
Nation of origin
Turkey
If we have 100 to 150 scalps, they are more than enough for our current numbers of mirage / (all 24 rafales to come). That goes for you too, even if you produce 500 SOMs you need planes to carry them. If you don't have enough planes then they are useless.
Well our F-16, F-4 as well as newly introduced Aksungur and Akinci UAVS have capability to deliver SOM, a surface based version with longer range is on development.

Yes because the Rafale has actual published specifications, Data, Red Flag results, beat other aircraft in various criteria on several different purchase competitions by Nations and has a history of 50 years of linage and R&D with historically proven results.
Yet, they are not tested in real combat environment. Neither meteor or mica are not battle proven. However, somehow they are also named as the best missile out there by some by just based on data. Turkish weapons are started to be tested in real conflicts, smart bombs and missiles proved to be efficient and good. We are pretty confident that SOM also will prove to be a good asset.

My bad I was mistaken. But rightfully so? You’re comparing a 50-year old design with a “top of the line Turkish missile” but aren’t even embarrassed by the fact that it has basically only 3.5x the range and has 0.7x the range of a 2002 missile ? I mean I do agree you guys have the advantage that you can produce as many as you want and ours are probably very limited but you’re also forgetting that the number of Delta fighters with remain the same but the number of Scalp missiles will increase that will actually be newer
Edit:Made a mistake
Why would I embarrass? SOM is first cruise missile Turkey developed. For example JSM also have similar characteristics and specs, I don't think Norwegians would be ashamed about it. This is just a start, we will ad features and continue development of better missiles, now Turkey is working on Ramjet and eventually we will have something like BrahMos in foreseeable future.
I would embarrass if I would jerk of some 3D image like Makedon missile or Frigate like ALS-100, and never able to see them realized.
 

Oublious

Experienced member
The Netherlands Correspondent
Messages
2,017
Reactions
7 4,328
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
Don't really see how it's that superior, Scalp EG has a range reportedly between 250-400km


I don't take you seriously anymore, you have no idea what you are talking about.
 

Oublious

Experienced member
The Netherlands Correspondent
Messages
2,017
Reactions
7 4,328
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
By stating that SOM is Superior, you have to give us some facts, right?

-Exocet AM39 entered service in 1979, 43 years in service, with constant improvements.
-It is combat proven in many wars.
-More than 30 countries using it.
-And it's been modified to get carried by 14 different fighter jets.

And you just spitting "SOM is superior", when it just entered service 3,4 years ago and passed some tests by hitting 3,4 targets.

The only thing that i see being better at is the range that it has.

SOM

- IIR seeker what AM39 doesn't have
- Data-link wher AM39 doesn't have
- loitering capabilities
- longer range, wher SOM will have 250km+, AM39 is 100km max.
- could be fired from Drones and Fighters(F16 and F4)

Am39 is a old outdated missile, it is still dangerous offcourse.



I didn't wrote about Cruise missiles and yet somebody have mentioned? Scalp and other missiles you have in your arsenal are old. The Turkish missiles are all updated with the latest technology like i have summed up.Our cruise missiles are all matured, and still in progress. SSM Atmaca 220km+ will be ready in 1 year. You have air launched cruise missiles. When we are finished with destroying your airfields you will be never able to fire a cruisemissile from your fighters. We can fire missiles wher we want, you can look to the map and imagine yourself.

1643045807813.png
 
Last edited:

Akritas

Contributor
Messages
555
Reactions
513
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Greece
SOM

- IIR seeker what AM39 doesn't have
- Data-link wher AM39 doesn't have
- loitering capabilities
- longer range, wher SOM will have 250km+, AM39 is 100km max.
- could be fired from Drones and Fighters(F16 and F4)

Am39 is a old outdated missile, it is still dangerous offcourse.
Rocket technology has remained the same for 60 years. What is changing are the part systems.

So, Exocet missiles is constantly developing, the last model, the MM40 B3C, has digital seeker allowing a more efficient processing and increased performances of the missile, has also new IIR seeker allowing the missile to recognize surface vessels profiles (thanks to a ship profile database stored on board via link).

Last, but not least, MM40 B3C be able to recognize a target within a group of ships and impact specific areas of the targeted surface vessel (such as its bridge, CIC, helicopter hangar, weapon or sensor systems).

When will it be understood that you are not alone in the world because you developed a rocket.
There are countries and companies that have been developing missiles for 60 years.
French Exocet try to to face much stronger opponents in the market than the SOM, like Norwegian NSM or American LRASM,

Greek Airforce has this type of missile from the last summer, upgraded and new AM39 Exocet missiles. The next step is the upgrade of the naval exocet.
 
Last edited:

Kansei

Active member
Messages
126
Reactions
94
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Cyprus
Well our F-16, F-4 as well as newly introduced Aksungur and Akinci UAVS have capability to deliver SOM, a surface based version with longer range is on development.


Yet, they are not tested in real combat environment. Neither meteor or mica are not battle proven. However, somehow they are also named as the best missile out there by some by just based on data. Turkish weapons are started to be tested in real conflicts, smart bombs and missiles proved to be efficient and good. We are pretty confident that SOM also will prove to be a good asset.


Why would I embarrass? SOM is first cruise missile Turkey developed. For example JSM also have similar characteristics and specs, I don't think Norwegians would be ashamed about it. This is just a start, we will ad features and continue development of better missiles, now Turkey is working on Ramjet and eventually we will have something like BrahMos in foreseeable future.
I would embarrass if I would jerk of some 3D image like Makedon missile or Frigate like ALS-100, and never able to see them realized.
Again their predecessors and other missiles made by the companies have had great success, so why would they be worse when they all use the same principles with improved technologies? Also I’ve only heard the Turkish missiles being successful against really outdated planes, but if you could cite some other incidents I would be also very happy to read them. I don’t know anything about JSM so I can’t really make an argument against it, but from a quick Google search the range seems to be 550+ KM but again this might be wrong so I don’t know. Also your argument about jerking doesn’t really work since I’m not the one who was jerking , you were. Lastly I don’t disagree that they are a good step and that the future looks bright for Turkish Missiles, all I’m saying is that you can’t really make the argument that the new missile is going to be better than a 50 year old missile, then when someone points out how it doesn’t make sense to compare the specs of a really old missile with a new one when there is a newer one in our arsenal, you reply with ok yeah sure it’s worse than a 20 year old missile but it’s just a step ?
 

Kansei

Active member
Messages
126
Reactions
94
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Cyprus
Rocket technology has remained the same for 60 years. What is changing are the part systems.

So, Exocet missiles is constantly developing, the last model, the MM40 B3C, has digital seeker allowing a more efficient processing and increased performances of the missile, has also new IIR seeker allowing the missile to recognize surface vessels profiles (thanks to a ship profile database stored on board via link).

Last, but not least, MM40 B3C be able to recognize a target within a group of ships and impact specific areas of the targeted surface vessel (such as its bridge, CIC, helicopter hangar, weapon or sensor systems).

When will it be understood that you are not alone in the world because you developed a rocket.
There are countries and companies that have been developing missiles for 60 years.
French Exocet try to to face much stronger opponents in the market than the SOM, like Norwegian NSM or American LRASM,

Greek Airforce has this type of missile from the last summer, upgraded and new AM39 Exocet missiles. The next step is the upgrade of the naval exocet.
You mind sending a source for the upgrade? This the first time I’m hearing about it and it’s a shockingly good surprise
 

Atlas

Member
Messages
12
Reactions
15
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Greece
SOM

- IIR seeker what AM39 doesn't have
- Data-link wher AM39 doesn't have
- loitering capabilities
- longer range, wher SOM will have 250km+, AM39 is 100km max.
- could be fired from Drones and Fighters(F16 and F4)

Am39 is a old outdated missile, it is still dangerous offcourse.



I didn't wrote about Cruise missiles and yet somebody have mentioned? Scalp and other missiles you have in your arsenal are old. The Turkish missiles are all updated with the latest technology like i have summed up.Our cruise missiles are all matured, and still in progress. SSM Atmaca 220km+ will be ready in 1 year. You have air launched cruise missiles. When we are finished with destroying your airfields you will be never able to fire a cruisemissile from your fighters. We can fire missiles wher we want, you can look to the map and imagine yourself.

View attachment 38954
And yes of course, again your new missile is superior to Scalp, like i wasn't expecting such an answer.
Ofcourse French/British State-of-the art Cruise missile is worse than your new untested/first Cruise development.
Your anti-ship missiles are ofcourse better than the Exocets too.
Your TF-X jet gonna be an F-22/F-35 killer, right;
I think you need to chill.
You are 20 years behind from France in terms of technology.
You are doing some great steps, but saying everytime that something you build is better from countries with State-of-the-art systems is just being arrogant.
 
Last edited:

Kansei

Active member
Messages
126
Reactions
94
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Cyprus
And yes of course, again your new missile is superior to Scalp, like i wasn't expecting such an answer.
Ofcourse French/British State of the art Cruise missile is worse than your new untested/first Cruise development.
Your anti ship missiles are ofcourse better than the Exocets too.
Your TF-X jet gonna be an F-22/F-35 killer, right;
I think you need to chill.
You are 20 years behind from France in terms of technology.
You are doing some great steps, but saying everytime that something you build is better from countries with State-of-the-art systems is just being arrogant.
My favourite part when I’m arguing in this forum is usually they not only assume that the new project is going to be finished on time AND be better than the current US and French standards, but they take it as FACT that it will be so much better that they will 100% counter/jam/win against any corresponding western systems.
 

Tornadoss

Contributor
Messages
1,329
Reactions
4 2,533
Nation of residence
Czechia
Nation of origin
Turkey
Again their predecessors and other missiles made by the companies have had great success, so why would they be worse when they all use the same principles with improved technologies? Also I’ve only heard the Turkish missiles being successful against really outdated planes, but if you could cite some other incidents I would be also very happy to read them. I don’t know anything about JSM so I can’t really make an argument against it, but from a quick Google search the range seems to be 550+ KM but again this might be wrong so I don’t know. Also your argument about jerking doesn’t really work since I’m not the one who was jerking , you were. Lastly I don’t disagree that they are a good step and that the future looks bright for Turkish Missiles, all I’m saying is that you can’t really make the argument that the new missile is going to be better than a 50 year old missile, then when someone points out how it doesn’t make sense to compare the specs of a really old missile with a new one when there is a newer one in our arsenal, you reply with ok yeah sure it’s worse than a 20 year old missile but it’s just a step ?
Well, MBDA made good missiles such as HOT and Milan AT missiles but they sucked with Eryx, contract canceled by the Turkish army. Eurocopter made helicopters for years, but their NH-90 has lots of problems and countries try to get rid of them. HDW built submarines decades yet, they got problem with Type-214 submarines which you may closely know. It doesn't mean you have years of experience on something, you would build the best. Turkish smart munitions, artillery systems, Guidance kits were successfully used in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Azerbeijan. Turkish weapon systems go through many tests until getting accepted. If they fail in some requirement rejected and development continues. All weapon systems are built with NATO standards.

Maybe you are not personally jerking of these greek projects but there were many. At least we are developing something. And if it's a really easy thing to develop such a system that would make us embarrassed, go ahead build your own.

We are saying what we have is better than you. The latest Exocet is nothing interesting, I don't say France won't develop better, but this is what you have right now. I am not sure that missiles in your arsenal have superior capabilities to ours.
 

Tornadoss

Contributor
Messages
1,329
Reactions
4 2,533
Nation of residence
Czechia
Nation of origin
Turkey
And yes of course, again your new missile is superior to Scalp, like i wasn't expecting such an answer.
Ofcourse French/British State-of-the art Cruise missile is worse than your new untested/first Cruise development.
Your anti-ship missiles are ofcourse better than the Exocets too.
Your TF-X jet gonna be an F-22/F-35 killer, right;
I think you need to chill.
You are 20 years behind from France in terms of technology.
You are doing some great steps, but saying everytime that something you build is better from countries with State-of-the-art systems is just being arrogant.
What makes Exocet better than Atmaca, and what makes SCALP better than SOM? Range? Sure but you don't have longer-ranged SCALPS.
We are maybe 20 years behind in certain tech but we started and eventually, we will close the gap.
 

Kansei

Active member
Messages
126
Reactions
94
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Cyprus
Well, MBDA made good missiles such as HOT and Milan AT missiles but they sucked with Eryx, contract canceled by the Turkish army. Eurocopter made helicopters for years, but their NH-90 has lots of problems and countries try to get rid of them. HDW built submarines decades yet, they got problem with Type-214 submarines which you may closely know. It doesn't mean you have years of experience on something, you would build the best. Turkish smart munitions, artillery systems, Guidance kits were successfully used in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Azerbeijan. Turkish weapon systems go through many tests until getting accepted. If they fail in some requirement rejected and development continues. All weapon systems are built with NATO standards.

Maybe you are not personally jerking of these greek projects but there were many. At least we are developing something. And if it's a really easy thing to develop such a system that would make us embarrassed, go ahead build your own.

We are saying what we have is better than you. The latest Exocet is nothing interesting, I don't say France won't develop better, but this is what you have right now. I am not sure that missiles in your arsenal have superior capabilities to ours.
“We are saying what we have is better than you. The latest Exocet is nothing interesting”LMAO AGAIN why are you comparing the Exocet? Are you seriously implying that the SCALP EG is worse than yours ?
 

Tornadoss

Contributor
Messages
1,329
Reactions
4 2,533
Nation of residence
Czechia
Nation of origin
Turkey
“We are saying what we have is better than you. The latest Exocet is nothing interesting”LMAO AGAIN why are you comparing the Exocet? Are you seriously implying that the SCALP EG is worse than yours ?
Well, compare Atmaca with Exocet doesn't matter.
Maybe not the ones that France has, might be better than what you have.
 

Kansei

Active member
Messages
126
Reactions
94
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Cyprus
Well, MBDA made good missiles such as HOT and Milan AT missiles but they sucked with Eryx, contract canceled by the Turkish army. Eurocopter made helicopters for years, but their NH-90 has lots of problems and countries try to get rid of them. HDW built submarines decades yet, they got problem with Type-214 submarines which you may closely know. It doesn't mean you have years of experience on something, you would build the best. Turkish smart munitions, artillery systems, Guidance kits were successfully used in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Azerbeijan. Turkish weapon systems go through many tests until getting accepted. If they fail in some requirement rejected and development continues. All weapon systems are built with NATO standards.

Maybe you are not personally jerking of these greek projects but there were many. At least we are developing something. And if it's a really easy thing to develop such a system that would make us embarrassed, go ahead build your own.

We are saying what we have is better than you. The latest Exocet is nothing interesting, I don't say France won't develop better, but this is what you have right now. I am not sure that missiles in your arsenal have superior capabilities to ours.
Never heard of the NH-90 being problematic? HOT and Milan AT are both regarded as extremely successful, and MDBA claims that it was Turkeys fault not theirs and the 214 problem from my knowledge was fixed and the sub now performs amazing .In your above examples, all problems were detected in excercises and evaluations, and were corrected further on before entering combat . The fixes are all done as soon possible and I’ve never heard of any examples that didn’t result in the weapon not working as intended after the fix and the problem not being one that can be fixed and just affected the harmony of the other parts working perfect vs the entire design being a failure. Having experienced doesn’t mean you’re not going to make mistakes, but it means you have vastly more experience with mistakes, how to avoid design-failing flaws and have a higher maturity and trust handling certain areas giving you the benefit of the doubt of usually making less mistakes over any new small country project. Again with missiles it’s even less complicated , you test the range and radar against static and dynamic targets ; Are the results really that worthless compared to the “combat proven” results against some Soviet 60s flying junk ? Never said it’s easy, what I said was that it’s hilarious to not only doubt successful missiles with no evidence but using an immature and inferior product as counter argument
 
Last edited:

Kansei

Active member
Messages
126
Reactions
94
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Cyprus
Well, compare Atmaca with Exocet doesn't matter.
Maybe not the ones that France has, might be better than what you have.
“Well okay yeah it’s unfair to compare a new missile with a 50 year old design missile when you have newer missiles, but let’s compare the 50 year old design missile again with a different new missile (ok not the French version but the one you have ) even though you have the SCALP”
Do you hear yourself talking ? Also please guys just state what you’re arguing against because you are switching discussions, are you claiming it’s better than competitors in general or is it better than competitors in Greece’s arsenal.
 

Tornadoss

Contributor
Messages
1,329
Reactions
4 2,533
Nation of residence
Czechia
Nation of origin
Turkey
Never heard of the NH-90 being problematic? HOT and Milan AT are both regarded as extremely successful, and MDBA claims that it was Turkeys fault not them.The 214 problem from my knowledge was fixed and the sub now performs amazing and. In your above examples, all problems were detected in excercises and evaluations, and were corrected further on before entering combat . The fixes are all done as soon possible and I’ve never heard of any examples that didn’t result in the weapon not working as intended after the fix and the problem not being one that can be fixed and just affected the harmony of the other parts working perfect vs the entire design being a failure. Having experienced doesn’t mean you’re not going to make mistakes, but it means you have vastly more experience with mistakes, how to avoid design-failing flaws and have a higher maturity and trust handling certain areas giving you the benefit of the doubt of usually making less over any new small country project. Again with missiles it’s even less complicated , you test the range and radar against static and dynamic targets ; Are the results really that worthless compared to the “combat proven” results against some Soviet 60s flying junk ? Never said it’s easy, what I said was that it’s hilarious to not only doubt successful missiles with no evidence but using an immature and inferior product as counter argument
https://www.flightglobal.com/helico...s-it-lines-up-black-hawk-order/146797.article
Check this for NH-90. Availability rates are worse than compared to Blackhawks.
Of course, the French would say it's Turkey's fault, it's face saving.
Of course, having a mature design good thing, yet it doesn't mean a new project will be unsuccessful or inferior. The inferiority ıf the Turkish system is on your had, nothing to the with the reality. Again my comparison is what we build and what you have.
 

Akritas

Contributor
Messages
555
Reactions
513
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Greece
You mind sending a source for the upgrade? This the first time I’m hearing about it and it’s a shockingly good surprise
Sure......

 

Tornadoss

Contributor
Messages
1,329
Reactions
4 2,533
Nation of residence
Czechia
Nation of origin
Turkey
“Well okay yeah it’s unfair to compare a new missile with a 50 year old design missile when you have newer missiles, but let’s compare the 50 year old design missile again with a different new missile (ok not the French version but the one you have ) even though you have the SCALP”
Do you hear yourself talking ? Also please guys just state what you’re arguing against because you are switching discussions, are you claiming it’s better than competitors in general or is it better than competitors in Greece’s arsenal.
No, we are on the same topic. There is nothing so revolutionary or different other than the range of SOM and SCALP. However, what you possess is the export version, which doesn't benefit that advantage.
 

Akritas

Contributor
Messages
555
Reactions
513
Nation of residence
Greece
Nation of origin
Greece
Eurocopter made helicopters for years, but their NH-90 has lots of problems and countries try to get rid of them. .
NH-90 manufactured by NHIndustries, a collaborative company owned by Airbus Helicopters, Leonardo and Fokker Aerostructures.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom