Nice mix of styles.
A destroyer that looks like an American, crossed with a Russian, with colors reminiscent of Russian ships (deck), and a stern that resembles that of a French cruiser, the shape of the hull is pretty.
Moreover, the shape of the hull and the decks reminds me of the De Grasse cruiser that I am making and that I would finish when I had a computer again.
Nice ship !
Not Fantesque, but Fantasque.
If I'm not mistaken, these are the fastest destroyers ever built, going at 45 knots, the record is not yet broken !
@MemrWii
Ah, your ban is finished 🙄 ? Good ! So, I will block you. 🤣 (I thought I had already done it)
I can't stand those who insult people without rasion, nor those who are stupid, nor those who insult a plane without reason. You are all that combined, toxicity ☣ in its purest form.
This plane, much better than what you have in your country, the Rafale is (by far) the best fighter of Europe, and one of the best of the world, In dogfight, the RAF Eurofighters got caught 7 to 1 in simulated dogfight against Rafales 🤣🤣, the Eurofighter is not a competitor to the Rafale in the field of air combat, and even less in the field of bombing..
And Dassault is by far the best manufacturer in Europe since the 1950s. And the only national manufacturer of fighter planes in Europe, with Saab.
In short, I like Italy, a lot of people in France like Italy, and a lot of people in Italy like France. Fortunately, people like you represent only 0.0001% of the Italian population.
@ChiChiWerx
It is already available there
This is my version of the Rafale that I modified from that of TonnkatuTonnkatuThePig one.
I also think that when I released my De Grasse cruiser, I would probably do a Rafale, but more detailed than that.
@ChrisPy
Indeed, I take the basic version of the F15, the A, for this comparison, already, I have a lack of information about this final version of the F15, but I wanted to put the performance of the basic versions, the Rafale , he does not change engines, therefore, the performance can be the same from F2 to F4.
Indeed, on stealth, you have right, even if the Rafale is equipped with a new AESA radar, this will be the only advantage of the F35 against the Rafale. But in wartime, the F35 still remains vulnerable to an Aquitaine frigate equipped with ASTER missiles for example, which has a radar operating on S band, the F35 is an aircraft which is rather designed to attack weak military powers, those which have a capacity of navy defense, with ships armed with anti-aircraft missiles can endanger the F35.
But indeed, despite speed, power, or superior dogfighting capabilities, the F35 relies on stealth, which can give it an advantage in long range. I know the F35 is manoeuvrable, and saying the opposite is a legend, but it is less so than the Rafale, as for the F22, I don't know, a Rafale beat it in dogfight, it is heavier and more imposing, but maybe.
Besides, you speak of the speed of the F22, but that of the Rafale is said to exceed Mach2.2, its engines can push even more when it reaches its maximum speed, but officially, it is Mach 1.8. Otherwise, I agree.
France is the first europeean military power and got better equipements than any europeean country. Shekelsberg
France is the 3rd arm seller of the world, and makes exellent weapons, Shekelsberg.
This just shows your ignorance.
@KnightOfRen
Sure ! https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/PoQV0S/Dassault-Rafale-C
But you will need to install 3 mods.
I think I will modify it with more details, and maybe make a navy version.
@SyntheticL
Indeed, but I prefer to put the basic version of the F15, to show its age, its improvements have not changed the plane a lot, on paper and on pure performance, it is the same, even if the capacities are improved. If I add the best version of the F15, I should do the same with the Rafale, taking the F4 version, but that would be too technical.
@F104Deathtrap
I don't even understand what you are saying ... Why compare the Rafale to an old obsolete 50 year old aircraft ? The Rafale is much more agile, and beats it in dogfight easily. In addition, a piper could not have carried out these bombings, he would have been shot down fairly quickly by a stinger, which the terrorists possess. Nor could a piper have attacked a Turkish base by overriding its anti-aircraft system, muppet 🤣.
The F15 accelerates much more slowly than the Rafale and is much less agile and manoeuvrable, it does not even have half of the technologies on board Rafale, and does not have the radar discretion of the Rafale, which has a form of stealth (RCS) , allowing it to be very discreet on KU or X bands. In short, it's like comparing a Mig25 with a Su57, you understand ?
A Rafale costs a price for its performance and quality, and is far better than any American aircraft available for sale. Logical that it is more expensive than an outdated 50-year-old plane !! The Rafale beat in dogfight its so-called competitor Eurofighter with the score of 7 to 1, and the F22 with the score of 2 to 0. With such scores, he deserves his prize. But to put an end to this futile and incongruous discusion in this phorum, I will have to regret you block, sorry.
@F104Deathtrap
I have just told you what the Rafales have done, it is an aircraft as good for deep bombing as it is for air combat, it performs both better than a fighter in air combat or better than a bomber in bombardment. They have proven themselves in operation and meet all the criteria, they are good, and are useful in combat, and not expensive for the quality of the aircraft, it is is an airplane manufactured by hand, and not on assembly lines, the assembly is done with care, with state-of-the-art equipment, the quality manufacture has a cost, but it is reliable and meets all expectations, and is not expensive compared to competitors, more expensive, less efficient, and less well made.
The F-104 was beautiful, but it cost the lives of dozens of pilots, the Mirage III was much better, as fast, more manoeuvrable, more multirole, as beautiful, or even more. Do not forget that Mirage III are still in service in some countries today, in Pakistan for example.
The Rafale cannot be compared to the F104, but rather to the superb Mirage III, which was an excellent aircraft.
@F104Deathtrap
This is good, but who cares, what matters is not the fighter board, but the capabilities, for the moment, the Rafale has not been used against enemy planes, he is not 50 years old, him, but we don't care, and besides, why come and talk badly about planes in a section where there are just screenshots of ships ? An anti-Rafale complex, or a complex encouraging you to enhance your old F15 ?
The Rafales managed to carry out all kinds of ground operations without being hit, they destroyed a Turkish base without being spotted and the Turks did not even know what had attacked them in the moment, they carried out operations against ISIS and were the most efficient planes against them, they dominated the skies of Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, in short, they carried out operations against countries and against ISIS without the slightest loss, it is the best plane multirole fighter in the world, and what's more, capable of winning against the best American fighter plane in dogfight, France and foreign customers are very satisfied.
The thing is, the Rafale is so better than the F35, or any other American plane of the moment, more agile and more maneuverable than the F22 or an old F15, so much better on-board aircraft than the F18, it put a dogfight beating on your best fighter plane, it's a fact, it's proven, it's on video, it annoys, but at least that calms the American "anti-Rafale" propaganda, to better sell their F35 shit, but it failed, Greece, Egypt, Croatia and India are receiving their Rafales.
Rafale > F15 > F22 > F16 > F18 > F35
@brians1209
Okay ! Yes, that's for sure, it's big caliber, not a "small" 7.7 or 7.92mm machine gun.
Indeed, that should shot down quite quickly a WWI plane.
@F104Deathtrap ??
Try a dogfight Rafale VS F15 , and come again write here lol 😏 .
AH, and do you remember the fight between the F22 and the Rafale, the video seen from the HUD of the Rafale, it seems to me that it is very badly ended for the F22 totally mastered by the (good) pilot of the Rafale !
it was the same day the Rafales put the Eurofighters 7 to 1, in a 4v4 fight.
"It was replaced by the Panavia Tornado and the Eurofighter Typhoon in the RAF and the Dassault Rafale in the French Air Force."
I quibble, but if you mention the (old) tornado in RAF, also mention for the FAF the Mirages 2000B, C and D which can bombard. (unless it is an "oversight" of wikipedia, but in short, who cares.) Otherwise, it's a nice plane
If we had good generals who command our army which was better in 39, and that De Gaulle had been entrusted with the command of the army, (he questioned the strategy, and said things that were true, in particular on tanks) we could have taken advantage of this kind of vehicle, but better designed, I think more of this kind of vehicle, with better suspensions, and with two crewmen like an Ft-17, an armored division with B1 (the Germans had a hard time beating a B1), accompanied by lighter tanks such as the S35, led by a good strategy could have made sure to beat the Germans, and instead of using the stupid defensive technic that has been bypassed and surrounded, also attacking, and taking advantage of B1's superiority.
I think a Panhard 178 machine gun had much more potential than this concept, can be better armored, but not very mobile, and in the event of a hit on the crew member, the tank can do nothing. Too bad the G1 tank was not completed, it would have been as mobile as the Panzer, but more powerful, the G1, if it had been built, would have been the equivalent of the Russian T34.
Too bad really that bad generals, and a stupid pacifist government ordered us, we had excellent tank models, and very good concepts, some of which, very interesting, never saw the light of day (FCM F4,
AMX TRACTEUR C/B, ARL 40, AMX 40, Sau 40, FCM F1, ARL CHAR DE FORTERESSE ...), with senior officers worthy of the name, Hitler's name would not have remained in history.
Last time I awnser to you today, and fast, I'm tired.
You say you respond with facts, such as "France has the best military," and "Napoleon was the best general". These are not facts. Those are opinions. Also, you just said link without actually sending a link.
France is the country that has won the most battles in the world, and Napoleon is by far the general having won the most battles.
I have never once insulted France, yet you say I have.
I had you, when you said that France was not exceptional, and that I had no reason to be proud of it (insulting), it was your first Walvis account that said that, therefore, I have the proof that you and him are only one, you take again his arguments in addition, and you thought that you had said that with your secondary account, trapped !
Also, you said to me "go to sleep", despite the fact that it is day for me. Learn time zones.
Well, I don't even know from where you from, tell me your country, lets laugh a little !
The Panzer was a medium tank and the B1 was a heavy tank, of course it has more armor.
Yes, that's what I'm saying, needless to say that the B1 is a heavy tank, and that the Panzer was a medium, I know that, Germany did not have heavy tanks in '39, the B1 was going at 25km / h, the Panzer at around 40, and at 15 off-road, the B1 could still move, but there was a deplorable organization, and bad generals, the tanks were not in cause.
"Without France, the colonized countries would only be backward countries without infrastructure... if you come from the USA, learn that your country is independent thanks to France" So? France was occupied by Nazi Germany and had to be liberated by the rest of the allies. your point is moot.
I don't understand what you mean, but hey ... Arab countries did not have infrastructure like Western countries, without France, they would never have had that, one Western country invading another one. 'brings nothing, because they both have comparable infrastructures, thinks two seconds 🤭 !! And if USA liberated France, even if Pearl Harbour started the war in USA, if France didn't free USA before, USA would not have free France after...
Quantity of nukes is not a good measurement of power
I agree, the launchers of weapons must be good, fast, and can do as much damage as possible, the top, M51 are perfect, but to measure the power of a country, it is also necessary that the Next, the navy, the air and the space, and the land, in all these areas, France is number one in Europe.
Funny observation, you created your account 3 months ago, and immediately after you published this flag, I'm just saying that as an observation, I quote you : "after 2 months, it was taken down automatically due to a surge of reports. This was just a few hours after you started commenting", false, STOP LIE, just one minut, plaese, try, I see this flag 1 or 2 days or some hours, idk, after you published it,
here is the comment :
"French Air Force Flag 3 months ago,
But what a moron ! Idiotic, uneducated, insulting guys get into a challenge, and post shit like that, it's pitiful, you are an harmful, where are you from ? If you come from the USA, learn that your country is independent thanks to France, if you are English, learn that the military power of France today is very very much greater in everything than that of the English, in addition, France retains its know-how in armaments manufacturing, it's like comparing French food to horrible English food, but tell me what your country is, let's laugh a bit.
Those who have upvote no longer receive an upvote from me anyway."
To verify, go see in my comments
But it's getting late, it's time to sleep, you are too much on Simple Planes, I noticed that when I write a message, you answer it in the minute, go go to sleep, it's time
A litle last (maybe the last) :
Seriously ?? Do you know the History ? Did you know that France has a better army ? His B1 tanks were twice as armored (32mm for the B1, 14.5mm for the Panzer II), B1 tanks also had better guns firing further... some B1 display a ratio of 14 destroyed panzers ! There is no doubt that if France had been managed by better generals, it would have won ! If De Gaulle had been put at the head of the armies in 1939, the outcome of the war would have been quite different.
Our aviation was also better, and more numerous. You should know that the Germans adopted the Blitzkrieg strategy, while the French army was managed by incompetent generals, the Maginot line which was of no use was surrounded, and the strategy of the other armies was also disastrous. France was also an "industrial giant" at the time. What the Germans had more was their population, very high, even higher than present-day Germany,
And why not... ANOTHER :
The fact that you apparently do not know the Second World War, and that you do not know French tanks does not authorize you to speak in this way, and to invoke the fact that I mention in my comment of "nationalism", is completely wrong, I am basing myself on real facts, and I do not understand your absurd attack.
-"France is not amazing stop being so proud of it"
We can call it insute, right ? Where are you from, let's laugh a little ? We have an incredible History, it is in terms of military victories far ahead of this little island called England, and insulting other countries' countries can make you think your comment can be deleted, who do you think you are saying this for? Do you know the history of our country? I do not think so. So stop your pathetic ad-ignoratum, and open a history book without messing around.
Have we committed scandals ? Which ones please ?
Without France, the colonized countries would only be backward countries without infrastructure, without hospitals as advanced, without anything, remote countries.
-"France is not the best country in the world"
The best country in the world does not exist, it is in everyone's heart depending on its origin, France on the other hand has one of the richest history in the world, and is a beautiful country, but criticizing you can be something that exceeds you, I think out of jealousy, if you tell me where you come from, I would find something to hurt you, and speak badly of your country.
Has France committed genocides like this country Turkey did, with the Armenian genocide, or like Nazi Germany ?
No matter what, I'm not fucking extremist, I'm just telling the truth, but in real, what are you trying to say ?
Anyway, I won't have more time to converse with you today, but a serious advice : do not insult a country without knowing it, and don't insult any country any course here, and do not insult those who are content to tell real facts, it discredits your words, anyone can verify what I'm saying.
Another ? Yes :
Yeah, except that the french army was better (navy, air froce, land), with better equipment, and numerically better, but not the leaders of our army, I advise you to go cultivate yourselves on the subject if that interests you, but if we had a good staff at the time, we would have largely won, we had everything better than the Germans, they used the strategy, the blitzkrieg, and won thanks to their strategy.
At the time, France was considered as the 1st world military power !
The Luftwaffe implemented essentially six types of aircraft (a single single-seat fighter, another twin-engine fighter, three medium bombers and a ground attack aircraft) where the French Air Force put at least 18 in line. (six different types of fighters including one twin-engine, seven bombers, two assault aircraft, three types of reconnaissance aircraft), three times more.
Ground army level, better tanks, B1 tanks were twice as armored (32mm for the B1, 14.5mm for the Panzer II), B1 tanks also had better guns firing further... some B1 display a ratio of 14 destroyed panzers ! (copied from my 1st comment), more equipment, more soldiers ...
Navy level, more ships, more powerful ships, it is the 4th navy in the world, and well ahead of the Kriegsmarine. And to break a myth, I also point out that the Richelieu, launched to respond to the Bismarck was better armored than Bismarck, twice as well armed frontally, the Richelieu had 2 turrets of 4 380mm guns at the front, against only two turrets of two 380mm guns for Bismarck, the total firepower of the Bismarck's weapons was concentrated just in the front part of the Richelieu, so instead of showing off, the allies should rather have sent the Richelieu to sink Bismarck instead of the old Hood !
All that to say that with a good general staff adopting a strategy of real modern movement warfare, we could have crushed the German army, if we had put De Gaulle at the head of the general staff, it would have been something else, Moreover, De Gaulle was trying to make himself heard at the time, but no one listened to him, one should have, his strategy would have been the right one.
It's funny to make jokes about us .... But don't forget that we are the country in the world that has won the most wars and battles in the world, (1115 battles won), and don't forget Napoléon.
But that sort of thing will obviously never happen again, given that we have the 3rd nuclear arsenal in the world, the leading military power in Europe, first Air
Real facts no ? (copy paste one of my comments in your cursed post)
Well, let's be OBJECTIVE !!!
Which country has won the most military victories in the world ?
objective answer: France.
LINK
Who had the best army and the best equipped army between Germany and France in 1939 ?
-objective answer: France
LINK
Who has the best army in Europe today (and the 1st Europe's military power) ?
-objective answer: France
LINK
Who is the best general of all time and the one who has won the most battles ?
-objective answer: Napoléon.
LINK
Who owns the 3rd nuclear arsenal in the world ?
-objective answer: France
LINK
What is not OBJECTIVE in what I am saying ? On the contrary, my text is an example of objectivity, I am giving you VALID and PROVEN ARGUMENTS, not as the pathetic "mêmes" and at the level of those who say it concerning France, the same idiots full of jealousy and absurdities.
Once again, what I'm saying is true, have fun checking it out, it will teach you a few things, the B1 tank was 2x better armored than the German Panzers in 1939, more efficient, everyone knows that, there is something non-objective in there? Answer, no ! Seek, but you won't find, all I'm saying is the facts.
@TFK001
When I tell you that I did not use alt to report (even if I did it with my main), it is because I did not do it, you already put that in your small head, unlike some, I am not lying myself, I tell you, it Is that true, did you get that? Your joke was as bad as your sense of humor, so I don't think I'm the only one who didn't like your stupid and equal to you pseudo humor even, I believe that you have indeed another account, you know very well which one, you are unfriendly, you have a pitiful humor, and besides, you are probably a liar, I have no proof that you have a alt, but neither do I have proof that you don't have any, like me, except that you, in view of your pathetic humor, and your unfriendly person, who can't think of anything else to do with his little life than going to post an insulting little flag, I would also have a tendency to believe that like being a fool, you are a liar, who in addition tries to turn the situation around, I have commited cried the argument on your lousy post stating real facts, my comments are still in my comment list, anyone can see that, it was you who looked for trouble, with your comments even more insulting than your filthy flag, but it is true that France had a white flag, the flag of the kingdom of France, until 1830, but Napoleon replaced it with the tricolor of today, before being replaced again by white until 1830, white being the royal color, the white flag was also the flag of the kingdom of France. Even then, it was to show respect for the French army that its enemies brandished it on the battlefield.
It is said that white was originally chosen for its reference to the virginity of Mary, under whose protection Louis XIII had decided to place the kingdom of France. He also thought it would have been Jeanne d'Arc flag. Above all, the English at war with the kingdom of France had chosen red for their own flag. in your stupidity, you said something true without realizing it.
Nice !
+1Nice sub ! It's looks a bit like a small Suffren.
+1Very nice Dauphin.
+1Tomcat.
+1Nice mix of styles.
+1A destroyer that looks like an American, crossed with a Russian, with colors reminiscent of Russian ships (deck), and a stern that resembles that of a French cruiser, the shape of the hull is pretty.
Moreover, the shape of the hull and the decks reminds me of the De Grasse cruiser that I am making and that I would finish when I had a computer again.
Very nice plane !
+1I like how the cockade is positioned.
Nice ship !
+1Not Fantesque, but Fantasque.
If I'm not mistaken, these are the fastest destroyers ever built, going at 45 knots, the record is not yet broken !
Ferrari red, in 1920 ?
+1It was rather Alfa Roméo red, rosso corsa is the racing color of Italy, otherwise, nice car !
I like the Super-Etendard.
+1Nice !!
+1@MemrWii
+1Ah, your ban is finished 🙄 ? Good ! So, I will block you. 🤣 (I thought I had already done it)
I can't stand those who insult people without rasion, nor those who are stupid, nor those who insult a plane without reason. You are all that combined, toxicity ☣ in its purest form.
This plane, much better than what you have in your country, the Rafale is (by far) the best fighter of Europe, and one of the best of the world, In dogfight, the RAF Eurofighters got caught 7 to 1 in simulated dogfight against Rafales 🤣🤣, the Eurofighter is not a competitor to the Rafale in the field of air combat, and even less in the field of bombing..
And Dassault is by far the best manufacturer in Europe since the 1950s. And the only national manufacturer of fighter planes in Europe, with Saab.
In short, I like Italy, a lot of people in France like Italy, and a lot of people in Italy like France. Fortunately, people like you represent only 0.0001% of the Italian population.
Very nice !
+1Nice
+1A small thank you to France would also be welcome !
+1Anyway, happy independence day.
Well, nice ship !
+1Gaston ? Gaston Lagaffe ? Anyway, nice missiles !
+1@ChiChiWerx
+1It is already available there
This is my version of the Rafale that I modified from that of TonnkatuTonnkatuThePig one.
I also think that when I released my De Grasse cruiser, I would probably do a Rafale, but more detailed than that.
Very nice plane, and lots of antennae on the nose !
+1Don't continue a Rafale drama, please. But your Cyclone is a nice plane.
+1@Mostly
+1Nice, and the F35 ?
@ChrisPy
+1Indeed, I take the basic version of the F15, the A, for this comparison, already, I have a lack of information about this final version of the F15, but I wanted to put the performance of the basic versions, the Rafale , he does not change engines, therefore, the performance can be the same from F2 to F4.
Indeed, on stealth, you have right, even if the Rafale is equipped with a new AESA radar, this will be the only advantage of the F35 against the Rafale. But in wartime, the F35 still remains vulnerable to an Aquitaine frigate equipped with ASTER missiles for example, which has a radar operating on S band, the F35 is an aircraft which is rather designed to attack weak military powers, those which have a capacity of navy defense, with ships armed with anti-aircraft missiles can endanger the F35.
But indeed, despite speed, power, or superior dogfighting capabilities, the F35 relies on stealth, which can give it an advantage in long range. I know the F35 is manoeuvrable, and saying the opposite is a legend, but it is less so than the Rafale, as for the F22, I don't know, a Rafale beat it in dogfight, it is heavier and more imposing, but maybe.
Besides, you speak of the speed of the F22, but that of the Rafale is said to exceed Mach2.2, its engines can push even more when it reaches its maximum speed, but officially, it is Mach 1.8. Otherwise, I agree.
France is the first europeean military power and got better equipements than any europeean country. Shekelsberg
+1France is the 3rd arm seller of the world, and makes exellent weapons, Shekelsberg.
This just shows your ignorance.
@KnightOfRen
+1Sure ! https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/PoQV0S/Dassault-Rafale-C
But you will need to install 3 mods.
I think I will modify it with more details, and maybe make a navy version.
When we come to treat one of "sub-man", we do not come to cry afterwards, the stupidity is done.
+1@SyntheticL
+1Indeed, but I prefer to put the basic version of the F15, to show its age, its improvements have not changed the plane a lot, on paper and on pure performance, it is the same, even if the capacities are improved. If I add the best version of the F15, I should do the same with the Rafale, taking the F4 version, but that would be too technical.
@F104Deathtrap
+1@SyntheticL
+1I know, in my future De Grasse curiser, I will make sure to have less drag points, I was remarked about it on the french sp discord serv.
@SyntheticL Yes, it's perfect !
+1@F104Deathtrap
+1I don't even understand what you are saying ... Why compare the Rafale to an old obsolete 50 year old aircraft ? The Rafale is much more agile, and beats it in dogfight easily. In addition, a piper could not have carried out these bombings, he would have been shot down fairly quickly by a stinger, which the terrorists possess. Nor could a piper have attacked a Turkish base by overriding its anti-aircraft system, muppet 🤣.
The F15 accelerates much more slowly than the Rafale and is much less agile and manoeuvrable, it does not even have half of the technologies on board Rafale, and does not have the radar discretion of the Rafale, which has a form of stealth (RCS) , allowing it to be very discreet on KU or X bands. In short, it's like comparing a Mig25 with a Su57, you understand ?
A Rafale costs a price for its performance and quality, and is far better than any American aircraft available for sale. Logical that it is more expensive than an outdated 50-year-old plane !! The Rafale beat in dogfight its so-called competitor Eurofighter with the score of 7 to 1, and the F22 with the score of 2 to 0. With such scores, he deserves his prize. But to put an end to this futile and incongruous discusion in this phorum, I will have to regret you block, sorry.
@F104Deathtrap
+1I have just told you what the Rafales have done, it is an aircraft as good for deep bombing as it is for air combat, it performs both better than a fighter in air combat or better than a bomber in bombardment. They have proven themselves in operation and meet all the criteria, they are good, and are useful in combat, and not expensive for the quality of the aircraft, it is is an airplane manufactured by hand, and not on assembly lines, the assembly is done with care, with state-of-the-art equipment, the quality manufacture has a cost, but it is reliable and meets all expectations, and is not expensive compared to competitors, more expensive, less efficient, and less well made.
The F-104 was beautiful, but it cost the lives of dozens of pilots, the Mirage III was much better, as fast, more manoeuvrable, more multirole, as beautiful, or even more. Do not forget that Mirage III are still in service in some countries today, in Pakistan for example.
The Rafale cannot be compared to the F104, but rather to the superb Mirage III, which was an excellent aircraft.
@F104Deathtrap
+1This is good, but who cares, what matters is not the fighter board, but the capabilities, for the moment, the Rafale has not been used against enemy planes, he is not 50 years old, him, but we don't care, and besides, why come and talk badly about planes in a section where there are just screenshots of ships ? An anti-Rafale complex, or a complex encouraging you to enhance your old F15 ?
The Rafales managed to carry out all kinds of ground operations without being hit, they destroyed a Turkish base without being spotted and the Turks did not even know what had attacked them in the moment, they carried out operations against ISIS and were the most efficient planes against them, they dominated the skies of Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, in short, they carried out operations against countries and against ISIS without the slightest loss, it is the best plane multirole fighter in the world, and what's more, capable of winning against the best American fighter plane in dogfight, France and foreign customers are very satisfied.
The thing is, the Rafale is so better than the F35, or any other American plane of the moment, more agile and more maneuverable than the F22 or an old F15, so much better on-board aircraft than the F18, it put a dogfight beating on your best fighter plane, it's a fact, it's proven, it's on video, it annoys, but at least that calms the American "anti-Rafale" propaganda, to better sell their F35 shit, but it failed, Greece, Egypt, Croatia and India are receiving their Rafales.
Rafale > F15 > F22 > F16 > F18 > F35
@brians1209
+1Okay ! Yes, that's for sure, it's big caliber, not a "small" 7.7 or 7.92mm machine gun.
Indeed, that should shot down quite quickly a WWI plane.
Nice !
+1But the machine gun seems a bit oversized to me.
@F104Deathtrap ??
Try a dogfight Rafale VS F15 , and come again write here lol 😏 .
AH, and do you remember the fight between the F22 and the Rafale, the video seen from the HUD of the Rafale, it seems to me that it is very badly ended for the F22 totally mastered by the (good) pilot of the Rafale !
it was the same day the Rafales put the Eurofighters 7 to 1, in a 4v4 fight.
Rafale : 9
Eurofighters and F22 : 1
LOL
+1Goliath, like the spider
+1@SyntheticL The E was Embraer, so I will say Fairchild.
+1Dassault
+1"It was replaced by the Panavia Tornado and the Eurofighter Typhoon in the RAF and the Dassault Rafale in the French Air Force."
+1I quibble, but if you mention the (old) tornado in RAF, also mention for the FAF the Mirages 2000B, C and D which can bombard. (unless it is an "oversight" of wikipedia, but in short, who cares.)
Otherwise, it's a nice plane
Me, I prefer the artillery of Napoleon I.
+1Morane-Saulnier , not "Moran-Saulnier" !!
+1Joyeux anniversaire.
+1Le mien était il y'a 11 jours, ce qui me fait 18ans.. Tu vas à l'armée ? Moi ce sera la marine.
If we had good generals who command our army which was better in 39, and that De Gaulle had been entrusted with the command of the army, (he questioned the strategy, and said things that were true, in particular on tanks) we could have taken advantage of this kind of vehicle, but better designed, I think more of this kind of vehicle, with better suspensions, and with two crewmen like an Ft-17, an armored division with B1 (the Germans had a hard time beating a B1), accompanied by lighter tanks such as the S35, led by a good strategy could have made sure to beat the Germans, and instead of using the stupid defensive technic that has been bypassed and surrounded, also attacking, and taking advantage of B1's superiority.
+1I think a Panhard 178 machine gun had much more potential than this concept, can be better armored, but not very mobile, and in the event of a hit on the crew member, the tank can do nothing. Too bad the G1 tank was not completed, it would have been as mobile as the Panzer, but more powerful, the G1, if it had been built, would have been the equivalent of the Russian T34.
Too bad really that bad generals, and a stupid pacifist government ordered us, we had excellent tank models, and very good concepts, some of which, very interesting, never saw the light of day (FCM F4,
AMX TRACTEUR C/B, ARL 40, AMX 40, Sau 40, FCM F1, ARL CHAR DE FORTERESSE ...), with senior officers worthy of the name, Hitler's name would not have remained in history.
Last time I awnser to you today, and fast, I'm tired.
You say you respond with facts, such as "France has the best military," and "Napoleon was the best general". These are not facts. Those are opinions. Also, you just said link without actually sending a link.
France is the country that has won the most battles in the world, and Napoleon is by far the general having won the most battles.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=most+powerful+militaries+of+all+time&&view=detail&mid=E093495F13A7E4A8AE24E093495F13A7E4A8AE24&&FORM=VRDGAR
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=best+generals+of+all+time&&view=detail&mid=68DB1E91801DEE46C99668DB1E91801DEE46C996&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dbest%2Bgenerals%2Bof%2Ball%2Btime%26FORM%3DHDRSC3
I have never once insulted France, yet you say I have.
I had you, when you said that France was not exceptional, and that I had no reason to be proud of it (insulting), it was your first Walvis account that said that, therefore, I have the proof that you and him are only one, you take again his arguments in addition, and you thought that you had said that with your secondary account, trapped !
Also, you said to me "go to sleep", despite the fact that it is day for me. Learn time zones.
Well, I don't even know from where you from, tell me your country, lets laugh a little !
The Panzer was a medium tank and the B1 was a heavy tank, of course it has more armor.
Yes, that's what I'm saying, needless to say that the B1 is a heavy tank, and that the Panzer was a medium, I know that, Germany did not have heavy tanks in '39, the B1 was going at 25km / h, the Panzer at around 40, and at 15 off-road, the B1 could still move, but there was a deplorable organization, and bad generals, the tanks were not in cause.
"Without France, the colonized countries would only be backward countries without infrastructure... if you come from the USA, learn that your country is independent thanks to France" So? France was occupied by Nazi Germany and had to be liberated by the rest of the allies. your point is moot.
I don't understand what you mean, but hey ... Arab countries did not have infrastructure like Western countries, without France, they would never have had that, one Western country invading another one. 'brings nothing, because they both have comparable infrastructures, thinks two seconds 🤭 !! And if USA liberated France, even if Pearl Harbour started the war in USA, if France didn't free USA before, USA would not have free France after...
Quantity of nukes is not a good measurement of power
I agree, the launchers of weapons must be good, fast, and can do as much damage as possible, the top, M51 are perfect, but to measure the power of a country, it is also necessary that the Next, the navy, the air and the space, and the land, in all these areas, France is number one in Europe.
With that, I'll go to sleep...
+1Funny observation, you created your account 3 months ago, and immediately after you published this flag, I'm just saying that as an observation, I quote you : "after 2 months, it was taken down automatically due to a surge of reports. This was just a few hours after you started commenting", false, STOP LIE, just one minut, plaese, try, I see this flag 1 or 2 days or some hours, idk, after you published it,
here is the comment :
"French Air Force Flag 3 months ago,
But what a moron ! Idiotic, uneducated, insulting guys get into a challenge, and post shit like that, it's pitiful, you are an harmful, where are you from ? If you come from the USA, learn that your country is independent thanks to France, if you are English, learn that the military power of France today is very very much greater in everything than that of the English, in addition, France retains its know-how in armaments manufacturing, it's like comparing French food to horrible English food, but tell me what your country is, let's laugh a bit.
Those who have upvote no longer receive an upvote from me anyway."
To verify, go see in my comments
+1But it's getting late, it's time to sleep, you are too much on Simple Planes, I noticed that when I write a message, you answer it in the minute, go go to sleep, it's time
A litle last (maybe the last) :
+1Seriously ?? Do you know the History ? Did you know that France has a better army ? His B1 tanks were twice as armored (32mm for the B1, 14.5mm for the Panzer II), B1 tanks also had better guns firing further... some B1 display a ratio of 14 destroyed panzers ! There is no doubt that if France had been managed by better generals, it would have won ! If De Gaulle had been put at the head of the armies in 1939, the outcome of the war would have been quite different.
Our aviation was also better, and more numerous. You should know that the Germans adopted the Blitzkrieg strategy, while the French army was managed by incompetent generals, the Maginot line which was of no use was surrounded, and the strategy of the other armies was also disastrous. France was also an "industrial giant" at the time. What the Germans had more was their population, very high, even higher than present-day Germany,
And why not... ANOTHER :
+1The fact that you apparently do not know the Second World War, and that you do not know French tanks does not authorize you to speak in this way, and to invoke the fact that I mention in my comment of "nationalism", is completely wrong, I am basing myself on real facts, and I do not understand your absurd attack.
-"France is not amazing stop being so proud of it"
We can call it insute, right ? Where are you from, let's laugh a little ? We have an incredible History, it is in terms of military victories far ahead of this little island called England, and insulting other countries' countries can make you think your comment can be deleted, who do you think you are saying this for? Do you know the history of our country? I do not think so. So stop your pathetic ad-ignoratum, and open a history book without messing around.
Have we committed scandals ? Which ones please ?
Without France, the colonized countries would only be backward countries without infrastructure, without hospitals as advanced, without anything, remote countries.
-"France is not the best country in the world"
The best country in the world does not exist, it is in everyone's heart depending on its origin, France on the other hand has one of the richest history in the world, and is a beautiful country, but criticizing you can be something that exceeds you, I think out of jealousy, if you tell me where you come from, I would find something to hurt you, and speak badly of your country.
Has France committed genocides like this country Turkey did, with the Armenian genocide, or like Nazi Germany ?
No matter what, I'm not fucking extremist, I'm just telling the truth, but in real, what are you trying to say ?
Anyway, I won't have more time to converse with you today, but a serious advice : do not insult a country without knowing it, and don't insult any country any course here, and do not insult those who are content to tell real facts, it discredits your words, anyone can verify what I'm saying.
Another ? Yes :
+1Yeah, except that the french army was better (navy, air froce, land), with better equipment, and numerically better, but not the leaders of our army, I advise you to go cultivate yourselves on the subject if that interests you, but if we had a good staff at the time, we would have largely won, we had everything better than the Germans, they used the strategy, the blitzkrieg, and won thanks to their strategy.
At the time, France was considered as the 1st world military power !
The Luftwaffe implemented essentially six types of aircraft (a single single-seat fighter, another twin-engine fighter, three medium bombers and a ground attack aircraft) where the French Air Force put at least 18 in line. (six different types of fighters including one twin-engine, seven bombers, two assault aircraft, three types of reconnaissance aircraft), three times more.
Ground army level, better tanks, B1 tanks were twice as armored (32mm for the B1, 14.5mm for the Panzer II), B1 tanks also had better guns firing further... some B1 display a ratio of 14 destroyed panzers ! (copied from my 1st comment), more equipment, more soldiers ...
Navy level, more ships, more powerful ships, it is the 4th navy in the world, and well ahead of the Kriegsmarine. And to break a myth, I also point out that the Richelieu, launched to respond to the Bismarck was better armored than Bismarck, twice as well armed frontally, the Richelieu had 2 turrets of 4 380mm guns at the front, against only two turrets of two 380mm guns for Bismarck, the total firepower of the Bismarck's weapons was concentrated just in the front part of the Richelieu, so instead of showing off, the allies should rather have sent the Richelieu to sink Bismarck instead of the old Hood !
All that to say that with a good general staff adopting a strategy of real modern movement warfare, we could have crushed the German army, if we had put De Gaulle at the head of the general staff, it would have been something else, Moreover, De Gaulle was trying to make himself heard at the time, but no one listened to him, one should have, his strategy would have been the right one.
It's funny to make jokes about us .... But don't forget that we are the country in the world that has won the most wars and battles in the world, (1115 battles won), and don't forget Napoléon.
But that sort of thing will obviously never happen again, given that we have the 3rd nuclear arsenal in the world, the leading military power in Europe, first Air
Real facts no ? (copy paste one of my comments in your cursed post)
Well, let's be OBJECTIVE !!!
objective answer: France.
LINK
Who had the best army and the best equipped army between Germany and France in 1939 ?
-objective answer: France
LINK
Who has the best army in Europe today (and the 1st Europe's military power) ?
-objective answer: France
LINK
Who is the best general of all time and the one who has won the most battles ?
-objective answer: Napoléon.
LINK
Who owns the 3rd nuclear arsenal in the world ?
-objective answer: France
LINK
What is not OBJECTIVE in what I am saying ? On the contrary, my text is an example of objectivity, I am giving you VALID and PROVEN ARGUMENTS, not as the pathetic "mêmes" and at the level of those who say it concerning France, the same idiots full of jealousy and absurdities.
Once again, what I'm saying is true, have fun checking it out, it will teach you a few things, the B1 tank was 2x better armored than the German Panzers in 1939, more efficient, everyone knows that, there is something non-objective in there? Answer, no ! Seek, but you won't find, all I'm saying is the facts.
+1@TFK001
+1When I tell you that I did not use alt to report (even if I did it with my main), it is because I did not do it, you already put that in your small head, unlike some, I am not lying myself, I tell you, it Is that true, did you get that? Your joke was as bad as your sense of humor, so I don't think I'm the only one who didn't like your stupid and equal to you pseudo humor even, I believe that you have indeed another account, you know very well which one, you are unfriendly, you have a pitiful humor, and besides, you are probably a liar, I have no proof that you have a alt, but neither do I have proof that you don't have any, like me, except that you, in view of your pathetic humor, and your unfriendly person, who can't think of anything else to do with his little life than going to post an insulting little flag, I would also have a tendency to believe that like being a fool, you are a liar, who in addition tries to turn the situation around, I have commited cried the argument on your lousy post stating real facts, my comments are still in my comment list, anyone can see that, it was you who looked for trouble, with your comments even more insulting than your filthy flag, but it is true that France had a white flag, the flag of the kingdom of France, until 1830, but Napoleon replaced it with the tricolor of today, before being replaced again by white until 1830, white being the royal color, the white flag was also the flag of the kingdom of France. Even then, it was to show respect for the French army that its enemies brandished it on the battlefield.
It is said that white was originally chosen for its reference to the virginity of Mary, under whose protection Louis XIII had decided to place the kingdom of France. He also thought it would have been Jeanne d'Arc flag. Above all, the English at war with the kingdom of France had chosen red for their own flag. in your stupidity, you said something true without realizing it.
@TFK001 Your stupid insult with your flag is not fun, I'v not reported with an alt, but don't talk about alt accounts you ! lol
+1