>>575398
>what do you think will happen (Especially to Dassault)?
Plane will be produced, eventually… decade or two behind schedule and it wont meet requirements until at least decade after introduction. Dassault will probably end up merging with Airbus. They cannot afford to develop next generation fighter alone, so the company is more or less dead in water once Rafale production ends.
>>575400
>It's funny because Tornado was the F-35 before it was cool. It came in several variants each shoved into an airframe too small to hold it, didn't meet any of the original mission requirements, it was inferior to aircraft it was replacing, it spent the first decade in service with concrete ballast in the nose cone because it had no radar…
Kill yourself. Pierre Sprey-tier bullshit here. Idea that Tornado is inferior to any of aircraft it replaced is hilarious. It replaced some good planes like Blackburn Buccaneer and F-4 Phantom II. Some were mediocre like Jaguar and some were trash like F-104. All of the planes that were replaced with Tornado were far less capable planes. That radar bullshit only applies to British interceptor version and didn't last more than couple years.
>>575422
>Is getting several competing nations and companies to work together not a surefire way to success?
No. It is surefire way to create bureaucratic nightmare. Program needs to go through multiple national and corporate bureaucracies for everything.
>>575432
>I think the worse is the NH-90 program
I don't think there can be worse multinational programs than NH-90 and Eurocopter Tiger. Supply chain of both programs is a bad joke and manufacturers have lied a lot to clients about schedule and actual capabilities. The supply chain issues have been completely insane. For example with NH-90 readiness in Finland and Australia collapsed when French, Germans and Italians deployed like half dozen helicopters each. Availability rates were around 20% at worst, cause was manufacturers inability to deliver spare parts that had been ordered years in advance. Australians are replacing their Tigers with Apaches only after 15 years of helicopters being in service.
>Germany UK Italy created a blob monster for the Eurofighter (they actually agreed on the requirement beforehand "we need an interceptor" which in itself took years). The various companies ended with cost overrun everywhere, then they decided they could make them "multirole" but they had to change the airframe
Brief French involvement with Eurofighter is probably most perfect example one nation causing a mess in joint multinational program. Main reason for getting French involved into it was US pressure on all parties. First French demanded new requirements for plane and way different priorities, first build an carrier version as F-8's and Super Etendard's were most urgent thing requiring replacement in French inventory. Also French demanded higher portion of production than their own orders justified and use of French engine. To an extent Rafale is the original Eurofighter. UK, Germans and Italy got out of the program and started new one. Spain as well dropped out couple years later and joined the new program.
Eurofighter Typhoon was multirole from the start, it was just priority get air to air capabilities integrated first. Real issue and cause of delays for Eurofighter were budget cuts after the end of cold war, that delayed integration air to ground armament. This is where political pressure comes into play, to pretend that delays in schedule weren't as massive as those actually were they went on and turned what was supposed to be limited series of pre-production planes into Tranche 1 serial production planes.
>>575440
>I still don't understand what NH-90 is supposed to do
To make money for companies involved in production and give post military career employment as consultants to lot of staff officers.
>You can't make that exactly silent or un-noticable to infantry.
Flight noise is stealth feature, difference if how far away you notice it.