Egyptian Air Force Rafale fighter jet crashed

[Nilgiri]

I think you are the imbecile here.

I said if the crash is due to pilot error or maintenance not done properly, then warranty woill NOT be honored.

If it is none, and just a technical issue, then warranty can be claimed. Why does it matter if the plane is 300 mil or 30 mil? If it's more expensive then it warrants a better warranty, the customer paid for it.

And just because things have been rigorously tested doesn't mean they can't have flaws. It can simply be a bug in the flight control software, or any mechanical part failing, where warranty can be claimed.

Apart from saying, "Why would France handover a 300mil plane", how about some real stuff where it says there is no warranty on these purchases? You seem to be the all-know of fighter deals?

I guess the indians would know as they are buying the rafale. PDF Indians, can you please share if known what the warranty terms are for your rafale purchase? @Nilgiri

I would (in more detail) if the character you are debating with is worth it. He's clearly not....resorting to calling you rickshaw puller or whatever (and he has done much much worse than that with other members I respect greatly...yet he is still allowed to be here which I find disgusting given much milder trolls have been perma-banned). You may thus find this sort is waste of time for getting into any serious discussion with just about anything.

Suffice to say, broadly you are correct, liability is negotiated and then delineated in the contract (before signing) as to what is on onus of the supplier and the operator.

@randomradio @jbgt90 @Vibrio @Joe Shearer @Dante80 @VCheng

 

[Ceylal]

I found the image of this K 8 trainer jet that has the Egyptian flag.

Did the plane that crash looked like that one?

One like that, locally produced, and a Rafale. They lost two aircraft on the same day with two pilots casualties...

 

[Bengal71]

I would (in more detail) if the character you are debating with is worth it. He's clearly not....resorting to calling you rickshaw puller or whatever (and he has done much much worse than that with other members I respect greatly...yet he is still allowed to be here which I find disgusting given much milder trolls have been perma-banned). You may thus find this sort is waste of time for getting into any serious discussion with just about anything.

Suffice to say, broadly you are correct, liability is negotiated and then delineated in the contract (before signing) as to what is on onus of the supplier and the operator.

@randomradio @jbgt90 @Vibrio @Joe Shearer @Dante80 @VCheng

Alright, I didn't interact with many to be able to profile and know who deserves a reply and who deserves the contempt of silence.

I don't know much about military sale contracts but it would just make sense a mechanical device being purchased for many billions of dollars will come with warranty. The warranty should come with clauses like as long as they are maintained according to manufacturer's requirements, a warranty can be claimed if there is a failure. It should not be a lot different from a car warranty although we are comparing apples and oranges.

 

[Nilgiri]

Alright, I didn't interact with many to be able to profile and know who deserves a reply and who deserves the contempt of silence.

I don't know much about military sale contracts but it would just make sense a mechanical device being purchased for many billions of dollars will come with warranty. The warranty should come with clauses like as long as they are maintained according to manufacturer's requirements, a warranty can be claimed if there is a failure. It should not be a lot different from a car warranty although we are comparing apples and oranges.

Yes its actually a subject I know quite well (a close dear professor I keep in touch with still.... worked at NTSB in the US for large part of his career)..that too commercial side where the total flying/operating hours exceed by ratio of 1000+ times (and concern 1000+ times the human lives) than military domain...but its pretty long winded stuff and will bore most people once you go into details etc.

Generally for military contracts (incl bilateral countries), there will generally be an agreed upon way to determine who is at fault (and this will also delineate how the investigation of incident etc is done) and which parts of the contract liability signed are relevant.

 

[Bengal71]

Yes its actually a subject I know quite well (a close dear professor I keep in touch with still.... worked at NTSB in the US for large part of his career)..that too commercial side where the total flying/operating hours exceed by ratio of 1000+ times (and concern 1000+ times the human lives) than military domain...but its pretty long winded stuff and will bore most people once you go into details etc.

Generally for military contracts (incl bilateral countries), there will generally be an agreed upon way to determine who is at fault (and this will also delineate how the investigation of incident etc is done) and which parts of the contract liability signed are relevant.

Thought so. The recent crash of the Boeing aircraft of an Indonesian airline says that to me. Boeing went there for the investigation and concluded there was a fault. Passenger airliner should have far higher safety requirements and undergo far more rigorous testing. So yeah, if for passenger airliners, warranty can be claimed, I don't see why not for military aircraft.

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

One like that, locally produced, and a Rafale. They lost two aircraft on the same day with two pilots casualties...

My understanding is the Egyptian authorities refuted the Rafael story. Did they confirm it? Keep in mind the "Egypt Defence Review" is a some entity with a gmail account. I wouldn't read too much in their claims.

 

[Sully3]

How sick can you be..Ask your mum buddy.. and know that when you buy a car.. it comes with warranties..let alone a plane.. that is any anomaly in functionality of any part is under that warranty for a certain amount of time.. so go cry somewhere else..

Thank you Stephen Hawkin for your great knoweldge.

point still remians. Egypt wont be getting a new jet free of cost just because this one crashed.

You being graduate from a Pakistani taliban madrasa must have made you specialist about fighter jet contracts, we all know.

Just because it's a Rafale, and been tested for 20 years it can't have mechanical fault. Result of talibani madrasa education. Dumbass.

Pakistani madrassa educated scientist made the jf17 which is beind exported worldwide, meanwhile benglais are well known for ...... being good cooks

You being graduate from a Pakistani taliban madrasa must have made you specialist about fighter jet contracts, we all know.

Just because it's a Rafale, and been tested for 20 years it can't have mechanical fault. Result of talibani madrasa education. Dumbass.

Mods i didnt expect this kind of racism from bengali muslim.

disgusting @waz @The Eagle @WebMaster

 

[Imran Khan]

sad news RIP to pilot

cant say what went wrong

 

[ziaulislam]

It maybe due to intense training but of cos, crashing a new plane is not normal.

Actually new plans initially crash more often

 

[Sully3]

I would (in more detail) if the character you are debating with is worth it. He's clearly not....resorting to calling you rickshaw puller or whatever (and he has done much much worse than that with other members I respect greatly...yet he is still allowed to be here which I find disgusting given much milder trolls have been perma-banned). You may thus find this sort is waste of time for getting into any serious discussion with just about anything.

Suffice to say, broadly you are correct, liability is negotiated and then delineated in the contract (before signing) as to what is on onus of the supplier and the operator.

@randomradio @jbgt90 @Vibrio @Joe Shearer @Dante80 @VCheng

Indian giving lectures on pdf about figther jet saftey.
Hasnt IAF got the worst saftey record in the reigon

and seeing as you are acting all knowledgable telling people who they should engage with and who not, why dont you tell @Bengal71 how many of the figthers your IAF crashes reguarly get replaced free of charge by the russians
This bengali babu thinks French hand over a free figther just because one crashed.

shhhhhhhh............

 

[Ceylal]

My understanding is the Egyptian authorities refuted the Rafael story. Did they confirm it? Keep in mind the "Egypt Defence Review" is a some entity with a gmail account. I wouldn't read too much in their claims.

They have pleinty of reasons to do that..The Rafale is one of the main contender in In India’s tender for a new generation fighter . Egypt wouldn’t do anything to jeopardize the Rafale’s chances , hence Egypt/French relationship..

 

[WebMaster]

@Sully3 @Bengal71 avoid insults.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

One like that, locally produced, and a Rafale. They lost two aircraft on the same day with two pilots casualties...

Doesn't K8 have two crew? One trainee one instructor?

 

[The SC]

Thank you Stephen Hawkin for your great knoweldge.

point still remians. Egypt wont be getting a new jet free of cost just because this one crashed.

No Rafale crashed..to your dismay..
Your point does not stand against the warranty..Mr argue for the sake of it.. grow up a bit..and keep your fabricated comments to yourself to sooth you sickness..

 

[Ceylal]

Doesn't K8 have two crew? One trainee one instructor?

It does, but it was two separates incident on the same day...Wait the next Airforces Monthly..it will be there in black in white..