Ranking

Nr .1 The Rafale

The Rafale is a true omnirole aircraft, exactly what Belgium is looking for. It is a bit expensive but being a direct neighbour to France helps here. Because of this Belgium might be able to cut some expenses on training and maintenance that other countries cannot.

It has proven to be capable of deployment oversea. France has operated the Rafale M from its carrier for operations in Libya and Iraq. The French Rafale's flew long missions over Libya and Mali. The Rafale was reported to have a high availability rate. They have operated grom N'Djamena in Chad and Al Dhafra air base in the UAE. One thing is clear. It's a beauty, but definitely not a hangar queen.

Nr. 2 The Gripen NG

The Gripen NG is in many ways a smaller and cheaper Rafale. This makes it a very good choice as well. So why did I put it in 2nd place? At the moment the Gripen is still a prototype not an operational fighter. Belgium usually prefers to cooperate with Western European partners, not with neutral Sweden or Eastern European countries.

It also smaller than the other Eurocanards and upgrading aircraft usually means putting more stuff on it. Equip a Gripen NG with three fuel tanks and two external pods and you will quickly run out of room and hardpoints. The Gripen might be half as expensive as the Rafale but if you need two of them to carry the same weapons then where is the benefit?

(Allright, you might need one and a half of them to carry as much as a Rafale but you can't fly half a plane unless it's an F-15.)

Nr. 3 The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

The F-35 is a decent fighter-bomber. Its stealth capability gives it a bit extra protection against SAM threats. Quite a few European countries will have it including our Dutch neighbours.

But it is the greatest in air-to-air combat and they will be meeting Russian Flankers while taking part in the Baltic Air Policing. It is also expensive. The actual price is difficult to predict. Lockheed Martin keeps saying that costs will reduce once serial production starts. Question is if the orders won't be reducing faster driving the price up. Canada seems to be dropping out at the moment. Others may follow. One of my concerns with the F-35 is that it will be hard and costly to maintain, especially during foreign deployments. A so called "hangar queen".

The F-35B is nice if you have carriers. The extra stealth can be useful against really tough air-defense systems but it won't be required in most cases. Even the US left its F-22 Raptors at home during the intervention in Libya in 2011.

Nr. 4 The Eurofighter Typhoon

I like the Typhoon but it is more expensive than the Rafale. It is a bit better at air-to-air combat than its French counterpart but the thing is, ..., for Belgium the difference is irrelevant. Air-to-ground and cost-effectiveness are far more important for the Belgian armed forces.

Nr. 5 The Super Hornet

Many people think that the Super Hornet is the right choice for Canada. But Belgium is not Canada.

Not a single European country uses it. It is not as advanced as the Eurocanards. The Gripen NG will be cheaper to operate. Belgium has always liked the single engined F-16 so the 1 vs 2 engines debate is irrelevant here. As I said earlier the Frenchness of the Rafale is less relevant here as well. The production line is closing down, casting doubts on future upgrades.

Conclusion

I think that the final decision comes down to choosing between the Rafale and the Gripen NG. The actual costs and the offered offset deals should make the difference. Dassault has offered rather good deals in the past including full transfer of technology and 100% industrial offsets. Saab has offered 100 % offsets to Switzerland and the Netherlands as well. 

If the Gripen is selected than it might be a good idea to enlarge the order to 40 or 45 aircraft. As I said earlier, the Gripen NG is cheaper but also smaller. I have some concerns about its payload capacity. Three Rafales can carry 28500kg of ordnance (3x14 hardpoints). Four Gripens can carry 28800kg (4x10 hardpoints).

So the question really is: "Should I get three Rafales or four Gripens?"
...
And since cost effectiveness is Saab's biggest argument: "What is cheaper, three Rafales or four Gripen NG's?"
...
It seems that Dassault could offer Switzerland 16 Rafales for the same price as 22 Gripens. This is rather close to the 3/4 ratio.

Better together?

At the moment Finland wants to replace its F/A-18 Hornets (61 aircraft), Canada wants 65 new aircraft, Belgium wants 34 aircraft and Denmark 24-36 aircraft.  All together 184-196 aircraft.
If all four countries acquired the Rafale together, costs would be substantially lower. Future upgrades would also be guaranteed.

The Rafale could be a good choice for all of them:

*Finland is not a NATO country but will often meet aggressive Sukhoi's. Buying the F-35 might be too politically sensitive. On the other hand, the Super Hornet and Gripen might be a little too small to confront badass Sukhoi's.

* Canada needs a good interceptor, preferably with two engines and easy to operate on small bases. The Rafale has good top speed, climb rate and 2 engines. It can carry 5 droptanks and perform buddy refueling. It has succesfully operated from N'Djamena airbase in Chad in small numbers with little preparation.

*I have made my point for Belgium already. Belgium needs a dependable, multirole bomb truck. The Rafale fits the bill.

*Denmark needs an aircraft that can patrol its overseas territories as well, the Faroe Islands and Greenland. Anti-ship capabilities and long range are important. The Rafale can be equipped with the Exocet anti-ship missile (and Perseus in the future), can carry 5 drop tanks and can use buddy refueling. Denmark only wants to buy as few as 24-36 aircraft. A high availability will be essential.








 The Rafale goes to war.
source: defense-update.com
"The Rafale has successfully completed its first test flights in a new heavily-armed configuration, comprising six air-to-ground precision AASM Hammer missiles, four medium and long range air-to-air missiles from the MICA family, two very long range METEOR missiles, as well as three 2,000 liter fuel tanks."