Took me a while to respond, but I kept scrolling after the canards pr0n waiting for the most beautiful canard plane to finally be posted.
Thanks you @Victork2 for paying hommage to those deserving fellas across the sea (from you) who made this.
Still, I think after 100 posts, there should be a whole lot more of them in this thread:
Even with the wheels out, she still looks smooth:
EDIT: one more
French jets are so sexy. From the mystere to the mirage to the rafale they’re all superb in their lines.
If im totally honest. Brutally honest. I think Rafale is a much prettier plane than the typhoon. Maybe not as effective. But far far prettier. The lumps that thr canards stick out of are spectacular
I kinda see them both as beautiful, just in different art styles.
Rafale has curves and flowing lines.
Eurofighter has hard edges and clear lines.
They are different like… you know the difference between that angular, sharp manga/anime style and the round one?
…or like male and female models are different but both sexy.
…uh… and that was the gayest thing I ever said I guess. 
Yup.
I agree though. Good points. But I still stand by that the flowing natural lines of the rafale is prettier…perhaps I enjoy the female form more than you 
However. I would not be happy to be sat in a Rafale with a fight with a Typhoon in my immediate future. That plane is outright Dangerous for its opposition. Its a flying punch to other aircraft. Even raptor thinks twice about typhoon and before anyone disagrees… yes. It. does.
Well said.
Tho, I’d argue the Carrier borne pilots of the time had an even bigger pair; “Here, fly and land this extremely underpowered, unresponsive, unreliable missile off a postage stamp in the middle of the ocean. Also, minor note; when you fire the guns the engines might stall.”
Maybe a slightly more tactful thread name guys?
Nope, he’s right. The Typhoons issue is the boxy air-intakes. Good for silly little things like radar cross section, engine reliability/compressibility, and aerodynamics. Bad for important items like looks and coherent design language.
And, once again with my ban-worthy comments: I’d take the Rafale over a Typhoon in DCS. Among the reasons, you can’t land a Typhoon (successfully…) on a carrier. Still gonna day-one-preorder the in-the-works typhoon, don’t get me wrong, but the Rafale is such a neat and underappreciated plane.
I completely agree on @Victork2 assessment of the top eurocanards. I just want to add that none of the European jet fighters are as cost effective as the Swedish ones.
I couldn’t find a photo with all three in it so I will just post this:
And some more combinations of different planes:
This one, if you look closely past the canards and lawn darts, includes an American one in @Victork2’s preferred size:
Yes!
I’ve been too absent lately and lost this power, but please, someone…
Yup, this. And I say that as a loud, obnoxious, 'merican tax payer.
A BIG feather in the Typhoons cap is IRST; in the mid-range game that’s a huge advantage, and can put the F-22s stealth profile in check. If Raptor had a long-range option like the AIM-54, that would change the game a bit, but it’s generally slinging mid-range AMRAAMs, which means getting close enough for IRST to pick it up in a lot of cases.
Once things get into the phone booth, thrust vectoring seems like a neat party trick, but also a fantastic way to bleed vital energy. Sure, you might get yourself a snap sidewinder shot off, but that if said snake is starting from essentially 0 energy, it’s chances of success are severely curtailed.
I thought I changed it to a more acceptable one but it has been changed again.
It’s OK. 
Why ban worthy?
Edit: Just because you’re obviously wrong doesn’t mean you have to be banned! 
That is one cool picture @Freak!! I like the way even with all those canards and delta wings. The big fella still has more wing area than all the other planes in the photo. Big and beautiful.
Thrust vectoring mostly comes into it’s own at very high altitude where mach 1.4 equates to like 180knots IAS. Not having to make huge draggy control surface deflections is a huge boon in that regime.
Huh, I never thought about that! Makes sense.
The change from WW2 high altitude attack profiles , to cold war era low level tactics unfortunately killed a lot of pilots. The technology to do so safely in the conditions they were tasked to do so just wasn’t mature enough. They made it work, but the price was in destroyed aircrafts and pilots lives.
I thought the Rafale had an IRST system (PIRATE or something like that)? Also agreed that the modern versions of IRST have a nasty habit of overcoming much of the vaunted 5th generation stealth.
“I was inverted” lol
More 104.
Bella!
Wunderschönen
Hi Slim Jim!
