Not in the 1987 manual, as it doesn’t the AS.30 “NORAS” anymore at all. I always heard the NORAS could still be used also later, but apparently wasn’t intended to be anymore and not covered in the manual.
But before , the NORAS absolutely was carried and fired.
Our club owns a NORAS, and not only did I help restore it, I also helped with a sim we have in the club where one can fire and control the missile, using the original control stick wired to a PC.
Again, that 's one of the things I want my Mirage people to confirm with first level sources…
After a few tries he managed to hit within 2 meters of the intended target., after having started with 50 meters. It’s really finnicky to use, and to do that while flying the Mirage, and through enemy air defense, must really have been a daunting task and the main reason why most of NORAS operations were stopped relatively early on.
A good Soul has been able to provide me with the TARAN manual I’ve been looking for so desperately, and it answers a lot of questions, also including radar and missiles operation and capabilities, gun lead predictor, AS.30 usage and CCRP bombing, even terrain avoidance modes, etc. …
Now it will take time to process the info, translate, report…
Only have a few flights in Sim, and don’t think it’s exceptionally great: The AIM-9E is quite bad and outclassed by all the Magic I’s and AIM-9J and 9P the aircraft you encounter carry, FALCO are ok-ish but not exceptional, their only grace being you can carry two of them.
RWR and CMS is good, flight model also ok but not so much improved over e.g. IIIC and IIIE that it makes much of a difference.
BR’s wise it’s ok with the armament it currently has, and even could stay at that BR or rise to max. 10.7 if it also got AIM-9P-3.
If it got AIM-9P-4 (as it should historically), it should go to 11.3, and if it even got 9P-5 (again, as would be historically correct), 11.7 would be fine.
At 11.7 it wouldn’t have a worse radar than say the F-5E FCU or SCU…
If you’re talking sim, I think the mirage can be 11.0 with p4, as the bis and first 23m gets 6 all aspect r60s at that br while also having better flight models (don’t forget the 23m getting those utterly nasty r23ts as well which are literally an upgrade in every way over the p4 other than super close range maneuverability) and i also think the p4 is a worse missile than the r60m ( at least for sim). I think even if it got aim 9 p3 it can stay at 10.3, due to the first American crusader being a better plane WITH better missiles and at a lower br of 10.0 (seriously how the hell is the f8u2 at 10.0 still in sim, American mains fr).
I mean, it’s expected to better than the 3e, as it’s literally the same plane from what I understand but with canards and new missiles. But, the 3c being so light is what makes it better than both, I wonder why the 3e is so much heavier than the c for just adding counter measures.
Ngl I would expect them to do better in sim than rb because people in sim are a lot more clueless, although ig it’s still wore than the crusader’s aim 9c which is a lot more maneuverable (at least becomes more maneuverable much much sooner)
Are the cms single or double pop
Bit off tangent, but is this the thread for general mirage 3s discussion? I don’t see one other than the one in the suggestion
the P-3 is smokeless, but that aspect is not modeled in game right now.
In game it is just a regular 9P. The Hunter has the 63/80, which is the P-3.
Yes, this is the post for the Swiss Mirage IIIS. It was ported over from the dev-server section.
I mainly made it to collect all the bug reports of the Mirage on the dev-server, but general discussion is also happening. At the moment it is somewhat split with here being the issues and the sugegstion being more of a general discussion.
Once the suggestion post is closed though, I will rename the post to general discussion or something like that.
Aha that makes sense, for stuff like falco I just thought you were just mistyping them, didn’t know those were actual names, cool bit of trivia to learn
