Mirage 2000 Thread : Variants, performance, characteristics and sources

[dedale_stargate]

I think i have a fairly good idea, since i kind of worked on the bug reports made regarding that missile at the time…

The lack of range never really bothered me, because asking for the best close range and one of the best long range at a time where everyone had bugged missiles and F15I and E were not a thing seemed over the top and frankly quite unnecessary.

We’re not in June anymore however, and MICA is going to be the only missile france gets for a while, so it better be correctly modelled for “future proofness sake”, same could be said about R-77, although that one at least has a bunch of sub variants.

To sum up :

• it misses 0.35 mach in top speed when vertically launched
• it lacks speed at 7 and 12km repsectively, once again in a VL scenario, being unable to reach the advertised overload of 50 and 30G repectively at these distance (especially at 12km, where it already is subsonic)
• The loft, which was 20° in the dev server of Danger Zone has been reduced to 5°. To my knwoledge, this is the only missile that received such a treatment, and the reasons for it are still not clear to this day

In the example below, the red AMRAAM was fired at 8000m, 1150 km/h by a Gripen, while my MICA was fired at 8000m, 1350 km/h. Both missile flew relatively straight during most of their flight path, as neither me or my target made any evasive maneuver for quite some time. They only had to pull hard 20s before being before being trashed (missing or self exploding). My MICA stayed high, while the AMRAAM had to come down to thicker air, where i dragged it.

Result ?

Spoiler

(Both missiles highlighted in blue)
Here it goes, 40km for MICA, being basically trash at 400 kph, still 1320 kph for AMRAAM, after 48km and a more aggressive downards evasive move.

You can also notice my other MICA further to the right, where my opponent defended more aggressively, and which was fired AFTER the one highlighted in blue (launched at more than 1400 km/h and 8500m), being already dead after 28 km of travelling

Finally, i would like to point out that these kind of posts :

@MiG_23M

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

…bring nothing to the conversation. If you have some counterpoints, say them, and we can figure out what can be misunderstood or what source can make the most sense. Whatever the above post is, is a waste of everyone’s time.

And just for good measure :

• Community Bug Reporting System
• Community Bug Reporting System

[MiG_23M]

@dedale_stargate

I think i have a fairly good idea, since i kind of worked on the bug reports made regarding that missile at the time…

I worked on several and provided many of the sources you may have used, the French server enjoyed my consistent testing and evaluation of these materials for some time along with help from @DirectSupport

@dedale_stargate

To sum up :

• it misses 0.35 mach in top speed when vertically launched
• it lacks speed at 7 and 12km repsectively, once again in a VL scenario, being unable to reach the advertised overload of 50 and 30G repectively at these distance (especially at 12km, where it already is subsonic)
• The loft, which was 20° in the dev server of Danger Zone has been reduced to 5°. To my knwoledge, this is the only missile that received such a treatment, and the reasons for it are still not clear to this day

Most ordnance like R-27ER, R-77, AIM-120, AIM-54 are missing 100+ m/s top speed at medium and high altitude due to a combination of Gaijins poor modeling of air density and their subsequent incorrect modeling of missile drag as a static value. These ordnances are optimized for medium altitudes and thus over perform slightly at sea level and underperform above 5km. The MICA is no exception.

@dedale_stargate

…bring nothing to the conversation

You provided no substance to discuss either and did so without a lot of unnecessary back and forth contradicting my statement without actually providing any real argument. It was just a paragraph summed up as “nuh uh”.

[dedale_stargate]

Then you agree with me…

That bug report :
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/OoskoLXRLTgx

Specifically refers to MICA at low altitude. However by your logic :

@MiG_23M

These ordnances are optimized for medium altitudes and thus over perform slightly at sea level and underperform above 5km. The MICA is no exception.

…which is not what said bug report, which you tell me you helped work on, is stating.

It specifically refers to the VL (low altitude performances of MICA).

[MiG_23M]

Overload capacity is nerfed on TVC missiles intentionally to avoid conditions that cause loss of control, top speed being less than expected is a function of the overall lower drag coefficient provided to meet medium and high altitude range requirements without over performing as much at sea level. What is the maximum launch range at sea level against a 1.2 mach target, as opposed to the subsonic one?

[dedale_stargate]

@MiG_23M

TVC missiles intentionally to avoid conditions that cause loss of control

Doesn’t matter, in VL configuration the burner at 7 and 12km is off. It just doesn’t have the speed to reach those overload in any shape or form.

If memory serves, it was 900-950 km/h after travelling 12km. At 7km, it was around 1500 km/h.

As for close range, and considering the struggle the devs went through to get it somewhat right, i can’t say i’m dissatisfied, it honestly behave well for me on that front, and i’m in no right to complain when basically no one has an equivalent

[dedale_stargate]

Ok so i redid a little test after sniffing around in that custom’s mission code, so i could be sure

Scenario is as follows : Mach 2 Mirage 2000 at 10000m, firing a MICA at a co-altitude f14a, who himself is at Mach 1.8, flying straight at me.

I’m firing when the HUD says i’m in range, and giving the missile a little boost with a 15° manual loft.

Result is as follows :

Spoiler

Firing : (please ignore the aircraft’s speed, it’s still bugged in tacview, made a bug report if you are interested)

Max speed reached by MICA (an impossible Mach 5.1) :

Just under 23km later, the MICA gives his standard behavior (so much drag it feels like hitting a wall) :

And then, a few centi-seconds before self desctruct :

All in all, i think it is safe to assume the MICA can’t reach the advertised 80km range in any scenario, since this one is basically the most favorable. Note that MICA is also advertised at 80km for Rafale, which can’t reach Mach 2.

So it seems like Gaijin weren’t lying with their 50km stat card after all huh

As for the 80km range :

• Armée de l’air’s archive, stating “100km range class”
• French fleet air arm archive, although that one may be less reliable

From the behavior observed, i would say that :

• The MICA probably has too much thrust, seing how abnormally fast it accelerates off the rail compared to the rest, and considering the speeds it can achieve up high (hypersonic ?)
• It also has far too much drag.

From there on :

• Either the thrust figures come from a reliable source, and it means something is seriously wrong with the way atmosphere is modelled in war thunder (i know it’s the case, but i would hope it’s not to this extent)
• Or the thrust is guesswork, in which case an easy way to fix it would be to lower the drag, reduce the diameter, give the lofting back, make sure the missile can reach 80km in a correct scenario, and lower the thrust accordingly.
  That way, it would just be what it’s supposed to be : a thrust vectoring AMRAAM

[Cpt_Bel_V]

@dedale_stargate

As for the 80km range :

• Armée de l’air’s archive , stating “100km range class”

100km class doesn’t mean it should reach 100km,…
it means 50km< x(classified range - MBDA Talks of 80km: check their website) <100km

also, both sites you used can’t be considered as source (unlike MBDA one)
Fleet air arm as already been used several times in the past and been denied.
as for Air Ministry website, it is not possible as a Class of missile, doesn’t give a PRECISE and CLEAR information (here the range)

[dedale_stargate]

I know it shouldn’t reach 100km exactly.

Couldn’t find the 80km on MBDA’s website anywhere though, if you have the link, feel free to share

[Cpt_Bel_V]

after reviewing MBDA websites, it appears that they have refined the articles,… i can’t find it with explicit ranges anymore.

there should be more reliable sources tho.

MICA-IR was said to be able to reach only 60km (because IR Seeker brings more drag and less refined trajectory)
MICA-EM was said to be able to reach 80km range
(on both many websites seems to agree, but no one quotes the sources of that information - and not being Source reliable for Gaijin)

MICA-EM-NG is said to get a max of 100km range (which was in the objectives of MICA NG program: getting 20km more range)
Similarly MICA-IR-NG gets 80km range
(which many sites seems to agree, but no one quotes the sources of that information - and not being Source reliable for Gaijin)

[MiG_23M]

@dedale_stargate

Doesn’t matter, in VL configuration the burner at 7 and 12km is off. It just doesn’t have the speed to reach those overload in any shape or form.

It does, limiting the overload until burner is off prevents high off boresight launches at low speed and in dogfights. Their only option is to limit G load & control actuator deflection / force to a medium that prevents spinning in those conditions and this affects performance post-burn drastically but allows for tight turn radius in dogfight scenarios.

[dedale_stargate]

@MiG_23M

It does, limiting the overload until burner is off prevents high off boresight launches at low speed and in dogfights. Their only option is to limit G load & control actuator deflection / force to a medium that prevents spinning in those conditions and this affects performance post-burn drastically but allows for tight turn radius in dogfight scenarios.

That i agree with, but it doesn’t cause me any issue tbh

What i mean is : in a VL launch, once the missile travelled 12km (burner is off since several seconds at that point), its speed is 900 km/h, making it unable to turn at 30G

DirectSupport might have more information on that one though, he deduced that from a magic II documentation if memory serves

[Cpt_Bel_V]

Thing is the missiles knows when it is off boresight and when it is not,…

The game should refined the model in order to get a condition of launch range, and off-boresight at launch.

Because you’ll not use a MICA-EM for an off-boresight 60km launch.

The problem is how they choosed to model the missile and not the missile itself.

And they can do it as good as they have made the flight model, with 2 modes “Long-range”(don’t allow max pull until being close) / “Short-range”(allow max pull immediately)

[MiG_23M]

I don’t think he deduced it from magic 2 documentation so much as he’s essentially stating that the Magic 2 required 1.25 mach airspeed to pull 50G’s therefore the MICA should require similar? I don’t recall the reasoning for the figure but it would have been translated well to the tech moderators internal report as that would be more comprehensive.

[dedale_stargate]

@MiG_23M

I don’t think he deduced it from magic 2 documentation so much as he’s essentially stating that the Magic 2 required 1.25 mach airspeed to pull 50G’s therefore the MICA should require similar?

yeah it was something like that.

In the meantime, i did an other test : 12000m, mach 2.1 and 20° loft, MICA still had a bit of energy.

It reached 5400 km/h before self exploding after travelling for 46.5s and 50.8 km. It would probably have had the energy to reach 60, but it self destructed before. I really believe they hard capped it at 50 km for some reason (50.8 to be exact) :

Spoiler

[MiG_23M]

Gaijin hating France is not new

[dedale_stargate]

In the air department i don’t feel too much “hate” tbh, although i think this is more of a money thing i would bet X)

That being said, at the time where MICA was introduced, asking for a long range missile AND the most busted thing at close range would have been a bit entitled imo.

I just hope it will follow the magic II route, being gradually buffed as the rest gets newer variants of their missiles. I would be fine with that

[Cpt_Bel_V]

@dedale_stargate

In the air department i don’t feel too much “hate” tbh

let’s talk about:
1- SEM - no magic-2 (not fixed)(being the only “recent attack aircraft” to not recieveing All-aspect missile)
2- Etendard IVM - 3years to get a radar + CCIP (fixed now)
3- Mirage III several inconsistencies (fixed now, or so afaik)
4- Magic-1 inconsistencies (fixed now, or so afaik)
5- Magic-2 IRCCM Being a Copapaste of R-73 for no apparent reason (while technically very different seekers)
6- S.530F (i saw one of mine going for my ally flying parallel to me at 1.5km on my side, while the target was in front of me 5km - that was years ago) & S.530D had several problems which lasted for years (now it is decent, but it wasn’t back then)
7- AS-30L still limited to 370m/s, when it is said to be between Mach1.3 (442m/s) to Mach1.5(510m/s) at impact
8- Mirage 2000-5F (insanely wrong both historically than capacity[never had 8 missiles])
9- lack of MB.152 variants in Techtree (which could have been a great addition of early WWII, and Marcel Bloch [MB.] was also Marcel Dassault after WWII, from which we do have several aircrafts)
10- Mirage 2000D RMV ahving Magic-2 - so wrong as there were no Magic-2 left for Mirage 2000D’s at that time, the last were used with the 12 last Mirage 2000C-S5-II)
11- SO-4050 Vautour IIB - still 9.0 with no off/def weaponary other than bombs, while IIA is also 9.0, with 4x30mm

and without annoting the lack of research for some specifics interceptors that have been prototyped :

• SO.602X Prototypes
• Mirage III Balzaz or IIIV
• Mirage G.4 or G.8
• Mirage 3NG asked as premium/squadron for a long time now
• Nord Griffon II (with 2xMagic-1 and 2xDefa 30mm which have been the outsider of Mirage III and which is insane for it’s kind)

so many things gaijin could add for some “French Touch”

EDIT:
Some wants me to add :
the Combat flaps of Étendard IVM and Super-Étendard.

2nd EDIT:
“Don’t forget how Muti-Dart still has no CCIP despite other rockets having CCIP on the jaguar. Wouldn’t even hard to model it, games have shotgun reticles since the 80s…”

[MademoiselleSXXI]

They never fixed the Vautour IIN’s flight too

[Cpt_Bel_V]

i’m not knowledgeable on this one ^^
Vautour are all pretty much the same for me

[SpectreXXI]

Don’t forget about both SEM and IVM still retain the broken combat flap which haven’t been fixed up until today. I must say, other the Mirage 2000 FM (and balancing), yes France Aircraft at sometimes still lacking.