Tbf, when the M2K ripspeed was 1365 km/h, its enemies were only like Phantom and Flogger which obviously has lower top speed (Flogger was an exception for it can reach rip speed easily, albeit low rip speed). But in the current meta, there’s no strategic reason to bring M4K instead of M2K-5F except for its Magic 2 Missile Bus and good early acceleration.
It’s just a shame that M4K currently sitting as overtiered F-15 😥
Why do you assume channel loss of 10% when the general rule as stated by developers is 5%?
Also, I wouldn’t trust statcard. What does WTRTI say?
wrong
Such rule never was a thing? All engines in game have different channel losses.
I would have pointed out the source (Forecast international) is not very reputable to begin with. The engine thrust is irrelevant anyway as the flight model is fairly accurately modeled to a couple of known sources (the Russian F1 and 2000 book for example). There are some changes to be made in regards to sustained turn rate and climb rate I think but that is about it.
This is something that devs and Smin have both said in lieu of hard data not being available to model. Hence the 10% being a bit of an absurd place to start from. I know they said this for the Mirage F1, and iirc, they said it for the J-7E as well.
Yeah, I just didn’t want to nitpick about the quality of the source when he didn’t obtain the numbers from WTRTI in the first place atleast. But like you said, they gathered info from the Russian manual and US symposium, and hopefully they can also include the chinese datapoints
Just a quick question here : are those Russian sources, reliable ? I’m speaking for gaijin here, considering they simply refuse Russian sources for ground stuff now… I just don’t really understand their stance on the matter (and am also salty but that’s another story)
It is not the best source available, and was for a Mirage 2000 with a different engine, but it’s one of the few sources available with some datasets. How the Russians obtained it, I’m not sure. But in lieu of better sources that’s what they resorted to. Then they incorporated some data points from a Lockheed document comparing the Mirage 2000 with F-20 and F-16.
There’s now a Taiwanese dataset for sustained rates of the Mirage 2000-5F and we know the Taiwanese use Mirage 2000-5F. The data is very close to what the Lockheed document states. So we may see a report soon on the sustained rates for Mirage 2000s in-game.
Do you guys think there is any chance we could get a 8 missiles load out on the mirage 2000-5F after the introduction of MICA’s ?
As the MICA will be mounted on center wing pylons + 4 under belly, the actual external wing pylons will still be available for magic 2’s.
I know it’s not an historical loadout, but well… The 5F in war thunder is everything except historical already ^^’
It is just wild assumptions based solely on foreign press materials like their F-5E book… which was also used to model the F-5E and why that particular aircraft is heavily overperforming (to the point it is better than the real life F-20A…)… lol.
Anyhow, it doesn’t quite match any newer M2000 charts at all such as the Taiwanese source or Tornado tactics manual source.
The MICA stores are 1 3 4 6 7 and 9.
Stores 2 and 8 are Magic 2 stores, along with stores 1 and 9.
I think they may add a new Mirage next update (the 2000-5f mk2 maybe) with only magic 2 and mica (historical load out): it will be a new plane (copy paste) and won’t open a big gap in Br between the 2000-C and the 2000-5f.
And maybe they could add the Exocet to it cause it carry them irl
Taking into account losses of arbitrary magnitude lol
The above is a typical loss graph
Well technically it is historical as everything the current M2K5F carries has been proven to be possible to carry on models derivated from the 2K5F so from a game perspective the 5F got these because it spares the addition of copy pastes Mirages that’ll take slots in your bar when you could have one aircraft instead. Gaijin relies on the principle of “If a modification of it carried it then the original can too” which isn’t always true but stand logic from a certain perspective. Also 8 missiles loadout won’t then be possible as no Mirage 2000-5F or variant ever flown with 8 missiles afaik.
Well that’s where you are mostly wrong technically a historical 2K5FMk2 would be the one we got in game which is fully multirole from whaat i heard from more informed ppl i might fforget some details too but the A2A focused M2K should be the 5F and Multirole the 5FMk2(Whihc is supposedly the version we have in game but gaijin remained withe the 5F name because it’s cooler than Mirage 2000-5F Mk2, probably)
Also there would be no point in adding another M2K5 because as mentionned above gaijin relies on “If variant can do original can” to limit the copy pasting in game which would make trees horrendous to grind as you’d have to grind multiple times the same plane for just one more weapon or system which is dumb only event vehicles escape this logic(Example : Mirage 2KCS4 and CS5 only difference is addition of SPIRALE chaffs dispensers).
in fact the version we have in game simply does not exist, the closest mirage to what we have is the 2000-9 (export version for the UAE, with multirole capacity, hence the use of PGMs) , the 2000-5f is a variant purely intended for air combat without air-to-ground equipment. I spoke above about the 2000-5 mk2 because it is an improvement with a radar allowing air-sea targeting and firing exocets and whose airframe is a derivative of the 2000-9 (which we we are more or less at stake).
If Gaijin adds the 2000-5 mk2 it would be an opportunity to add the exocets missiles into play and that would be a nice addition
