Mirage 2000 Thread : Variants, performance, characteristics and sources

[MythicPi]

Forgot to address this so here I go.

@Kishin_SR6

First : AASM can achieve the 70km+ range only when launched at high alts

Doesnt really matter at what alt it needs to be at to achieve these ranges, the fact it can is the issue in the first place. Not like the M2K struggles to gain alt either…

@Kishin_SR6

Second : At low alts AASM have a 15km(Under 100m)-30km range

Right, so at low altitude, the AASM already outranges all but the pantsir, that sounds like a SIGNIFICANT limitation… /s

@Kishin_SR6

Third : Iirc AASM works with 2 impulses the first to make it fly and the second to dive on it’s target in order to lower interception chances.

I’d love to see your source for this seeing as I’ve only ever seen the terminal motor in action, never one post launch, and I’m genuinely curious. Also not sure why you include this in me being “wrong”, i was asking if anyone knew how the motor on it worked, not stating it was terminal only.

@Kishin_SR6

Fourth : AASM is a smart bomb it can even be launched behing a mountain but gaijin won’t model that anyway.

Thats not unique to the AASM, any weapon with GPS guidance can do this easily enough, and technically any weapon with a lofted trajectory and terminal guidance (such as basic LGB’s) can as well. The incoming GBU-48/49/50 will all be able to do this just fine.

@Kishin_SR6

Fifth : AASM would roughly be an equivalent to KH38 when deployed as gaijin don’t want to introducce LOAL capabilities

LOAL already exists in-game, not sure why gaijin decided to pretend that was a sticking point regarding the brimstone. Optical seekers were made to be able to lock the ground to extend their range in-game, which allows for them to switch to locking a target near the ground they have locked if the target is within its FoV once in-range. All SALH weapons in-game are also LOAL.

@Kishin_SR6

Sixth : TGP render distance being 20km AASM launch would be limited by TGP render distance because you can’t directly designate targets with the AASM seeker like you can do with Mavericks, KH38, PGM… You need either a TGP for the Laser/IIR version and Rafale OSF can be used for taregt designation with AASM IIR, and GPS version of AASM would just be an anti base weapon mostly as you can’t change the coordinates once launched.

All seekers are limited in the vehicle lock range by render distance, and afaik all are LOAL if fired beyond render distance. The mav and Kh-38 are both also limited by render distance. Also, it seems render distance may be longer than 20km on the dev server, atleast for some vehicles.

@Kishin_SR6

AASM is a good weapon but due to how WarThunder works it wouldn’t be a broken weapon at least until the LOAL capabilities are added or TGP render distance increased. If introduced in ccurrent game state AASM would still be less broken than KH38.

As stated, LOAL is already in-game, and even beyond that fact, AASM is still superior to every guided weapon currently in-game. Pretending otherwise just because you want to see it added is disingenuous. I’ve also specifically stated the Kh-38 also should not be allowed in GFRB, as it is broken, and the mavs are pushing it and could be argued not to be balanced in GFRB either. Its bad gameplay design to have a class of vehicle that is literally 100% impervious to all things on the ground in a primarily ground game mode.

Gameplay should take primacy over weapon implementation.

Here’s proof LOAL literally currently exists in-game btw, with explanations on POINT locks and TRACK locks as well in-case you had doubts.

Dev Server Reopened | NEW IR PGM\Range Buff & Kormoran Missile Test

[Kishin_SR6]

Ah i understand it better now. You’re just a yapper that hates being slammed with long range weaponry in GRB. Makes more sense why you are against evolution of weaponry in WT. And considering gaijin already went “fuck it” with the GRB gameplay might as well get good weapons for western nations too. Also a LOAL where you have to keep an eye on your weapon for it to finish it’s course is not a proper LOAL so cope.

[MythicPi]

Im against this weapon being added to GFRB because its an outright unfun game mechanic with literally no counter, only checks. I primarily play aircrafts and I’m still capable of empathizing with those on the ground wanting to at least have a chance. You’re clearly extremely biased with respects to this topic.

As for “the evolution of weaponry” I’ve literally stated I’d be fine with this stuff being locked to air battles like sim EC and having objectives warranting their addition. I don’t mind the AASM or more advanced stuff being in-game, I mind massively unbalanced weapons ruining the fun for others.

@Kishin_SR6

Also a LOAL where you have to keep an eye on your weapon for it to finish it’s course is not a proper LOAL so cope.

1. Yes it is lmao
2. POINT track does not require you to “keep an eye on your weapon for it to finish its course” POINT locks will switch to TRACK lock when in range of the sensor.

[DevilO6]

Just going to drop it here, as it affects you guys too.
[DEV] PGM family of missiles range underperforming
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ctFsg9SOlivp

[Bugblox]

the m2k5f is supposed to get an actual hmd right? whats the status of its report

[Braindit1234]

Hi guys! Has anyone tested the Chinese m2k? Is he ready yet? What kind of cabin is it?

[Sakyuz]

it should and will be just the m2k 5f without a2g capability and fueling probe, the cockpit will be 1:1 the same as the 5F.

[ExcaliburSniper]

Su34 can get a lot closer than 20km due to not facing Pantsissies

[Grimtax]

Could that be related to this bug?

[joze5]

MOOOOORE FUEEEL!!!!

An error occurred: Body seems unclear, is it a complete sentence?

[kasumiku]

Doesn’t anyone here think that the Mirage 2000D-RMV, as a 2023-released aircraft, should have an RWR system capable of identifying the radar signature of the Pantsir-S1?

We all know Gaijin uses time periods as an excuse to nerf NATO’s RWR, but NATO’s RWR systems are programmable, so the RMV model from 2023 should logically be able to detect search warnings from the Pantsir-S1 radar introduced in 2003.

In fact, all the aircraft and air defense vehicles currently in the game entered service earlier than the RMV, which means the RMV should have access to all aircraft radar signals.

[HakwHunt]

I am posting this for no other reason than expressing my love for the Mirage 2000C-S4.
Its my only Mirage so far. I grinded it in the event and have been playing it ever since. Its my best performing aircraft I think as it suits my playstyle pretty much perfectly.

Thank you, based angry angry dorito plane.

[Mathll]

@WaretaGarasu I finally found a picture of a 2000D with GBU-22s, I’m adding it to the bug report.

[kasumiku]

Do you have any RWR data related to RMV that you can provide? It seems like you have more resources, and if possible, could you write some bug reports? As a Mirage player, I really hope to have a better gaming experience. Thank you.

[ACOMETS]

thats a golden first post

[Mathll]

Unfortunately my resources are limited to the armament of the aircraft, I have absolutely nothing on the internal systems

[oom1992]

I might not worry gaijin rename to Mirage 2000D-R2 instead Mirage 2000D-R1 and change FLIR & laser designator pod

[WaretaGarasu]

Added.

[SkillIssueSimula]

"Honestly, adding the MICA IR to the game would make sense, especially since the planes equipped with it are strike fighters that only carry two. It wouldn’t make them overpowered but would give them a fair shot in mixed battles. Having more threads focused specifically on adding these new IR missiles could streamline these discussions and highlight the unique role each missile plays without derailing other topics. So, I’d argue the MICA IR is a balanced addition that should be considered tbh r27et has range of 9.5km from behind and its been like 2 years sense its been added mica ir is only better at turn 50g>>35g an irccm technology so 2 of them might garneted a 2 kill every time but if you can fire them in first place Beusse fox3 still the metta and these type of missile are coming out anyway in like 5 months so adding them now can make us pepper them for the acutel fighters that carry them :)

[Mathll]

@I AM OVER 9000

especially since the planes equipped with it are strike fighters that only carry two

I don’t know what your source is for this but the 2000D RMV is the only ground attack aircraft equipped with it, all other aircraft that carry it are aircraft with air combat or air superiority roles (2000-5F and Rafale) and can be carried on the same pylons as the EM, so up to 6.

I think that adding the Mica is not yet on the agenda because it implies adding IR missiles of the same generation/capacity in the game. I’m talking about the Aim-9X, ASRAAM, IRIS-T, PL-10, Python-5, R-73M, … And frankly, I would prefer that these missiles do not arrive in the game yet, especially when we see the compretion of the Br.

Moreover, I do not think that these missiles are a good thing for attack aircraft (for example the 2000D RMV or the Tornado), indeed, adding these missiles to them would only make them go up in Br, making them much less fun to play. To be honest, I have no desire to play the 2000D RMV in 13.3 or 13.7 just because it has 2 very good air-to-air missiles.