it has less heat than F-117, it is really easy to flare missiles in that thing thanks where its flares spawn
no reason to grind france now i suppose
I bet the uk will get an indian rafale as much as id rather get an atlas cheetah or more future typhoon variants
Missiles added dragg is quite substancial so it’s not that surprising. Also don’t quote me on that but IIRC MICAs are much draggier than they should.
Well sorry for spamming the mention in before. I just want to point out that at some point are indeed some elements of Mirage 2000 are artificial like the rip speed.
Yeah but it only just slowing a little bit, not totally dragged the aircraft more like J-10 carrying full missile.
I also just found out that testing the J-10 in unlimited minimum fuel without missile vs unlimited minimum fuel with fully loaded missile. I see that in fully loaded, the J-10 struggle to reach 1450 km/h. I guess, logically, Mirage 2000 should’ve also struggled then when carrying 8 missiles.
The playerbase still will be one of my main consideration. I rarely played British Gripen because the playerbase sucks, playerbase determine how much you will win most of the match.
Mirage 2000: Mach 1.2. Takes 58 seconds to get to mach 1.
J-10: Mach 1.19 on the deck. Takes 44 seconds to get to mach 1.
Gripen: Mach 1.14. Takes 54 seconds to get to mach 1.
Su-27: Mach 1.2. Takes 46 seconds to get to mach 1.
Tornado F3 is mach 1.15 - 1.18 on the deck, faster than Su-34. Takes a while to accelerate.
Su-34 doesn’t need testing, that’s obviously the slowest alongside Gripen. Tornado is one of if not the slowest to accelerate.
Conclusion: J-10 is perfectly average in speed.
Problem starts when you equip full loadout.
Even with 8 missiles Mirage will be able to reach its rip speed on deck while J-10 cant do the same.
2 Likes
Yeah, I’m still a bit away from being able to equip 8. At 4 it’s mach 1.19.
At 8 it’s probably 1.16 - 1.18.
There’s a reason I did all my tests with 4 except Gripen cause the R-Darters are tiny and I’m lazy.
I’m still 318,000 from J-10 cause I’ve been working on other vehicles [namely ground].
Though I do have to get around to spading the rest of my owned favorite vehicles of China.
At 8 it still rips
I have never heard this, but it is hard to compare the two. One of them uses a mechanical scan in 2024, so I’d hazard any nonsense claims about “TEMU ripoff”.
1 Like
Unrelated to whatever was happening a few hours ago,
What other Mirage 2000s would be worth adding to this game?
I know the 2000-9 has some nice weapon choices but what about the -5 Mk II with RDY-2, Mirage 2000H with I believe different weapons from India’s stock, anything else?
The current 5F is already a mix of the 5F model, and -9 and Mk2 CAS loadout.
Here are all the versions that can be added, it should be noted that the B are training versions and the N are the nuclear weapon firing versions, these two variants have little chance of being added to the game. In addition, the 2000D R1 present in the game corresponds more to a 2000D R2
Mirage 2000 B
Mirage 2000 C (S1, S2, S3)
Mirage 2000 D (R2)
Mirage 2000 N (K1, K2, K2+ and K3) → the K1 can’t carry regular air to ground weapon and not sure for the K3
Mirage 2000-5 Mk2
Mirage 2000-9
Mirage 2000 E
Mirage 2000 H
Mirage 2000 B-501 (Rafale technologie on a Mirage 2000 B)
For me the variants with the most chance/interest to be added to the game are the Mirage 2000-5 Mk2, 2000B 501, as well as the export versions (E, H, 9) even if as @vizender says, these variants already exist in game in the form of the 2000-5F
MICA’s excessive drag is post launch, due to bad PID controller tuning. The missile has fairly low drag when mounted to the plane.
Personally, I’d take more drag with the missile mounted if the PID controller got fixed and the MICA didn’t wobble itself out of energy all the time.
1 Like
keep in mind that the diameter of the MICA is still wrong and to large, so there’s also just pure drag that reduces it’s range on top of PID running
What speed did you start at?
0, runway.
still 165mm instead of 160 huh ?
No, range is already correct as drag has been tuned for it to reach the correct distance. The drag is currently too little due to this, if they reduce diameter the drag will increase to match current performance. What you will see is likely an increase in energy loss during maneuvers if they correct the diameter.
@dedale_stargate but yes, still incorrect
Actually I was speaking of both
The 5EI has tail hook (which is right compared to real photos) but no eclair m modelled, therefore it should be updated. Flare or tail hook but it can’t have both that is a physical limitations of the aircraft.
In my opinion it would be preferable to have the éclair (no one wants to play with 16 countermeasures) but I do not know if Taiwan paid the éclair m dispenser or designed one on it’s own…
To be fair countermeasures are quite a mess on a lot of aircraft (j10 is modelled with 18 large + 36 small and it ended up with 72 large. All F-16 are messed up and modelled with combination of large and small caliber but only have small countermeasures…)
since they decided to update the amount of countermeasures on the 3D model they should update a lot of aircraft like they did for jaguar, MF1, F-5 family and F4 family…