what’s this missile on the outside pylon?
1 Like
Apparently a training variant of the MICA-IR.
4 Likes
After a few games in the M2K-5, I’ve concluded it’s really not worth playing the plane atm in Air RB. It is excellent and very fun in ground RB, but as it is right now where they’re dragging their feet on adding HMS to it, fixing the Super 530D, and adding TWS PD, it’s really not worth using it currently to make it more usable in Air RB. The Super 530D is obscenely slower than it should be.
I sincerely think this plane could stand to drop down to 11.7 and a BR rework thread should be around the corner where we could suggest that the plane is dropped down to 11.7 in lieu of missing features.
If we organized to have it dropped down to 11.7, it may get Gaijin to either drop it down there or finally stop delaying things and actually fixing the plane so it’s 12.0 worthy.
7 Likes
They don’t care. If there was a huge discrepancy in efficiency they’d care, but currently it has a fantastic win rate I think.
It’s too soon to say that it has a good winrate I think, for any plane that came this patch. They’ve refused to comment on the efficiencies so far. Maybe they will once the BR rework thread comes.
Mirage 2000-5F is quite good. It has high rip speed and loads of fuel so you can afterburn longer than anyone else. You get 2x free kill missiles and 2x more almost free kill missiles. You can even bring enough bombs to destroy 1x base granting you free RP.
4 Likes
Adding onto what MIG-23M said, you have examples such as this (with a grain of salt)
Mock combat scenarios like this or the F22 example are not a good performance index of how aircraft will actually perform, as they happen with specific parameters and limitations that can put much better aircraft at a significant disadvantage. Nor do we know the validity of the mock dogfights without primary sources on what exactly they were attempting to accomplish, and with what parameters
And regardless of how the Mirage 2000 performs in DCS … or Ace Combat for that matter … it will have little weight over how the jet performs in War Thunder as they are entirely separate games in how they work.
2 Likes
The boy is getting hammered down while he just wanted to have some fun. Ofc any person that has knowledge about aircrafts know that F22 loss many DF situations and even ones were they had zero hadicap at all. It is just this thread is about M2000 which is a frecnh plane which is why he only talked about Rafale beating F22. This way of doing it may also have been induced by the fact that americans citizens and any country citizen in general says that France is a country that sucks in every aspect and tend to mock our army more than anything else while we do have some powerfull ressources. Before downing someone think about why he puts his point in a specific way.
1 Like
It’s a wingless training Magic 2 you can recognize the shape and marks on it.
Just looking at the data, the 530D is both ever so slightly faster than the 7M, and accelerates faster than the 7M so idk what makes you say its “slower than it should be” seeing as its one of the fastest SARH’s ingame…
Fact is (regarding radar missiles losing tracks and missing easy targets) that most/all radar missiles are like that atm. Gaijin mustve screwed something up with them as they tend to go for missiles way more than they go for planes, and when 2 enemies are in a headon and firing missiles, they tend to distract eachother and throw both missiles off target. I have dozens of clips of 7M’s missing “perfect” targets as well to support this.
I said this in another post, but radar missiles and radars in general in WT are in a HORRIBLY unreliable place atm. Most, if not ALL radars in-game can’t hold a stable lock on target and bob around all over the place. Its not particularly obvious until you use something with zoom and notice that even at high altitudes with low clutter, radar locks just float around the target instead of sticking on them. I’m guessing this is either the cause, or something that’s also not helping with missile reliability now, as if the focused beam is floating around the target instead of sticking on them, there might be an increased likelihood of the missiles lock transferring to something else.
We should really be pushing gaijin to fix radar mechanics as a whole, because they really just destroyed their reliability back when they decided to make their locks all floaty. Multipath is also just getting excessive at this point with players literally being able to fly straight and level at low alt and have literally no fear of ever being damaged by a radar missile, which at this point is starting to feel more like an exploit with how much it can dictate how an engagement goes. If you aren’t abusing multipath to the fullest, you are immediately at a massive disadvantage against enemies now.
2 Likes
To add to this, afaik, a pretty common thing is to saddle the higher performance aircraft with multiple fuel tanks as well to try to even things out.
Tbf, ppl probably wouldn’t rip on France as much if they weren’t so insufferably elitist/prideful all the time…
1 Like
The AIM-7M has slightly less acceleration for the booster phase but for more than 2x the duration. Then, during the sustainer phase a similar thing happens. Less thrust, but maintains sufficient speed and has lower overall drag than the Super 530D. This disproportionately affects the Super 530D when target aircraft maneuver to bleed its’ energy.
However, the difference here if I recall correctly is that the Super 530D is still currently underperforming… Which is part of the issue. Currently has 31% larger caliber and only 1/2 of a single percentage more deltaV (0.4%).
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/955829235493273680/1126903057049976852/image.png
2 Likes
is the slower speed on the 530d a gaijin doesn’t have the proper drag or is it the over leading constantly bleeding its speed
u sure its the wrong calibre? quick search came up with 263mm calibre as well…
My point is mostly that considering how the 530D and 7M are very similar in deltaV, but the 530D attains its energy faster, its dubious to say the missile “obscenely slower than it should be”. It likely performs extremely similar to the most common adversary SARH in-game, both in terms of seeker and kinematics. Past testing I did supports this, but that was before the drag change to the missiles.
Im going by the primary Super 530D performance sheet rather than comparing it to other radar missiles.
The fuel mass is incorrect as well. The total fuel mass should be lower.
Seeing that the Super 530D has correct thrust, but not the correct stated speed, the only conclusion i can then make, is that it’s drag is too high.
2 Likes
Both. It’s guidance should be a lot more restrictive making it manuever less while further out in flight.
The missile design of both missiles are completely different (Super 530D and AIM-7F/M). The doctrine of the countries for the missiles were also different. The Super 530D is meant to better eliminate and kill enemy fighter jets quickly hence the higher manuevering limits, mach 5 speed, greater altitude difference, high thrust and acceleration. It is also supposed to lock onto fighter jets with seeker ranges much greater than any other missile in the game. But the shorter burn time and guidance duration (55 seconds) is because it was unlikely for an enemy fighter jet to get killed past 55 seconds against any SARH missile. The concern for France was high altitude fast Russian jets like Mig-25/31. France being on the coast of Western Europe did not see the concern of Soviet bombers over their airspace.
The AIM-7F/M places more emphasis on longer guidance duration and longer range to also include enemy bombers as one of its intended targets. This sacrifices acceleration. There was a concern of Soviet bombers at the time.
So all in all, Super 530D places a greater emphasis IRL against manuevering fighter jets yet we dont see this translated into the game.
5 Likes
What? The <M5.0 speed listed? Its not gonna get near M5.0 at basically any of the altitudes we play at in-game. WT is played at way too low of an altitude for that. Unless you have a source stating its supposed to be hitting substantially higher than ~M3.0 at low to medium alt, Id continue to believe its performance is likely right.