Hmm I didn’t know that, I knew the P-4 was All aspect but isn’t it marginally worse than 9L?
the P-5 being iRCCM would throw this thing quite high though no? like could it be 11.7 with an IRCCM missile? the platform itself is going to be quite a substantial frame to begin with?
as it upgrades a lot on what the mirage IIIE and such lack.
Will be intersting to say the least, I do hope it gets P-5s though
you think so? remember aim9L isn’t really found on a fighter till about 11.7 / 12.0
They should have splitted out Mirages IIIs into an early and late variant. The early at 10.3 with AIM-9E and AIM-9P3 and the late variant featuring AIM-9P5s
Still got a radar and engine from the sixties, albeit with improved aerodynamics…
Well, could well be that an early “silver” pre-1985 Mirage IIIS would be added at a later stage, no? We also had the upgraded Hunter Mk.58 for quite a while now, and only now are getting the “original” early variant…
10.3 is already to high for any Mirage without countermeasures in my opinion.
At that Br AIM-26B will already be somewhat useless.
Compression is the issue over all of course.
I do not thinkbMirage should suffer for it.
IIIE at 10.7 with MiG-21MF/SMT being 10.3 is quite the stretch already.
ah right, I thought its engine was slightly better.
seeing as its form 88
I’d say that perhaps the Mirage IIICS could fill that gap at 9.7/10.0
9.7? why would it be 9.7 the hunter F58 early, which is an F6 should be 9.7, the mirage 3C should be 10.0 as it is too in the french tree.
we dont want more compression.
(If thats not cool trivia i dont know what is)
Because a Mirage IIICS would be outfitted with Falcons and AIM-9Bs, making it the counterpiece to the MiG-21S - which is 9.7.
No, the single Mirage IIIC we had (J-2201) only used the FALCO in separation tests. The necessary TARAN radar and electronics to actually guide the missiles could not fit into the shorter IIIC fuselage, which is why the IIIS was then based on the IIIE airframe (and had an even slightly larger nose) instead.
Only the IIIS could launch FALCO’s, and were originally armed with FALCOS and the AIM-9B.
Fair enough, that makes an argument for a IIICS at 9.7 even stronger
has this been reported?
Mirage IIIC would likely be in a better position without Magic at 9.7 as well.
IIIE has no business being 10.7.
IIICJ should receive a similar treatment and we would end up with all the Cs at 9.7.
I really hope it at least gets regular 9ps while on live server also is the radar falcon pulse seeker?
Imsorry but a mirage 3C at 9.7 is gonna re compress the entire bracket?? why cantyou see that xD what is a venom going to do against a fully afterburning super sonic mirage? or a mig17 or any 8.7 .
Compression isn’t the answer. Also isnt there a report to give this thing aim9P-5s? the mirage currently being implemented or am i missing something?
EDIT: as well does this swiss 3C not get counter measures? , if so its yet another reason to be 10.0 as the french one doesn’t
Yes it does? it does absolutely great at 10.7
I’m talking about the Mirage IIICS and not the S we’ll be getting in the game. The CS with two AIM-9Bs, no countermeasures and RWR shouldn’t be a problem as far as the game is concerned, as we already have the MiG 19s and some Fishbeds at 9.3, the T-2 and MiG 21S at 9.7. The Mirage is equivalent in flight performance to all of those. Should the matchmaking get decompressed? Yeah. Will it get decompressed? No.
those also are ridiculously under BR’d man.
Not if we keep demanding stuff jammed in at BRs they shouldn’t be.
However, is it going to be the swiss equivelant of a milan? xD
9.7 aint too bad for that.
We’ll never get Br decompression lol. People have been demanding it since I’ve started playing in 2016 and nothing was ever done about it. It always got worse and worse, so frankly I can’t say I care much about it anymore.
And yes, it would effectively be a slower, but more maneuverable Milan ingame
