According to newspaper of 1960th, the Mirage IIIS would have the best radar in Europe. Reality in WT, it is not …
Judging the quality of Swiss newspapers today if it comes to reliability of info, that doesn’t really fill me with too much confidence… = /
3 Likes
that is, the radar will remain the same and this is not a bug but a given?
I just flew it in sim here
considering that everyone there flies at low altitudes… and I’m like a fool with a blind radar and firecrackers with an overload of 10g
To be fair I think everyone says that because no one will challenge them if its wrong as it means proving there’s a better radar and therefore showing a competitor the extent of another radars capabilities
SAAB says the same thing with the PS-01 and PS-46 radars found on the J35F and JA37 respectively
1 Like
Considering it meant European made aircraft in the 60s and that War Thunder is not even a real simulator…
You face some rather modern planes in 60s Mirage III/5 variants.
I have been playing the mirage a bit and i say, give it aim9P-3 and keep it at 10.3, like its not like there is plane with more aim9ps at the same br, or planes with better missiles overall
1 Like
Whats wrong with the radar? I thought it was one of the best basic search radars I’ve used. Lack of ACM is about the only thing bad about it. Use the smallest sweep to aquire targets that you have visual on, and it has good width and range options, and plenty of vertical tilt.
It is a place holder / copy paste from the French mirage 3
No it isn’t, it has completely different specifications in game:
…
2 Likes
Would be nice but that unfortunately is not how that works.
Im still confused on one thing.
Does the radar have boresight/acm or not?
it does not, at least in game not sure about irl
Also not sure, as I have no evidence for or against it.
But one should keep in mind the radar was conceived as radar for an interceptor, not a dogfighter, at a time where radars were still weak, inflexible and clumsy. I’d assume the TARAN has nothing like a ACM mode, but again, no proof.
The AIM-26B Falco missiles are so infuriatingly dogshit when it comes to chaff.
Are they Pulse IRL? because in-game they behave like pulse ( since the seeker values are COPY PASTE from AIM-9C ) , and they stop guiding after ONE chaff.
yes, they are pulse and failry correctly modeled
2 Likes
Hey look thats me!
Yeah they are pulse but thats not actually what causes them to be easily chaffed, pulse would mean it has a hard time determining ground from plane which isnt in game. The actual cause for the chaff issues is the tracking type and how gaijin have it on Distance tracking whereas it should also do angular tracking which negates chaff to an extent (its not an amraam its not that good)
the biggest issue would arguably be the Mirage’s radar if the seeker for the falcon was correct but whilst doing the bug reports for the falcon i had no idea what trailing edge or angular or distance tracking was so it was missed out and now we have it like this, hopefully it will be fixed but i wouldnt hold your hopes too high
well, all the people started taking chaff reflectors en masse
the first few days you could still find a fool who maneuvered a little hoping that the falcon wouldn’t hit
now our close-range missiles are a laughing stock and long-range ones only make sense against fools
and yes, in over 100 battles I probably never fought against 9.3, but almost always against 11.3-11.0
As Swiss Mirage IIIS C.70 has been added as a part of update 2.47 Leviathans,
Moved to Implemented Suggestions. o7
1 Like