Galinette

It gives a very accurate value of the minimum required optimal lift/drag ratio. Then if you keep the exact same angle of attack, adjust the engine thrust carefully, and find the speed at which you can sustainably turn in these conditions, it gives a minimum point on the STR chart. We are basically at this point.

I don't know how to explain it better. There are several engine versions in the M2000, all variants of the Snecma M53. M53-5 was the original engine of the first produced airframes, then M53-P2 was developped, installed on the later airframes. In the AdA, all M53-5 were gradually replaced by M53-P2 (retrofit) and the newer engine is now the only one for the whole french M2000 fleet. There are still M53-5 engines in service in other countries. The newer engine has significantly more thrust in both MIL and AB, for instance wikipedia states +8% in AB and +18% in MIL. All this info is publicly available if you search a bit. Now the video : this is a pre-2007 video taken in Orange, France. This is likely a twin seater as B&W hudcam is typical (unless a color video was converted to B&W but unlikely). Twin seaters were still M53-5 in 2007 at Orange, so there is a significant chance this is video was recorded on an aircraft with a M53-5. This of course is, from my own source. It's not openly verifiable unless you have yours. (I'm the FM author)

To be compared with the very likely 10% engine performance with the M53-5 and M53P2

About +10% thrust with full AB

One important detail, the engine in the video is likely a M53-5 which has less thrust than the M53P2 modelled in DCS. Source : pilots, terrain (orange), aircraft (B&W -> twin seater), date (<2007), and date of M53P2 introduction on twin seaters in Orange.

Oops, yes. Fixed in next release.

It has been asked to a Mirage pilot already, no, Mirage 2000's are always filled to 100%. And confirmed with 100% confidence that this demo wasn't an exception. Also when doing a partial fill you can't know accurately how the fuel will distribute in the various tanks, so you can have imbalance, and the gauge will be wrong (since the internal level is extrapolated from the fuselage tank level gauge, wing tanks having no gauges). So it's just not possible. On the other hand partial external tank fill is in the procedures (and actually done to adjust T/O weight)

Dear Sir, You forgot air density... And guess what, if you divide your result (1.65) by 1.225 (approx air density at sea level) you find 1.34

No, lift coefficient at 28.50 AoA is 1.40 with slats fully deployed. I don't know where you get this data from. When it comes to static thrust, the acceleration (Jx coefficient in HUD) is exactly where it should be for every loadout.

He's citing Ian Black, he's not him He likely only lost the afterburner (and this may be a safety from the FADEC), not a full flameout. The backwards slide stunt has been done in airshows, and they don't flame out.

That's incorrect. You do not need to hold start in any way. And the procedure did not change for a couple of months in this regard You likely have an recent issue in your controller setup. Do you have any bind set to 'Throttle Cutoff Unlock' or 'Engines STOP' ? Also check the idle detent value in the special options.

Yes, we know this is confusing, but so far we can't avoid the sliders. There was an attempt at hiding the sliders, it worked on new missions (for which sliders are 64/234 by default) but on older missions, especially on MP servers, this resulted in people not being able to drop CMs, being limited server side by a hidden quantity value, so the change was reverted. It would have required all MP server admins to update their missions. You should always set sliders to 64/234 (this is the default on newly created missions) and ignore the number. If not this can limit the actual number of CMs that you can release. Internal will be loaded with 16/112 External is as shown on the ECLAIR slot. Actual loaded CM count is in noted your kneeboard for post-rearm check.

No, as this is unfortunately a DCS counter measure system limitation.

When he says the mirage gains speed, it seems to me it has -10° slope. As said before, a dogfight video isn't a proof, energy is not constant, and skill is involved. Another example, in the first tacview images, the F-16 is gaining altitude while turning, the Mirage is loosing altitude. The mirage has more initial energy and has an advantage. Skills skills skills.

Well yes the idea that delta wings are as aerodynamic as an ironshoe, whereas classic wings are cutting through air like a knife, are occasionally shared in sim forums, but no. The "enormous drag" is a myth. Yes, if you look at wing only models, using the same wing profile, same wing area, and compare a delta to a classical wing, there is a difference in favor of the classical design, but it's measured in percents, not "enormous drag difference", and this only at low AoAs. Now add body, pylons, cockpit, high lift devices (slats, flaps), egrets, nose, lift bodies, flat bellies, various wing profiles, different masses, engine thrust (and actual engine thrust in a turn is not the static thrust you find by simple web searches), and high AoAs, and thing get complicated. And you don't get "the group of classic wing fighters" vs "the group of delta wings fighter" with the former one well above the latter when it comes to performance. Also add to this that delta aerodynamics have been continuously improved. You cant put a Rafale delta wing on the same performance box as a F-106 delta dart.

Since you started this discussion, you could highlight it with a video proof too, this will motivate other people to do so. This being said, any BFM/dogfight video will never be a "proof" as skill is generally a greater outcome factor than anything else.

There are twice the number of seats, so no And besides, even considering front seat only, the avionic is about 99% different

No

The option doesn't display AoA in the HUD, but it makes the analog AoA indicator on the left visible even if it's hidden by the HUD housing. It isn't restricted to users without trackIR, but it's mostly useful to them, as with TrackIR/VR you can move your head to the left. You toggle it with a bind.

Yes (I need to ask a badge) And you do nothing wrong! FBW (should) take(s) cares of the rudder for turns. Pedals are used mostly for crosswinds landing and take off. They can be sometimes useful for finely adjusting A/G gun aim and for BFM (stall turn)

That's correct about my name Yes, pilots never use the PSIC push button as far as I know

This is incorrect "PSIC switch" bind is in "RDI radar" section. It corresponds to the push button labelled "PSIC" on the radar panel (left console). "STT/TWS Toggle" bind is in "HOTAS" section. It corresponds to the thumb button on the stick. Now both have exactly the same function. The first one was labelled like this because that's how it's labelled on the actual cockpit. The second one was labelled by english function since it has no label on the HOTAS. Both were kept because they both exist in the physical cockpit. This can be somewhat misleading.

That's correct, rudder FBW model is not 100% done yet. We are still getting more information on this. As a result, the aircraft might get excessive slide in this condition Flat turn rate and rudder authority is still being tuned as well.

You should consider playing chess. The game is quite stable for a while

Things have changed since then... It's rather unfair saying most DCS modules are unfinished, if you haven't tested them recently. Yes, it was far from finished one year ago.