mattebubben

Not sure hard to find any good sources for range. And do you mean Aim-9P in general or Aim-9P3 (Most likely the Aim-9P we have modeled ingame at least visually) or do you mean one of the all aspect variants?. But in either case ive not been able to find any definate sources and those ive been able to find have stated different ranges. Some gives it the same range as the Aim-9L/M and some gives the Aim-9P slightly shorter range. And its also slightly less manuverable but all in all the all aspect variants should be pretty decent. And they cant be all that bad seeing as they were even used by the USAF for many years in decent numbers. (to complement the Aim-9L/M series and to be used when they did not need to carry the more expensive Aim-9L/Ms)

Well The All aspect Aim-9Ps are actually quite capable. (Aim-9P4 and Aim-9P5) And that has been the standard missiles amongst many of the major users of the F-5E for over 30 years. And i REALLY hope they will add either of those... As it would really make no sense not to add them. Since they are compatible they are very common for the F-5E across the world and it would in no way make the F-5E unbalanced etc...

Yes. Only the wingtip launchers can carry Aim-9s.

For me i only had this problem with Rudder Pedals. Ive had the Mirage 2000 since the Dec 25 Release. And ive never had this problem except for when i plugged it to the Rudder pedals i bought (CH Pedals that i returned later as they were to narrow for me) With Those rudder Pedals i had the same problem as you guys seem to Experience (As soon as you start gathering speed the aircraft Pulls hard to the side Left in my case and is pretty much impossible to stop the turn) and i only had that problem with the rudders for the mirage all other aircraft worked fine. But as soon as i went back to the Joystick Twist rudder the problem vanished.

well actually no =P. In British English its ELK and the only reason the name in American english changed is due to a mistake/cofusion. When the first colonists from England got to North America the Elk (or Moose) they knew kinda what a Elk (moose) was as it existed in the european mainland but since it has been Extinct in Britain for a long time already none of them had ever seen one. So when the Saw a large 4 legged animal with Antlers (Wapiti) they called it an Elk. So when they found a real elk (moose) the name was already taken xD. But Internationally Elk is name for moose and most European languages have names very close to Elk in their own languages (as they are all related) (Alces Alces in Latin, Elk in English,Elch in German,Elg in Danish / Norweigan,Älg in Swedish,Alce in spanish and so on) Sorry for the Language Lecture ^^.

Either way the Mirage Line is starting to be pretty filled out. With the Mirage 2000 and now the Mirage III as well as the Mirage F1 from Aviodev. The line is getting pretty completed. Only Mirages missing after that would be the Mirage V based of the Mirage III and the Mirage IV Strategic Bomber.

Yea an announcement on the 6th with a release after the 21st would make sense. the 21st is a Teusday so maby Pre orders on 21st and the Launch on the friday? (24th) Unless they can talk ED into doing a Update on Teusday =P. One can always dream =>.

Seems like its almost time for this to come into effect =).

Yes but is there any idea / Plans in roughly what order they will be released in after we have the AG radar Support. Will they all be worked on side by side or will some be a bit more focused (or are already further along) It just feels a bit strange if the A-6 and AV-8B+ would come before the A-7 as we have heard about it for so long while the A-6 and the AV-8B+ were announced pretty recently. And for me the A-7 is the aircraft i look the most forward to of all the DCS aircraft in development (Not just from Razbam but over all). But i trust you guys so if you guys are saying it will be made sooner or later i will trust you guys. Though i would lie if i said i would not prefer it to come out sooner ^^.

They already stated they might turn it into a E but that it remains to be seen.

How are they close to eachother?... They might look similar (as in they are both French Deltas) But other then that they are completely different. one Is a modern 1980s FBW fighter and the Other is a early 1960s Barebones Fighter. They will play out and preform VERY differently and will be very different to fly.

As already stated work on other Modules dont impact the Progress of the Mirage 2000. A dev Team is large and the members are specialised at different areas. So when they are at a part with the module that the module is finished in many of those areas so a number of Dev members can no longer contribute as their areas of expertise has been finished it only makes sense that those members move on to lay down the basics on other modules. Instead of them just doing nothing while other team members finish up the Mirage 2000.

Thats Because it is the Mirage III =P As They stated a few times in the Thread Already. A Mirage IIICJ Shahak was the Israeli nickname for their Mirage IIIs.

Sure but In a Dev team most of the Devs have different Work Areas. So when some Devs are done with they work on a module and cant really help with polishing / bug fixing it only makes sense that they might move on to start working on a different module. They way when the all the work is done on the module you already have some of the basics for the next module. Instead of Team Members just sitting there Fiddling their thumbs when are done with the areas where they have expertise. So work on other Modules does not take away from the work on the Mirage 2000.

A Mirage III would be amazing no matter the Variant. As would a Mirage V.

The Cessna was Likely a FAC aircraft. But yea Using Carriers for Aircraft Delivery was not that uncommon. (for aircraft that were not able to just fly to the destination)

While the F-5B is kinda similar to the T-38 (has a similar nose etc and has no onboard cannon) the F-5E still retains all the capabilities of the Single Seat F-5E (it looses 1 cannon some internal fuel and is a bit heavier but otherwise its as capable) It has a radar 1 cannon and can carry all ordnance the Single Seat can. And it also twin Radar Screens so it could be a fun two seat aircraft especially if they gave it AGM-65 capability (if they found enough info for it) AMG-65 Capability was actually more common for the Two seaters then for the Single seaters. As the Two seater gave the benefit of having a WSO (back seater) to handle the Maverick and its display while the pilot could fly the aircraft. So some users would get the maverick displays for their two seaters and have it do more of a strike role and leave the air-air to the single seaters (as they had slightly better flight performance etc). But even if i would love to see a F-5F i dont think its to likely sadly as it would take some major work. It would need a modified Flight model and some structural changes (more then just adding a second cockpit as its nose it stretched and some other changes) and also they would have to work on the Two seat capability (so they would have to make two cockpits even if the front one should be pretty identical to the F-5E) If they make it i will probably buy it but i would not count on it. But id much rather have a Two seat variant of a fighter then someone making another Trainer =P.

A F-5F would be nice as you could still fly it alone and operate it pretty much fully. Especially if they gave it AGM-65 Support =) (with the Backseater being able to focus on using the Maverick with the Pilot focusing on pilot stuff)

There were Un-Upgraded F-5Es with Refuling Probes. It was an Option from the start. As an example. Here is a Moroccan F-5E on its way to be Delivered in 1981. And as you can see it has a Refuling Probe.

If they add it it should be optional. I dont think they should add it as default as most F-5Es never had the Refueling probe.

Yes there was. Its just that Canada Decided for the Refuling Probe for the aircraft they bought (as any Canadian fighter will be required to fly long distances so a refuling probe is a must) But look at the NF-5. the CF-5s Built by Canadair for the Netherlands airforce. They did not have the Refuling probe. Because the Netherlands airforce did not see it as needed as it was only supposed to be used in the European Theatre and as such the distances where small enough to where it had not need for Refuling capabilities to fulfill its mission. Just because The Canadian airforce decided on the refuling probe does not mean it was not an Optional addition. And out of the two nations that Acquired new built CF-5s (Canada and the Netherlands) one of them Chose a Refuling Probe and the other did not.

Well they have stated they would be willing to add the Maverick if they got good information on how it was used with the F-5E (How the AGM-65 capable display looked / worked etc)

The Refuling Probe was Optional. So if the User wanted a Refuling probe their F-5Es would be fitted with Refuling probes before Delivery. The Probe was optional with the CF-5 as well.

Just remember You dont need to jettison the Centerline External tank to enter AA config. As long as its empty of fuel its light enough. So when your centerline is empty you should change to AA config. (as the CONF warning light will be lit if you are not in AA config at that point)

What about PIPin and PIPout? :music_whistling: