DCS Mirage 2000C Discussion

[sedenion]

Nobody says the M2000 wins all the time... ok, going back to the first asertion: The M2000 is good to fight Mig-21... everybody is okay ? Good !... tiring debate...

[Slipp]

Nobody says the M2000 wins all the time... ok, going back to the first asertion: The M2000 is good to fight Mig-21... everybody is okay ? Good !... tiring debate...

 

Mirage 2000 should be able to successfully fight pretty much any Russian plane in the game.

[Esac_mirmidon]

I dont think so.

 

With only two 530 with less range than the ER its going to be very difficult to beat a Su-27 in bvr. In CAC i need to know sustain and instantaneous turn rate but this could be a better arena for the Mirage.

[jojo]

There are plenty of examples of M2000 being whipped in unscripted dogfights by F-16s.

 

And surely the opposite too :music_whistling:

[jojo]

What about counter measurements in Mirage-2000C? Does it have some kind of EO/IR MWS or any other ECM capability (jammer etc...)? Or it have only RWR and simple countermeasures (chaff/flares)?

 

Mirage 2000C have integrated counter measure system with:

- RWR

- Jammer

- Chaff + Flare dispenser

 

RWR will looks like the F-15 rather than Russian led design.

 

As far as I know, IR MWS (MWS = DDM in French for Missile Launch Detector) is found only on Mirage 2000D and Mirage 2000N.

[jojo]

Momentum or inertia is only one parameter, when there are countless others, thrust to weight ratio (1.26 Su27 > 0.88 M2000C), avionics, ease of use, available weapons, countermeasures, etc. etc. etc.

Sure that difference is impressive. But let’s look at these numbers.

For Su-27 I’ll use DCS values in game and manual.

Engine thrust are bench rating with after burner. Installed thrust depends on air intake, speed, altitude, temperature…

Su-27

T/W = 1.26

Thrust = 12500kgx2 = 25000

25000/1.26 = 19841kg

Empty weight in DCS = 17500kg

 

19841kg – 17500kg = 2341kg of fuel, so 300kg less than half the normal take off fuel (5270kg)

 

Mirage 2000C:

T/W = 0.88

Thrust = 9700kg

9700/0.88 = 11022kg

Empty weight 7500kg

11022 – 7500kg = 3523kg, internal fuel = 3165 (so central fuel tank, almost empty).

If we take half fuel for Mirage :

7500+1582 = 9082

9700/9082 = 1.07

 

So yes Su-27 has better thrust/ to weight, but Mirage is not that bad.

1.26 Vs 0.88 figure is wrong.

 

 

Any plane can have hard time against Su-27 in BVR, so do M-2000C because Super 530D will have shorter range and is still Fox 1.

 

In dogfight the Mirage is lighter, has better max roll rate (270°/s Vs 180°/s), probably lower sustain turn rate due to lower T/W and delta wing speed bleeding at high AoA.

But it probably also has better instantaneous turn rate (Mirage 2000 is probably better than any other in that arena), so you have to use that, and kill quickly or run against fighters with better T/W.

FBW should also allow more "care free" maneuver than Su-27.

 

Mirage has 2 x DEFA 554 30mm gun (2x125 shells), firing each at 1800 rpm (3600 rpm combined, or 2400rpm in low rate mode) Vs 1 Gsh-301 for Su-27 (150 shells) = twice the fire power !

I think the radar and RWR will be more “user-friendly” too, as most western aircraft Vs Russian design.

Avionic, ease of use and countermeasures are all in favor of Mirage Vs Russian fighters.

Weapons are roughly equal in potential, but M-2000C will have fewer and no HMC.

 

MiG 29A will have hard time in BVR because of its lack of jammer and more equal weapon load.

Edited November 2, 2015 by jojo

[greco.bernardi]

I will fly mirage 2000c and i´m not care if its is or not the ultimate killer plane....i will enjoy to much to kill and be killed at this module. :)

[Slipp]

I dont think so.

 

With only two 530 with less range than the ER its going to be very difficult to beat a Su-27 in bvr. In CAC i need to know sustain and instantaneous turn rate but this could be a better arena for the Mirage.

 

How often were ER's carried by Russian planes in 80's or 90's? Surely ER wasn't common or available at all.

 

For more modern scenarios we'd need Mirage 2000-5.

 

But for 80's and 90's, two 530 will be more than enough to go against R-27R.

Edited November 2, 2015 by Slipp

[Esac_mirmidon]

Even the R version.

 

4 of them plus 2 T plus more fuel, plus more R-73 plus bigger more powerful radar. I think a clever Su-27 pilot could keep a Mirage 2000C defensive long enough to enter WVR or at least to be able to launch a R-27R within NEZ.

 

Obviously not an easy task but i think without knowing how powerful was the ECM suite of a Mirage 2000 on 80´s the Su-27 would win more BVR battles than lost against the 2000.

 

And the ER and ET entered service in 1990. The Matra 530D in 1988 so.

 

For example:

 

Su-27s of the Kluczewo 88th IAP on 1990 with ER.

 

[jojo]

Su-27s of the Kluczewo 88th IAP on 1990 with ER.

 

Yes, but without Sorbtsiya jammer :music_whistling:

 

Anyway, the fight will be fun :joystick:

[Esac_mirmidon]

Yes, almost even in much situations but IMHO a little advantage for the Su-27 because more fuel, more range, more missiles and maybe more numbers. But i´m not taking in count the ECM balance in the equation. I don´t know nothing about Mirage 2000 jammers in 1990.

[Robin_Hood]

The thing with air combat is that a slight advantage will generally be less of a factor than pilot skill, tactics and situation (whereas really big advantages can be much more of a factor).

Which is why the fight will probably be really fun :thumbup:

[Ganesh]

 

 

This would be great to have, as the limited flares mentioned in the video scared me a bit!

 

Yeah all the discussion is useless with only 18 Flares

Give me that upgrade!!! Otherwise i don´t buy it

[Moos_tachu]

plus bigger more powerful radar.

 

This will allow the Su-27 to detect the smaller and less detectable M2000 at a decent range... just as the smaller M2000's radar will detect the bigger and more detectable Su-27.

 

Size of radar antenna is proportional to size of airframe, so it's a draw...

Except that the M2000's shapes and hidden single engine give it far better RCS than the Flanker's shapes and nacelle-mounted twin engines.

 

Another comment on the missiles: don't forget the 530D's higher speed.

Higher speed means you hit first. The message to Flanker pilots is you'd better shoot first, or you're dead.

So R-27R only you can worry, and if you have R-27ER, the longer range won't be too much of a luxury.

 

Not that simple as you can see, and size is not always an advantage.

 

Regarding your question on the capabilities of the M2000's ECM suite, it's hard to find reliable data for comparisons with its counterparts.

But from everything I've heard and read, it's a domain in which French stuff has excellent reputation, putting it in the same class as US designs, and clearly above Russian designs.

 

So that would be another mark in the Mirage's "plus" column for BVR combat vs. Su-27.

[Esac_mirmidon]

For me the ECM factor its very important. A Mirage 2000 with an internal jammer could degrade enough the Flanker superior detection range radar to a certain degree where the 530D could be a dangerous opponent.

 

But maximum 45-50 km for the Matra must be degraded also because is only for cooperative non manouvering targets. Im guessing but i suposse the 530D could have a max effective range about 30-35 at best.

 

The R-27R has a supossed maximum range of 70 km and a effective range of 40 roughly speaking. So could the ECM beats the flankers STT mode until this 30-35 launch range? Or the N001 has power enough to burn through to a solid lock and launch before?

 

 

Very interesting discussion. But i think both are in a very similar situation in the early 90's. Again pilots training and tactics could decide. Gci support, Awacs, numbers must be a factor also.

 

And a very important feature. The datalink capability of the Flanker, existing from the very beggining, sharing data information on the MFD, something the Mirage 2000 didn´t had in the 90´s.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Esac_mirmidon

[jojo]

The R-27R has a supossed maximum range of 70 km and a effective range of 40 roughly speaking. So could the ECM beats the flankers STT mode until this 30-35 launch range? Or the N001 has power enough to burn through to a solid lock and launch before?

 

This 70km range myth is hard to kill :(

 

See here for R-27R range

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1938509&postcount=8

 

So clearly, R-27R and Super 530D are in the same range class. (max launch range in DCS manual 35km)

R-27ER will have an edge in range. (max launch range in DCS manual 66km)

Super 530D should have an edge in speed in its range (published max launch range 50km Vs head on target, the missile would travel about 35km)

 

A lot will depend on how ED will do things about ECM and Super 530D speed.

 

Basic Su-27 radar (N001) range is not that great. Published figure gives 100km Vs 3m² target (confirmed in real Su-27SK manual which gives 80-100km Vs head on target in look up mode above 1000m altitude, but doesn't specify the target size)

Edited November 3, 2015 by jojo

[Esac_mirmidon]

The maximum ranges are at optimal conditions. Very high very fast launches. And the table tells what i´m saying, a range about 35-40 Km for the engine rocket impulsion. The same Manual before is talking about maximum launch distance. In head on 50-60 Km, in rear aspect 16-18 Km.

 

The graphic you are pointing talks about Maximum Range for the missile rocket impulsion, not the maximum range of the missile itself. The rocket engine could stop but the missile has energy enough to travel a little more to the target. This is why 35 Km is not the maximum.

 

This is why i´m using effective range but it´s very dependant from launch circunstances, speed, altitude, aspect, etc.

 

But both 530D and R-27R suffer from the same degradation. At similar speeds, altitudes i think the R-27R could have a slight advantage in range, maybe balanced by the superior speed of the 530D. The Su-27 radar could lock in head on about 65 Km at best conditions so ECM could take some lot here or maybe not.

 

And also it´s supossed that the N001 radar was very ECM resistant so. Very difficult to tell who has the edge.

 

I think they are very similar around 90´s.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Esac_mirmidon

[GGTharos]

Rmax if a combination of many things. It MAY tell you something about the missile flight dynamics, but it doesn't have to. The only thing the Rmax tells you is that the pilot can launch at that range under specific conditions, and we don't even always know what those conditions are.

 

As for the 530D being faster than an ER, that is not likely. The ER is bigger and heavier because it is made out of rocket engine.

 

The 530D can probably do M4.5 if you launch it at M1.5 or more. The ER does it from M1.

[Beamscanner]

 

Are we expecting those towed decoys to come with the module..?

 

Because that would surely improve this birds chances against a flanker.

[*Rage*]

There is only one way to settle this discussion! I will be flying both :)

 

Seriously though alot depends on how the developers choose to model the missiles and ECM. They may have a different 'interpretation' to ED regarding range/ECM/ECCM etc. Thats assuming its not ED in the first place who will be modelling/updating the M2000 missiles for their release.

[BabaGanoosh]

Does anyone know if a skinning template will be available?

[Erab]

Does anyone know if a skinning template will be available?

 

I do hope for some IAF skins...

[Hook47]

This 70km range myth is hard to kill :(

 

See here for R-27R range

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1938509&postcount=8

 

So clearly, R-27R and Super 530D are in the same range class. (max launch range in DCS manual 35km)

R-27ER will have an edge in range. (max launch range in DCS manual 66km)

Super 530D should have an edge in speed in its range (published max launch range 50km Vs head on target, the missile would travel about 35km)

 

A lot will depend on how ED will do things about ECM and Super 530D speed.

 

Basic Su-27 radar (N001) range is not that great. Published figure gives 100km Vs 3m² target (confirmed in real Su-27SK manual which gives 80-100km Vs head on target in look up mode above 1000m altitude, but doesn't specify the target size)

 

Yea there is no way the 530D hauls faster than the ER my man...

[jojo]

Well, if you say so then we will have to trust you I guess...:D

 

Edit

Edited November 4, 2015 by jojo

[sedenion]

Both are claimed with max speed mach 4.5, but the S-530D is also claimed / known to have in fact a max speed near to mach 5.0... I think this will be hard to have accurate reliable information about these characteristics.. anyone know ?

 

I think this will depend how ED/Razbam modeled the S-530D