7rooper Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 It's a Magic My rig specs: Intel Core i7 4770 @3.4Ghz // Corsair 16GB DDR3 // MoBo Asus Z87K // HDD 1TB 7200RPM // eVGA Nvidia GTX 760GT 2GB DDR5 // LG 3D 47" 1920x1080 // Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS // Saitek Combat Pro Pedals // Thrustmaster MFD Cougar pack // PS3 Eye + FTNOIR
Rangi Posted September 12, 2015 Posted September 12, 2015 http://florent1973.free.fr/FrenchAirWings/francais/aviation/armement/air_air/magic2/magic2_fiche.htm It's in French but as far as I can make out the above missile is an exercise magic as stated by WinterH. PC: 6600K @ 4.5 GHz, 12GB RAM, GTX 970, 32" 2K monitor.
sedenion Posted September 13, 2015 Posted September 13, 2015 http://florent1973.free.fr/FrenchAirWings/francais/aviation/armement/air_air/magic2/magic2_fiche.htm It's in French but as far as I can make out the above missile is an exercise magic as stated by WinterH. (approx translation) For reasons of economy, a training version with only the homing head was created because of the missile wear out during flight. The replacing of a simple tube equipped with a homing device costs less than a complete missile, equipped with explosive charge, propeller, proximity fuse and fins system.
Rangi Posted September 13, 2015 Posted September 13, 2015 (approx translation) Thanks for the translation. PC: 6600K @ 4.5 GHz, 12GB RAM, GTX 970, 32" 2K monitor.
Zeus67 Posted September 13, 2015 Posted September 13, 2015 Today, nobody is safe from the M2000C. "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." "The three most dangerous things in the world are a programmer with a soldering iron, a hardware type with a program patch and a user with an idea."
Jumbik Posted September 13, 2015 Posted September 13, 2015 War Never been so much fun .... Bombs Never been so much fun .... Do, or do not, there is no try. -------------------------------------------------------- Sapphire Nitro+ Rx Vega 64, i7 4790K ... etc. etc.
VikingTsunami Posted September 13, 2015 Posted September 13, 2015 RELEASE IT TO MEEEEEE [sIGPIC]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic18896_1.gif[/sIGPIC]
Stratos Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 The variant represented can carry any tpe of targetting pod? I don't understand anything in russian except Davai Davai!
QuiGon Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 The variant represented can carry any tpe of targetting pod? It can't carry any kind of targeting pod at all as far as I know. Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!
Bidartarra Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 For single seaters only M2000-9 carries a targeting pod I think. The 2 seaters (-D and -N) do though.
jojo Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 It can't carry any kind of targeting pod at all as far as I know. Yes, Mirage 2000 C doesn't carry targeting pod. For export Mirage 2000 with RDM radar the 2000 EAD (UAE) had the capacity (now upgraded to 2000-9), and maybe Mirage 2000 H in India. But it's "home made" with Israeli targeting pod. Not sure if it was twin seat or single seat Mirage. Mirage fanatic ! I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2. Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi
mattebubben Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Today, nobody is safe from the M2000C. whats the size of those bombs? MK 82?
Fer_Fer Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 It looks very nice looking forward to release :)
CrazyShooter Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 As the Mirage has no targeting pod, does it have some sort of dive bombing calculator to achieve some degree of bombing accuracy?
didilman Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Look Wags picture he have a M2000. http://forums.eagle.ru/member.php?u=3338
Zeus67 Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 As the Mirage has no targeting pod, does it have some sort of dive bombing calculator to achieve some degree of bombing accuracy? It mainly uses the INS system for CCRP purposes. It does have a CCIP as well. "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." "The three most dangerous things in the world are a programmer with a soldering iron, a hardware type with a program patch and a user with an idea."
Hook47 Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Look Wags picture he have a M2000. http://forums.eagle.ru/member.php?u=3338 Looks like Wags is as excited as we are! Our first Gen 4 multi role jet, baby!
kazereal Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 (edited) AFM vs SFM, which one is better? The differences between the AFM and the SFM is as follows: The AFM provides better control to the developer of the aircraft characteristics, with the SFM you surrender all control to the SIM. BUT!!! and there is a very important one: Aerodynamically speaking, a really well done SFM would be indistinguishable from an AFM. In the M2000C case, at this moment it is flying with the best SFM that we could achieve. Her flight characteristics, and that means a lot of graphics curves at different regimes collectively known as drag polars, are as close as possible to the real aircraft. That also includes engine performance as well. Our AFM developer, an aeronautic engineer, created this SFM. Now that we have that SFM, for development purposes and to establish a base against which we can test everything, we are developing the AFM. The AFM takes more time to develop and fine tune, since it gives us total control of the aircraft. So, yes. At this time we are flying with a SFM but eventually we will have our AFM, which right now is in early alpha stage. I'll skip the part about what the difference is in generic case (theoretically speaking), but in the DCS simulation there are very clear differences with using SFM and AFM. Effect of damaged wings to flight model needs AFM. Proper ground contact handling needs AFM. Stalling, flatspin and so on are easy to notice. I would suggest your developer takes a step out from FSX and start comparing what the different flight models really are like. Edited September 14, 2015 by kazereal "I would have written a shorter post, but I did not have the time."
Svend_Dellepude Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 (edited) I'll skip the part about what the difference is in generic case (theoretically speaking), but in the DCS simulation there are very clear differences with using SFM and AFM. Effect of damaged wings to flight model needs AFM. Proper ground contact handling needs AFM. Stalling, flatspin and so on are easy to notice. I would suggest your developer takes a step out from FSX and start comparing what the different flight models really are like. Zeus67 said: Aerodynamically speaking, a really well done SFM would be indistinguishable from an AFM. Aerodynamically!! Edited September 14, 2015 by Svend_Dellepude [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Win10 64, Asus Maximus VIII Formula, i5 6600K, Geforce 980 GTX Ti, 32 GB Ram, Samsung EVO SSD.
kazereal Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 (edited) Zeus67 said: Aerodynamically speaking, a really well done SFM would be indistinguishable from an AFM. Aerodynamically!! That is a really arrogant claim. And I would really like to see someone to manage pull that off.. Really, do go ahead. I can admit I'm not expert on aerodynamics but I'm curious to see what you can do. Would not be the first time someone making claims like that.. Edited September 14, 2015 by kazereal "I would have written a shorter post, but I did not have the time."
ED Team NineLine Posted September 14, 2015 ED Team Posted September 14, 2015 That is a really arrogant claim. And I would really like to see someone to manage pull that off.. Really, do go ahead. I can admit I'm not expert on aerodynamics but I'm curious to see what you can do. Would not be the first time someone making claims like that.. Whoa whoa... lets not get too wound up. You can question his opinions, but dont start in with the insults, its his opinion that he can pull of a good SFM, I bet he can. I dont think that was meant to be arrogant, I think its confidence in their product. Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**
kazereal Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Whoa whoa... lets not get too wound up. You can question his opinions, but dont start in with the insults, its his opinion that he can pull of a good SFM, I bet he can. I dont think that was meant to be arrogant, I think its confidence in their product. Hmm.. I don't know how that sounded to you but I don't think it was insulting. Tone really does not carry well over text perhaps.. Anyway, there can be claimed that SFM flies well when you are flying level, constant speed, no crosswind and so on and so on. The thing is that does not matter since it is very rare to fly like that: these are combat aircraft and not passenger airliners. They are normally used in parts of flight envelope that civilian aircraft are not used at. And that means the "corner cases" will matter that much more. I think I've expressed my scepticism here. "I would have written a shorter post, but I did not have the time."
Recommended Posts