Mirage 2000 digest: read this if you aren't clear on what it is/does!

[Gladman]

Just a quick Wikipedia search and it turns out the Egyptians used the ARMAT on the M and BM versions. Doesn't say anything about the C.

 

Quote:

Egypt was the first export buyer, ordering 16 single-seat Mirage 2000M and four 2000BM trainers in late 1981, with deliveries beginning in 1986. The Egyptians also purchased ATLIS II pods and a wide range of appropriate munitions, including Magic and Super 530 AAMs, AS-30L laser-guided air-to-surface missiles (ASMs), and Armat anti-radiation missiles (ARMs).

[BlackLion213]

Only with this module you'll be able to fly the best-looking fighter ever (ex-aequo with the Spitfire). :D

 

++

Az'

 

I first saw the Sky Fighters videos on this forum and it really upped my excitement for the Mirage 2000. The footage is beautiful and the Mirage is quite photogenic - nearly as much as the F-14! ;)

 

Pretty hard to compete with the French when it comes to aesthetics! :thumbup:

 

-Nick

[VincentLaw]

Just a quick Wikipedia search and it turns out the Egyptians used the ARMAT on the M and BM versions. Doesn't say anything about the C.

There are photos of the Mirage 2000C RDM carrying ARMATs. I don't have proof for or against the RDI versions, but if it can't carry the ARMAT then it is probably the only French version of the Mirage 2000 that can't. The ARMAT doesn't require a radar to use it, so the RDI itself is not a technical limitation in this regard.

 

This document by RAND includes the ARMAT for the D, N, and -5

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1235/MR1235.chap10.pdf

 

Edited September 21, 2015 by VincentLaw

[VTJS17_Fire]

Does the 2000C have A/A tacan?

[jojo]

Does the 2000C have A/A tacan?

 

Yes.

 

Can anyone find one picture or Mirage 2000EM with Armat ? Even then it wouldn't be Mirage 2000 C RDI...

 

This Mirage 2000C RDM flew at Paris Le Bourget air show with AS37 Martel missiles for marketing purpose in 1985.

 

In the same way a Mirage 2000N flew with Atlis laser pod, Matra BGL or AS30L, but these weapons were not operational on Mirage 2000N. It was a figuration of what the future Mirage 2000D will be able to do and its intended export variant Mirage 2000S which never happened!

 

RAND document is full of BS. By the time Mirage 2000-5 entered service ARMAT was obsolete!

I don't have time to tell you everything wrong in this document...

[FraserNZL]

Hey zues I understand that there is a great deal of work in coding radar and systems but would it be possible after release of the RDI variant could you possibly do a RDM variation as a add on so we can choose what we want to do when we fly ? Just a thought. I'd gladly pay for a add on like that

[goestrip]

If i'm a little disapointed, it's by our reaction toward this module which is not even there yet. French are famous for whining, but looks like this (awesome) french plane is making everyone become one ;-)

 

It's gonna be an awesome module, which such a great plane deserve !

[jojo]

If i'm a little disapointed, it's by our reaction toward this module which is not even there yet. French are famous for whining, but looks like this (awesome) french plane is making everyone become one ;-)

 

It's gonna be an awesome module, which such a great plane deserve !

 

:megalol:

 

Very good !

[Skjold]

Thanks for the clarification.

[Pikey]

Just in case it's an option, I think i'd be happy if there was a later update to whatever export version that contained additional variants and technology for a smaller fee. I'd never ask for soemthign for nothing, I know what the C version should be, in terms of effort to add things I bet the market could come to an arrangement.

[Zomba]

Actually I'm glad it's the slightly older M2000C RDI variant, it places the Mirage as an underdog to the big modern powerhouse fighters. It's so much more rewarding to splash an F-15 with the Mig-21bis than something on par with it and i'm looking forward to a similar feeling with the Mirage. Using less capable aircraft forces you to rely on your wits and skill rather than the sheer brute capability of the machine to dominate. I can see people using very similar tactics as those developed for the Mig-21 to engage the top tier fighters.

[VincentLaw]

So, I decided to go to the library today to see what I could find, and there are a large number of publications stating that the ARMAT can be used with the Mirage 2000. Two of these publications specifically mention the 2000C, while at least one other can be assumed by the context and date. There is absolutely no published contradiction to the possible compatibility of the RDI versions with the ARMAT. Being able to fire an ARMAT has nothing to do with the radar.

Combined with French military/Dassault tendency to be very secretive about detailled capabilities, implementation and the like

Maybe a little out of context, but this is exactly the problem. We can't find specific details about the 2000C RDI and the ARMAT because France doesn't want us to know. There is more reason to believe it is capable than not, even if the AdA usually gives the SEAD mission to Jaguars and F1s.

 

Here is my list of sources and contained quotes relating the Mirage 2000 to the ARMAT:

 

• Dassault Mirage: The Combat Log, Schiffer Military/Aviation History, 1996, p. 20.
  -- "Specification-Mirage 2000C [...] ARMAT anti-radiation missiles"
   
  
• "Variant Briefing: Dassault Mirage 2000", World Air Power Journal, vol. 37, Summer 1999
  -- "An early weapon to be cleared was the MATRA ARMAT antiradiation missile, seen here carried by a 2000C-S1."
   
  
• Jane's Air-Launced Weapons, Issue 8, Jane's Information Group, 1989.
  -- "[ARMAT] has been cleared for carriage by Jaguar, Mirage F1, and Mirage 2000 aircraft."
   
  
• The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Aircraft Armament, Salamander Books Limited, 1987, p. 97.
  -- "Armat has been in action from Mirage F1EQ Aircraft of the Iraqi air force, and is also in service with French Mirage 2000s."
   
  
• The European Missile Success Story, TTU-Certes, 2005, p. 126.
  -- "[ARMAT] weapons for Mirage F1 and Mirage 2000"
   
  
• International Electronic Countermeasures Handbook, Horizon House Publications, Inc., 2004, p. 149.
  -- "Usual load is two [ARMAT] missiles for a Mirage 2000"
   
  
• Les Missile Tactiques de 1945 à 1995, Paris: Centre des hautes études de l'armement, Département d'histoire de l'armement, 2004, p. 152.
  -- "160 missiles [ARMAT] furent produits pour équiper le Mirage F1 et le Mirage 2000"
   
  
• The Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapons Systems, Naval Institute Press, 1997.
  -- "ARMAT antiradar missiles carried by a French air force Mirage 2000"

 

Here is another photo of an ARMAT loaded on a Mirage 2000C I found:

 

Edited September 23, 2015 by VincentLaw

[Toxic]

Nice information :). I cannot wait til I am in the cockpit of the 2000C!

[jojo]

Vincent Law: We can't go forward if you don't read answers. All have been said. Outdated books from people who don't know won't change that :

- France never purchased Armat but AS37 Martel.

- Martel have not been fitted to any Mirage 2000.

- Armat is an export ARM missile fitted to export Mirage F1 and export Mirage 2000.

- Mirage 2000 C is French only.

 

Pictures of Armat on French Mirage 2000C were done for Paris Air Show 1985 to promote the system for export orders...usual practice.

 

The only question which remains is "gameplay" purpose. It's up to Razbam/ M2M & ED.

Edited September 23, 2015 by jojo

[QuiGon]

Even if it has been used on the Mirage 2000C RDI, it wouldn't help much unless there is info on how it works exactly. If RAZBAM is supposed to integrate it, then they need to know how it works (avionics), which buttons to push and what kind of feedback the missile gives (e.g. screen display, HUD display, audio feedback, ...) and how it's deployed (e.g. how to aim it). Unless there is such kind of information available I don't see it happen. Let alone the fact, that we don't even know, if it's been used on this variant of the Mirage.

[WinterH]

Funny thing about ARMAT, being one of the older anti radar missiles, it had quirky guidance. It had 3 different seeker head options that could track a specific radar type only. Whatever seeker your missile had determines what radar you can engage. It was also fairly slow, barely supersonic apparently. Not too long a range either.

 

So if modeled properly, forget about firing any and all targets of opportunity, most newer ones probably won't even be targetable by it. So no "hmm which radar should I take out first" business like we do with Su-25T (which I don't know accurate or not either). And even then, after firing, since it is particularly big and slow, if there is anything that can engage missiles around target it will most likely just get blown out of sky.

 

So in light of this is it still a missile to long for inclusion against data for it's use in AdA? Or should we take gameplay yet further by including the missile, and making it able to target any radar as well...?

[Azrayen]

There is absolutely no published contradiction to the possible compatibility of the RDI versions with the ARMAT. Being able to fire an ARMAT has nothing to do with the radar.

Agreed. Radar itself is not an issue.

Separation (launch/release) would be the same for 2000C RDM and RDI (or export version such as the EM) so this is not an issue either (provided separation/launch tests were made?).

 

OTOH the possible compatibility of the RDI versions with the ARMAT also depends on the combat system and associated wiring.

Do you know if the RDI, with its new "PCA" (Poste de Commande Armement / Weapon Control Panel) retains the ability that may have been possible for the older RDM? Do you know if the "BGS" (Boitier de Génération de Symboles) stayed the same? Perhaps there were new symbology needed for the RDI? Perhaps they decided to replace some ARM-specific mods/symbols with totally unrelated modes/symbols, due to any reason (one I can think of is lack of available memory)?

 

Rest assured, VincentLaw, that I would be happy to be able to use this missile if Razbam feels confident enough to integrate it. But as far as we know, it would be an arrangement with reality that we try to simulate. I'm not unconfortable with that specific case, because (as earlier) I'm not saying it's not feasible. I'm saying it was not done (due to absence of requirement).

People with an tougher position regarding this can always choose not to use it nor allow its use on their servers/missions.

 

Funny thing about ARMAT, being one of the older anti radar missiles, it had quirky guidance. It had 3 different seeker head options that could track a specific radar type only. Whatever seeker your missile had determines what radar you can engage. It was also fairly slow, barely supersonic apparently. Not too long a range either.

Indeed. Would provide for an much harder challenge than using good old Su-25T and its Kh-xx.

BTW the (comparatively) low speed of the missile comes from its (comparatively) big size, which in turn comes from its origin as an anti-ship missile.

[VincentLaw]

Vincent Law: We can't go forward if you don't read answers. All have been said. Outdated books from people who don't know won't change that :

- France never purchased Armat but AS37 Martel.

- Martel have not been fitted to any Mirage 2000.

- Armat is an export ARM missile fitted to export Mirage F1 and export Mirage 2000.

- Mirage 2000 C is French only.

No, we don't need to move "forward" because your statement is wrong. The ARMAT is not an export only missile. It is used by France.

 

From International Electronic Countermeasures Handbook, page 149:

"The French used the ARMAT successfully in the 1991 Gulf War with Iraq, and the missile will remain in inventory for the foreseeable future."

[NeilWillis]

No, we don't need to move "forward" because your statement is wrong. The ARMAT is not an export only missile. It is used by France.

 

From International Electronic Countermeasures Handbook, page 149:

"The French used the ARMAT successfully in the 1991 Gulf War with Iraq, and the missile will remain in inventory for the foreseeable future."

 

A very selective comment, when the specific airframe we are discussing doesn't use ARMAT even if exported variants do. If the extract you gave said the M2000C that is being represented in the module used ARMAT successfully in France, then you'd make an excellent point. Sadly not.

[fixen]

This is what wiki has to say (which i know is not always a good source of information):

The ARMAT was operational since 1984. It was used as main, if not exclusive anti-radar weapon by French aviation, employed by SEPECAT Jaguars against Libyans during Operation Epervier.

 

The ARMAT was developed from the AS37 Martel in 1984. The missile stayed in service until 1999. The french airforce does not have any antiradar missiles in the inventory after that.

 

The ARMAT is also called the AS37 by the way. AS37 ARMAT is the improved version of the AS37 Martel.

[QuiGon]

No, we don't need to move "forward" because your statement is wrong. The ARMAT is not an export only missile. It is used by France.

 

From International Electronic Countermeasures Handbook, page 149:

"The French used the ARMAT successfully in the 1991 Gulf War with Iraq, and the missile will remain in inventory for the foreseeable future."

 

But it was used by Jaguars, not Mirages!

It's also not in service with the french Air Force anymore.

[VincentLaw]

If the extract you gave said the M2000C that is being represented in the module used ARMAT successfully in France, then you'd make an excellent point. Sadly not.

But it was used by Jaguars, not Mirages!

I am simply pointing out that France had the missiles, and they have the airplanes. I consider selecting not to use them together irrelevant if the option was there. They are simulating the aircraft, not French military doctrine. The only thing I don't know, as Azrayen pointed out, is whether the specific avionics of the S5 retained the needed capability from previous 2000C models. I doubt France is keen on sharing information that specific, and unfortunately I am already pushing the limits of my research capability without access to libraries with better collections on French equipment.

Edited September 23, 2015 by VincentLaw

[mattebubben]

I am simply pointing out that France had the missiles, and they have the airplanes. I consider selecting not to use them together irrelevant if the option was there. They are simulating the aircraft, not French military doctrine. The only thing I don't know, as Azrayen pointed out, is whether the specific avionics of the S5 retained the needed capability from previous 2000C models. I doubt France is keen on sharing information that specific, and unfortunately I am already pushing the limits of my research capability without access to libraries with better collections on French equipment.

 

I agree.

 

What the debate here is if the Mirage 2000C RDI, CAN use the Armat not if it did.

 

For example.

 

If somone was to model the Cf-104 (Canadian built Starfighter)

 

The canadian doctrine for the CF-104 was a low level strike aircraft/recce aircraft.

 

And as such it never Carried Aim9s in Canadian service.

 

Does that mean if somone was to model the CF-104 as used by canada that they should not allow the Aim-9?

 

All the wiring was there and pilots even did Air-Air training but the aircraft where never armed with them.

 

But if it was modeld in the game then ofc it would be given Aim-9s because it COULD use them even though it never did use them in canadian service.

 

So if the Mirage 2000C RDI can use the Armat in Theory then it should be given it in the game (even if france never armed them with Armat missiles)

 

This game and most games are what if scenarios and then if players / mission creators want to not use the armat because france did not then thats up to them.

 

But lets take an example.

 

If the Mirage 2000C RDI could use the missiles.

 

And a war occured and they started to run out of Jaguars and needed other aircraft to do "sead" missions with the Armat.

 

Then the Mirage 2000C RDI could be used in a pinch.

 

Thats one of the reasons why it might be more likley then not that it "can" use the Armat.

 

 

Also Side note.

 

 

 

Does any1 know if the Used Mirages that Brazil bought from france where RDIs or RDMs?

 

Since they did buy and use 10 single seat (and 2 twin seat) Mirages (Used) from france (they where retired in 2013 when the maintenance contract ran out)

 

In my eye it looks like RDIs and in that case they where actually not just used by france.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 23, 2015 by mattebubben

[Sporg]

-

Also Side note.

 

Does any1 know if the Used Mirages that Brazil bought from france where RDIs or RDMs?

 

Since they did buy and use 10 single seat (and 2 twin seat) Mirages (Used) from france (they where retired in 2013 when the maintenance contract ran out)

 

In my eye it looks like RDIs and in that case they where actually not just used by france.

 

A quick Google revealed this:

 

"The first Mirage 2000 flew on March 10, 1978 and the airframes selected by Brazil were produced between 1984 and 1987 with all twelve being S4 variants (equipped with the RDI J-1 radar, the baseline M53 engine and capable of fire the Super 530D missile)"

 

;)

 

Source: http://www.milavia.net/specials/fab-mirage2000/

(Good photos in that article actually..)

 

Edit 2: Interesting quote:

 

""The gap between the Mirage 2000 and the Mirage III is enormous. With the Mirage III we had to concentrate on many aircraft flight aspects and be aware to not push the aircraft out of its flight envelope. On the Mirage 2000 we are free to focus mainly on the combat and do not have to worry about the aircraft limitations, as the computer does it for us"." :)

Edited September 23, 2015 by Sporg

[mattebubben]

So they are pretty similar to the Ones being modeld.

 

How large is the Difference between the S4 and the S5.