M2000 vs Mig-21

[jojo]

This is useless to speak with Ramsey.

 

While some speak about real world tactics, Ramsey is speaking about gaming, driven by the need to win in massive MP.

 

He don't really care about real world.

 

gaming = use all simulation limitations to your profit. Like barrel roll to escape missile head on. No one would risk it in real life.

[Hook47]

This is useless to speak with Ramsey.

 

While some speak about real world tactics, Ramsey is speaking about gaming, driven by the need to win in massive MP.

 

He don't really care about real world.

 

gaming = use all simulation limitations to your profit. Like barrel roll to escape missile head on. No one would risk it in real life.

 

What do you think this thread is about??? REAL MiG 21 fighting REAL M-2000C? NOPE. This is about DCS MiG 21 vs DCS M-2000C.... in DCS world... which is a Sim/game depending on who you ask.... Did you miss that??? Talking about the real counterparts is nice as it pertains to the level of our simulation, but ultimately it's a sidetrack. We didn't buy DCS modules to sit around and talk about the real aircraft which almost all of us never have or ever will fly, we bought them to fly them and kill things in DCS world... The sim/game...

 

I use barrel roll to evade missile, huh? Where did you get that? I said I used vertical maneuvers and I also use 3/9 to evade missile shots, but they don't do that in the real world, do they.

 

I am sorry, I am driven by the need to win in "massive" (40 people tops) MP? Yes because by god I could never live with myself if I didn't dominate every engagement in DCS world. After all, it is so much more fun to get shot down all the time.

 

I am sorry if you are angry that your French plane isn't doing as well as you might have hoped, but try to contain the outburst. I figured you would show up to try to sour things here but we were having some civil discourse.

 

Stop taking everything so personally, and getting so personal. I'm just going to ignore your trollworthy posts from now on and continue the discourse with people who can have civil interaction. Seems you are more interested in ad hominem argument than discussion of DCS World aircraft.

Edited December 31, 2015 by Hook47

[GGTharos]

Doesn't matter what you've heard, there are HUD videos of it happening in real combat, and they're out there if you can find them.

 

Not sure I have ever heard of many RL encounters where modern fighters just "fly right up and shoot them in the face a rmin"

 

But anyway....

 

He didn't have ECM on when I've hit with an R3R, and there was a lot of "in theory" "Possibly" "Probably" and "AFAIK" up there for ED to go making it a solid rule that my R3s are totally useless, my friend :) For this, I am glad ED won't make missiles changes unless hard data is presented. A good policy since probably about 90 percent of what people think missiles would and wouldn't do on this forum is complete guesstimation, as almost none of it has ever happened.

[Hook47]

I'm suspecting non mirage owner have trouble with R3R since missile will hit a su27 collision mesh. Hence mirage is now having an invisble shield. Gonna play *another simulator* until everything fixed.

 

This is a valid point and something they REALLY need to fix right away. By "another simulator" do you mean *cough* BMS? *cough*

 

Doesn't matter what you've heard, there are HUD videos of it happening in real combat, and they're out there if you can find them.

 

You missed my point, brother, I wasn't disputing MiG 21s being shot down by more modern fighters, just poking at the phraseology of "Just flying up and shooting them in the face" as I feel fighter pilots would not be so flippant even in engaging a Gen 3+ fighter.

 

Besides real MiGs being shot down by other fighters is kind of off the M-2000C vs MiG 21 topic, since I brought all this up talking about performance in the sim.

 

You said yourself he lost all his energy turning with you, to which my only answer is: Of course he did, cause atm that's what the M2000 does :D

 

Anyway I never said that the MiG-21 didn't stand a chance regardless of who's flying, I always said with equal pilots ;)

 

When the M2000 is fixed it'll be like fighting F-15's with sparrows and some extra agility.

 

I missed this from a couple pages back, Hummindbird. Yes agreed pilot skill is a major factor and the M-2000C has better capability than the 21, although like I said the 21 has enough minor advantages to help make up for the larger weaknesses. That being said though you said the Mirage will be a more agile F-15 when done, by the strong impression I have gotten from reading and from the devs is that the M-2000C does bleed quite a bit of energy, and that it backed up by HUD videos I have seen pursuing the web. In fact I think even the large F-15 manages energy better than the Delta wing M-2000C. Am I wrong for thinking so?

Edited December 31, 2015 by Hook47

[jojo]

There's nothing personal.

 

I just see that many people talk about real tactics, you mainly talk about massive MP.

 

So there is a gap...like your claim about "what if" weapons load to be more efficient in MP.

 

So there are people talking to each other but not about the same thing in endless talks.

 

There is no problem to have fun in massive MP...until you ask to adapt the plane with more weapons specifically for massive MP.

 

And it's beta release, so there is no point to make definitive conclusion.

[GGTharos]

But that's exactly what they did :-)

 

Sure they weren't flippant about it, but that's is exactly the result.

 

You missed my point, brother, I wasn't disputing MiG 21s being shot down by more modern fighters, just poking at the phraseology of "Just flying up and shooting them in the face" as I feel fighter pilots would not be so flippant even in engaging a Gen 3+ fighter.

[il_corleone]

Yes, the Mirage can be shot down by Mig 21, like the F15 too.

 

But remember, Beta for Mirage, lot of capabilites are not working, the posibility of slave the Magic to radar lock will be a game changer, just one example

[mattebubben]

and also the R3R is overpreforming...

 

Maby not the range but its accuracy and abillity to keep lock is very much to good.

 

The R3R is actually more prone to hit then the 530D is... (at the same range)

 

And that just SHOULD NOT be the case...

 

The R3R is very much overpreforming since it is an old late 1960s missile and it has better or comparable hitratios compared to the 1980s Super-530D ,Aim-7M and R-27R...

Edited December 31, 2015 by mattebubben

[il_corleone]

and also the R3R is overpreforming...

 

Maby not the range but its accuraccy and abillity to keep lock is very much to good.

 

The R3R is actually more prone to hit then the 530D is... (at the same range)

 

And that just SHOULD NOT be the case...

 

The R3R is very much overpreforming since it is an old late 1960s missile and it has better or comparable hitratios compared to the 1980s Super-530D ,Aim-7M and R-27R...

 

I Agree with the R3R but that doesent need to change, the 530D is the one that needs change

[GGTharos]

No the R-3R needs to change, big time.

[Brisse]

When I read the latest comments here I though I should check out R-3R stats in missile lua, but I can't find it anywhere...

[mattebubben]

if the R-3R is overpreforming then it needs to be changed...

 

And it very much is overpreforming.

 

The R-3R was not a bad missile for its time (in the late 60s and early-mid 70s)

 

but after that it was no longer top of the line.

 

And by the 80s-90s it was an obsolete weapon.

 

And while it could be effective against larger targets (bombers / strikes) that did not manuver as much and were easy to maintain lock in it should not be as effective as it is against fighters especially modern fighters with ecm.

 

my experience with the R-3R is that in a headon you will get a kill 70-80% of the time and its harder to spoof then it should be and is suprisingly agile.

[il_corleone]

No the R-3R needs to change, big time.

 

if the R-3R is overpreforming then it needs to be changed...

 

And it very much is overpreforming.

 

The R-3R was not a bad missile for its time (in the late 60s and early-mid 70s)

 

but after that it was no longer top of the line.

 

And by the 80s-90s it was an obsolete weapon.

 

And while it could be effective against larger targets (bombers / strikes) that did not manuver as much and were easy to maintain lock in it should not be as effective as it is against fighters especially modern fighters with ecm.

 

my experience with the R-3R is that in a headon you will get a kill 70-80% of the time and its harder to spoof then it should be and is suprisingly agile.

 

 

Ok, sorry for the mistake guys , I didnt knew it was so poor! ;)

The question is, when?

 

PS: Both missiles need to change, including the Magic

[Darkwolf]

As a mig-21 pilot, I agree R3-R is overperforming. I had 85% Pk with it last year.

 

R3R is hardcoded.

[Hook47]

The R-3R we have in the sim is a reverse engineered radar guided Aim-9G. Despite talk about how much it needs to be nerfed (I use it for front aspect shots which my opposition is often caught off guard by and it still misses more than it hits) a front aspect shot is what it was partially designed for and it still misses easily if the target takes basic evasive action. It may be better than it should be to some degree but that has nothing to do with why I've done well against the M-2000C, as the 530D even in its current form has a far better range and guidance system. You guys realize how much work it takes to actually get an R-3R in the air right? The reason I almost only use them in head on passes is because God help you to get a lock in a dog fight....

 

I'm not saying it doesn't need adjustment but I don't get a lot of kills with it in PVP.

 

Whatever advantage is may have that it shouldn't is more than offset by the PITA they are to use. More often than not I ditch them for R-60s

Edited December 31, 2015 by Hook47

[GGTharos]

If by 'some degree' you mean 'way better' then we are in agreement.

 

As for the 530D, your chances of evading it head-on should be zero. Your only saving grace would be the missile Pk being less than zero strictly due to component/system malfunctions, and none of that is modeled.

 

In case it still isn't clear, you shouldn't even get the chance to get an R-3R in the air in a head-on scenario, let alone be lecturing about 'how much it takes to get an R-3R in the air'. :)

[Hook47]

If by 'some degree' you mean 'way better' then we are in agreement.

 

As for the 530D, your chances of evading it head-on should be zero. Your only saving grace would be the missile Pk being less than zero strictly due to component/system malfunctions, and none of that is modeled.

 

In case it still isn't clear, you shouldn't even get the chance to get an R-3R in the air in a head-on scenario, let alone be lecturing about 'how much it takes to get an R-3R in the air'. :)

 

I say to some degree on the R-3R because I haven't seen conclusive proof either way about it performance, so I assume it to be true, even though my perception is the opposite (It isn't effective for me)

 

Where do you base this information? I had a USAF Lt. Col who was assigned to the USAF Weapons School tell me that even the latest 120C could be defeated by evasive maneuvering in a BVR shot, provided you knew it was coming and could afford to maneuver.

 

This article https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2013/08/17/evading-air-to-air-missile/ also strongly backs up everything he told me.

 

You make it sound like a 530D isn't beatable once fired within parameters. I think your perception of these weapons capability is far too high.

 

The R-3R is like a front aspect old sidewinder. Just because I evaded BVR shouldn't and in my experience haven't prevented me from sometimes getting off my head to head shots.

Edited December 31, 2015 by Hook47

[*Rage*]

Are we talking in DCS or on RL because in DCS chaff still works works reasonably well in defeating SARH missiles head on (0-30deg aspect)

[Hook47]

Are we talking in DCS or on RL because in DCS chaff still works works reasonably well in defeating SARH missiles head on (0-30deg aspect)

 

Well RL is nice but obviously were we are concerning DCS is were is applies

[Hummingbird]

I missed this from a couple pages back, Hummindbird. Yes agreed pilot skill is a major factor and the M-2000C has better capability than the 21, although like I said the 21 has enough minor advantages to help make up for the larger weaknesses. That being said though you said the Mirage will be a more agile F-15 when done, by the strong impression I have gotten from reading and from the devs is that the M-2000C does bleed quite a bit of energy, and that it backed up by HUD videos I have seen pursuing the web. In fact I think even the large F-15 manages energy better than the Delta wing M-2000C. Am I wrong for thinking so?

 

I'd say you are yes, the charts done by professionals on the matter give a clear edge to the Mirage in terms of turn rate when both aircraft are armed, roughly 1.5 deg/sec more sustained and 4 deg/sec more instantanous. This is also only logical when looking at the specs of the aircraft, both featuring a high thrust to weight ratio but the Mirage being over 100 kg/m2 lighter in terms of wing loading as well as featuring full span LE devices. Also the induced drag is likely about the same as both are delta wing designs, one is simply a pure delta whilst the other is a cropped delta design.

 

Finally keep in mind that the turn rate charts posted for the F-15 & Mirage in the other thread was for a completely clean F-15 and an armed Mirage. Armed similarly as the Mirage with two IR missiles the F-15 would need those draggy missile pylons attached just as the Mirage, only on the F-15 they are bigger & draggier. With these on the F-15C will perform noticable worse in the sustained realm, whilst the sustained turn rate of a clean Mirage will obviously improve significantly over one armed with two IR missiles and their draggy pylons.

Edited January 1, 2016 by Hummingbird

[tusler]

In this video here it looks like the F-16 cannot stay out of the M2000 sights.

It looks like some of it is under 200 knots witch would be death to a F16 since I guess it's corner speed is 400+.

[ame]

[/ame]

[Pilotasso]

corner speed is at 350. Once at 6 o'clock it'll be hard to shake the guy off regardless of aircraft performance differences between 2 jetfighters of same generation.

[ttaylor0024]

R8s3wVCY4Hw

 

Rough day for these MiGs...

[Hook47]

I'd say you are yes, the charts done by professionals on the matter give a clear edge to the Mirage in terms of turn rate when both aircraft are armed, roughly 1.5 deg/sec more sustained and 4 deg/sec more instantanous. This is also only logical when looking at the specs of the aircraft, both featuring a high thrust to weight ratio but the Mirage being over 100 kg/m2 lighter in terms of wing loading as well as featuring full span LE devices. Also the induced drag is likely about the same as both are delta wing designs, one is simply a pure delta whilst the other is a cropped delta design.

 

Finally keep in mind that the turn rate charts posted for the F-15 & Mirage in the other thread was for a completely clean F-15 and an armed Mirage. Armed similarly as the Mirage with two IR missiles the F-15 would need those draggy missile pylons attached just as the Mirage, only on the F-15 they are bigger & draggier. With these on the F-15C will perform noticable worse in the sustained realm, whilst the sustained turn rate of a clean Mirage will obviously improve significantly over one armed with two IR missiles and their draggy pylons.

 

That wasn't strictly my question. What the charts don't say is what happens to your airspeed during said turn, right? There is were I think the Eagle may do better. Maybe even the MiG. I haven't tested it much since this is beta.

 

Good kills on that video, I don't know what the second MiG 21 was doing but I think he had totally lost sight... Loose sight, loose fight.

 

Too bad the MiG 21 is the only bird in game I feel confident in my ability to take on ATM

[GGTharos]

That isn't a benchmark for anything.

 

If you start on someone's six and you can't stay there, either your really suck, or your plane does, or both. Generally it isn't the aircraft.

 

In this video here it looks like the F-16 cannot stay out of the M2000 sights.