A little note for the Dev team

[WinterH]

+1 Zomba and jojo

[il_corleone]

This sort of discussion comes up often. The F-14A/B had a long one regarding AIM-120. Seems to fall in three camps; those that want a particular weapon for gameplay purposes knowing it isn't realistic; those only wanting what can be a proven reality; and those that want to prove a fictional reality to justify the weapon.

 

The M2000C discussion has already been done to great length and from what I remember there is no credible source showing that ARMAT was deployed with FAF M2000C (Correct me if I'm wrong). Why can't we be happy with just sticking to reality?

 

 

I am with you, but the ARMAT is a realistic possibility, we just dont have clear sources about yes or no, the only ones that can answer is RAZBAM, and of course, I am happy about the module, I was just giving my opinion in a mature form, and read about real use of ARMAT of FAF in the midle east.

 

We all should be happy about getting a Mirage.

 

And about stikcing to reality, do you have Mig 21? did you know that the Mig couldnt carry Grom? or the R2US, and yes, it can be very probable that in a need they could wire them (Or even arrange something on the radar), and is not violating the sacred reality rule, we are behind a monitor, it is up to you to use them or not, reality begins with the person that is flying

Edited October 11, 2015 by il_corleone

[Moos_tachu]

We have not seen photos of the ARMAT mounted on a Mirage 2000 RDI, however, absense of evidence is not evidence of absense.

 

lol, ok Agent Mulder :D

Seriously, from a developer's standpoint, would you base your work on proof of existence, or non-proof of non-existence?

 

Seems to fall in three camps; those that want a particular weapon for gameplay purposes knowing it isn't realistic; those only wanting what can be a proven reality; and those that want to prove a fictional reality to justify the weapon.

 

+1 :thumbup:

 

The latter just want to believe :D

[Azrayen]

I am with you, but the ARMAT is a realistic possibility, we just dont have clear sources about yes or no

It's not "just" that unfortunately.

Let's say, for the sake of the argument, that Razbam decides it's a 'yes'. So they want to implement the ARMAT under their M2000.

Now, the question remains: how to do it? What shall the HUD indications be? What shall the PCA and PPA (armament control/set-up panels) display when using this particular missile? How do they manage to implement into DCS a missile that is in fact 3 missiles (different seakers=different radars targetable)?

If you don't have any hard data on the matter, you'll have to totally guess the thing. Guessing "a bit" is OK. Totally guessing is... well... not (OK) (IMO).

 

 

read about real use of ARMAT of FAF in the midle east.

Huh?

I'm aware of Martel's use in Africa (against Libyans at Ouadi Doum in mid 80s), by FAF Jaguars (from the only - at the time - squadron responsible for the SEAD mission in FAF: 3/3 "Ardennes").

But I'm not aware of use in the Middle East. Care to elaborate?

 

++

Az'

[il_corleone]

It's not "just" that unfortunately.

Let's say, for the sake of the argument, that Razbam decides it's a 'yes'. So they want to implement the ARMAT under their M2000.

Now, the question remains: how to do it? What shall the HUD indications be? What shall the PCA and PPA (armament control/set-up panels) display when using this particular missile? How do they manage to implement into DCS a missile that is in fact 3 missiles (different seakers=different radars targetable)?

If you don't have any hard data on the matter, you'll have to totally guess the thing. Guessing "a bit" is OK. Totally guessing is... well... not (OK) (IMO).

 

 

 

Huh?

I'm aware of Martel's use in Africa (against Libyans at Ouadi Doum in mid 80s), by FAF Jaguars (from the only - at the time - squadron responsible for the SEAD mission in FAF: 3/3 "Ardennes").

But I'm not aware of use in the Middle East. Care to elaborate?

 

++

Az'

 

 

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"

 

 

From VincentLaw also, Im searching for the Middle east info

[Moos_tachu]

We already had this discussion. You place your faith in the wrong publications...

I already posted link on French Weapon Agency history (DGA) who was driving these weapons programs. If you can read French just read it.

Most of your sources are probably copying each other.

 

[...]

 

If you're are a complots theory adept I can't do anything for you. Just throw your Jane's book and alike away.

Sometimes it's surprising good data. Sometimes it's just wrong. And you can't sort it out unless you're military with good sources...

 

:music_whistling:

[VincentLaw]

From VincentLaw also, Im searching for the Middle east info

Unfortunately none of these sources demonstrate how the systems appear to the pilot, so Azrayen's point about "How to do it" is valid. A certain amount of guesswork is probably necessary for any modern aircraft though, especially regarding the more secret systems.

 

We already had this discussion. You place your faith in the wrong publications...

I already posted link on French Weapon Agency history (DGA) who was driving these weapons programs. If you can read French just read it.

Most of your sources are probably copying each other.

If my sources are all copying each other, then why do they all refer to different locations?

 

French using ARMAT in Chad: https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1988/1988%20-%202808.html

 

French using ARMAT in Iraq: https://books.google.com/books?id=Y8kePYFK1L8C&pg=PA149#v=onepage&f=false

 

NATO (who other than French?) using ARMAT in Balkans: http://www.ijet.pl/index.php/ijet/article/view/10.2478-eletel-2013-0034/145

 

Your publication does not say the French didn't use the ARMAT. It is just discussing exportation as the motivation for its development, and as for faith in publications, your document only mentions 160 ARMAT missiles being produced, but this one mentions 450 were exported to Iraq. Clearly there is a discrepancy. http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/pdf/rapports/r3191.pdf

 

And you can't sort it out unless you're military with good sources...

Right, I can demonstrate that 2000C RDI/ARMAT compatibility is plausible, but without better, more specific sources, I have no proof. As such, it is rather pointless for me to continue arguing unless I manage to obtain some better sources. I'll return if I do. Edited October 11, 2015 by VincentLaw

[jojo]

Iraq used Armat under the name of Bazar with little succus against Iran.

 

Armat is said to have been exported with some export Mirage 2000 E in limited quantity.

But until today no picture of export Mirage 2000 with Armat surfaced.

 

Martel under Jaguar or Mirage III E was not secret. There is no reason for it to be secret under French Mirage 2000.

Would this weapon have been in use on FAF Mirage 2000, it would have been on Mirage 2000 D/ N.

 

By the way, Irak had laser targeting pod, AS30L, AM39 and Armat on Mirage F1. These capacities were never added to FAF Mirage F1 C/ CR/ CT.

 

For god sake : ARMAT IS EXPORT MISSILE, WITH NEW SEEKERS, FAF USED MARTEL.

 

Burn those shitty books written during Cold War, at a time where there was more secret.

Today we have better data !

 

We have some former Mirage 2000 crew and weapon crew on French C6 forum. None is requesting this capacity.

 

At the time of Jaguar withdrawal in France there were debates all over French specialized press over the loss of ARM capacity. It wouldn't have been the case if the missile was adapted to FAF Mirage 2000.

[jojo]

French using ARMAT in Iraq: https://books.google.com/books?id=Y8kePYFK1L8C&pg=PA149#v=onepage&f=false

 

Aerospatiale Armat As its name suggests, Armat (Anti-Radiation MarTel) is based on the earlier AS. 37 anti-radiation version of Martel. Entering service in 1984, it saw combat when Iraqi Mirage F.1EQ fighters fired the weapon against Iranian air-defence radars.

French Air Force Jaguars used the missile also during a January 1987 raid against a Libyan military base at Ouadi-Doum in northern Chad.

Operators France, Iraq, Kuwait.

 

Where do you read France used Armat or Martel in Iraq ?

 

Operators = users/ client

 

And the publication miss the difference between Martel and Armat.

 

Martel, co-developed by France & GB was forbidden of export outside of NATO.

So Matra designed the ARMAT = Anti Radar MATra

[VincentLaw]

Where do you read France used Armat or Martel in Iraq ?

You did not quote the book in the link I provided. It says

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

 

Martel under Jaguar or Mirage III E was not secret. There is no reason for it to be secret under French Mirage 2000.

It doesn't matter that you can't see a reason for the secrecy. My official book from Dassault Aviation says the ARMAT is very secret. Most information about the ARMAT, or technology upgrades based on the ARMAT is going to be secret. It is very logical that France does not release information about the logistics or use of a top secret weapon.

 

By the way, Irak had laser targeting pod, AS30L, AM39 and Armat on Mirage F1. These capacities were never added to FAF Mirage F1 C/ CR/ CT.

According to this source, some French Mirage F1s had SEAD capability.

http://www.eurosae.com/pages/comaero/Bonnet_Avions_militaires_II.pdf

Les premiers Mirage F1 C ont été modifiés en Mirage F1 CT (à partir de 1991) en

utilisant pour une bonne part des équipements communs avec ceux du Mirage F1 CR. La

mission principale de ces avions est l'attaque des radars sol avec missile Martel AS 37

We have some former Mirage 2000 crew and weapon crew on French C6 forum. None is requesting this capacity.

France had Jaguars and F1s for that role, so of course they would not request that capacity if they didn't use it. They are also unlikely to discuss secret weapons very much. I am interested in the technical compatiblity of the plane with the weapon, not if they have actually used it or not. I still see no definitive proof for or against the 2000C RDI being compatible with the ARMAT. Either one would satisfy me. For now, I am not arguing that this specific variant of the 2000 can use it. We can't be certain without more evidence. I am simply maintaining that this compatibility is plausible.

 

This sort of discussion comes up often. The F-14A/B had a long one regarding AIM-120.

This discussion is not comparable to the F-14 AIM-120 discussion in which there is definitive proof the versions in service cannot use the missile. Unlike France and the secret ARMAT, the US didn't go around vaguely stating that their F-14 can use a certain missile.

Edited October 12, 2015 by VincentLaw

[jojo]

It's so secret that in the Comaero PDF they describe flight profile, warhead, engine, proximity fuze...

[VincentLaw]

It's so secret that in the Comaero PDF they describe flight profile, warhead, engine, proximity fuze...

the ARMAT is based on the Martel, and it has a lot in common with it, but I did not see that document specify any of that information for the ARMAT. If I understand correctly, the only specifics they really give about the ARMAT is that it is able to cover all three frequency bands of the Martel simultaneously.

[jojo]

the ARMAT is based on the Martel, and it has a lot in common with it, but I did not see that document specify any of that information for the ARMAT. If I understand correctly, the only specifics they really give about the ARMAT is that it is able to cover all three frequency bands of the Martel simultaneously.

 

No, both Martel and Armat have 3 seekers, but Martel have some frequency gaps and Armat not.

 

However Martel may have been upgraded in early 90'.

 

I never saw pictures or heard of Jaguar using Martel during Gulf War or Bosnia. The same for FAF Mirage F1.

 

Even on Jaguar only one squadron at a time used Martel. So all of a sudden the whole FAF fleet is Martel qualified...doesn't make any sense.

 

And finally if FAF did qualified the Martel on Mirage 2000 it would have been on Mirage 2000 D/N with more accurate weapon system, moving map and so on...

Again Martel was withdrawn together with Jaguar.

Edited October 12, 2015 by jojo

[Azrayen]

You did not quote the book in the link I provided. It says

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

I'm afraid this source is wrong. There is no other mention of this anywere else AFAIK.

 

It doesn't matter that you can't see a reason for the secrecy. My official book from Dassault Aviation says the ARMAT is very secret. Most information about the ARMAT, or technology upgrades based on the ARMAT is going to be secret. It is very logical that France does not release information about the logistics or use of a top secret weapon.

The AS-37 use in Chad is very much public. Numerous sources. There is no reason why France would have been so public about Chad AND so secretive regarding gulf war. This would rank as highly unlogical, wouldn't it?

[VincentLaw]

There is no reason why France would have been so public about Chad AND so secretive regarding gulf war. This would rank as highly unlogical, wouldn't it?

Yes, it would seem unusual, and I agree that some of the information in the sources I linked may contain errors. I am simply posting my findings from places that seem at least semi-credible, but without either official or corroborating sources, some of the information, such as use in Iraq or the Balkans, can be taken with a grain of salt. The statement about the ARMAT being secret is from an official source. In any case, what France selects to make public or not regarding secret material is up to France, not up to common sense.

And finally if FAF did qualified the Martel on Mirage 2000 it would have been on Mirage 2000 D/N with more accurate weapon system, moving map and so on...

And I also agree that seems the most logical from my point of view, but I really have no perspective on what lead to any such decision. I personally think that retiring the Martel and relying on allies to provide SEAD support is an absolutely terrible decision... but I don't have the whole story. Edited October 13, 2015 by VincentLaw

[Moos_tachu]

I personally think that retiring the Martel and relying on allies to provide SEAD support is an absolutely terrible decision... but I don't have the whole story.

 

In modern days, SEAD relies more on intel (sat + reco) and long range strikes, than on risking aircraft over SAM territory.

This was NATO doctrine in all recent conflicts: massive Tomahawk strikes to suppress enemy radar capacities before any aircraft enter the airspace.

 

In this context, airborne SEAD capability is no longer a critical asset, and only a couple of countries retain it, with a limited number of units.

 

Moreover, a modern fighter such as the Rafale can perform SEAD missions very efficiently without a specialized ARM. Its EW integrated suite can localize a radar threat very precisely (if not known before take-off, which is 99% cases) and guide stand-off weapons to it (AASM, SCALP...)

 

By the way, the Rafale EW suite can also guide a Mica to an A/A threat that is painting it with radar, without turning on its own radar... surprise! :D

[Azrayen]

The statement about the ARMAT being secret is from an official source. In any case, what France selects to make public or not regarding secret material is up to France, not up to common sense.

I agree with your 2nd sentence, however let's just assume that there is a valid reason for secrecy. And there, we can add that EW in general is a very secret domain, due to its strategic importance and the fact that it may become a true game changer in the event of a conflict.

So there is not much public data about the precise capabilities of the missile (how it works technicallly, what are its strong/weak points) because you want your adversaries to be as unable as possible to invent a parade.

But there is (today) many public data, accounts... etc. of the missile use in Chad. None, except the one sentence in the book you quoted, regarding its use during the Gulf War (and we do have precise accounts of "meaningful" Fench missions during that war).

This is why I think it's safe to designate the quote as an error from the book. :)

[Flogger23m]

Yes...and then why not AM39, and why not AS30L, why not ASMP...where do they have to stop ?

 

Its simple. The 2000C never carried those weapons. To illustrate your argument, you're arguing that the F-15C shouldn't have the AIM-120 because it can't carry the AGM-88. Your argument makes zero sense and has no consistency.

 

RAZBAM decided to choose a different radar that was better for air to air, hence why the current variant modelled will not get those missiles. That does not mean the other Mirage 2000C variants do not carry them.

 

As I mentioned, having both variants of the 2000C would be nice. Perhaps it can be added in post release, but I don't think RAZBZM is interested in doing two radar/Mirage 2000C versions.

[jojo]

You completely misunderstood me.

The quote you made is pure irony.

 

My argument is that Martel on Mirage 2000 C is not more legitimate than AGM-88 on F-15C = nonsense

 

The other M2000 version would be Mirage 2000 E not C. And it doesn't have to be debated now.

What is being marketed is Mirage 2000 C RDI.

Edited October 13, 2015 by jojo

[Flogger23m]

You completely misunderstood me.

The quote you made is pure irony.

 

My argument is that Martel on Mirage 2000 C is not more legitimate than AGM-88 on F-15C = nonsense

 

The other M2000 version would be Mirage 2000 E not C. And it doesn't have to be debated now.

What is being marketed is Mirage 2000 C RDI.

 

You're moving the goal post. If you are discussing a different topic why bother responding to me? I stated the Mirage 2000C with a different radar (the RDM) is capable. You then claimed that I wanted them to add a bunch of other weapons when I didn't. And now you're excluding the radar modules I alluded to in my post. You're arguments don't make sense because you're not actually responding to posts, but making your own narrative and then counter arguing it.

 

As I mentioned in my previous posts, I'd be very happy if RAZBAM decided to model other radars to get the additional missile. Keep in mind what France uses is irrelevant, seeing that they're including various other nationalities:

 

 

Meaning that if Egypt or some other export customer has an RDM equipped version, then they can realistically be added to the game. If the module came with both Mirage 2000C variants that would be wonderful. But I doubt RAZBAM will develop two separate radar systems/variants in a single module. :(

[jojo]

If you are discussing a different topic why bother responding to me?

 

You're right...I'll just stop answering you :doh:

[VincentLaw]

Something I have not explored very much is loadout modding in DCS. Does anyone know if it is possible to restrict loadout by nationality? If RAZBAM could add the ARMAT just for Egypt then it would probably satisfy most people. I have also seen some reports that India purchased the ARMAT.

Edited October 14, 2015 by VincentLaw

[PiedDroit]

Something I have not explored very much is loadout modding in DCS. Does anyone know if it is possible to restrict loadout by nationality? If RAZBAM could add the ARMAT just for Egypt then it would probably satisfy most people. I have also seen some reports that India purchased the ARMAT.

You can already define the number of missiles available, at mission creation.

Limiting per country would not make sense and would bring frustration rather than satisfaction.

[Moos_tachu]

Your argument makes zero sense and has no consistency.

 

You're moving the goal post. If you are discussing a different topic why bother responding to me? [...] You're arguments don't make sense because you're not actually responding to posts, but making your own narrative and then counter arguing it.

 

Sweet... :music_whistling:

 

I'm sure everybody here can see who's posting constructive messages with verified information, and who's just trolling...

[Esac_mirmidon]

It could be very interesting how a massive tomahawk strike could defeat a modern mobile SAM network for example a russian SAM defence line. ( A modern, professional, well trained SAM network )

 

How satellite and recon could discover S-400 mobile systems in a tactical deployment under well camouflaged protection and how it could be possible to launch a massive tomahawk strike against them. How the same tomahawks could travel a long distance over enemy SAM protected territory without beeing intercepted by the same SAM network. MOBILE SAM network.

 

How a long distance attack without the SEAD strike professionals over the terrain could defeat a regiment of S-400 protected with bateries of TOR and Tunguskas, and the mid protection of BUK systems. Not to mention the less capable but also present IR SHORAD systems like Strelas and the ubicuous mobile AAA.

 

It´s also very interesting how a modern air conflict like the Operation Allied Force over Kosovo, F-16 SEAD flights cross the line again and again and over again searching on the ground for SAM systems do be discovered and destroyed.

 

Also the A-10 was commited in the search for EWR systems, and attacking short range SAM systems.

 

With a massive cruisse missiles atack you can only destroy or dismantle partially the FIXED comms center, biggest fixed EWR systems and maybe a little portion of the long range SAM network. This could be a deep blow for any Air Defense Network but it´s impossible to destroy a modern SAM defence force without specially dedicated SEAD flights operating over the territory, searching for SAMS using ARM and the tactics well defined all over history by the well known Wild Weasel boys.

 

SEAD it´s not only destroying SAMs its also denying the use of it because the thread they are projecting when flying OVER the enemy territory. You cant deny the SAM system to be employed against a strike force with tomahawks. You will never going to discover by any means a mobile SAM force well trained and tactically deployed in enough quantities to be able to attack them with tomahawks.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Esac_mirmidon