F-5E Or M-2000C?

[FlankerMan]

I thought this was the best place to put this, as it involves two different modules. Anyways, as you may have noticed;), there's a 50% off sale on most DCS products (all but the three newest: Persian Gulf, F/A-18C, and M-2000 campaign), and it lasts until July 5. I was intending on purchasing either the F-5E Tiger II, or the Mirage 2000C, but as they're the same price ($60-50% off-$30), I was wondering which one to get. So, I have a few questions:

 

1-Most importantly, as I have no experience with full fidelity modules, which is easier to learn and fly?

 

2-Which is more fun and rewarding to fly?

 

3-Which is a better dogfighter?

 

They each can carry laser-guided bombs, but presumably neither can guide them, and neither of them have many missiles. I prefer air-to-air combat, but a little ground attack never hurt anyone (except the enemies:megalol:), and as they both can carry guided bombs, ground attack becomes more enticing.

 

Overall, what do you think? Which should I purchase? I won't do any actual shopping until Independence Day, so I have plenty of time to think about it.

[Essah]

the Mirage 2000 has better IR missiles and can also carry SARH (although they are quite short ranged) and has superior maneuverability as well as a much much better radar. The F-5 radar can only really be used for rudimentary short range search and for determining weapons envelope. the Mirage radar allows for BVR (barely but its possible) combat.

 

the Mirage also has more advanced countermeasures (including IR detectors) and more advanced ground attack modes including CCIP and CCRP.

the F-5 has no range measuring equipment and so bombing has to be done the same way as in World war 2.

 

simply put the Mirage is superior in every way.

that said though the F-5 is a really fun aircraft to fly but if you're out for capabilities the Mirage wins, and is equally fun to fly.

[FlankerMan]

Okay, but isn't the Sidewinder better than the Magic II?

[firmek]

Get the M-2000C. $ per content, F-5E is one of the simplest jet planes in DCS. Kind of like Sabre with a radar but without a SARH missiles capability. Don't consider F-5 as a priority if you're not a fan of the plane.

[FlankerMan]

Okay, but which one is easier to learn?

[Maulkin]

I would say the F-5 is easier to learn only because it has a simpler set of systems. But I feel the Mirage has more potential and versatility. The tutorial for the Mirage is really well done. I fly the Mirage far more often than the F-5

[gavagai]

Magic II on the mirage is better than the aim-9p in dcs.

[myHelljumper]

Just to correct some info here :

 

Magic 2 has good maneuverability and shorter range than AIM-9M

Super 530D has almost the same range as the AIM-7 but has better speed (~18nm @ 20-25kft against maneuvering fighter).

Radar has ~40nm detection range on fighter sized targets.

 

And another info, Mirage has a pretty good INS system with a very ergonomic HUD :).

 

And you can't beat it in instantaneous turn rate ;).

[schurem]

On the other hand, the F-5E is an icon. It's what the agressors flew, as well as top gun. The mirage is fly by wire, meaning the pilot tells the computer where he wants the plane to o and the machine flies itself to the best of its abilities. Not so in the F-5. Its all you in there. I consider that more fun.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

Personally I always recommend the F-5 as a first full-fidelity module.

As mentioned earlier, it is the easiest to learn, and will give you the idea whether or not full-fidelity is something you'd enjoy.

And, it is incredibly fun to fly, no matter which other modules you have and independant of your experience.

 

Feel free to do a forum search as well, since this question has been asked before and you might be interested in what people had to say then :-)

[Nooch]

Mirage is easier to learn and to fly.

[Skitter]

And another info, Mirage has a pretty good INS system with a very ergonomic HUD :).

Worth to mention the INS is not implemented correctly by RAZBAM. The INS drifts and can be updated as often as you require accurate navigation. The update process is bugged. It always reset's the INS. It doesn't update it. Not much of a simulation if you ask me.

Generally the M2000C is incomplete and it doesn't seem to me like RAZBAM is planning to complete it. ot's of switches, functions simple doesn't work.

[cypc]

Generally the M2000C is incomplete and it doesn't seem to me like RAZBAM is planning to complete it.

 

Razbam is working with the French Air Force to get the Mirage to the best level possible, and it takes time. Yet it's doesn't entitle you to spread miss information about product abandon.

[myHelljumper]

Generally the M2000C is incomplete and it doesn't seem to me like RAZBAM is planning to complete it. ot's of switches, functions simple doesn't work.

 

Yes and working with the French AirForce, visiting french airbases, using real simulators... is done in order not to complete it ;).

 

While I agree that the plane is missing some feature and have some amount of bugs, it's not game breaking in my opinion. And calling the whole INS bugged is, I think, a bit far fetched.

 

OTOH from my understanding the F-5 has less bugs but have some controversial problems like the RWR or the radar, might be wrong tho.

[Nero.ger]

its more a question of "do i like modern jets with high end avionics or do i prefer ColdWar aera techology"

[beppe_goodoldrebel]

1-Most importantly, as I have no experience with full fidelity modules, which is easier to learn and fly?

 

2-Which is more fun and rewarding to fly?

 

3-Which is a better dogfighter?

 

4-They each can carry laser-guided bombs, but presumably neither can guide them, and neither of them have many missiles. I prefer air-to-air combat, but a little ground attack never hurt anyone (except the enemies:megalol:), and as they both can carry guided bombs, ground attack becomes more enticing.

 

1- F5 is very easy to learn

 

2- Im still learning the m2000 but I think F5 is more challenging. Keep energy and speed is very hard.

 

3- In guns only I think the F5 , better turn rate but the M2000 is very fast.

If you consider BVR M2000 have the Super530 ( fox 1 ) , F5 don't use Aim-7.

 

4- Beside LGB ( both need a JTAC ) unguided bombs are the real difference between the 2.

M2000 have CCIP and CCRP ( so it's easy peasy ) ,with F5 you have to learn tables to use MK82s...

[firmek]

I wouldn't be so sure that F-5 is easier to learn. Yes it has much less systems, it's extreamly easy to operate the cockpit - do the startup, etc... This raw simplicity makes it however way much more difficult to master. Mirage is more advanced with more systems which obviously have to be learned how to interface with. On the other hand we're talking about pushing a buttons. When it comes to real application like for instance bombing, Mirage can do an automated CCIP while with F-5 you need to know and perfectly exectue a bombing table parameters. Being precise with bombing in F-5 requires a lot of practice and flight precission (starting run at the right altitude, approaching at correct angle and dropping the bomb at right altitude and speed).

 

Bottom line, system whise Mirage will take a bit more time to learn (still it's really easy to do). When it comes to application, Mirage is way much easier to be effective with comparing to fully manual F-5.

[Robert31178]

I'm a dummy and have trouble in modern planes, I do better in things lile Huey, Sabre, F-5. I'm saying that because what I'm abkut to say comes from that statements point of.view. I would say it falls in between. Listen, systems wise the F-5 Is way easier to master, but the same things thst make it an easy jet to remember how to do things in make it difficult to fly. There's no comouter/fly by wire, no nav help aside from TACAN, no HUD......if you can effectively employ a Sabre or Mustang then you can effectively employ an F-5, however she is a bear to even take off and land in.

 

Mirage is intimidating as far as systems go, 8 mins to align the nav, lots of fancy modern systems, a modern HUD, but she's the opposite of work to fly from what I understand. If you can effectively employ the Hog then you'll be fine in a Mirage.

 

Now I understand it's your first HF module, clicking is clicking no matter which route you go, it's just a matter of which side of the plane you think you'll struggle with. Well, thst us the Mirage is more capable/survivable on the modern battlefield than the F-5 is because of the systems.

 

I don't have the Mirage because I tend to fly older stuff more effectively, but my squad mate's who have it all speak highly of it. Both planes have their shortcomings as far as development, neither being as polished as some of the more attentive or knowledgeable users here would like, so that one's on you bub!

 

~Rob

[beppe_goodoldrebel]

There's no comouter/fly by wire, no nav help aside from TACAN, no HUD......

 

Tacan navigation... it's the only thing hard to do with the F5.

BFM and ACM campaign have a glimpse of it , I find it more hard to understand than actually shoot down a couple of F14s.

[lmp]

1-Most importantly, as I have no experience with full fidelity modules, which is easier to learn and fly?

 

2-Which is more fun and rewarding to fly?

 

3-Which is a better dogfighter?

 

1. F-5E. It has significantly simpler avionics, a better manual and the labels are all in English. The Mirage will be easier to learn to fight in once you wrap your head around the systems though.

 

2. Depends whether you like FBW and other complex avionics or prefer to keep it simple.

 

3. Mirage. It's more maneuverable, faster, more powerful and its avionics are a generation ahead at least. Are you going to pit them against the same enemies though? The F-5E against the MiG-21bis is about as capable as the Mirage against, say, a MiG-29.

[Wizard1393]

My money's on the Mirage aswell. The F-5 is fun, but is very limited on the battlefield.

[Papa Spardy]

The f5 was my first and loved it. Ya it doesn't have a HUD or GPS but it is a great plane to fly. Ita a great starter plane and a good jumping off point for other more complicated modules.

[nessuno0505]

My first clickable modules have been a-10c and ka-50. Compared to these two the f-5 (which I've bought later) is a lot more easy to learn, but has to be used in the right setting: WVR dogfight against mig-21. In this setting you can have some fun. Blind free fall bombing is hard to master and not so useful when you can use an a-10c. I bought the f-5 since I wanted a full clickable supersonic plane, and it's fun to fly. You can also do some aerobatics (patrouille swiss uses f-5 IRL). I do not own m2000c, but it's a 4th gen fighter, a "french f-16", clearly far way superior to f-5e. If you want a clickable module, why not the a-10c? You have to study but it's not so hard if you understand its basis. You need years to master its more advanced features, but you can start bombing with effectiveness quite soon.

[lmp]

IMHO the A-10C is a bad choice for a first full fidelity module. There's just sooo much to learn. Especially if you're the type who likes to have at least a general understanding of how everything works before you start doing "proper" scenarios, you'll be reading rather than flying for weeks. Both the F-5E and the Mirage are a better choice IMHO...

 

That said, there's one thing I don't think anybody mentioned. Follow your gut. Which aircraft appeals to you more (aesthetically, personally, as a piece of history)? It'll take you some time before you'll be comfortable and feeling in control. Getting the "better" aircraft won't mean a thing if you get bored half way through the learning process and put it down because you don't really care for the thing.

[FlankerMan]

I'm totally going for the Mirage 2000C. The F-5E-3 Tiger II sounds like a capable dogfighter, and a good cold-war era aircraft, but I prefer more modern fighters. Plus, having better radar, missiles, and ground attack systems is nice. BTW, I thought the F-5E could use the AIM-9M, which is better than the Magic II, so why can't the F-5E-3?