Mirage F1 project update

[Get_Lo]

I would like to think that its close enough for them to give us a list of what we can expect at least for EA. I would like to start designing missions in the editor but I really have no idea what to do without a weapons list.

[Harlikwin]

@Aerges

 

So, out of curiosity.

1. How is the Cyrano modeled in "look down" per documents it wasn't particularly good as it was an MTI type radar system

2. IFF, does the Mirage F1 have the ability to IFF targets and how does this work? It doesn't seem to be integrated into the radar

3. 530 Missiles, these were famously bad, how "bad" will your implementation be, i.e. do they work in "shoot down" modes at low altitude? How about the IR version with limited all aspect capability (i.e. only really supersonic targets like the red-top). 

[Lurker]

So which variant of the F1 will be coming first? Is it still planned to be released as per the first post in this thread?

[WinterH]

41 minutes ago, Lurker said:

So which variant of the F1 will be coming first?

CE

As for the release date, there is no confirmed date right now, but it does seem "close" by DCS standards at least  Guess we'll hear more soon.

 

[potatoman530]

I have not been able to find this anywhere, but does anyone know the G limits of the Mirage F1?

[TLTeo]

The G-meter on the dash goes up to 10 but I'd imagine it's rated to ~7.5 like most aircraft of that era.

[Bremspropeller]

 

 

Edited February 9, 2022 by Bremspropeller

[Jester986]

Could we get a bit of an update on where the Mirage stands? I know a release window is out of the question but maybe a list of things left to do to give us an idea where we’re at? 

[Get_Lo]

On 2/16/2022 at 1:34 PM, Jester986 said:

Could we get a bit of an update on where the Mirage stands? I know a release window is out of the question but maybe a list of things left to do to give us an idea where we’re at? 

Agreed, im dying for an update. 

[spartan2078]

Soon. I think... 

[FlankerKiller]

On 2/9/2022 at 4:32 PM, Bremspropeller said:

 

 

 

So the wings shaping off at 11g is unrealistic then. 

[turkeydriver]

2 hours ago, FlankerKiller said:

So the wings shaping off at 11g is unrealistic then. 

Why?  8-9 G should warp the wing and damage your devices- it won't snap the wing off until insane loads are put on- like 11g sustained for more than a moment

 

[Get_Lo]

2 hours ago, turkeydriver said:

Why?  8-9 G should warp the wing and damage your devices- it won't snap the wing off until insane loads are put on- like 11g sustained for more than a moment

 

Im not really too excited about trying another half assed G Stress/Wear system based purely on speculation. The F5 attempted this recently were the plane can get damaged at over G and then rip at a lower G load later in the flight. The problem is that its not a good system at all, it ignores weapon stores, it doesnt matter if you land and repair, and the best part is that its set to trigger at specific value where the plane will receive no wear at all under the value, but a constant amount above the value regardless if its 0.5G over or 2.5G over.
I think the best bet for now is just setting a hard limit where the plane will break at certain G limits and weight loads until a G stress system can be properly modeled and tested. Once we can get an accurate simulation of that, im all for it.

[FlankerKiller]

It's called being  a troll. 

[FlankerKiller]

36 minutes ago, Get_Lo said:

Im not really too excited about trying another half assed G Stress/Wear system based purely on speculation. The F5 attempted this recently were the plane can get damaged at over G and then rip at a lower G load later in the flight. The problem is that its not a good system at all, it ignores weapon stores, it doesnt matter if you land and repair, and the best part is that its set to trigger at specific value where the plane will receive no wear at all under the value, but a constant amount above the value regardless if its 0.5G over or 2.5G over.
I think the best bet for now is just setting a hard limit where the plane will break at certain G limits and weight loads until a G stress system can be properly modeled and tested. Once we can get an accurate simulation of that, im all for it.

The F-86 has this. Problem is who cares if you bend up your virtual plane. The F-14 was going do something  similar. But I think it got replaced by a hard limit. FYI I just retired from twenty years in aircraft maintenance. I've actually seen overG over speed damage. I've been in a nice three way debate with an actual pilot, and a engineer that works in analysis.  I'm not getting in it again. But overG damage is very vary complicated. It's not just a linear scale. I personally agree with the above. I hard limit is probably the best compromise. So the F-1 is about 7G. Sweet. A better  question for the neards is what is its corner speed, and what is It's best sustained turn rate at 5000 ASL. Will stores being  ripped off be modeled? God that needs to have needs to be a thing on all models. The maxG isn't really a big concern.

The only thing I will say is it wouldn't matter if you land a repair. Structural damage isn't really something  you would be able to repair on a quick turn. Hell it's not something you can repair I theater. The kind stress damage that will cause wing separation are depot level repairs if they can be done at that. You can talk to the F-15C community about that. As for bent wings, I've know a few jets that had to have there flight  controls rigged to that a warped airframe into consideration. 

And that's the problem with the whole thing you can't accurately model it at all. You need some kind of system or people  will just put the stick in there laps. Personally I like the idea of say 140% of max equals a break. Another good addition would be to sat start subtracting points from that pecent for every hundredth of a second over the rated max G. Is it 100% real no. This is something that can't  really be modeled. 

[Get_Lo]

14 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

The only thing I will say is it wouldn't matter if you land a repair. Structural damage isn't really something  you would be able to repair on a quick turn. Hell it's not something you can repair I theater. The kind stress damage that will cause wing separation are depot level repairs if they can be done at that. You can talk to the F-15C community about that. As for bent wings, I've know a few jets that had to have there flight  controls rigged to that a warped airframe into consideration. 

I was just keeping with the trend of "The DCS ground crew is magical and can re-assemble and entire aircraft in 300 seconds"
If I can get 2 new wings, a nose, a tail, and an engine all replace in minutes. I would hope they could at least fix my bent wing spars.
As for the other modules, im not entirely sure but I think the old recipe was 1.5x what the manual says while on max internal fuel for a fair bit of them and that worked out pretty well (This would put the F1 at ~11G), with more weight lowing the threshold and less weight raising it. of course many use much more advanced calculations now with varying degrees of success.
Im sure what ever Aerges is going with will be a good solution and I trust them entirely on it.

Edited February 19, 2022 by Get_Lo

[FlankerKiller]

32 minutes ago, Get_Lo said:

I was just keeping with the trend of "The DCS ground crew is magical and can re-assemble and entire aircraft in 300 seconds"
If I can get 2 new wings, a nose, a tail, and an engine all replace in minutes. I would hope they could at least fix my bent wing spars.
As for the other modules, im not entirely sure but I think the old recipe was 1.5x what the manual says while on max internal fuel for a fair bit of them and that worked out pretty well (This would put the F1 at ~11G), with more weight lowing the threshold and less weight raising it. of course many use much more advanced calculations now with varying degrees of success.
Im sure what ever Aerges is going with will be a good solution and I trust them entirely on it.

 

I bet, I fucking love the C-101. Also IRL there's often  more planes then pilots. What we would do is swap you to the spare. Which we can have "cocked on". That would be cool in the future. 

But yeah this is an area where I think simple is best. I'm just coming back to the F-5 after falling out of love with the fly by wire crowd. I personally  love the M2000C, but would like something  a little  bit less 4th Gen. So I am waiting for this thing. I'm really looking  forward to the F-1 more then the AH-64. I can't wait to learn this bird. 

[PLAAF]

Any news on the release date?

[WinterH]

Anxiously waiting for its arrival in my virtual hangar

This, and if it really happens this year the F-4E are my top anticipations for this year's releases, followed by Corsair.

[FlankerKiller]

15 minutes ago, WinterH said:

Anxiously waiting for its arrival in my virtual hangar

This, and if it really happens this year the F-4E are my top anticipations for this year's releases, followed by Corsair.

You and me both. For me it's F-4E, F-1, A-7E. But I'm really looking forward to the

F-1 

[WinterH]

Very much looking forward to the A-7 as well, but don't think it's for this year. Otherwise I have long list of upcoming things I'm very much looking forward to that also includes A-7, A-6, G.91, Mirage III, MiG-23, Su-17, EE Lighting, Super Tucano, Pucara, Bo-105, Kiowa, F-8 etc etc

 

Hope F1 is really getting near!

Edited February 20, 2022 by WinterH
fixed the horrible mistake of forgetting F-8 :D

[Cab]

The F-8 is also on the way but not getting any love here.  

[kontiuka]

Probably 90% of the posts here have nothing to do with an actual Mirage F-1 update.  Mildly annoying.

[BonerCat]

46 minutes ago, kontiuka said:

Probably 90% of the posts here have nothing to do with an actual Mirage F-1 update.  Mildly annoying.

Including this one

 

[spartan2078]

OOF