Mirage 2000C 18/11/2021 update presentation

[Krippz]

Great work Razbam. 

[sylkhan]

1 hour ago, Thinder said:

....Same here, you compare aircraft which are not within the same time frame, as I said, the 2000 was BVR capable well before the introduction of the F-16 Block 25, be it with the F or D model.

.......

You don't have a valid argument here.

Are you ok ?
I have said absolutely nothing

1 hour ago, Thinder said:

...I suggest you inform yourself before posting stuff like this...

But from what stuff are you talking about ?
Are you sure you are refering to my post.

falcon_120 said "Hopefully we'll get a m 2000-5 at some points as a new module, it would be awesome as it is the current M2000C "

and i said " Mirage 2000-9 would be (IMO) a better option. (because of the multi role capacities)"

Nothing more... nothing less.
We were talking about a possible future module.

Is it more clear for you ?

[Thinder]

Just now, sylkhan said:

Are you ok ?
I have said absolutely nothing

But from what stuff are you talking about ?
Are you sure you are refering to my post.

falcon_120 said "Hopefully we'll get a m 2000-5 at some points as a new module, it would be awesome as it is the current M2000C "

and i said " Mirage 2000-9 would be (IMO) a better option. (because of the multi role capacities)"

Nothing more... nothing less.
We were talking about a possible future module.

Is it more clear for you ?

Sorry, blue on blue.

But I disagree that we need a 2000-5/9/Mk2 at all cost, what we need is a timer which would put those A-C on par with each other in the frame of their respective capabilities of the time for specific scenarios, today 2000C don't even have a BVR missile.

The 2000C-RDI is perfectly competitive when it comes to BVR capabilities for the time, even if persistence (number of weapons) is lower.

As for the -5/9/Mk2 you'll have to wait until they are declassified by foreign customers to have semi-accurate datas, it's DGA policies.

 

[sylkhan]

1 hour ago, Krippz said:

Great work Razbam. 

Never too late to do things right

Will the engine sounds inside the cockpit be reworked?

Thanks

[sylkhan]

13 minutes ago, Thinder said:

Sorry, blue on blue.

But I disagree that we need a 2000-5/9/Mk2 at all cost....

I never said that we need a 2000-5/9 :), i just said that, IF RAZBAM can do a 2000-5 in the futur, then a 2000-9 would be a better option (IMO).

For the rest i agree with all you have said

Edited November 14, 2021 by sylkhan

[Thinder]

Just now, sylkhan said:

I never said that we need a 2000-5/9 :), i just said that, IF RAZBAM can do a 2000-5 in the futur, then a 2000-9 would be a better option (IMO).

For the rest i agree with all you have said

 

Never mind my English.

It's just a pitty that A-Cs are not pitted vs eachother with time limits for their loadout.

[Harlikwin]

3 hours ago, Thinder said:

 

Sorry you're talking B.S, only the first 37 2000 had this radar and were upgraded with modifications to their inlets in order to take the M53 P2 as well, service entry of the 2000 is officialy summer 1983.

https://www.defense.gouv.fr/air/moyens/avions-de-chasse/mirage-2000-c

The 530D was in service before the F-16 Block 25 and to do so had to be equiped with the new RDI radar in the first place.

  

Same here, you compare aircraft which are not within the same time frame, as I said, the 2000 was BVR capable well before the introduction of the F-16 Block 25, be it with the F or D model.

If you put them back to this context your F-16/18 would be limited to AIM-9, that's a FACT.

This is a game but you all try to play "accuracy" and completely forget the real capabilities of those aircrafts within their respective service history, even so, the F-16 Block 25 would equiped with AIM-7, the 530D had snap up performances superior to those models of AIM-7.

Then if you want to talk accuracy, ask yourself why the transonic issues with assymetric load of the F-16 is not simulated in this game.

You don't have a valid argument here.

 

Here is an intercept profile for the 530F.

I suggest you inform yourself before posting stuff like this...

 

 

So, as I said, the 2000C with the RDI and 530D, wasn't a thing for most of the 1980's. Lets assume your 87 date is in fact an actual operational date not some rosey eyed oh we have like 1 working plane and 2 missiles that are "technically" working which most of those dates usually are. So lets see lemme do some math, 1980-1987 thats 7 years. Then 1987-1990 is 3 years. So, last I checked 7>3. So, I'd say my statement that the RDI 2000 and the 530D werent a thing for most of the 80's is in fact pretty accurate.

Also at no point did I even bring in some block25 viper into the conversation.

 

Also I'd be curious since we have a 2000's era M2Kc what sort of upgrades did the RDI, and 530D get over the course of the 90's. 

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Harlikwin

[LtCol_Davenport]

8 hours ago, =36=Witcher said:

This is another module, said plenty of times.

Oh absolutely. And I will also pay full price for it, don’t worry, that’s not the problem.

 

I will be simply happy to see it coming!

[Thinder]

1 hour ago, Harlikwin said:

 

So, as I said, the 2000C with the RDI and 530D, wasn't a thing for most of the 1980's. Lets assume your 87 date is in fact an actual operational date not some rosey eyed oh we have like 1 working plane and 2 missiles that are "technically" working which most of those dates usually are. So lets see lemme do some math, 1980-1987 thats 7 years. Then 1987-1990 is 3 years. So, last I checked 7>3. So, I'd say my statement that the RDI 2000 and the 530D werent a thing for most of the 80's is in fact pretty accurate.

Also at no point did I even bring in some block25 viper into the conversation.

 

Also I'd be curious since we have a 2000's era M2Kc what sort of upgrades did the RDI, and 530D get over the course of the 90's. 

 

 

Keep your assumptions for fanboys, the sources I posted are official, not only AdlA but also Centre des hautes études de l'armement. Département d'histoire de l'armement. Comité pour l'histoire de l'aéronautique. Paris COMAERO. That's the official French Defense archive site for the R530 F and D development and performances, not to mention MATRA slide on the snap up performances and intercept profile of the 2000C RDM/R530 F.

This mean that for years the Mirage had potent BVR capabilities even the RDM variant, and the F-16 hadn't, then I assume that the block 25 came into service with full BVR capabilities which might or not be the case.

In short you posted whatever on the subject, so it is NOT as you said.

Quote

The F-16 was never intended to carry the Sparrow missile because it was designed to be a short range day-time interceptor without any BVR capabilities. Although the possibility of equipping the aircraft with the missile were already tested succesfully in 1977 it took untill the introduction of the F-16C block 25 and the F-16 ADF before the Viper got a BVR capability.

F-16.net AIM-7 Sparrow Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile

Service entry of the Mirage 2000C RDI - M53-P2 1987

Quote

Following initial deliveries to overseas units, the 312st TFTS stationed at Luke AFB in Arizona became the first continental US unit to receive the F-16C/D, getting its first planes in April of 1986 and becoming fully operational in October of 1988.

F-16.net F-16C/D block 25

Quote

The Super 530 D is the version adapted to the Mirage 2000 equipped with an on-board pulse doppler radar (called RDI, pulse doppler radar).

The main differences in characteristics compared to the F are as follows: - semi-active EMD doppler seeker (see chapter 8, EMD), with digital technology from 1980 (microprocessor for management); significantly increased range of AD: 50 km; very high resistance to modern countermeasures; - partially digitized computer pilot; - more efficient vehicle: increased mass and length (+ 30 kg and + 265 mm), total impulse thruster 16% higher, with a composite SEP casing; - performance: maximum speed of Mach 5; Possible elevation gain, allowing attacking targets at 24,000m; minimum target altitude of 60 m; Maximum firing distance of 50 km, with an intercept distance of 35 km.

At the time, this missile was "the must have" from a performance standpoint. Launched in development in 1977, it was commissioned in 1987.

1,000 missiles were produced, of which 620 (including 30 training) for France. It was exported with the Mirage 2000 to Egypt, India, Abu Dhabi, Greece. It was widely used by the French Air Force on patrol with AD operation, without fire, during the Gulf War and the conflict in the former Yugoslavia.

This use had not been foreseen and the operating potential of the AD (the mechanics) was limited to 25 hours; but it could be increased to 200 hours after testing. For its part, the third American generation consists of the 7 F and 7 M versions of the Sparrow.

The vehicle has been improved; but it was above all the AD that needed modernization. The reliability of the Sparrow 7 E version used during the Vietnam conflict was viewed by reports in the US Senate as unacceptable; AD had stuck with "tube" technology.

Version 7 F, featuring solid state technology, did not enter service with difficulty until 1978, due to flaws encountered during the evaluation phase; we will see the consequences with the hasty launch of its successor, AMRAAM (Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air

http://marc.mistral.free.fr/aventure/militaire/missiles tactiques/mt 59 79/mt ch 09.htm

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Thinder

[myHelljumper]

Hey guys, could you take this conversation to MP or another thread please ? Thanks :).

The only improvements that I know of between the first 2000C RDI and the Mid 2000 ones are NCTR, small symbology changes and the NVG compatible cockpit.

The RDI and Super 530 did not change after they were fielded AFAIK

[Worrazen]

Great stuff an like that the documentation also gets the touch, but I wanted to comment a couple of weeks ago and I guess I forgot and I'm too late ... I was hoping the english manual would include english cockpit edition pictures and that the abbreviations and names in the english manual would be translated to english as well and referr to the english cockpit rather than the french.

Perhaps that might require two different whole manuals in parallel, french and english one with their respective cockpit editions, not sure how this idea goes because might not be realistic if there's no official english airplane in existance but that's the most optimal idea. I found the mission tutorials keep referring to French abbreviations and modes for knobs that simply didn't exist for me using the english cockpit which kinda defeats it's purpose if I have to then use the French one.

Ofcourse using the proper official language cockpit is what we should eventually strive for as users if we want to be all by the book and I certainly am not an advocate of too many conveniences, shortcuts and cheats.

The english cockpit it self also has some things that aren't translated, I understand for things that have same letters in both languages, but for example the EFF button, if it means to delete/clear then shouldn't it be "CLR" or "DEL" ?

 

EDIT: Oops I see I did infact talk about this on the previous Update Presentation thread and I did get a reply, sorry about that, and thanks for consideration!

 

PS; for clarity, this thread could be named to include the date just like the previous one, ..13/11/2021..

Edited November 14, 2021 by Worrazen

[sedenion]

At last, I will no longer need to update my mod ! Good job guys.

[Dudikoff]

Great work, Razbam. Hope some of this stuff can be reused by some of your other modules.

[Mr_sukebe]

Great to see these ongoing refinements.  Nice one RB

[Harlikwin]

6 hours ago, Dudikoff said:

Great work, Razbam. Hope some of this stuff can be reused by some of your other modules.

Pretty sure thats the plan, the radar stuff flat out will be used in the F15, and most likely the 23. And the TAF DL, is at least in basic form similar to lazur to consider it a beta test for that DL.

[bies]

7 hours ago, Dudikoff said:

Great work, Razbam. Hope some of this stuff can be reused by some of your other modules.

Especially MiG-19P and MiG-23MLA.

[Voodoo_One]

Finally some M2k love

[M F1]

Good job! Thanks

 

[noxyd]

Thanks myHelljumper for this detailed update!

Also checked out the YouTube video, can’t wait to try all this in game.

Quick question on the PSID mode : what changes in terms of behaviour/functionality should we expect for this mode (that I use a lot!) compared to the existing one ?

Thank you 

[myHelljumper]

Hi,

The PSID lock will have issues maintaining lock at long range or in look down when the signal to noise ratio is too low.

The target track is updated only when the radar is passing over the target and will lead to the radar contact and VTH target box "jumping" to update the position of the contact.

Thanks.

Edited November 16, 2021 by myHelljumper

[noxyd]

Thanks!

will we still get the target vector in PSID ? 
 

[myHelljumper]

Yes, the PSID symbology won't change much.

Edited November 17, 2021 by myHelljumper

[Snappy]

Very nice update presentation!

Its hard to see from the screenshot, but I wanted to ask, did the radar gunsight update include a reworking of the centerdots thickness and brightness?

In the current version it is  not very visible on the snake. On the real aircraft HUD it seems to be brighter and slightly thicker than the snake itself. See pictures in this thread:

Besides that very impressed with the work that went into this update and the new level of system simulated!

Kind regards,

 Snappy 

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by Snappy

[Ramsay]

4 hours ago, Snappy said:

did the radar gunsight update include a reworking of the centerdots thickness and brightness?

It doesn't look like the center dot has changed (but everything else looks great - and I'd fear a large center dot might obscure the target in an already "busy" HUD).

Make your own judgement on the WIP footage @57:37

 

[jpvbx]

Hello,

Sorry for this question, but, what is the procedure to update M2000 from Razbam?