Jump to content

About Mirage F1


M F1

Recommended Posts

Yeah true, but I don't think that using e.g. the F-5 or Mig-21 as a placeholder would be significantly better. Plus the Harriers on the other side may not get radar, but they do get a more modern airframe and avionics, including an RWR.


Edited by TLTeo
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it isn't really ok from either side, but if people want to roleplay a historical mission the best they can with what's available, they'll just have to make do with that.

Razbam wants to eventually do modules of Mirage IIIEA and also an earlier Harrier from period (either a GR or a Sea Harrier), but that should be a good while in the future yet.

Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V

DCS-Dismounts Script

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope we eventually get Mirage IIIEE from Aerges after F1 if they manage to do so sooner than Razbam, especially since they already have a knowledge and are modelling Dassault systems and all with F1. It would be more or less the same for the purpose I guess, and it's a cold war aircraft fitting many sceneries in Middle East, not only Malvinas/Falklands.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ala13_ManOWar said:

I hope we eventually get Mirage IIIEE from Aerges after F1 if they manage to do so sooner than Razbam, especially since they already have a knowledge and are modelling Dassault systems and all with F1. It would be more or less the same for the purpose I guess, and it's a cold war aircraft fitting many sceneries in Middle East, not only Malvinas/Falklands.

In the Middle east it was mirage IIICJ, but EE is close enough I guess. My credit card will come out flying for any Mirage III.

  • Like 2

“Mosquitoes fly, but flies don’t Mosquito” :pilotfly:

- Geoffrey de Havilland.

 

... well, he could have said it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aerges also have the advantage that unlike RB they don't have a huge backlog of modules. Doing four F1 variants is ambitious but it's nowhere near doing the F-15E/Mig-23/whatever else. I could 100% see them getting the Mirage III done before RB.


Edited by TLTeo
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bozon said:

In the Middle east it was mirage IIICJ, but EE is close enough I guess. My credit card will come out flying for any Mirage III.

Engine was different, I believe. System wise I haven't the faintest.

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ala13_ManOWar said:

Engine was different, I believe. System wise I haven't the faintest.

The engine of all Mirage III and 5 is some variation of the ATAR, including the Israeli ones. You are probably thinking of the Kfir, which was a Mirage 5 re-engined with the J79 among other modifications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/20/2022 at 10:58 PM, Bremspropeller said:

That still leaves you off with a more capable aircraft in A-A.

Especially, when the other side gets to fly Harriers with no radar.

Of course it's not a perfect replacement, since it is a different aircraft, but if you have any idea which of the playable DCS aircraft would be a better stand-in for Daggers and Mirage IIIs I would really appreciate your input!

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TLTeo said:

The engine of all Mirage III and 5 is some variation of the ATAR, including the Israeli ones. You are probably thinking of the Kfir, which was a Mirage 5 re-engined with the J79 among other modifications.

No, I'm remembering from my modelling stuff, in order to build a CJ out of a regular Mirage IIIC, you have to scratch build (or find some aftermarket for the purpose) the tail end/engine exhaust which is a bit different 🤣 .

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ala13_ManOWar said:

No, I'm remembering from my modelling stuff, in order to build a CJ out of a regular Mirage IIIC, you have to scratch build (or find some aftermarket for the purpose) the tail end/engine exhaust which is a bit different 🤣 .

That doesn't mean the engine is different though. The Israeli A-4s also received a different exhaust by the end of their service, but they were not re-engined afaik.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TLTeo said:

That doesn't mean the engine is different though. The Israeli A-4s also received a different exhaust by the end of their service, but they were not re-engined afaik.

AFAIK the Israeli A-4s with the extended tailpipe were A-4N with the later J-52 engine, while those without were A-4E/H with the older model J-52. This extended exhaust was also used when they installed late J-52 in the Dassault Super Mystere and turned it into the much improved Sa’ar.

“Mosquitoes fly, but flies don’t Mosquito” :pilotfly:

- Geoffrey de Havilland.

 

... well, he could have said it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2022 at 8:59 AM, QuiGon said:

Of course it's not a perfect replacement, since it is a different aircraft, but if you have any idea which of the playable DCS aircraft would be a better stand-in for Daggers and Mirage IIIs I would really appreciate your input!

A Mirage IIIEA and a Dagger.

But then again, I don't quite understand the question, since any deviation from "factual" is a forbidden outcome in your universe:

 

So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, TLTeo said:

That doesn't mean the engine is different though. The Israeli A-4s also received a different exhaust by the end of their service, but they were not re-engined afaik.

The CJ and C are virtually identical. The late CJs shipped to Argentina had been re-engined in Israel from ATAR 9B (eyelid nozzle) to ATAR 9C engines (proper convergent-divergent nozzle) a couple of years before.

They also had their radars removed and hence were lighter, slightly more powerful and had a rear-shifted CoG, which gave them the best dogfighting performance of all Mirage III family aircraft.

You're right, the engines themselves weren't changed (unless they swapped a couple of -6 to -8 motors or re-engined to -408s altogether later). The IDAF switched their Super Mystères to J-52 engines, though. They not only threw away the afterburning ATAR 101s, they also elongated the jetpipe - in a similar fashion as on the Skyhawks.

The result looked a bit awkward, but it seems it worked well enough for them:

SH72345 SMB-2 Super Mystère 'Sa'ar - Israeli Storm in the Sky'


Edited by Bremspropeller
  • Like 1

So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

A Mirage IIIEA and a Dagger.

But then again, I don't quite understand the question, since any deviation from "factual" is a forbidden outcome in your universe:

 

Now tell me please how I can get my hand on a DCS Mirage IIIEA or a DCS Dagger without having to wait years for it and I will be happy.
Otherwise I will have to stick with the Mirage F1 as the closest surrogate soon available...


Edited by QuiGon
  • Like 2

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2022 at 2:36 PM, TLTeo said:

Aerges also have the advantage that unlike RB they don't have a huge backlog of modules. Doing four F1 variants is ambitious but it's nowhere near doing the F-15E/Mig-23/whatever else. I could 100% see them getting the Mirage III done before RB.

 

Let's wait til the F1 is actually released, let alone all the variants done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

Otherwise I will have to stick with the Mirage F1 as the closest surrogate soon available...

You can stick to whatever you like, but it won't be "closest" just because it's sharing a common name. You'd get closer to a MIIIEA using a MiG-21 with weapon-restrictions than when using an F1. The F1 is more capable than both the -21 or the MIII. The F1 can carry twice the A-A weapons farther than the MIII (or MiG-21) and it outclasses the MiG in fwd quarter capability and radar capability. The MIIIEA should be about the least capable aircraft of those three.

That still leaves you with a Harrier without a radar, but that doesn't really matter because you can't Shrike Port Stanley with a Vulcan, supplied by a daisy-chain of Victors, anyways.

See where this is going?

So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the end of the day DCS is full of these placeholders, we already have Mig-21bis and F-5E being used in "Vietnam-era missions" despite both first flying in 1972, Cold-war era Mig-29s, brand new JF-17s, mid-2000s Vipers and Hornets and 1990s Tomcats all fighting each other in various settings, etc etc.

Is it realistic? Obvoiusly not, but it's the best we can do in the short and intermediate future. It's not surprising that people try extra hard to get placeholders for stuff that's not in the game, even though that stuff is a huge stretch.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

That still leaves you with a Harrier without a radar, but that doesn't really matter because you can't Shrike Port Stanley with a Vulcan, supplied by a daisy-chain of Victors, anyways.

See where this is going?

Well, I have to work with what's available. Believe me, I would much much rather use the exact right equipment that was used historically, but I can only use what DCS offers and try to get as close to the realistic equipment as possible with that.

  • Like 3

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, QuiGon said:

Well, I have to work with what's available. Believe me, I would much much rather use the exact right equipment that was used historically, but I can only use what DCS offers and try to get as close to the realistic equipment as possible with that.

That's not exactly my point. We all like to play "sandbox" and I'm no exception here.

The point is, however, that if you want to depict any Falklands scenario even semi-realisticly, you'll have to kind of play along with the constraints that were inherent to each side during the conflict. The Argies were stretching their range to the utmost maximum and had issues flying Daggers and Mirages across the South Atlantic (sometimes relying on Learjet navigational escorts) during late fall, while the Brits had to wing it with less than optimal equipment on their own, on short notice, starting thousands of miles away. Including semi-mothballed tankers going on a logistical tour de force. The constraints are at least 50% of the flavour in terms of gameplay. Your mileage may vary here, but trust me, otherwise, it's just another set of airquake on a different map.

The Mirage IIIEA had a Cyrano II, which had A-G modes, so the Cyrano IV could "stand in" in a way. Trouble is, they didn't fly that much and were kept mostly out of combat. The Daggers hauled most of the mail and their navigation-equipmanet was basicly down to a compass. I suppose you can force a radar-failure in the F1 to arrive at the same point, but how much do you want to force-fit the airplanes?

Then there's the radar-less Harrier. You now basicly have reversed what actually happened IRL.

It's REALLY hard to make this conflict work in the greater sceme of things. Good news is that you can use the A-4 mod and the MB-339 (when it comes out) and almost have no issues whatsoever. And with the Venticinco de Mayo up the pipe, you can even stirr things up a little and create the carrier-battle that never happened. Too bad we don't have the SuE.

 

BTW: The beauty of playing pretend-Vietnam on the SEA server is that you mostly don't change the constraints of the conflict. Especially when sticking to southern Vietnam ops, where it doesn't matter whether you're flying an A-37 or a C-101. It does a great job there.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

That's not exactly my point. We all like to play "sandbox" and I'm no exception here.

Then I don't really understand the negative attitude in your previous comments, that mostly pointed out why not to do something like that instead of providing ideas on how to make it work.
 

12 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

The point is, however, that if you want to depict any Falklands scenario even semi-realisticly, you'll have to kind of play along with the constraints that were inherent to each side during the conflict. The Argies were stretching their range to the utmost maximum and had issues flying Daggers and Mirages across the South Atlantic (sometimes relying on Learjet navigational escorts) during late fall, while the Brits had to wing it with less than optimal equipment on their own, on short notice, starting thousands of miles away. Including semi-mothballed tankers going on a logistical tour de force. The constraints are at least 50% of the flavour in terms of gameplay. Your mileage may vary here, but trust me, otherwise, it's just another set of airquake on a different map.

I totally agree!! That's the very reason why I did ask in the first place and hence I'm gratefull for every piece of advise on how to make this happen. You're remarks about fuel/range differences and radar differences are really quite helpful there!
 

12 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

The Mirage IIIEA had a Cyrano II, which had A-G modes, so the Cyrano IV could "stand in" in a way. Trouble is, they didn't fly that much and were kept mostly out of combat. The Daggers hauled most of the mail and their navigation-equipmanet was basicly down to a compass. I suppose you can force a radar-failure in the F1 to arrive at the same point, but how much do you want to force-fit the airplanes?

As much as necessary/possible! The closer I can get to the real thing the better. Unfortunately purpose build failures don't work in multiplayer, but weapons and fuel restrictions are not a problem at all.
 

12 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

Then there's the radar-less Harrier. You now basicly have reversed what actually happened IRL.

True in regards to the Sea Harriers, but there were also radar-less GR Harriers in the Falklands. Of course they did not have all the fancy avionics of our AV-8B, but it is what it is.
 

12 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

It's REALLY hard to make this conflict work in the greater sceme of things. Good news is that you can use the A-4 mod and the MB-339 (when it comes out) and almost have no issues whatsoever. And with the Venticinco de Mayo up the pipe, you can even stirr things up a little and create the carrier-battle that never happened. Too bad we don't have the SuE.

It's not too bad now that we also have the map and the asset pack and the A-4 mod is a must have for that. Additionally to what you already mentioned, there's also the Huey for the land campaign.
The absence of SuE does indeed make it difficult to portrait a very important part of the war. I might have to use Viggens instead :dunno:


Sorry if this is getting OT too much. I actually just wanted to know what the F1(CE) will bring in terms of capabilities and how it differs from the Dagger/Mirage III.


Edited by QuiGon
  • Like 1

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

Then I don't really understand the negative attitude in your previous comments, that mostly pointed out why not to do something like that instead of providing ideas on how to make it work.

I'm just mirroring your attitude on display in other instances. :dunno:

I'm also not your personal researcher. If you displayed less "attitude" yourself, I'd be more willing to party. But that's just "zwischen uns Pastorentöchtern"...

20 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

The absence of SuE does indeed make it difficult to portrait a very important part of the war. I might have to use Viggens instead :dunno:

Is it going to be MP or SP? It might work in SP if you really dumb the Viggens down (including no blowers allowed).

In MP you will most likely end up with a hopeless situation for the UK - provided they only get to fly Harriers. The lack of subs scaring the Veinticinco away and keeping it's threat for the British Task Force low kind of hurts here. Viggens off a carrier would be "interesting", though.

Then again, if you just stick to Skyhawks (which the Argentinians had on the 05/25 ) you'll end up with a more playable option for all sides. Make sure the Skyhawks only have dumb and retarded ammo to play with. You could already depict the 05/25 by using the Melbourne mod as it's quite similar to the 05/25.

Here's some food for thought: As I kind of like the idea of using Viggens off a carrier and using the F1 on the map in general: Why not go a little farther into the fictional territory and have the F1s defend the islands against Viggens off a boat? I'm quite sure you can shoehorn the Harriers into the mission and have them on the attackers side: Maybe even off some container ships to add a little spice.

 

So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Bremspropeller I better take this to PMs as this is getting too far beyond just the F1 which this thread is dedicated to :smile:

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...