Mirage 2000C &/or JF-17 ; Worth it? Thoughts?

[minerunknown]

Mirage 2000C: I've heard great things about the aircraft performance, but terrible things about its armament. Is it true it only has the Magik 2 and Super 530D for AA, and that the 530D is almost useless compared to an AIM-120?

JF-17: How does it perform in AA? Heard it's a beast at ground pound and that it's SD-10's are possibly even better than AIM-120's.

How difficult are they to learn/fly and how long do they take to get in the air? Should I not bother with them if I already own the F-16, F-14, and the low-fidelity aircraft?

[Red_Camarada]

Go for jf17, is better than M2000C and it is a red aircraft so it will differ from nato one that you already own. The jeff also has a great Datalink.

[spike2071]

The Mirage isn't good at BVR. The Super 530 is a Fox 1 that has a range of about 10nm. The Magic is decent for a Fox 2, but isn't on par with the 9x. If you're looking at PVP MP, you're going to lose if it's not WVR. Also, it can only hold 2 Super 530s and 2 Magics when fully loaded.

That said, the SP experience is good. The training missions are pretty good, the default campaign is a perfect stepping stone from the training missions, and if you own the Nevada map, the (paid) Red Flag campaign is excellent.

The plane is easy to learn and easy to fly.

I don't own the JF-17, so I can't speak directly to it, but I thought SD-10s were scaled back to be on par with the AMRAAMs.

[FireShark]

I would get the Jeff or if you want an older Cold War plane, get the Viggen.

[minerunknown]

spike2071 eredeti hozzászólása:

The Mirage isn't good at BVR. The Super 530 is a Fox 1 that has a range of about 10nm. The Magic is decent for a Fox 2, but isn't on par with the 9x. If you're looking at PVP MP, you're going to lose if it's not WVR. Also, it can only hold 2 Super 530s and 2 Magics when fully loaded.

That said, the SP experience is good. The training missions are pretty good, the default campaign is a perfect stepping stone from the training missions, and if you own the Nevada map, the (paid) Red Flag campaign is excellent.

The plane is easy to learn and easy to fly.

I don't own the JF-17, so I can't speak directly to it, but I thought SD-10s were scaled back to be on par with the AMRAAMs.

Thanks for the info, I assume theres no chance of the mirage getting MICA's.

[jalsina]

The Mirage 2000C is great. Very well done by their developers. An excellent dogfighter and easy to fly. A great energy management fighter. There is no single mission you can´t manage and win. Wingmen are not as stupid as in the SU-25T (probably because I have not used the Mirage yet in ground to air IR missiles infected areas).
Limited but effective weapons. Unfortunately we don´t have the MICA missile (radar active).

The Mirage has a great flying and it´s not hard to dodge SAMs and BVR missiles, due to its great maneuverability and energy conservation.
If you can´t win a turning knife combat, just push the afterburners and get the hell out of there. Very few will reach you if they decide to pursuit.

I can´t tell about the Pakistani aircraft, but as everyone of its owners says, it is very good, and it has a more modern cockpit.

[startrekmike]

The best way to answer your questions is to put the aircraft in their proper context.

The Mirage we have in DCS (the RDI-S5 version) is probably best thought of as a stripped down air to air platform. It got its start in the mid/late 80's and while it does have some limited air to ground capability, France never really intended to use said capability because they already had much better aircraft for air to ground roles (like the Jaguar for example).

Perhaps it is best to think of the Mirage we have as something like a early F-16. It has a decent engine, reasonably capable radar, and decent semi-active and IR missiles. If you confine it to missions where it is facing appropriate threats (80's Russian stuff for example), it will probably do okay. This is especially the case if you use it properly and as part of a larger "air power ecosystem" (for lack of a better term). It is very much a 80's fighter and it needs to be treated like one in order to really use it to its fullest.

From a air to ground perspective, the Mirage has little meaningful to offer. It has basic CCRP/CCIP HUD functionality and can carry some air to ground weapons but it is obvious that the specific version we got was never really intended to do air to ground tasks. If you like air to ground at all, the Mirage isn't going to give you a great experience.

Now let's talk about the JF-17. The first thing to understand above all else is that a lot of the design decisions seem to come from a need for something that Pakistani F-16 pilots could easily transition into. If you are already familiar with the F-16, you will notice a lot of thematic similarities in the way things work.

While it is tempting to compare the JF-17 to the F-16, it is perhaps more useful to compare it to the proposed F-20 Tigershark. The F-20 was essentially a F-5 with a F-16 engine and modern (for the time) weapon and avionics capabilities. To put it simply. It was what you get when you make a F-5 into a proper modern multi-role aircraft. The F-20 was all about being cheap and having a lot of "bang for the buck" in terms of capability. The JF-17 is a lot like that. It has a lot of "off the shelf" components that combine to form a very capable light multi-role fighter.

As far as capability goes, the JF-17 is going to share a lot in common with the Hornet and Viper. It has a few extra wrinkles (like the very useful SPJ pod that integrates quite seamlessly into the rest of your sensors) but for the most part, it does a lot of the things that the F-16 does but not in quite as slick a way.

Now, this brings us to how difficult they are to learn. I am going to be blunt. I don't think any module is more difficult to learn than another. They are all straightforward to learn if you are willing to open up a manual and go step by step. Likewise. I don't really worry too much about how long they take to start. Generally you should be worried about getting your mission related info sorted during navigation alignment anyway.

[SSerponi76]

minerunknown eredeti hozzászólása:

Mirage 2000C: I've heard great things about the aircraft performance, but terrible things about its armament. Is it true it only has the Magik 2 and Super 530D for AA, and that the 530D is almost useless compared to an AIM-120?

M-2000C is a nice plane, easy to learn and really fun to fly. Yes, it can be armed only with Magic 2 (Fox II) and S530D (Fox I) for a total of 4 missiles + a dual 30mm gun.
S530D is not useless but it is semi-active, so it can be more properly compared to AIM-7, not to AIM-120C.

Although the S530D limits its BVR capability, it is a really good WVR dogfighter: Magic 2 performs more or less like AIM-9M and the gun can crush any targets with really few rounds.

It also has a basic A-G capability but with some strange "french" limitations:
- Cannot mount mixed AG ordances.
- CCIP / CCRP release modes are not user selectable but pre-selected by the weapon.
- Can carry LGB but does not carry laser pod.

Module comes with 2 really good campaingn by Baltic Dragon, one of witch need the Persian Gulf. A third campaing, M-200C Red Flag, again by Baltic Dragon, can be bougth as separate module and require NTTR map.

minerunknown eredeti hozzászólása:

How difficult are they to learn/fly and how long do they take to get in the air? Should I not bother with them if I already own the F-16, F-14, and the low-fidelity aircraft?

M-2000C is a FF module but, like the F-5E, is quite easy to learn, much easier than the average FF module. Using the Chuck's Guide as starting documentation and doing pratical training I was able to complete the base OCU of the plane in 10 days or less. Moreover, one of the included campaing is intended as a tutorial to learn both plane and weapon handling.

[minerunknown]

Thanks for the info guys, Im using the free trial of aircraft right now for the sale to test them.

Would anyone know why I cant use the radar on the JF-17? Pressing the button to switch the MFCD to it simply does nothing.

[Blinky]

minerunknown eredeti hozzászólása:

Thanks for the info guys, Im using the free trial of aircraft right now for the sale to test them.

Would anyone know why I cant use the radar on the JF-17? Pressing the button to switch the MFCD to it simply does nothing.

On the MFCD on the top of the screen you have to press the standby button AND silent button to the right of the standby.

[SaxonRaider]

If you want realistic missions then Mirage is much more useful, Used by UAE for example on Persian Gulf Map and France from King Hussain Airbase in Jordan on the Syria Map https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Op%C3%A9ration_Chammal. JF-17 is only flown by Pakistan and Myanmar, both of which are not in and don't have any foreign bases in the Theaters of DCS. Alright if you want to fly a realistic simulator in a fictional setting i guess.

[minerunknown]

Blinky eredeti hozzászólása:

minerunknown eredeti hozzászólása:

Thanks for the info guys, Im using the free trial of aircraft right now for the sale to test them.

Would anyone know why I cant use the radar on the JF-17? Pressing the button to switch the MFCD to it simply does nothing.

On the MFCD on the top of the screen you have to press the standby button AND silent button to the right of the standby.

Apologies for late reply, steam is dumb:

Pressing the RDR button does nothing, so I cannot get to the page to press the standby/silent. I have to use 1-2-3-4 on the keyboard similar to a low-fi model to get to the radar, THEN turn it on. Not sure if that's intentional or not.

[Gerdam1701]

I have both and love both. The Mirage is unmatched in close in guns fight, and shes generally capable in air to ground. But not that modern. The JF 17 is very modern, great missiles and targeting pods etc. Also a beautiful plane to fly. Highly capable in any role. Either will be great.

[dan]

Mirage is really let down by a lack of fox3s. Otherwise it would give any other module a run for its money. I loved the mirage's agility, cockpit layout and some little convenient feature here and there. Really loved the campaign. Extremely educational for a new player.

Jf17 is modern but quite manageable. The UI is quite straightforward once you learn the procedure. Many powerful features at your fingertips. Quite a lot of keybindings required though since it has so many systems and functions. If only it could fire SD10s on datalink alone, it would be unstoppable.

And yeah while jf17 carries up to 4 fox 3s, mirage carries 0. At most 2 even if it could.

[kalnaren]

The Mirage is a hellion up close and arguably one of the best WVR aircraft in the game. There's nothing -and I mean nothing- it can't take on in WVR and beat (provided you know how to use it).

The hard part is surviving to get to that point. The Mirage was designed as a high performance interceptor. The idea was to take off and race to enemy aircraft when you knew where they were and they were already close. In this context it does well. Using it like you'd CAP with an Eagle or Hornet is using it outside of its intended role, and it does not perform well in that respect.

DCS is a bit of a mixed bag that way.. especially in MP, most players really overload their aircraft and RoE isn't really a thing (for example, a usual realistic CAP loadout for an F-15 is four AMRAAMs and two bags -not 3,214 AMRAAMs people load them with in DCS- and RoE usually stated you have to get visual ID before shooting something down).

So as startrekmike stated.. when used in context the Mirage is great. Used like an F-15 or F-18.. it's not.

[SaxonRaider]

kalnaren eredeti hozzászólása:

The Mirage is a hellion up close and arguably one of the best WVR aircraft in the game. There's nothing -and I mean nothing- it can't take on in WVR and beat (provided you know how to use it).

....- and RoE usually stated you have to get visual ID before shooting something down)....

kalnaren, excellent post i totally agree however, visual ID i.e. WVR? if so does that include IFF in BVR?