What's new

IAF Mirage 2000 Upgrade Slowed By Weapons

dbc

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Feb 1, 2009
5,091
13
5,521
Country
United States
Location
United States
It is a proven and reliable fighter, with a lot of excellent multi role capabilities and it wasn't surprising that IAF wanted more of them and why they are ready to pay the price for the upgrade.
How many Mirage 2000's has the IAF lost? I believe the number is nine or ten, how does the IAF Mirage attrition rate stack up against the Jaguar or MKI? This trend is likely to get worse as the air frame ages, in other words the IAF is likely to loose more airframes in the last 20 years than it did in the first 20.
 

luckyyy

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 23, 2010
2,337
-1
522
mirage2k are the same airframe and aerodynamic as that of mirage3......they are not worth for a air combat mission , in kargil 12 out of 61 are comverted to be used for droping bombs , why then the rest are not used to excort them , they were excorted by mig-29...
then how is mirage a multi-role fighter if it need someone alse to excort them..
what a useless , a mirage in kargil have to fly from a different location and then a mig-29 from a different airbase to give it the air cover , they could have used the same airbase to fly the mirages in excort mission but didn't do it..coz mirage are not worth in air combat against F-16.....as PAF themself says , mirage are sitting ducks in air combat missions..
infect mirage2k in IAF never a option for A2A missions , they are just for ground attack along with jaguar...
and the t 90 was developed from the t 72, still no comparison between the two....
and here we are talking about a aircraft not a MBT , you can improve a MBT by keeping the same frame but , you can't improve the agility and other aerodynamics of a aircraft just by improving some avionic and radar...
 

aanshu001

FULL MEMBER
Aug 31, 2008
561
-1
502
mirage2k are the same airframe and aerodynamic as that of mirage3......they are not worth for a air combat mission , in kargil 12 out of 61 are comverted to be used for droping bombs , why then the rest are not used to excort them , they were excorted by mig-29...
then how is mirage a multi-role fighter if it need someone alse to excort them..
what a useless , a mirage in kargil have to fly from a different location and then a mig-29 from a different airbase to give it the air cover , they could have used the same airbase to fly the mirages in excort mission but didn't do it..coz mirage are not worth in air combat against F-16.....as PAF themself says , mirage are sitting ducks in air combat missions..

infect mirage2k in IAF never a option for A2A missions , they are just for ground attack along with jaguar...

and here we are talking about a aircraft not a MBT , you can improve a MBT by keeping the same frame but , you can't improve the agility and other aerodynamics of a aircraft just by improving some avionic and radar...
MIG 29 was used to escort mission coz it had R -77 missiles, which can not be integrated on french platform. That's why MIGs were able to keep away the mighty F-16 of PAF
 

sancho

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 5, 2009
13,011
27
10,560
Country
India
Location
Germany
mirage2k are the same airframe and aerodynamic as that of mirage3......they are not worth for a air combat mission , in kargil 12 out of 61 are comverted to be used for droping bombs , why then the rest are not used to excort them , they were excorted by mig-29...
then how is mirage a multi-role fighter if it need someone alse to excort them...
...infect mirage2k in IAF never a option for A2A missions , they are just for ground attack along with jaguar...

:disagree: Bogus!

The Mirage were procured as multi role fighters for the interception and additional strike role. That's why IAF used them mainly with AAMs and they were deployed in the strike role only, when Russian fighters and the Jags with dumb bombs proved to be ineffective. The modification of Mirage were only needed to carry the US Paveway bombs, because the French LGBs were 1000Kg versions and not ment for CAS. Just like aanshu001 said correctly, the Mig 29s did the escort roles for Mirage and Jags, once because they were more capable for that back then, with their real BVR capability (compared to the French missiles back then) and the fact that the older Mirage in strike roles, carried the LGBs and EW pods, which leaves only a few weapon stations for AAMs if at all:

A2A



A2G



A2G with 1000Kg French LGB on the centerline, LDP and EW pod
 

dbc

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Feb 1, 2009
5,091
13
5,521
Country
United States
Location
United States
@DBC-Mirage aircraft crash-lands at Mauritius airport - Times Of India
Please post other source for the nine losses claim.
Other source? there were four losses in 2004.

The Air Headquarters has sent its new DG Flight Inspection & Safety, Air Marshal P.S. Ahluwalia, there to probe the reasons behind the recent series of Mirage crashes. The three crashes this year have cost the IAF at least Rs 360 crore. ‘‘The crashes are surprising indeed. The Mirage continues to be our finest fighter,’’ Malik said.
 

luckyyy

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 23, 2010
2,337
-1
522
:disagree: Bogus!

The Mirage were procured as multi role fighters for the interception and additional strike role. That's why IAF used them mainly with AAMs and they were deployed in the strike role only, when Russian fighters and the Jags with dumb bombs proved to be ineffective. The modification of Mirage were only needed to carry the US Paveway bombs, because the French LGBs were 1000Kg versions and not ment for CAS. Just like aanshu001 said correctly, the Mig 29s did the escort roles for Mirage and Jags, once because they were more capable for that back then, with their real BVR capability (compared to the French missiles back then) and the fact that the older Mirage in strike roles, carried the LGBs and EW pods, which leaves only a few weapon stations for AAMs if at all:
a aircraft which need someone alse to excort it , is not a fighter at first place , ....
 

KEETARP

FULL MEMBER
Feb 19, 2010
770
0
419
Mirages were neither good A2A fighter nor a multirole fighter .

In 1989 a DACT between Mig29 and Mirage showed the difference between a beast and beauty .

Mig29 outperformed Mirage in each and every sphere ranging from
Instantenous turn rate
Sustained turn rate
Rate of climb
name it and mirage was lacking behind

Apparently Mirages at that time had Fly-by-wire while Mig29 had Hydraulic control . Still Mirages were pounded by Fulcrums .
Not only experience but rookie pilots of Mig29 had Experienced lot of Mirage pilots looking for answers .

And this legacy will continue - Mig29smt will outclass Mirage2000-5 any day , be it Range ,BVR , Radar , T/W , Litening3 vs ATLIS , SPICE/GRIFFIN3 vs Pavewayii .
Mig rules
 

sancho

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 5, 2009
13,011
27
10,560
Country
India
Location
Germany
a aircraft which need someone alse to excort it , is not a fighter at first place , ....
Good to know, so in your opinion LCA is not a fighter as well, because in strike role, it has the same loadout like our Mirages back then and will carry only 2 x SR missiles, which means it will require dedicated escorts as well!


And this legacy will continue - Mig29smt will outclass Mirage2000-5 any day , be it Range ,BVR , Radar , T/W , Litening3 vs ATLIS , SPICE/GRIFFIN3 vs Pavewayii .
Mig rules
The Migs will carry the same KAB 500s that the MKI uses, while the Mirage can use US, Israeli and French bomb kits, not to mention the other weaponary. In A2A as mentioned before, so the M2K-5 will be much closer in A2A and still superior in A2G!
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom