Many people consider the Mirage 2000 to be an equivalent to the F-16, but in reality, it is an interceptor rather than multirole, and is closer in performance to a Tornado ADV or MiG-25
Many people consider the Mirage 2000 to be an equivalent to the F-16, but in reality...
Anthony Foster
Henry Gray
Well not really an interceptor.
Although not as multirole as an F-16, the Mirage 2000 can do much more than intercept.
Colton Bailey
As French fighter jets are tailor-made to suit the highly specific french needs, "french" should be a category of jet of its own.
James White
The 2000 had a lot of versions (not pictured here, the 2000-3 with RDI radar); all of them were tailored to the client's needs.
On top of that, there were somethimes huge differences between earlier and latter models of the same version.
The original Mirage 2000DA (Defense Aérienne, = air defense) was indeed a pure fighter. But it was equipped from the start to be able to attack ground targets, with guns, bmobs and rockets, and since its RDI radar was only good against air targets and took longer to develop, they equipped the multirole export models and some with the RDM (jokingly called "Radar De Merde", shitty radar) that could lock on ground and sea targets.
Latter versions got the much improved RDY.
Jaxon Scott
The Rafale is barely more capable than an F-18F, and Mirage 2000 is wholly inferior to an F-16 especially as it has stopped being updated while F-16 is in Block 70
Christopher Fisher
You are obviously French and cannot be trusted as a source
Thomas Perez
Indeed I am, user. Now you're doomed to wonder if I told the truth or not for all eternity. Honhonhonhonhon.
Or quickcheck wikipedia, that works too.
Owen Long
Why would you do that? Go on the internet and tell lies?
Owen Rodriguez
Who considers it an equivalent?
Christian Lewis
>Many people consider the Mirage 2000 to be an equivalent to the F-16
lol
Mirage is a gen 3 on steroids, f16 is a totally new gen 4 beast with ridiculous kinetic performance and far superior weapons systems.
Jeremiah Stewart
The f16 was tailor made to be a daytime air superiority fighter, it's just so good at everything they made it multirole.
Aaron Jenkins
It is fact that F-16 is superior to Mirage and Superhornet is comparable to a Rafale
James Williams
Mirage 2000 is nothing more than if Russians had upgraded MiG-21 instead of designing MiG-23
Carson Cooper
Superhornet has compared poorly to Rafale (and Eurofighter) in all trials (Switzerland, India,...). The data is freely available.
Meanwhile the 2000-9 will get updated when its operators ask for it and not sooner, since Dassault is shilling the Rafale.
Stop 'muriking, user.
This has to be the most nonsensical statement on Jow Forums today, and I say that knowing that we have a couple thread infested by sturmniggers.
Chase Rodriguez
>if Russians had upgraded MiG-21 instead of designing MiG-23
They'd probably get something better than the Mig-23
Hudson Rivera
No, the F1 was a Gen3
Ayden Walker
The Mig 23 was shit
Jayden Turner
Mirage III = F-5
Mirage 2000 = F-20
Mirage 2000 is nothing more than a filthy 1960s design pretending it is relevant in 1980s
Nicholas Torres
t. Frenchman
Jason Wright
In reality, Mirage 2k was based on a gen 2 airframe
Bentley Mitchell
Thats wrong though. The Airframe was always legit, but they improved it thanks to fly-by-wire technology. It also had impressive radar for its size, while also being able to carry a good amount of ordinance for its size.
It proved itself in Desert storm as an excellent ground attack platform.
John Jenkins
>gen 2 airframe
So? It wasn't the exact same airframe.
Xavier Lewis
Mods are asleep, post deltas.
The Mirage F-1 is the superior bomb truck of the family, tho.
Parker Hill
I disagree, the 2000 could carry more and use more accurate munitions.
Jaxon Mitchell
M-2000 has a shifted centre of gravity compared to the Mirage III (as well as leading edge slats and vortex generator), this makes it inherently unstable requiring full FBW.
Kinematically it is superior to any 3rd gen and while the early versions are similar to F-16A/JAS-39A the later versions (ie: 2000-5) are definitely in the same technological class as the F-16C (albeit not in the same weight class).
Asher Collins
>We never got the Frogcat
WE'RE IN THE WRONG TIMELINE
Christian Torres
If I were looking to put together an effective AF on a budget I'd see about buying the old M2000 airframes as they are retired. Turn them over to the Israelis for a SLEP and new avionics and viola! effective fighter. The key would be ensuring the engines could supported by France or Israel.
Eli Baker
Its the opposite actually, that's one of the reasons Taiwan retired them early, Dassault charges up the ass for service and maintenance, they're very pricey to keep in the air compared to other contemporary fighter aircraft.
Andrew Kelly