Back with another report from Heatblur’s Cold War server. I’ve been flying with a group of friends on the server a fair bit recently and I’ve already documented some of my earlier experiences flying the Frogfoot and Hind. This time around, I’m focused on a single platform and it’s the Mirage F1!

Strategic target striker

Heatblur Cold War server features of a mix of ground targets that help influence the direction of each battle. There are frontline targets largely consisting of vehicles and small bunkers or buildings, there’s the occasional EW tower, and then there are more strategic targets (in this context) with HQ and factory targets. I was inspired by a recent Bullet4MyEnemy video to go after these targets and I’ve really developed a taste for this sort of flying.

Mirage F1 is, in the Cold War lineup, quite a capable and potent as a fighter and interceptor. With high speed, good radar and ample armament, the F1 is a dangerous challenger versus the F-4 Phantom and F-5 Tiger II. But I’ve had only a couple of aerial engagements so far and the vast majority of my flying has been using the jet in the role of strike fighter. And its pretty good at it too!

I haven’t yet settled on an optimal loadout but I did start with two fuel tanks and gradually found that they weren’t needed for these sorties. More and more it’s been a loadout that included French, Spanish and American general purpose, low-drag, bombs in pairs under each wing and a quad mount under the fuselage. We’ve also been bringing along a Matra SNEB rocket pack with 37 HEAT rockets on the outer wings. And we’ve, of course, been packing the pair of onboard 30mm DEFA cannons and I like putting Magic I missiles on the wingtips.

The results?

After nearly a dozen sorties, I’ve added some additional knowledge to my understandings of the Mirage F1 and flown the jet in single and formations with other Mirage F1s and mixed formations with other jets. And its been terrific fun!

Factories are the easiest targets with large areas to target and dropping a string of bombs on them can bring them down quickly. Supporting buildings are vulnerable to follow-up rocket attacks.

More challenging is when we have to deal with concentrated SAM defenses around enemy airfields, which I’ve strayed into a couple of times, or persistent enemy fighters. In one instance, damage to my flap system made it difficult to get away from a persistent enemy fighter who eventually got the better of me after a protracted battle.

When uncontested, we’ve caused significant damage to both the enemy HQ target and factory targets in the north of the map. A pair of Mirages can travel quickly with a significant payload and, when properly aimed, hit and cause significant damage with fast pop-up and roll-over maneuvers onto target.

In these instances, we’ve been able to significantly affect the frontlines sometimes taking over two or three hexes at a time.

In one sortie, a mixed flight of MiG-21 escort with Su-25A and Mirage F1 strikers laid waste to a factory and the enemy northern HQ. It was highly effective and, as I said earlier, tremendous fun.

I’ve only flown the F1 on a largely fruitless combat air patrol sortie.

I did engage with a F-4 Phantom and even fired a Magic I at it only for the Phantom to crash into the ground just as I fired the missile and for said missile to then track onto my wingman instead. Unfortunate!

So, while my ground attack sortie success rate is relatively high, aerial combat success remains low. Perhaps that will change soon! In the meantime, the Mirage F1 as a strike fighter is just a tremendous amount of fun.


19 responses to “Flight Journal: I’ve been flying the Mirage F1 as a strike fighter”

  1. Would you like to see a redone Dassault Mirage 2000 one day to fly? It would have to be better than the RAZBAM one, so maybe having two or more variants could help with sales. It is still a relevant aircraft, yet it is also a Cold War one so I assume it should be declassified enough to be put into DCS.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      I’d love it. The Mirage 2000 was my first full fidelity module and it took me a long time to fully get into and appreciate it but eventually I did and had some great flights with it. I’d love to see someone return to it…. Perhaps a 2000-5 for greater versatility and to distinguish it from the earlier offering. That said, none is rumoured so for now it’s just a pipe dream.

      The Rafale or Typhoon will likely fill my desire for a modern European combat jet.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I’d love to see the Indian version of it – the HAL Vajra (Thunderbolt). Would be very useful to have if they were ever to make a Kashmir map.

        Like

      2. I would also like to see a Saab Gripen C/D one day. Very good fighter aircraft I think. I would also love to see a Saab Gripen E/F one day too, but by then the platform will be old and we might have a new one that replaces DCS. One day…

        Like

      3. I look forwards to the Rafale and Typhoon too.

        Like

      4. Reinhard Eichler Avatar
        Reinhard Eichler

        The other week i started to relearn the M2000 and that module has a surprisingly high quality. I worked with her after she got released but went on hiatus for years. So i never really noticed how much they changed and improved on that module.

        Yes you cant buy it anymore but for everyone already owning it, i would shout out a huge recommendation to try it out.

        Liked by 3 people

      5. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        RAZBAM, for all of their challenges, continued to work on all of their modules during their active phase with DCS. The M2000C is probably the one that had the biggest “glow up” with enhanced realism, a revised and visually updated cockpit, continued flight model tweaks, one of the best and most satisfying radar simulations in the business… yeah it is/was a great module. I have a big soft spot for it.

        Aerges similarly seems to be a developer that continues to work on their projects and the Mirage F1, while a very different airplane, does give me similar vibes that I get from the 2000C. Just much more analogue of course!

        Liked by 2 people

  2. Who will get to Vietnam first? DCS or IL-2?

    Liked by 2 people

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      DCS. 1CGS has said they aren’t interested in going beyond Korea timeline wise.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Urgent Siesta Avatar
        Urgent Siesta

        Seems like they might be avoiding radar & missile combat…? Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing – it’s a very intensive set of new technologies to model.

        And there’s PLENTY yet left to cover for them even with that self-imposed limitation. 🙂

        Like the entire Pacific Theatre of Operations, the Mediterranean, Scandinavia, a proper Battle of Britain, etc.

        I do feel like the ETO & Med are kinda played out other than new maps over which to fly, tho – mainly just variants of the same aircraft already in game.

        Whereas PTO and all the carrier ops and such are truly greenfield for them (and US!) 🙂

        Well, Korea is shaping up to be a great continuation, so I’ll enjoy that for now (should be “Soon”!) 🙂

        Like

    2. Probably DCS. Though it will take a while for people’s computer’s GPUs or CPUs to process a massive Indochinese map of jungles with highly detailed trees and foliage. That is why no one at DCS has attempted to make such a project. But technologies will get there by 2035 I think.

      Like

      1. To be fair, Marianas doesn’t run too bad and it has lots of forest and jungle. Then again it also has lots of sea areas. However, the experience there should be able to be used in a SE Asia context soon.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        That’s very true. Marianas I think managed to check a couple of boxes at once for ED. It was a testing ground for new visuals and technology related to south east Asia region while keeping the scale considerably smaller while also providing for a setting for their WWII PTO assets.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Urgent Siesta Avatar
        Urgent Siesta

        I stand to be corrected, but if they can handle Caucasus, Kola and Argentina, they can handle Vietnam, in terms of jungle & foliage, etc.

        IMHO, Vietnam is a problem mainly because of the oblong shape of the country combined with the fact that it’s roughly 1,000 miles north to south(!).

        And in stark contrast to other maps, players would likely freak out if the entire country wasn’t rendered in High Detail. E.g., not the area difference between Cold War Germany and what would be necessary for Vietnam.

        Plus add in likely demands for airfields in Thailand as well as room for USN Yankee Station, and the real problem simply becomes one of geographical area with detailed object density.

        A pressing issue is also installed disk size. Germany is already pushing 200GB. A map like Vietnam could easily double that, IMHO.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
        ShamrockOneFive

        Yeah I think it’s the sum total of those issues you’ve identified that has kept ED from immediately going there. They keep saying they will eventually and I believe it but they are slow walking it while technologies improve and mature.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. Great job for Flight! Let’s remember Strike Fighters once in a while, even though its official website has disappeared.

    Like

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      I missed that particular title but I did hear good things about it.

      Like

  4. Urgent Siesta Avatar
    Urgent Siesta

    The F1 is a “Goldilocks” module in so many ways. I wish that it had been available when I started DCS – would’ve loved for it to be my first jet instead of the F-5.

    Not because I don’t like the F-5, but just because the F-5 is really rather limited in what it can do. Very limited air to air sensors and weapons, good air to ground, but mainly “dumb” munitions, and finally, the headroom in terms of nav systems is REALLY low.

    Realistic? Yes. But IMHO you outgrow this jet really fast unless your primary goal is P2P dogfights.

    The F1, in contrast, is single pilot (in contrast to the F-4 and F-14), and is simple enough to get up and get fighting in fairly short order. BUT, the systems are so much deeper than the F-5. Where you run out of headroom on the F-5, with the F-1 you can go so much further and still not have to contend with Jester/Petrovitch/George. 🙂

    And in contrast to the more modern Mirage 2000, the F1 is still a 3rd Gen Stick-n-Rudder aircraft that rewards good piloting skills 🙂

    I think the only technical limitation seems to be the F1’s radar. I’m not convinced that’s modeled accurately (tho I stand to be corrected).

    Oh, and finally, the F1BE is probably THE best trainer aircraft in the sim. 🙂

    In any case, yeah: F1 is wonderful 🙂

    p.s.: still eagerly awaiting that F1M version with some modernized glass systems 🙂

    Like

    1. ShamrockOneFive Avatar
      ShamrockOneFive

      Yes absolutely! Completely agree. You’ve got a summary of what my inevitable review will read… I’m just waiting on the F1M to arrive!

      Regarding the radar, what I’ve read suggests Aerges have implemented a stop gap solution right now with intent to do a much more high fidelity simulation of the radars fitted to the four variants later. So, it’s a little too good for now.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment

Trending