Dassault Variable Geometry: Mirage G / G4 /G8 family

MIRAGE 4000 said:
Well, we don't forget the AFVG ... (and some new projects ! :p ::) ;) ;) ;)
Click to expand...
See the four articles from the issues of the magazine Le Fana de l'Aviation, July to October 2014.
 

Attachments

  • LeFana_de_lAviation_2014_07_08_09_10_Dassault Variable Geometry_Mirage G_G4_G8 family.pdf
    14.1 MB · Views: 337
Last edited:
It is curious that France succeeds in killing the joint BAC Dassault VG in favour of the Mirage G only to end up using the delta Mirage 2000 while BAC goes on to build the MRCA Tornado which is quite close in design to its P45 and AFVG ancestors.
Perhaps it is something to do with single engines being easier and cheaper as well as fixed Vs VG wing weight and cost. The UK prefers dual engines (Harrier excepted).
 
uk 75 said:
Perhaps it is something to do with single engines being easier and cheaper as well as fixed Vs VG wing weight and cost.
Click to expand...
As I remember it, it had to do with range and cost. The parlance then was "vying for air superiority above Hanoi when flying from Saigon", and AdlA decided that it wasn't realistic to vie for "superiority above Kiev when flying from Colmar". So went for shorter-ranged, lighter, cheaper.
FWIW.
 
fightingirish said:
An eight-page article about the Mirage G by the author and forum member @JC Carbonel has been published in the newest issue of the magazine Aeroplane September 2023 (605). :cool:
Click to expand...
I was going to buy a copy online but oddly I don’t see it mentioned here… it’s this the right issue?

001-am-sept-23-shop.jpg


https://shop.keypublishing.com/collections/aeroplane-monthly/products/aeroplane-monthly-issue-605
 
Caravellarella said:
Dear Boys and Girls, here is advertisement in French proclaiming the high speed and field performance of the Avions Marcel Dassault Mirage G prototype......

Note the Mirage G is fitted with a different tail-fin tip design in this advertisement. At some time during flight-testing, the tail-fin was changed. Would anyone when and why this happened please?

The advertisement comes from the 15th June/1st July 1968 issue of Aviation Magazine International......

Terry (Caravellarella)
Click to expand...
 
From Pegase 2010,

please focus on picture # 17 ?.
 

Attachments

  • 15.png
    15.png
    2.1 MB · Views: 229
  • 16.png
    16.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 242
  • 17.png
    17.png
    1.7 MB · Views: 225
  • 18.png
    18.png
    2.1 MB · Views: 208
  • 19.png
    19.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 193
  • 20.png
    20.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 186
  • 21.png
    21.png
    2.1 MB · Views: 180
  • 22.png
    22.png
    1.7 MB · Views: 173
  • 23.png
    23.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 229
 

Attachments

  • 41_MirageG.jpg
    41_MirageG.jpg
    293 KB · Views: 188
  • g1.jpg
    g1.jpg
    55.8 KB · Views: 152
  • G.jpg
    G.jpg
    46.6 KB · Views: 162
  • MIRAGE G.jpg
    MIRAGE G.jpg
    111.3 KB · Views: 157
  • mirage_g.jpg
    mirage_g.jpg
    89.8 KB · Views: 162
  • 2014-Mirage-G-présenté-à-la-presse-à-Villaroche-1.jpg
    2014-Mirage-G-présenté-à-la-presse-à-Villaroche-1.jpg
    72.6 KB · Views: 169
  • Dassault Mirage (230)_Page_25-960.jpg
    Dassault Mirage (230)_Page_25-960.jpg
    74.6 KB · Views: 183
Last edited:
I see two type vertical tail stabilizer shape in Mirage G pictures.
What is the reason for this difference?
 
I believe the aircraft is displayed with one side slightly lifted? Looking at the gear it certainly looks the case.
 
BLACK_MAMBA said:
I believe the aircraft is displayed with one side slightly lifted? Looking at the gear it certainly looks the case.
Click to expand...

I was there a long time ago (2013) but from memory yes, the aircraft there are mounted in "dynamic" positions (see the Trident behind it).
In fact the aircraft are disposed in circle around a giant Armée de l'Air roundel painted on the ground.
 
Hi! Mirage G8.
 

Attachments

  • 9315_2_PLT246_1 (1).jpg
    9315_2_PLT246_1 (1).jpg
    225.2 KB · Views: 201
  • 9315_2_PLT246_5.jpg
    9315_2_PLT246_5.jpg
    283.5 KB · Views: 208
How effective could the Mirage G8A be with 55° sweep angle? If for some reason the G8A entered production and went into a conflict
Would it worked as well as the Mirage F1 when it comes to dogfights, bombing, interception, etc?
 
Quick question, i might have missed it but what engine was on Mirage G1/G1M and G2? Especially interested in the single engine carrier variants like G1M, somehow i missed those until now.
 
Just checking here, the Mirage G family has 5 weapon stations? Two on each wing, and one centerline is what I've seen. Are there additional fuselage stations, ala the Mirage 5, 2000, and 4000?

It also seems to me that the Vought V-507 design (which was apparently the G5 in the G series) is superior for weapons carriage. No rotating wing stations, one on each of the wingboxes, but the real magic is that the gear folds into the wing box not the fuselage, so it has 4 cheek stations for Sidewinders or other dogfighting missiles, and at least six under the fuselage.
 
ElTeletubi said:
How effective could the Mirage G8A be with 55° sweep angle? If for some reason the G8A entered production and went into a conflict
Would it worked as well as the Mirage F1 when it comes to dogfights, bombing, interception, etc?
Click to expand...
Super Mirage G8A/ACF would have been a "F-15 class" fighter (in terms of raw performance) with less advanced aerodynamics.
The original G and G8 were MiG-23 and F-111/F-14A class, respectively.
The decision to replace US-designed TF-30s with French M53s on the G8A gave it superior engines to those of an F-14A. But let's not forget that, while on paper it should have superior raw performance in the air to an F-14A, keep in mind that it would have inferior agility and cockpit visibility, and it was very likely to get inferior weapons and avionics suite.
Speaking of Grumman, an early Grumman FX (pictured below) study showed similar characteristics to the G8A.

The G8A's 55° wing sweep would have made the aircraft unsuitable for carrier-based / short runway operations.

It would have been decent for interception, ground attack, and nuclear deterrence. Think of it as a less rugged, larger Mirage F1 (so.. F2) with Mirage 2000 tech inside.
Otherwise, it was too expensive for what it offered, and I don't think it was attractive to Dassault's usual export customers.
The later Mirage 4000 would have been a better multirole twin M53, F-15 class fighter.

Edit: small mistake pointed out by Archibald
 

Attachments

  • Wright Patterson F-X F-15.jpg
    Wright Patterson F-X F-15.jpg
    447.6 KB · Views: 102
Last edited:
The original G4 and G8 were MiG-23 and F-111/F-14A class, respectively.
Click to expand...
Small nitpick : the G was MiG-23 class. G4 was as big as a F-111 (or Mirage IV, 30 mt+) and way too expensive so G8 shrunk to Tornado size (less than 25 mt).
 
apparition13 said:
Just checking here, the Mirage G family has 5 weapon stations? Two on each wing, and one centerline is what I've seen. Are there additional fuselage stations, ala the Mirage 5, 2000, and 4000?
Click to expand...
Mirage G (single TF306 engine) had 3 pylons, all wet. The centerline pylon would likely have carried 1x Matra R530 or 4x 400kg bombs, as on the Mirage F1. The wing pylons couldn't rotate and were limited to 22 degree sweep when carrying 2x 1,300L tanks.

The Mirage G8 (twin engine ) could take 2x 2,000L tanks on the inner wing pylons, but again these wouldn't rotate and the wings could only be swept after they'd been jettisoned. The G8 added 2x rotating external wing pylons - these could rotate to 55 degrees (i.e. mid-sweep) and could carry 2x AS30 missiles for air to ground missions.

Finally for the air to air role the G8 would have carried 2x Matra 530 under the fuselage (likely in tandem, perhaps these could have been 2x Super 530F carried conformally, as on the ACF) and 2x Magic AAMs on fixed pylons under the wing glove box.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom