Mirage 4000 vs ACF

F-2

F-2

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
22 May 2020
Messages
695
Reaction score
1,213
Two very interesting what if aircraft that never went into production. Both contemporary to each other and largely using the same technology. The ACF prototype was mostly completed and then canceled. The 4000 was completed but never ordered, it was notable on the air show circuit in the 80s and was a test bed for other programs like the Rafale.
The ACF was a mach 2.5 aircraft while the 4000 was thermally limited to 2 though supposedly could spend slightly more time super sonic than contemporary Eagles and Flankers. The mirage 4000 was an RSS design and married the 2000s agility with higher thrust and F-15a like climb rates. The ACF was also built to be highly mobile.


How do these big Irish Twins compare to on another. What advantages and disadvantages would they have over the other?

Which was the bigger missed opportunity?
 
Geeeeeeeeez you are speaking to my heart here. I have been ruminating such musings since 2005 at least. Please, can I throw the earlier Mirage G8-01/02 into the fray ? same as the other two, except VG. And Atars, but upgrades were planned down the road.

Okay, so this suppose that President Giscard allows ACF first prototype to be finished as a high speed testbed, as done with the G8s before (1971-74) and the 4000 afterwards (1979-88, alongside the Rafale A !). Also the F1-M53 itself, incidentally.

Important starting point of the story: June 7, 1975, the day the F1-M53 was crushed by the F-16 in the Deal Of The Century. This doomed the ACF as the F1 was to be its low end, F-16 style. This threw the AdA procurement plans in disarray. Six months later, December 18, 1975, Dassault visited Giscard with
Plan A: 4000 for France, 2000 for export
Plan B: reverse
Giscard, former finance ministry turned President only months after the 1st oil shock (May 74) went for Plan B and TBH, while Giscard could be a dickhead at time, this time the right move. The 2000 was good enough for AdA and sold well at export.

Yet the ACF was scrapped, which is a pity. Photos have been seen in Le Fana de l'aviation and the thing was 2-3 complete: a fuselage on wheels still lacking the wings, nosecone, canopy. Bit like an "iron bird" nowadays but it was not a static test airframe but the full blown prototype. First flight was planned for late spring 1976.

Problem is that Dassault got from Giscard the 4000 prototype on top of the 2000 order, to be exported. Dassault was all too aware that the 4000 was doomed - exactly as happened to the F-18L or F-20 (Northrop giant screws) "if the mother country doesn't buy it and pay it, why we should we ?" (export customers). And this is exactly what happened. IRaq and Saudi Arabia couldn't fill the missing AdA stamp of approval.

So big problem if you want to finish the lone ACF (say, June 1976): the lone 4000 is coming (March 1979) ! Plus the F1-M53 which kept flying, that's a lot of "one shots".

Dassault could argue the ACF could help the 4000 development but, Giscard being Giscard, he would ask "why two expensive birds ?" Even the 4000 flight test program 1979-87 was done on a shoestring budget, "robbing" M53 engines from the AdA 2000 fleet.
 
Last edited:
4000 and what I believe to be the magazine photos of the ACF? And by all means add any aircraft to the discussion. The F1m53 started me on this path.
 

Attachments

  • B0B719F9-0800-4658-94C6-E68F8E963A69.jpeg
    B0B719F9-0800-4658-94C6-E68F8E963A69.jpeg
    22.1 KB · Views: 116
  • 7788CA77-B0E2-44F1-91AF-2B88DF86993F.jpeg
    7788CA77-B0E2-44F1-91AF-2B88DF86993F.jpeg
    38.4 KB · Views: 118
The above well noted, let's suppose that, by some Miracle, Dassault tells Giscard "a pity that ACF prototype is almost finished. We flew two G8s in parallels, 1971-74 and learned a crapton about VG wings. Last G8-02 flights in November 1974 had the VG fixed to 55 degrees, simulating the ACF. So why not fly the ACF along the 4000 ? we could learn a lot about swept vs delta wings, on extremely similar airframe bodies. Make no mistake: ACF is dead, it is 4000 to go in production... someday. Maybe we could put analog FBW on the ACF, as we will do on the 4000."
(nota bene: there were proposals to put FBW on the F1-M53 facing the F-16, and later in 1982 the III-NG pulled out a 2000 by stealing its flight control system. Soooo... it can be done).

Giscard finally agrees and scrounge some funds to finish the ACF by 1976 and have it fly as a chase plane for the 4000, as the vanilla Mirages won't be able to follow it at Mach 2.5, after all.

End result: June 1979, Le Bourget airshow: the ACF, rebranded "Mirage F8" and the 4000 (just flown in March) are standing side by side on Dassault stand.
They will make a stunning display.
And then Dassault has a lightbulb moment. "While the 4000 can help the 2000 and ACX later - that ACF could be useful to the Iraqi F1EQ flight development program..."
 
Last edited:
F-2 said:
How do these big Irish Twins compare to on another. What advantages and disadvantages would they have over the other?
Click to expand...
From the information dug up on this forum on the two, the ACF's main advantage over the Mirage 4000 is that it's faster. In every other consideration - avionics, armaments, maneuverability, range - the Mirage 4000 is superior. Which is unsurprising, since it's newer and gets to take advantage of additional weapons, avionics, and engine development.

Speaking more generally, the ACF was more of an air superiority aircraft with a secondary ground attack capability, while the Mirage 4000 is more balanced between the two jobs.
 
The obvious POD here is IMO Mirage F1-53 winning at least part of the deal of the century, say at a minimum the Belgian order. This should be creating a snowball effect. The AdA was supposed to switch part of her own F-1 order to the newer model. The Spanish ordered F1 in June 1975, it's all too logical they order F1-53 instead if its already ordered by France and NATO. Morocco and Iraq made their orders in 1975 and 1977 again it more than likely they go for the newer version. The Greeks are just about to begin expedited deliveries with Giscard agreeing to deliver aircraft straight from the French air force production after the invasion of Cyprus, with the first delivered in August 1975 so this order is unlikely to change but a follow on order of the Greeks trying to join the NATO production consortium if there is one seems logical.

What does this mean in practical terms? That Mirage 2000 is dead at birth, or rather at conception, it would be just duplicating Mirage F1-53, but its not offering any significant improvement over it. Electronics? The same. Engine? The same. Performance? comparable. Maneuverability and FBW? Comparable.

And if you remove Mirage 2000 from the equation what are your options come late 1975? Either stick to Mirage ACF, or switch to Mirage 4000 or cancel all development programs? The third option is out of the window for strategic/political reasons, thanks De Gaulle! So either you stick to development of ACF or you go for Mirage 4000.

In either case though... what is the point in starting development of what became eventually Rafale come 1979. Versions of 4,000 or F1-53 can be covering all needs. Which means the next fighter is a 5th generation machine...
 
Lascaris said:
The obvious POD here is IMO Mirage F1-53 winning at least part of the deal of the century, say at a minimum the Belgian order. This should be creating a snowball effect. The AdA was supposed to switch part of her own F-1 order to the newer model. The Spanish ordered F1 in June 1975, it's all too logical they order F1-53 instead if its already ordered by France and NATO. Morocco and Iraq made their orders in 1975 and 1977 again it more than likely they go for the newer version. The Greeks are just about to begin expedited deliveries with Giscard agreeing to deliver aircraft straight from the French air force production after the invasion of Cyprus, with the first delivered in August 1975 so this order is unlikely to change but a follow on order of the Greeks trying to join the NATO production consortium if there is one seems logical.

What does this mean in practical terms? That Mirage 2000 is dead at birth, or rather at conception, it would be just duplicating Mirage F1-53, but its not offering any significant improvement over it. Electronics? The same. Engine? The same. Performance? comparable. Maneuverability and FBW? Comparable.

And if you remove Mirage 2000 from the equation what are your options come late 1975? Either stick to Mirage ACF, or switch to Mirage 4000 or cancel all development programs? The third option is out of the window for strategic/political reasons, thanks De Gaulle! So either you stick to development of ACF or you go for Mirage 4000.

In either case though... what is the point in starting development of what became eventually Rafale come 1979. Versions of 4,000 or F1-53 can be covering all needs. Which means the next fighter is a 5th generation machine...
Click to expand...
As I understand it the F1m53 was said to be 90% as capable as the mirage 2000 RDM which might might either eliminate the 2000 or just merge it with the 4000 or that 3000 that never happened.
 
Just to blast a door already opened

low end / high end mix
F1-M53 / ACF
2000 / 4000
F-16 / F-15
F-18 / F-14
MiG-29 / Su-27

-Note that the 2000/4000 studies started as early as 1972. Back then they were called MAMI / MIMI which stands for "maximum Mirage / Minimum Mirage". At the time the "official" high-end / low-end mix was the F1-M53 / ACF
Still Dassault wanted to return to deltas, this time with FBW and degraded stability.

- The F1C IOC at Reims air base was in spring 1973, same as the Jaguar - and their respectives costs put a led weight on AdA future planning. The AdA received a total of 246 Mirage F1s over the next decade and something (F1 production stopped in 1992). The deal was to convert a large percentage of that order from Atar 9K50 to M53, something akin to 125 (from memory). But ACF costs made the AdA reluctant to pump any money into the F1-M53, plus the Jaguar had just cost them to IOC an arm and a testicle.

- the G8-01 had flown on May 8, 1971, the second (single seat and superlative) G8-02 would fly in July 1972 and hit Mach 2.35 on Atar power merely a year later.

- ACF studies had started in earnest in May 1972

- the M53 had been accelerated again, its Caravelle subsonic testbed would fly it first in July 1973, followed by a modified F1 in December

- France was trying to sell Belgium (SABCA) a F1-Mercure-Alphajet package, but SABENA went Boeing instead.

- Belgian PM was Edmond Leburton: 26 janvier 1973 – 25 avril 1974 (he lost the legislatives on March 10, 1974 to Leo Tindemans)

- Crucially, Dassault was unable to secure a F1 sale before the fall of Leburton, and this triggered the beginning of the Deal of the Century when The Netherlands entered the party in spring 1974. By this point the YF-16 had flown, in January 1974.

- Meanwhile French Minister of Defense Michel Debré had decided in favor of the Super Etendard in January 1973, so any hope of a naval-F1-M53 was now buried. It had started there, as early as 1970. The F1-04 even flew approaches on Foch late 1971.
 
Last edited:
Archibald said:
Just to blast a door already opened

low end / high end mix
F1-M53 / ACF
2000 / 4000
F-16 / F-15
F-18 / F-14
MiG-29 / Su-27

-Note that the 2000/4000 studies started as early as 1972. Back then they were called MAMI / MIMI which stands for "maximum Mirage / Minimum Mirage". At the time the "official" high-end / low-end mix was the F1-M53 / ACF
Still Dassault wanted to return to deltas, this time with FBW and degraded stability.

- The F1C IOC at Reims air base was in spring 1973, same as the Jaguar - and their respectives costs put a led weight on AdA future planning. The AdA received a total of 246 Mirage F1s over the next decade and something (F1 production stopped in 1992). The deal was to convert a large percentage of that order from Atar 9K50 to M53, something akin to 125 (from memory). But ACF costs made the AdA reluctant to pump any money into the F1-M53, plus the Jaguar had just cost them to IOC an arm and a testicle.

- the G8-01 had flown on May 8, 1971, the second (single seat and superlative) G8-02 would fly in July 1972 and hit Mach 2.35 on Atar power merely a year later.

- ACF studies had started in earnest in May 1972

- the M53 had been accelerated again, its Caravelle subsonic testbed would fly it first in July 1973, followed by a modified F1 in December

- France was trying to sell Belgium (SABCA) a F1-Mercure-Alphajet package, but SABENA went Boeing instead.

- Belgian PM was Edmond Leburton: 26 janvier 1973 – 25 avril 1974 (he lost the legislatives on March 10, 1974 to Leo Tindemans)

- Crucially, Dassault was unable to secure a F1 sale before the fall of Leburton, and this triggered the beginning of the Deal of the Century when The Netherlands entered the party in spring 1974. By this point the YF-16 had flown, in January 1974.

- Meanwhile French Minister of Defense Michel Debré had decided in favor of the Super Etendard in January 1973, so any hope of a naval-F1-M53 was now buried. It had started there, as early as 1970. The F1-04 even flew approaches on Foch late 1971.
Click to expand...
Wasn't NL already pressuring Belgium before 1974 because they said they were categorically opposed to F1 M53? Or was it after Leburton left?

Unrelated, but the Leburton govt was also tied to an AMX-10P purchase instead of the OTL much later AIFV buy (early 80s instead of 73 for Leburton's 10P). Sadly I don't think a success in Belgium would snowball later because 10P was quite expensive for what it offered compared to the AIFV.
 
Just a question re Jaguar, couldn't they just pull out of it and instead buy a Mirage F1A version (like Libya and South Africa did) fitted with Jaguar avionics? Would that save them some money for a future F1-M53?
 
The Shah also toyed with the idea of buying the Mirage G8.

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1969-76ve04/d154

154. Telegram 7283 From the Embassy in Iran to the Department of State 1 2​

Tehran, December 22, 1971, 1400Z
CINCEUR for Gen. Burchinal

Subj:​

  • Shah’s Plans for Long-term Air Force Build-up

Shah referred to his discussions with Defense Secretary Ajaird in Washington at Blair House in 1969 when Shah had first discussed his desire to eventually purchase F–15 aircraft from US. He recognized this aircraft is still in developmental stage but wanted us to know that if it is selected for large-scale production by USAF, he wants place order for three sqdns of this next generation aircraft. He hoped most earnestly that there would be no difficulties and said that a) while French had been discussing with Iranian military desirability of purchasing the proposed Mirage G–8 aircraft which will be about mach 2#31/2, and b) there had also been discussions with British-German group, which is trying to develop a next generation aircraft, he wanted F–15 as he wished to keep his air force completely US equipped. Furthermore, if he could place order at same time as we placed orders for mass production, it should help in keeping cost down. He assumed there would be no problem but did want us to know that he must have next generation aircraft and would purchase one come what may.
 
GTX said:
datafuser said:
The Shah also toyed with the idea of buying the Mirage G8.
Click to expand...
was there anything he didn’t toy with buying?
Click to expand...

Yes, the Chinese J-8 Finback (Hsian-A in the 1972 document below).

====================

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1969-76v17/d240

The Hsian-A interceptor, a native-designed follow-on to the Mig–21 currently being tested, may be available for deployment in the mid-1970s.

====================

In addition he declined the offer of the MiG-25.

====================

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1969-76v27/d12

In backchannel message 62 to Kissinger, April 6, Helms transmitted the Shah’s report that Kosygin had offered him MIG–25s and T–65s, which he had declined. In the Shah’s judgment, “the significance of the offer is that if he [Kosygin] could sell MIG–23’s to Iran, then he would have no difficulty introducing them into the Arab states of the region. I can only assume that this is what the Soviets want to do.” (Ibid., Box 425, Backchannel Files, 1973, Middle East/Africa)↩

====================

BTW in 1966 he wanted to buy the Soviet SA-2 along with the American F-4 (just like Erdogan with the Russian S-400 and the American F-35) but gave up.

====================

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1964-68v22/d160

Then went into lengthy explanation of how USG does not want its Hawks, Blue Shark and F–4's compromised after example of Soviet SAMs. Pursuant to last para Embtel 311,5 I noted how difficult it would be to shield Soviet technicians from Blue Shark control, etc. Shah said he suspects Soviets already know much re U.S. equipment, and in my case he would shield US equipment, as for example by keeping Soviet technicians within walled compound way out in country.
 
Last edited:
lancer21 said:
Just a question re Jaguar, couldn't they just pull out of it and instead buy a Mirage F1A version (like Libya and South Africa did) fitted with Jaguar avionics? Would that save them some money for a future F1-M53?
Click to expand...
Makes tons of technical sense for sure. Mirage F1A, as you say. Or better: moar Mirage IIIEs. Or Mirage V from Israel canned orders... wait, it happened for real.

Alas, Jaguar 1965 agreement was like Concorde 1962 agreement. No escape clause, or at enormous political and financial costs. NO WAY. And so it went on, and on, and on.
 
The obvious POD here is IMO Mirage F1-53 winning at least part of the deal of the century, say at a minimum the Belgian order.
Click to expand...

Nope. Because if the F1-M53 survives, then so does the ACF, and the Mirage 4000 never happens. It was kind of "generational change". The F-16 victory triggered the F1-M53 death and then the ACF cancellation which triggered the 2000 plus the 4000 as a private venture. After Giscard inversed Dassault initial proposal: 2000 for export, 4000 for the AdA in place of the ACF.
This mean that the 2000 barely escaped a F-18L / F-20 fate, in passing. The 4000 got doomed instead, the same way.

What essentially happened was that the F-16 made the F1-M53 / ACF duo look obsolete, and thus the new generation of 2000/4000 with delta, FBW and controlled instability was rolled in place. That's the sticky point.

Giscard, to his credit, by picking the Mirage 2000 on December 18, 1975 put an end to the AFVG-G4-G8-ACF-4000 folly. Bottom line: no, France can't afford all alone a F-111 nor a Tornado nor a F-15. Stick that in your tiny head, you stubborn Armée de l'Air.

Now, that new F-18 / MiG-29 trend of smallish, lighter twin-jets, with the smaller turbofans like J101, F404 or RB.199 ? maybe... (Rafale, cough, cough).
 
Last edited:
Lascaris said:
And if you remove Mirage 2000 from the equation what are your options come late 1975? Either stick to Mirage ACF, or switch to Mirage 4000 or cancel all development programs? The third option is out of the window for strategic/political reasons, thanks De Gaulle! So either you stick to development of ACF or you go for Mirage 4000.
Click to expand...

4th option - go early with a really next-gen combat aircraft, with amazing maneuverability, thrust-to-weight ratio and electronics? The 'amazing maneuverability' means stop warming-up the basic Mirage III idea, but introduce lifting body a-la F-14 or LERX a-la F-16, no Mickey Mouse intakes but ventral or semi-ventral so the high AoA fighting does not mess with airflow, really big canards paired with a FBW.
Higher thrust-to weight ratio = no more Atar legacy, but a proper, new turbofan design, with t/w ratio starting at 7.5:1 instead of 6:1.
Electronic - no worse than what F-18 had when it entered service?
 
Lascaris said:
The obvious POD here is IMO Mirage F1-53 winning at least part of the deal of the century, say at a minimum the Belgian order. This should be creating a snowball effect. The AdA was supposed to switch part of her own F-1 order to the newer model. The Spanish ordered F1 in June 1975, it's all too logical they order F1-53 instead if its already ordered by France and NATO. Morocco and Iraq made their orders in 1975 and 1977 again it more than likely they go for the newer version. The Greeks are just about to begin expedited deliveries with Giscard agreeing to deliver aircraft straight from the French air force production after the invasion of Cyprus, with the first delivered in August 1975 so this order is unlikely to change but a follow on order of the Greeks trying to join the NATO production consortium if there is one seems logical.
Click to expand...
I have always thought that South Africa could and should have been key to the Mirage F1 M53.
They were the first F1 foreign customer, with SAAF pilots already test flying the F1 in 1971 in France.

The official order announcement for the Mirage F1 (including licence production of airframe and engine agreement) was made on 27th June 1971.

Production of the first SAAF F1's started sometime in late 1974, with deliveries in South Africa, after assembly at Atlas, on 4th April 1975.

A big " what if" is if Dassault had perhaps convinced them to translate their order into the M53 variant instead, possibly around the time, or just before, of the European competition.
Dassault tendered the F1 M53 into the European competition in June 1973 if I recall.
The timing is certainly there, and fits.
 
Last edited:
I have carefully studied the M53 early history because I needed to understand what was wrong with the damn engine.
First bad news: SNECMA is no Dassault but closer from the SNCF, that is - the worst kind of french public company, even today, and even more in post Mai 68 France.

This point well noted,

M53 early history starting from 1968 until 1973 first flights (July on a Caravelle, December on the F1-M53) is very tortured and complicated.
For a start, SNECMA from 1968 also developed the last of the Atar: the 9K50.
And the massive TF306E with 10300 kg of thrust wasn't fully terminated until 1970.

So the M53 with only a paltry 8200 kg of thrust ran third at best. Only the M45 was more maligned and forgotten.

Even more importantly, the M53 fate was NOT tied to the F1, since 9K50 had been expressly created for it and out of the Mirage IV 9K31. Bottom line: just like the Mirage III, the Atar staunchly refused to die.

So, what was the M53 for ?

As far as single-engine types were concerned, it was either 9K50 or TF306E (think Mirage G)

So it was for twin engine types. You guess - the Mirage G4. No, wait, the G8. Merde, the G8s 01 and 02 got 9K50s, so not them either, although an upgrade was to happen. And then the program was canned as too expensive, even before the G8-01 flew !

And there, the M53 turns skizophrenic. Took me a while to understand it.
- M53-2 with only 8200 kg of thrust has one big advantage: it can be rolled into the... rump of the 9K50 types. That is
a) the Mirage F1
b) the G8s
Through herculean efforts SNECMA soon created the M53-5 with 8500 kgp, but truly hit a brickwall afterwards, for a decade at least and the "P2 solution".

SO there was another planned M53 with MOAR thrust... except SNECMA was unable NOT to enlarge it to get to 9 or 10 tons. And so, it couldn't be rolled into the older types.

Nota Bene: it took until 1983 and the M53-P2 for the "moar powerful M53" not to grow obese and there the Mirage 2000 is proof, as it got the two generations. In fact the P2 was created for the 2000N, which needed moar power for low level nuclear strike with a draggy ASMP on the belly and a navigator in the back seat. Otherwise, the 2000B/C interceptors were M53-5 and "do your best with that !"

I found glimpse of an improved M53 beyond the "-2" and "-5" (8500 kgp) through Google books, with dates in the 1970's so before the M53-P2. It is very clear the compressor grows too big for a F1 update in fact it is tricky even for the 2000 !

Bottom line: before the P2, more thrust than the M53-5 8500 kgp = "drats, doesn't fit in place of a 9K50". Note that the F1-M53 had a M53-2 with the limited thrust, and it already had difficult inflating its rump and air intakes to swallow that one.

Now back to the M53 development. It ran on the bench in February 1970 and then... nothing happened until 1973 and those Caravelle flights.

Why ? because the G8s and F1C were flying 9K50, and that was more than enough (see the Iraqi EQ and the G8-02 Mach 2.35 record, July 13, 1973, still standing to this day).

The M53 was de-frozen in May 1972 when the ACF program began. It was THE engine to carry it to Mach 2.5. The F1-M53 was a test bed for it, but there was another player: the Aéronavale, before it was neutralized by the Super Etendard decision in January 1973.

Since 1968 at least, and in parallel with the Jaguar M (to replace the Etendard IV) the Aéronavale was dreaming of a loitering, turbofan interceptor to replace the Crusader. The Mirage G was tempting, but no way. Next was the F1, but it needed two essential things to loiter long enough
- a bigger wing than that paltry 24 m2
- a far better engine than old 9K50

And thus the Aéronavale was tempted by a naval F1-M53, and made repeated atempts to get it between 1970 and 1973. The F1-04 even made approaches on Foch in December 1971.

But the interceptor wing of the Aéronavale was more and more controversial, as the Clems were too small while MASURCA, Tartar and Crotale ships could handle most of the threats. Particularly off the coast of Djibouti / Somalia. So could even antiquated Crusaders - this was kind of validated in May 1977 when during training, they mistook AdA F-100s for Yemen Air Force Mig-21s (!!!) yet nothing bad happened.

Or, in case of WWIII - call the Americans, and get their AEGIS / Tomcat umbrella for Foch and Clem (Red Storm Rising, is that thou - Clancy got that right). Two more carrier decks for the USN and NATO, that will be appreciated. And in exchange, Foch & Clem would get the all powerful USN umbrella. So post 1973 S.E decision the message was clear: no room for a renewed air defense wing on the Clems. "Eight Crusaders or bust." And bust they did, until 1999.

Bottom line: as far as the M53 fate was concerned, from May 1972 it was ACF or bust. But before that month ? frozen. For two years.

As for the AdA, top priority was F1 IOC and Jaguar IOC, both to happen in spring 1973 in Reims and Saint Dizier. They had 160 each in order !
 
Last edited:
These images are from the French Senate on 20 April 1983.

https://www.senat.fr/rap/1982-1983/i1982_1983_0253.pdf

Could anyone please translate the following part into plain English?

Does it mean the Mirage 2000 armed with the Super 530D should intercept its Mach 1.8 target 250 km out from the border?

C'est ainsi que, face à un avion hostile volant à Mach 1.8, l'intercepteur gagne par rapport au « 530 » quelque 250 kilomètres sur la distance à laquelle il doit intercepter sa cible avant qu'elle puisse agresser le territoire national.
Click to expand...

996E69455EAE135334.png

996359455EAE135334.png

996F43455EAE135433.png
 
C'est ainsi que, face à un avion hostile volant à Mach 1.8, l'intercepteur gagne par rapport au « 530 » quelque 250 kilomètres sur la distance à laquelle il doit intercepter sa cible avant qu'elle puisse agresser le territoire national.
Click to expand...
So, an hostile aircraft is coming at Mach 1.8 (Su-24 or Tu-22M, you get the foe) direction French airspace. In this case - compared to plain old Mirage III R-530 the F1's Super-530F quite literally provides a 250 km advantage (headstart or margin might be a better word).

I readily agree the sentence is not very clear, not even in French. Then again, we are talking about politician language here, so not surprising. :D
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Does it mean the Mirage 2000 armed with the Super 530D should intercept its Mach 1.8 target 250 km out from the border?
Click to expand...

A bit more subtle (or obtuse) Not the 2000 / S-530D but the F1 / S-530F. Compared to a IIIE with R-530 (think AIM-7B / E Vietnam level of shitiness) from the same airbase of Reims, a target heading toward French airspace at Mach 1.8, nuclear weapon blazzing, can be killed 250 km further; and hopefully, far away from the border.
One of the reason is mentionned just before: unlike the cranky old R-530, the Super 530F is well hardened against Soviet jamming and ECM. Overall, the Mirage III's Cyrano II was a worthless piece of junk even with zero jamming, and so was the R-530, hence their killing probability was pretty dismal. The F1 S-530F was a quantum leap in comparison, so much it could kill a target 250 km further.
 
Last edited:
Archibald said:
C'est ainsi que, face à un avion hostile volant à Mach 1.8, l'intercepteur gagne par rapport au « 530 » quelque 250 kilomètres sur la distance à laquelle il doit intercepter sa cible avant qu'elle puisse agresser le territoire national.
Click to expand...
So, an hostile aircraft is coming at Mach 1.8 (Su-24 or Tu-22M, you get the foe) direction French airspace. In this case - compared to plain old Mirage III R-530 the F1's Super-530F quite literally provides a 250 km advantage (headstart or margin might be a better word).

I readily agree the sentence is not very clear, not even in French. Then again, we are talking about politician language here, so not surprising. :D
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Does it mean the Mirage 2000 armed with the Super 530D should intercept its Mach 1.8 target 250 km out from the border?
Click to expand...

A bit more subtle (or obtuse) Not the 2000 / S-530D but the F1 / S-530F. Compared to a IIIE with R-530 (think AIM-7B / E Vietnam level of shitiness) from the same airbase of Reims, a target heading toward French airspace at Mach 1.8, nuclear weapon blazzing, can be killed 250 km further; and hopefully, far away from the border.
One of the reason is mentionned just before: unlike the cranky old R-530, the Super 530F is well hardened against Soviet jamming and ECM. Overall, the Mirage III's Cyrano II was a worthless piece of junk even with zero jamming, and so was the R-530, hence their killing probability was pretty dismal. The F1 S-530F was a quantum leap in comparison, so much it could kill a target 250 km further.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot!

Below is a 250 km radius circle centered on Reims.

Perhaps the idea was to stop a Mach 1.8 bomber with a 250 km stand-off weapon somewhere over western Germany or Belgium.

250km.png
 
I picked Reims out of thin air because it was the only F1 air base in the area (North-East France) I could think off. But there were almost certainly air bases far closer from Germany, where the threat would come from.
But yeah, exactly what you said - Tu-22Ms and Su-24s were every NATO air force worse nightmare.

And, incidentally - this is a truly fantastic resource. https://www.escadrilles.org/histoire-et-histoires/armee-de-l-air-1975/

I knew the air bases names, but never had plotted them on a map. Well, the results speak by themselves.

So, there it is: the French network of air bases covering the northern flank, direction Germany. Dijon (got the first Mirage 2000s in '84) Creil (near Paris) Nancy & Toul & Saint Dizier & Luxeuil (massive numbers of Jaguars & IIIE for strike, including tac nukes) Reims (got the first F1C in '73) Cambrai (to cover the northern tip of France)

www.google.com

Aéroport de Dijon-Bourgogne to Cambrai

www.google.com www.google.com

Note how Cambrai, Creil and Reims are strategically positioned to create a true and entire "air defense death trap" for any Soviet aircraft intending to attack Paris. "Go ahead, make my day !" Same for the strike squadrons: an enormous strike force flying out of four different bases. Ready to carpet bomb, nuclear or not, a Soviet armored onslaught having flattened NATO across Germany and reached the Rhine, and thus the french border.
"All right folks ! We lost that Battle Of The Frontiers three times in a row (against the goddam Germans): in August 1870, August 1914, and May 1940. There won't be a fourth time. If the Soviet cross the Rhine, they take a tac nuke on the bridgehead. No more Sedan 1940. Eat my shit."
 
Last edited:
tomo pauk said:
Lascaris said:
And if you remove Mirage 2000 from the equation what are your options come late 1975? Either stick to Mirage ACF, or switch to Mirage 4000 or cancel all development programs? The third option is out of the window for strategic/political reasons, thanks De Gaulle! So either you stick to development of ACF or you go for Mirage 4000.
Click to expand...

4th option - go early with a really next-gen combat aircraft, with amazing maneuverability, thrust-to-weight ratio and electronics? The 'amazing maneuverability' means stop warming-up the basic Mirage III idea, but introduce lifting body a-la F-14 or LERX a-la F-16, no Mickey Mouse intakes but ventral or semi-ventral so the high AoA fighting does not mess with airflow, really big canards paired with a FBW.
Higher thrust-to weight ratio = no more Atar legacy, but a proper, new turbofan design, with t/w ratio starting at 7.5:1 instead of 6:1.
Electronic - no worse than what F-18 had when it entered service?
Click to expand...
Ok... what is this "really next-gen" proposed aircraft offering that the Mirage 2000 does not? Mirage 2000 was supposed to compare to F-16. It does, electronics. performance and weapons wise. Now granted I did wonder what would happen if you mated an F100 class engine with Mirage 2000 airframe. After all F100 and F110 are nearly the same dimensions. And an F100 powered Mirage 2000 would be making something in the order of 2 mach on dry thrust...
 
Lascaris said:
How do you speed up development of a Rafale/Eurofighter class aircraft, or if you prefer a French Novi Avion by 10-15 years?
Click to expand...
10-15 years? It was 1979 when the ECA was 1st mooted:
In 1979, the French company Dassault joined the MBB/BAe "European Collaborative Fighter" project which was renamed the "European Combat Aircraft" (ECA).
 
tomo pauk said:
Lascaris said:
How do you speed up development of a Rafale/Eurofighter class aircraft, or if you prefer a French Novi Avion by 10-15 years?
Click to expand...
10-15 years? It was 1979 when the ECA was 1st mooted:
In 1979, the French company Dassault joined the MBB/BAe "European Collaborative Fighter" project which was renamed the "European Combat Aircraft" (ECA).
Click to expand...
1992 was the earliest, optimistic service date being proposed. Hence ACT 92. Rafale A actually flew in July 1986 with the definite Rafale C in May 1991. EAP in August 1986 with the actual Typhoon in 1994. Mirage 2000 took 6 years from prototype to entering service. Mirage F1 about the same. So what's the best to expect? That you could possibly get an operational Rafale A derivative by late 1992.
 
Lascaris said:
So what's the best to expect? That you could possibly get an operational Rafale A derivative by late 1992.
Click to expand...

With the AdA having pressing needs for a really modern fighter (no Mirage 2000, no 4000, no ACT), I'd hope for the late 1980s.
 
If you want to go that way, then your best best is the Mirage 3000. Somewhere on this forum is my research related to it.

Edit: there it is, scroll down a bit. https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/mirage-3000.757/

Imagine a scaled-down Mirage 4000 - scaled down thanks to RB.199s replacing the M53s. This essentially shrinks it from F-15 size (and cost) to F-18 size (I won't say "cost" here as the Hornet was controversial, to say the least).

If that scaled down Mirage 4000 flies like the original one, it can be done by March 1979. Took a bit more than six years (1978-1984) to get the 2000 from first flight (March 10, 1978) to IOC (July 1984, Dijon air base).

Starting in 1979 or 1980 for the 3000, could get its IOC by 1986 - ironically, the year the Rafale demonstrator flew.

Note that the 3000 could complete the 2000 rather than replacing it.

Big problem: SNECMA would scream like hell... or maybe not, if the 2000 with THEIR M53 survived along the 3000. Depends who would manufacture the RB.199 under licence. Could be SNECMA, but could also be Turboméca.

And yes, it would look like a Bae P.110: buble canopy, canards, twin RB.199s...
 
I get that it’s viable but aren’t RB.199 and M53 antithetical engines? Tornado 2000?
 
kaiserbill said:
I have always thought that South Africa could and should have been key to the Mirage F1 M53.
They were the first F1 foreign customer, with SAAF pilots already test flying the F1 in 1971 in France.

The official order announcement for the Mirage F1 (including licence production of airframe and engine agreement) was made on 27th June 1971.

Production of the first SAAF F1's started sometime in late 1974, with deliveries in South Africa, after assembly at Atlas, on 4th April 1975.

A big " what if" is if Dassault had perhaps convinced them to translate their order into the M53 variant instead, possibly around the time, or just before, of the European competition.
Dassault tendered the F1 M53 into the European competition in June 1973 if I recall.
The timing is certainly there, and fits.
Click to expand...
The big problem with the F1-M53 is indeed a (Early) launch customer. But part of the reason many classic French buyers didn't go for it before going F-16 was France itself weren't buying any in my view. It has been a repeated problem in history for many great designs that if the build country doesn't buy any, no other launch customer wants to take all the initial risk (and costs).
 
Wait - I see your point (Mirage 4000, F-18L, F-20) but in the case of the F1-M53, it HAD an order from the Armée de l'Air. Out of a 246 batch of Mirage F1s, at least 125 were to be re-ordered as F1-M53s. The AdA was dragging its feet as it was obsessed with the unaffordable ACF BUT part of the ongoing F1 order was to include M53's.
 
Archibald said:
Wait - I see your point (Mirage 4000, F-18L, F-20) but in the case of the F1-M53, it HAD an order from the Armée de l'Air. Out of a 246 batch of Mirage F1s, at least 125 were to be re-ordered as F1-M53s. The AdA was dragging its feet as it was obsessed with the unaffordable ACF BUT part of the ongoing F1 order was to include M53's.
Click to expand...
There again is the "second" problem - production. If it isn't in production, but ordered you are still not going to land big orders easily. I think F-16 was lucky in that it had a big order, but was also much superior to most of the competition. Reliance on BVR (A point lacking on early block Vipers, but decent on most French by same time) was not yet very high in the mid 70's and here came a jet that could out fight most with relative ease. Given the choice between a warmed up F1 and an electric hotrod, both with future orders but not yet fully in production, you go for the better "future" jet. The key to beating the F-16 in Europe is to have the alternative entering service or in production by late 1974 already.
 
Hope i'm not diverting too much, but this Mirage-3000 got me thinking of a possibility 15 years earlier. Was the M45G engine from the defunct AFVG any good? I was thinking of an alt F1 with 2 M45G engines, fixed wing, no VG. Probably the end result being more like an F3 but with two M45Gs. Let's suppose France pulls out of AFVG but perhaps not from the M45G venture.

So then they (AdA) get a middle sized twin instead of the F1 with a lot more power, and they stick with the concept. Fast forward and in late seventies you have a medium twin powered by two RB-199s or perhaps that M69, preferably a scaled down 4000.
 
Last edited:
Archibald said:
If you want to go that way, then your best best is the Mirage 3000. Somewhere on this forum is my research related to it.

Edit: there it is, scroll down a bit. https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/mirage-3000.757/

Imagine a scaled-down Mirage 4000 - scaled down thanks to RB.199s replacing the M53s. This essentially shrinks it from F-15 size (and cost) to F-18 size (I won't say "cost" here as the Hornet was controversial, to say the least).

If that scaled down Mirage 4000 flies like the original one, it can be done by March 1979. Took a bit more than six years (1978-1984) to get the 2000 from first flight (March 10, 1978) to IOC (July 1984, Dijon air base).

Starting in 1979 or 1980 for the 3000, could get its IOC by 1986 - ironically, the year the Rafale demonstrator flew.

Note that the 3000 could complete the 2000 rather than replacing it.

Big problem: SNECMA would scream like hell... or maybe not, if the 2000 with THEIR M53 survived along the 3000. Depends who would manufacture the RB.199 under licence. Could be SNECMA, but could also be Turboméca.
Click to expand...
There is an early POD solution for this, in Snecma teaming up with Bristol / Rolls Royce to get turbofan technology. You have spey Mirage F3 and then RB199 as a joint development...
 
Let's suppose France pulls out of AFVG but perhaps not from the M45G venture.
Click to expand...
This is OTL, actually. The M45 was never cancelled, it just agonized for five more years including on the civilian market, as nobody really cared.
A pity, because it could have replaced the Atar 9C to K from " below" with 5500 kg of thrust and half the size and half the SFC. Imagine a Mirage IV with two of them.
Liébert& Buyck stupendous F1 books have a whole bunch of "smallish Mirages" with M45s.
As for the Adour, it was a scaled down M45 with half the thrust, for that trainer to complete the AFVG - the Jaguar. Interestingly enough it was Turboméca which got the contract, and it was far closer from a Dassault than a SNECMA in spirit and raw efficiency. They also got the Larzac for the Alphajet later.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom