Mirages I - III/5, Prototypes & Projects

F.L. said:
I found a strange photo of a single-seat Mirage IIIDA. The rear cockpit appears to be painted or removed.
The photo appears to date from after the Argentinian Mirage was withdrawn from service.
Would anyone know more about this ?
View attachment 708448
Click to expand...
Hi F.L.
To me, that is a two-seater Mirage III DA or a two-seater IAI Dagger B. Those special marking were done for the celebrations and to commemorate the 100 years of the Argentine air force.
If you look close, in the rear cabin, there is still the blanket to cover the pilot during a training flight.
All Deltas are currently out of service.
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    117.3 KB · Views: 110
  • 2.jpg
    2.jpg
    73.5 KB · Views: 99
Orpheus found its way into a Mirage at last: the VSTOL Balzac V. It needed a turbojet much smaller than Atar, to make internal room for 8 RB-108s lift jets...
 
F.L. said:
Mirage IIIDA, I think.
The question is why this retired aircraft has been painted like this, I don't really see the point.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's painted. I think it is the blanket to cover the pilot during a training flight. Do you have a larger photo, so I can ask someone else? Because it's the first time I've seen it.
 
Moncho said:
I don't think it's painted. I think it is the blanket to cover the pilot during a training flight.
Click to expand...
In any case, I'm pretty sure it was painted like this after being withdrawn from service.
Do you have a larger photo, so I can ask someone else? Because it's the first time I've seen it.
Click to expand...
I'll try to find out.
 
F.L. said:
In any case, I'm pretty sure it was painted like this after being withdrawn from service.

I'll try to find out.
Click to expand...
Hi F.L.
I just find this photo and I think is the same as yours.
Looks like we were both wrong, ha ha:
The rear cabin was neither painted nor covered by a training blanket. Hope this can help you.
Photo by unknown photographer, shared on Facebook via Charly Dacunda: 1.jpg


Cheers, all the best.
 

Attachments

  • Atar 09C Exposed.png
    Atar 09C Exposed.png
    313.9 KB · Views: 37
The Mirage IIIE and its R variant for reconnaissance, were lengthened behind the cockpit to add an avionics compartment with a new aluminum folding rack for equipment, with significant electronic improvements.
 
Javvp said:
I can speak about the Mirage IIIEE.

E is for exportation models. And EE is for exportation to Spain. Now part of them are in the Air Force of Pakistan.
The EE takes the ATAR 09 C5.

Here you have my work about them:

Mirage III E/R ENGINE ATAR 09 C5 exposed ATAR 09C5 jet engine []

Engine Mirage III Atar 09C5
www.tecnikit.com
Click to expand...
The Mirage IIIE was the follow on from the IIIC developed to French AF needs. It was not an export model. The second E was the designation for the country of export. In this case E for Spain as you said, Z for South Africa etc. It was based on the international two letter abbreviations used for each country.
 
If we’re going to be so precise, it’s not exactly like that.

The French E was then prepared to transport the AN 52 nuclear bomb. So it was different for export models. On the Dassault-Mirage page you can see that officially the one we know as E sold to the rest of the world, technically for the manufacturer is D to differentiate the export from their own E version.

"La version française reçoit ultérieurement l’arme nucléaire tactique AN 52. Le Mirage III D est la version exportation du Mirage III E"
https://www.dassault-aviation.com/fr/passion/avions/dassault-militaires/mirage-iii/

In any case, someone mentioned shots of the nozzle of the Mirage IIIE ( I think ). There goes a fairly accurate interpretation without the coverage panel. On the web here is other with the panel placed.
https://www.tecnikit.com/catalog/in...uct_info&cPath=65&products_id=218&language=en
 

Attachments

  • MirageIIINozzleUncovered4.png
    MirageIIINozzleUncovered4.png
    312.9 KB · Views: 41
The Mirage IIID is the conversion trainer for the Mirage IIIE. As far as I can tell that is the BE in French service. The Mirage IIIB is the conversion trainer for the IIIC.
 
BLACK_MAMBA said:
The Mirage IIID is the conversion trainer for the Mirage IIIE. As far as I can tell that is the BE in French service. The Mirage IIIB is the conversion trainer for the IIIC.
Click to expand...

Probably you could inform to the official web page of Dassault Aviation ( Builder of Mirage ) of their error. :D

"La version française reçoit ultérieurement l’arme nucléaire tactique AN 52. Le Mirage III D est la version exportation du Mirage III E"
https://www.dassault-aviation.com/fr/passion/avions/dassault-militaires/mirage-iii/
 
My brain is bleeding in pain. I do know that the Mirages exported to Argendina in 1972 where called Mirage IIIEA: "E" for IIIE, and "A" for Argentina.
Mirage IIIEs were exported to many countries, with the name IIIE + a country letter.
In fact the IIIE from the late 60's probably sold more than the IIIC... until the Mirage V and 50 stole its thunder.
In a sense, the IIIE was the definite, multirole Mirage III variant. The IIIC had no A2G capability, the V & 50 were simplified bomb trucks.
 
That same site references the French Mirage IIIBE as the same as the Mirage IIID (both conversion trainer versions which is correct) and says the IIID is the export veraion of the IIIE, the single seat strike variant? Same article, two different references to different airframes but the same name. Casts doubt as to how trustworthy it is. Single source documents rarely are the best source.

Perhaps things got lost in translation, or the site references internal Dassault only documents which differ from the documents/name conventions used by their customers, but the IIID is the conversion trainer to the IIIE. The French and its customers used the E. Export aircraft are identified by the second suffix letter in the name e.g. the Mirage IIIEZ of South Africa.
The BE (Mirage IIID_ to the export market) seems to be the only naming convention which is different between French Air Force and export Air Forces aircraft.
 
Dassault's site does not say the Mirage IIIE is an export version, it says the IIID is the export version of the IIIE.
Le Mirage III D est la version exportation du Mirage III E.
Click to expand...
I must admit the use of the IIID designation as export version of the IIIE is news to me.
Chenel/Liébert/Moreau enumerate export IIIE variants in Mirage III/5/50 en service à l'étranger LELA Presse 2012:
- IIIO and IIID (single-seat and trainer for Australia)
- IIIS and IIIDS (single-seat and trainer for Switzerland)
- IIIEZ, IIIDZ and IIID2Z (single-seat and trainer for South Africa)
- IIIEL and IIIBL (single-seat and trainer for Lebanon)
- IIIEP and IIIDP (single-seat and trainer for Pakistan)
- IIIEE and IIIDE (single-seat and trainer for Spain)
- IIIEBR, IIIBBR and IIIDBR (single-seat and trainer for Brazil)
- IIIEA and IIIDA (single-seat and trainer for Argentina)

I humbly suggest the IIID as export version of the IIIE is both claimed and contradicted by the Dassault-site.
L’armée de l’Air française a reçu 95 Mirage III C, 59 Mirage III B, B1, B2 et BE (équivalent de la version D à l’export),
Click to expand...
On top of that, of course, you get the IIIA, IIIB, IIIC, IIIR, IIIT, IIIV, 5, 50, Milan and NG subtypes.
 
Last edited:
After review it thoroughly, the problem with Dassault’s website has its explanation.

I confirm that the E is identical for exportation or not. But the D not.

From the French point of view the two-seaters are B. But for export models they were called D.

In fact their two-seat series are always IIIB, IIIBS, IIIBE... Israel, for example, did use the French name IIIBJ for its two-seaters of theirs IIICJ.

Mirage’s two-seater branch began as a root with the IIIB derivates from a IIIC to be used as testing laboratory in 1959.

Things aren’t as clear as they seem anyway. The Mirage IIIC eventually adopted things from the IIIE. For example, the IIICJ parked in the Israel Air Force Museum, shows the landing gear of an IIIE on its wings. In 1971 these IIICJ were re-engineered with the ATAR 09C5.
 
Javvp said:
After review it thoroughly, the problem with Dassault’s website has its explanation.

I confirm that the E is identical for exportation or not. But the D not.

From the French point of view the two-seaters are B. But for export models they were called D.

In fact their two-seat series are always IIIB, IIIBS, IIIBE... Israel, for example, did use the French name IIIBJ for its two-seaters of theirs IIICJ.

Mirage’s two-seater branch began as a root with the IIIB derivates from a IIIC to be used as testing laboratory in 1959.

Things aren’t as clear as they seem anyway. The Mirage IIIC eventually adopted things from the IIIE. For example, the IIICJ parked in the Israel Air Force Museum, shows the landing gear of an IIIE on its wings. In 1971 these IIICJ were re-engineered with the ATAR 09C5.
Click to expand...
Israel heavily upgraded their IIICJs to use the 09C and part of that likely was to use spare Nesher wings etc. This likely wasn't a factory mod from Dassault.

Israel never bought the IIIE so never had an EJ and DJ. They went straight to Nesher and used a different nomenclature. South Africa bought the E and the D trainer for it.

In South Africa most of their IIICZs were also upgraded with IIIEZ wings as their IIIEZs were upgraded to Cheetah Es and had their wings replaced. They kept the IIICZ undercarridge though as the Cheetah E retained the IIIEZ main gear.
 
BLACK_MAMBA said:
Israel heavily upgraded their IIICJs to use the 09C and part of that likely was to use spare Nesher wings etc. This likely wasn't a factory mod from Dassault.

Israel never bought the IIIE so never had an EJ and DJ. They went straight to Nesher and used a different nomenclature. South Africa bought the E and the D trainer for it.

In South Africa most of their IIICZs were also upgraded with IIIEZ wings as their IIIEZs were upgraded to Cheetah Es and had their wings replaced. They kept the IIICZ undercarridge though as the Cheetah E retained the IIIEZ main gear.
Click to expand...
I read in another forum that the wings were changed.

I don’t think anyone can believe that this can be done without the engineering and supervision of the manufacturer.

There is a lot of legend that in reality only hide mockery to boycotts and blockades motivated by different situations. For example 20 of the IIICJ of Israel ended up in Argentina circumventing the trade blockade through another country. The IIICJ on display in the museum with the IIIE landing gear was returned by Argentina for exhibition.

I recommend that you read this article ( you will have to translate it ) where it is explained in detail that everything is Dassault’s engineering, ( including the Nesher ) manufactured in different plants to hide this and with the help of Rockwell International and the mediation of the united states to circumvent the blockade.

http://aeromaquina.blogspot.com/2019/05/los-mirage-5-nesher-dagger-no-se-fabricaron-en-israel.html
 
The IIIC and IIIE wings shared the same mounting points etc hence it could be done relatively easily. Lots of work around the Mirage III happened without Dassault input. Same for the F1 in South Africa. Numerous airframe mods like fitting RWR sensors, new ventral fin designs etc and even extreme upgrades as per the Cheetah programs albeit there quite a bit of knowledge from Israel (who by this stage was a bit more self reliant when it came to the Mirages/Kfirs) was drawn in too.

I think the fact that Nesher wasn't built locally in Israel from stolen plans as so widely reported that it became facts should by now be known more widely as false.
 
Last edited:
Yes, you’re right. But no one changes engine and wings without the manufacturer’s instructions.

Reading posts from other people it is very unfair that the genius of those designs can be minimized by the legend of Israel's designs ( At the end 100% French ). It’s like people know F-104 because someone put canards to it in another country. And finally is the manufacturer's work.

France has always been a world power in planes engineering, although for reasons that are not relevant here it has always been hidden.

At this moment it is the only European country ( including UK ) capable of creating fighters on its own experience in development. There is also Sweden with Saab, but the distance is very great.

I suggest to those who do not know Dassault, to visit information about Mirage IV. That design puts things in place about the mastery of design by Dassault.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Mirage_IV#/media/File:Mirage_IVA_(16811260277).jpg

1699562101070.jpeg
 
Javvp said:
Yes, you’re right. But no one changes engine and wings without the manufacturer’s instructions.
Click to expand...
South Africa did so multiple times.

First they upgraded a Mirage IIIRZ to R2Z standard by replacing the 09C with an 09k50. Admittedly these two engines are very similar, unlike the 09B to 09C change Israel did, sharing aiframe mounting points and with other R2Zs in service they had a good template, but it was done with no French help mentioned.

They spliced together two Mirage F1CZs (one had the rear fuselage destroyed in a engine fire after hard landing, the other had the forward fuselage damaged also upon landing after dogfight damage. They grafted the good parts together. Speaking with those involved this was a tough challenge to crack and French input even in a clandestine form is never mentioned nor would they even have a process for such an event. SA could not afford the loss of the aircraft.

That re-engined RZ (836) was later damaged beyond economical repair and the airframe stored. Few years later the rear fuselage was used to repair a Cheetah D2 (originally a Mirage IIID2Z) which had the rear fuselage destroyed with a hatd landing and engine fire. Again the two fuselages were grafted together. The Mirage F1 project some years before was quite helpful.

The biggest challenge was the SMR-95 project where a modified RD-33 was installed into a Mirage F1AZ and a Cheetah D2. Dassault in this case even said it couldn't be done (I thus assumed for this project they were approached to help seeing as this was during the period South Africa was starting to move into democracy and this was an even tougher nut to crack than previous rebuild/reengine projects in the sanction years). But they managed it and flew both prototypes very succesfully.

Dassault and Snecma were happy to clandestinely supply engines though through middlemen and I would assume certain spares too. SA was still investing in its aviation industry and all the related supporting industries and could only do so clandestinely thus lagged behind Israel there who could openly get help there. That is why local production lines of new built fighters (even with Mirage F1 plans from Dassault at time of purchase resulted in no new built aircraft).

I guess it would be foolish to state none of this had any input from Dassault as they plausibly at least consulted clandestinely, but in especially the Cheetah project they lacked data that Dassault could have provided but didnt like aerodynamic data around the rear of the aircraft and thus had to work more creatively like when designing the ventral fuel tank integral chaff/flare fit they used the RATO pack outline as guide within which to work. The Cheethas used differerent designs here than Kfir.
 
Last edited:
I remember reading on the SAAF forum that the mating of the two different fuselages mentioned (I think for the F1) required the local design and production of specialist jigs too.

Also, the Advanced Combat Wing, in its various configurations, fitted to the two Cheetah airframes, was designed, fitted, and tested completely locally, with no input from Dassault.

The project to incorporate substantial modifications (including aerodynamic changes to the airframe) to the F1 fleet, including features from the Cheetah C, was also done completely locally, with no Dassault input, as Dassault simply had no equivalent project, nor need.

As stated in another thread, the investment into design tools, infrastructure, and windtunnels was done with deliberation, and from necessity.
 
Last edited:
Looks like the late Michel Pons Savigny les Beaune stupendous collection in French Burgundy. As for the Mirage could be one of the 1980's ultimate updates, not the III-NG but the other one I can't remember the name.

MIRAGE III EX

MIRAGE III EX
www.meacmtl.com www.meacmtl.com
 
F.L. said:
Does anyone know more about this early Mirage III with air refueling probe ?
View attachment 719550
Click to expand...

Hi FL:

They say that this one is the prototype of the Australian Mirage IIIO-1, baptized City of Hobart, which was equipped with a Rolls Royce RB146 Avon 67 engine now exhibited in the aeronautical museum at the castle of Savigny-lès-Beaune, Côte d'Or, Burgundy, France, looking like a Mirage IIIE with an air refueling probe.
 
Moncho said:
Hi FL:

They say that this one is the prototype of the Australian Mirage IIIO-1, baptized City of Hobart, which was equipped with a Rolls Royce RB146 Avon 67 engine now exhibited in the aeronautical museum at the castle of Savigny-lès-Beaune, Côte d'Or, Burgundy, France, looking like a Mirage IIIE with an air refueling probe.
Click to expand...
Thanks !!!
 
Yes F.L., both denominations are correct.
Mirage IIIEA is a local Pakistani designation.
It stands for; Mirage III, model E, Australian version/variant.
These are the 50 Australian Mirage III O sold in 1991 to the PAF, of which 45 were restored and put into service in its air force.
Some were modernized with the ROSE I program.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom