As a young South Africa during Apartheid, us boys never used the word Mirage as a brand but as the replacement word for jet. We still used it when we made our knock-off Cheetahs i.e., following Israel's lead.
The talk of capabilities is something of a red herring, because even the most potent aircraft is vulnerable when it's on the ground. Needless to say, these aircraft will be based in Poland and/or Romania.
Similarly, talk of crew training isn't the point. These aircraft will be flown and maintained by sheep-dipped NATO crews, presumably French.
The real question is whether the Mirage 2000 can carry or can be configured to carry Taurus missiles, which Ukraine will be getting immediately after the German elections
This great post is worth a think tank on his own, AI is lagging behind! I always wonder why weapon systems have to be extremely costly and in the same time vulnerable and mostly failing. When I see the tunnels in Vietnam, Cambodja, in Gaza and probably in Ukraine certainly in Kiev, what’s the use of those Mirages in the air, when they have to take off and land somewhere where the conditions have to be perfect, and as a result can be observed from outer space. Not mentioning the maintenance and efficacy in time where they’re taken down by a new countering system. What I thought of a war on the ground, canon and drone fodder or a war at sea, it has all been more sophisticated and hiding underground. They’re working on missiles that penetrate the earth and cause an earthquake, a volcano explosion or a tsunami, who can be saved from these? What about pyroclasts, everything burned and melted like in Pompei? But in the end all is too complex too costly, so why not entering the enemy by engineering his DNA or even simpler starting with your own army and soldiers? To be more up to date armies have had their times, they belong in musea, just watch Ukraine the army is bleeding to death, now they recruit 18 years, what’s next 15, 12 years or children armies like in Africa 8 years?
"I always wonder why weapon systems have to be extremely costly and in the same time vulnerable and mostly failing."
Do you have appliances at home? When they break, and they break FAR more often than their predecessors, what parts usually break?
Huge strides in computers and electronics bestow impressive capabilities on newer designs. Capabilities so impressive that operating without them would almost waste the investment in that combat aircraft.
Yet each component is also a point of failure.
Each component may itself be extremely reliable. One you have hundreds, or thousands, or more in an airplane, the odds start to turn on you. See: modern "mission capable" rates compared to each previous generation - and even that misleads. It becomes a question of there's usually *something* not quite right, and the question is whether it's minor enough that you can be cleared to fly the mission anyway.
Great and very informative article.
If I were Russian, I'd be attacking the ground support personnel who would be almost exclusively French. No support/maintenance = no fly fly!
They will be based in Poland or Romania.
Good analysis, thanks 😊
As a young South Africa during Apartheid, us boys never used the word Mirage as a brand but as the replacement word for jet. We still used it when we made our knock-off Cheetahs i.e., following Israel's lead.
https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-tactical/south-africa-hacked-the-mirage/
https://youtu.be/u-CBziVSufM?t=50
Very interesting, as usual!
Thank you for the clear and well organized details, and the succinct summaries, Mike.
Perfect like Alweys.
The talk of capabilities is something of a red herring, because even the most potent aircraft is vulnerable when it's on the ground. Needless to say, these aircraft will be based in Poland and/or Romania.
Similarly, talk of crew training isn't the point. These aircraft will be flown and maintained by sheep-dipped NATO crews, presumably French.
The real question is whether the Mirage 2000 can carry or can be configured to carry Taurus missiles, which Ukraine will be getting immediately after the German elections
More junk from the west. z
If they are foolish enough to fly sorties from those countries then Vlad has said that those sites become legitimate targets. Fairs fair!
Lol, another Russian red line duly ignored.
This great post is worth a think tank on his own, AI is lagging behind! I always wonder why weapon systems have to be extremely costly and in the same time vulnerable and mostly failing. When I see the tunnels in Vietnam, Cambodja, in Gaza and probably in Ukraine certainly in Kiev, what’s the use of those Mirages in the air, when they have to take off and land somewhere where the conditions have to be perfect, and as a result can be observed from outer space. Not mentioning the maintenance and efficacy in time where they’re taken down by a new countering system. What I thought of a war on the ground, canon and drone fodder or a war at sea, it has all been more sophisticated and hiding underground. They’re working on missiles that penetrate the earth and cause an earthquake, a volcano explosion or a tsunami, who can be saved from these? What about pyroclasts, everything burned and melted like in Pompei? But in the end all is too complex too costly, so why not entering the enemy by engineering his DNA or even simpler starting with your own army and soldiers? To be more up to date armies have had their times, they belong in musea, just watch Ukraine the army is bleeding to death, now they recruit 18 years, what’s next 15, 12 years or children armies like in Africa 8 years?
"I always wonder why weapon systems have to be extremely costly and in the same time vulnerable and mostly failing."
Do you have appliances at home? When they break, and they break FAR more often than their predecessors, what parts usually break?
Huge strides in computers and electronics bestow impressive capabilities on newer designs. Capabilities so impressive that operating without them would almost waste the investment in that combat aircraft.
Yet each component is also a point of failure.
Each component may itself be extremely reliable. One you have hundreds, or thousands, or more in an airplane, the odds start to turn on you. See: modern "mission capable" rates compared to each previous generation - and even that misleads. It becomes a question of there's usually *something* not quite right, and the question is whether it's minor enough that you can be cleared to fly the mission anyway.
Might fine essay my pal. Carry on we must. To the Mother/Father Land, Godspeed. Old lady with a virtual kat❤️🐈⬛
Great!