M-2000C or Viggen


Well, first of all, thanks for the very kind and helpful advice on getting the Syria map to work. It was indeed because I was not signed up to the Beta updates and now sorted, I am loving the map.
So my next question is this, I only have a certain amount of time for DCS and I really would like to devote that on one airframe. I have the F/A 18 and love her, however, due to skill erosion I am constantly trying to play catch up with the complicated in-depth systems.

With that in mind, which would you pick out of the two listed above? I have no interest in Air Defense though I am happy to defend if I get bumped on my way to/back from a strike. I know that they are both far from simple aircraft but I would like to know which you would choose and why, and please no " out of the Viggen and Mirage I would choose the F16"

A genuine request for help.


1 Like

M2000 is primarily an A2A platform with a ground attack capability.

The Viggen is a low level high speed ground attack / anti-ship “one pass haul ass” platform with an old mission computer at its heart.

M2000 is easy to learn but doesn’t have standalone precision attack capability (you can carry LGBs but need another aircraft to lase) so if A2G is your thing, be aware of that. M2000 has FBW and it flies “on rails”, which you either like or not.

Viggen is older and quirky but awesome. The computer isn’t hard but needs a bit of book learning. Very hands-on to fly in comparison. It does have some very cool weapons in its arsenal.


Mirage usually gets the nod because it’s relatively capable, FBW, decent systems depth without being too complicated. It’s very much like an F-16A in operation, though with the addition of BVR missile capability. Absolutely fierce dogfighter, exceptional acceleration and top speed, highly limited air-ground capability. A very good EW suite to include an internal jammer, tons of chaff and flares, with a very good RWR. The relative shortfall is range can suffer and taking external wing tanks reduces your combat capability.

The Viggen is a Cold War striker, one pass haul you-know-what. You know where your target is, how to get there, fly at high speed at treetop level, drop your bombs and run. Overfly a juicy target? Forget it; note where it is, maybe come back later and destroy it. Also highly capable at hunting ships. Virtually nothing faster on the deck clean. But hope you like air-ground because that’s all you’ll be doing; the engine stalls if you pull more than 0.00001AoA and your best A/A weapon is an AIM-9L.

Of the two, I heartily recommend the Mirage if you feel the systems depth of the Bug is too much. The Viggen is all about those systems and usage of the authentic computer system, while the Mirage is pretty much set it and forget it.


Harrier :grin: … but really both the viggen and M2000 are very good, the viggen is slightly more skewed towards ground pounding and the M2000 is more air to air, with some ground work


Now it is very interesting that you mention the Harrier, I have her and of course, love her however it is the limited range and speed that has caused me to consider being unfaithful! Plus I am unable to recover to a ship as I am very poor at transitioning to the hover though I have done some very entertaining short landings on board.

I guess I was hoping to hear that the SAAB was the one for me, and in many ways, she is, however, I do like carrying out combat recces in fat it is my favorite and that’s a no without being able to prosecute a TOO…oh but that sweet capability to operate from short fields really is something. Well, I guess I have narrowed the choice of two down to THREE!!


Hey, thanks for that very comprehensive response. I could fight the Hornet, but a few days off due to work and I would be behind the airframe playing catch up with the avionics and then if it wasnt that it would be trying to remember how to use the JDAM.

The Mirage is so beautiful too, just that the retriction of the air to ground is putting me off.

Well in case of the Hornet, don’t feel pressured to know it all. In fact, operating it by choice with lesser weapons would give you that mix of speed, air to ground and a bit of air to air if the feeling hits.

Things like the Paveway LGBs (GBU-10/12/16) and JDAM are wonderful tools, but can be essentially boring when over used. Lobbing a JDAM at a SAM site involves flying high, throwing a bomb and going home. It does the rest. Not very involved, right?

Instead, take a few Mk-82 snakeye or AIR (Y) and do a low altitude high speed pass!


Out of your listed choices though, I would pick Mirage. There is alot of history in that family of aircraft, especially in the region we have a taste of with Syria.


Hello Spikeyspud, welcome to MudSpike. Here are two videos which should help you decide. :wink: LOL!



Another thought; take some time browsing the campaigns and missions out there (free and paid) and see what content there is available for each.

Also, is there a reason you’ve narrowed down to these two?

1 Like

You’ve basically got Mk82 snakes and slicks (and snakes are CCIP only, with slicks CCRP only), Beluga clusters (about like Mk20), rockets, and GBU-12 if you have someone else along for lasing. The 2000D was the air-ground platform, not the 2000C. The Viggen has more stuff to use but it’s a lot more restricted in how you can use it. The Mirage you can basically say “today, I want to drop bombs” and pack as many Mk82s you want on it (up to 8); then tomorrow you can pack 530s and Magics up for a little bit of air combat. You won’t be doing both at the same time.

The Viggen you can run an ELINT mission (probably the most complicated thing you can do), then review the data and pinpoint potential targets/threats (reviewing gathered frequencies in an area and determine what kind of radar it is, then figuring out what kind of SAM it might be or what ship uses that radar system), then plan an attack on the target. It’s methodical, with a huge attention to detail. You’ll be using the F10 map a lot. Also, the Viggen is not a long range striker in the vein of the F-15E or F-111; it mostly operates at a shorter range, with little potential to expand it.

I’ll add that if your problem with the Bug is more due to the more complicated weapons and procedures, you might consider focusing on the simpler stuff first as Wes says. I’ve been with the Bug since July of '18 so back then, all we had was unguided A/G weapons with Sparrow and Sidewinder for A/A. We used those for a long time before we finally got the more advanced stuff and for the better part of about 6 months. Consider limiting yourself to that same framework, then gradually add more as you get comfortable with it.



Also, Adding another plane to your stable wont help skill erosion either, as you’re splitting between the two now.

Ask me how I know…

The issue overall has driven me to more WWII simming, as the subject aircraft are more approachable,especially in the more survey sim oriented BoX platform.

Would love to devote more time to all the masterpieces in my DCS stable, but it is what it is.

Edit: also; Is there a reason you wrote off the F-5? I’ve always found it to be a very stick and rudder hot rod. Its simple as dirt systems wise, you get dumb bombs, slightly less dumb missles, and best of all, guns that are the aircraft rquivilant of 1980s pop up headlights. Whats not to love? :smiley:

Shes my go to girl when I get the “MFD blues” and want something more raw.

1 Like

Oh you had to ask me to pick between my two favorites. I’m fairly similar in what I like to do, which is mainly ground pound with some A2A. I have to give the nod to the M2000, but with some caveats.

The Mirage does A2G like the A-10A, put the thing on the thing and pull the trigger. It’s not a precision strike AC, has no real foul weather A2G capabilities, and very limited night A2G capabilities. However if you operate it within it’s constraints its effective. It doesn’t handle mixed ordinance loads well (neither does the Viggen), and it’s self escorting only in the sense you can carry A2A missiles and A2G ordinance at the same time.

The Viggen was a dedicated all weather strike AC, though in non-visual conditions we’re back to 1950’s radar bombing. It has limited A2A capabilities and it’s not really made to dogfight. The computer controls aren’t actually all that bad to learn, as you are never going to be carrying a mixed ordinance load. You only need to be aware of the mode and controls for what you are carrying that flight, which isn’t terribly difficult to do. The actual attack interface is again, put the thing on the thing (at .9 mach 50m above the ground…) the vast majority of the time.

Neither AC has the ground attack complexity of the A-10C. Sensors in the Mirage are mainly to calculate slant range on a visually acquired target, or to direct you to the correct spot in the air for the CCRP to decide it’s time. In the Viggen the radar can be used for navigation, INS updates, sea target locating, and even radar directed bombing. However don’t expect anything close to the information fusion you see in modern AC between the sensors and the displays. A flashing circle in your HUD is about all you get in the Viggen to help with target acquisition.

The Viggen is about short range attacks, usually less than 45 minutes mission time, most of it spent at absurdly low level and around mach .8-.9. The Mirage is a high flier, capable of A2A refueling, and can loiter for hours. Both feature good autopilots, and both are designed to use them extensively. The Viggens is a bit more primitive, but is still advanced for it’s time.

The campaigns they come with are both some of favorite for DCS. Each plays to the AC strengths, stair steps the missions, and has appropriate difficulty.

The Viggen reflects the time and place where it was developed, and excels in certain scenarios, while being less than optimal in others. The M2000 is late 20th century design and it reflects the progression. In the A2G realm it is not as capable as the Viggen in certain circumstances (bad weather and low level), however it does have a limited true night fighting capability (still visual but under NVG’s).

I honestly give the edge personally to the M2000, because on the rare days I go feel like going A2A it is VASTLY superior to the Viggen in that arena (aeronautically, capability wise, and ergonomics).


A-10C +1


Can confirm. I was learning the Hornet as I learned the early Harrier and I have been a master of the A-10C for ages.

Now I would say I am down to 85-90% on the A-10C, I haven’t flown the Harrier in depth since before the JDAM update, but my Hornet is pretty well 100% so far. I throw in a few others from time to time, lately that has been the F-5E.

The F-5 does not have CCIP / CCRP, it’s full manual bombing and that is complexity in and of itself. The only AG powered weapons you get are rockets, IIRC. The guns are terrible as they have not had the dispersion (accuracy) adjusted as they should be yet, but it has been acknowledged by Belsimtech.

Yes, the A-10C is the ultimate CAS plane. Might be more draw to it if they fix the performance as data has shown it should be quicker and more nimble. The A-10C can be both complex and brutally simple, but will never fulfill the need for speed!

I will still say Mirage though - I have it on shortlist for modules to purchase in the next sale.


Now, I am all for new toys, so don’t get me wrong!

But, you can mitigate a lot of the range and speed issues with practice and planning.


High altitude cruise is easy on the fuel flow: make your pounds count by only going low and fast when it matters.

Two bags is a lot of fuel - plenty for a bit of TGP+LGB loitering. Less boom per flight but no fuel issues.

Air to air refuelling - a single bag is plenty of range if you can AAR. A matter of practice - hard but not super hard in the Harrier.


A clean Harrier is actually pretty speedy on the deck: if you cruise to the AOR nice and high, drop down to do the deed, bolt away at 400-500kts and climb back up to sip fuel once out of harm’s way, you can generally be fast when it counts.

I hope the above makes sense - I guess my point is, once I started watching the FF gauge and planning ahead, the Harrier’s short legs became a non-issue for me. Sure, sometimes I scrape back to the FARP with 200 lbs on the gauge at touchdown…but that’s part of the fun :grin:

1 Like

AAR brings up a good point; is that on the table @Spikeyspud? (Don’t feel bad if not, I’m not really good enough to do it consistently myself, either). Figure you’ll never encounter a Viggen mission that requires you to do that…

Thanks for this, an excellent response to a statement from someone with less understanding (me). No BS about “learn the module before talking crap”.

Due to this, I have been back to the Harrier and I am enjoying her more and more… Still have the fine control movements of a Rino when trying to go into the transition to a vertical landing.

I love the Hornet, but I just don’t have the time to learn the complex systems in the first place and then keep current to avoid skill erriosion.

Thanks again mate, I genuinely appreciate you taking the time.



Lol, no I don’t have that skill level or the time to develop it!
The beautiful SAAB is calling me, it’s just her limitations with TOO…I never had these issues with the flight sim on my old Amiga!

1 Like

Hey Jenrick.

Just WOW. Thanks for this excellent reply, and for taking the time to write it.

I love to learn an airframe at study level, that’s my goal. However I just don’t have the time to do that with the more complex birds.

My mission profiles is as follows.

Spend a lot of time in the planning stage.

Fly as low as possible to the target, prosecute the target and egress.

I love being able to fly around/under surface threats.

AVOID where possible Any A2A.

I am going to have to choose one otherwise I am never going to get anything done… and for that reason I pick the SAAB.

Though the Mirage is French and stunning…



Standard mudspike answer to this: both.