R-40 has same manuvering capability as R-24. It will be an even better R-24 due to the range increase.
2 Likes
yes, but the radar its attatched to doesn’t have look down shoot down capability. plus, the mig 25 (until the most modern models) didn’t have CMs. so it would be a very hard plane to balance
Also, i really doubt the mig 31 will retain speeds like how the first release f-15e would. Plus, the mig 31 would have tornado syndrome in the point that it can’t turn fast enough to notch, unless it’s really able to throw out its missiles from further away than any other air craft can. With how the r-77 is currently, i doubt it
1 Like
You’d have to climb to go fast (as in MiG-25/31 levels of fast) - sticking yourself above the rest of the team and standing out as a target. Not a super-brilliant idea when the sky is full of Fakours and AIM-54s.
Be in no doubt, we just don’t have maps big enough at the moment. A big interceptor would be a real liability in 9/10 games.
Signed. Long Suffering Tornado F3 player.
The MiG-31 is significantly faster than the F-15
The later Mig-25s do have that capability
Stop writing nonsense
2 Likes
The first mig 25s had a worser radar than the mig 23
All MiG-25s had ejection seats.
what does that have to do with the terrible radar
1 Like
itll be like a f104A highly good boom and zoom fighter
this is true
i would like to know if east germany would Get a model of it
On the PD and PDS versions, the radar was modified and could hit targets against the ground.
4 Likes
Which doesn’t matter as the PD or PDS which are the most likely to be see, it essentially had an upscaled version of the MiG-23 radar already in-game! It is already a known quantity as to how it would function in-game. And guess what? It does just fine in the role it needs to fill, or even shooting low to low.
It have. Saphir-25 used on MiG-25 is bigger derivate of MiG-23 radar Saphir-23 which have this ability. However, don’t be confused by the Saphir-23’s current lack of performance in the game. It is proven on the basis of manuals that the radar lacks key modes.
Yo and MiG-25PD/BM can use also KDS-155 dispensers what is 60 countermeasures. I dont see any obstacle to add MiG-25PD and BM variants.
Even better, because it could turn tighter. G limits are relative, and the 4G limit imposed on the MiG-25 wasn’t a maneuvering limit in terms of aerodynamical capability.
Ummm…it kind of was.
Leaving aside the massive airframe stresses incurred the Foxbat also had a rather nasty habit of going into unrecoverable flat spins if pushed beyond it’s limits. A few crew deaths as a result. I’d say that would fall firmly into the ‘hard aerodynamic’ limits similar to ripping wings or tails off other aircraft when overstressed.
It’ll handle like a Tornado fully loaded with fuel and bombs - at best. Be in no doubt, it’s a dragster, not a sports car.
Flat spins can happen because of excessive AoA or unusual combinations of AoA and roll/rudder. Not directly because of G-load.
4G at something like Mach3 is barely a turn.
I can fairly belive that MiG-25’s aerodynamic limitations won’t allow it to do something like 8G at 700kph, but it’s certainly able to do that at high speeds when structural integrity is not considered
2 Likes
From the rather comprehensive look at the Belenko airframe. Specific quotes:
"Belenko’s particular aircraft was brand new, representing the very latest Soviet technology.
Welding was done by hand and construction was relatively crude. As in many Soviet aircraft, rivet heads were left exposed in areas that would not adversely affect aerodynamic drag.
The aircraft was built of a nickel-steel alloy and not titanium as was assumed (though some titanium was used in heat-critical areas). The steel construction contributed to the craft’s massive 64,000 lb (29,000 kg) unarmed weight.
Maximum acceleration (g-load) rating was just 2.2 g (21.6 m/s²) with full fuel tanks, with an absolute limit of 4.5 g (44.1 m/s²). One MiG-25 withstood an inadvertent 11.5 g (112.8 m/s²) pull during low-altitude dogfight training, but the resulting deformation decommissioned the airframe."
I would say that dubious build quality, combined with some truly heavyweight engineering would make for an airframe you DEFINITELY would not want to subject to any high-G turns - at any speed really. Whether the aerodynamics or structure let go first would be a coin-toss to be honest.
Edit to add - I’m not disputing the MiG-25 would be a fun addition. However there seems to be this strange fixation with arguing that it would be far more agile than it really was. Even the MiG-31 - the ‘ultimate Foxbat plus deluxe’, heavily revised and toughened - has some very stringent limits.
ODIN - OE Data Integration Network
Foxhound limited to 5G.