more naval migs so i can match the spam of rafale and f18 in sim.
MiG-25PDZ with thrust vectoring can be fun. Its very limited thrust vectoring but it can be fun.
its turning ability at high speeds aren’t that bad, i find it quite useful to be able to change direction and retain high speed.
1 Like
anything that gets added tbh im greatful for. I cant be asked to wait anything good from gaijin looking at these past updates and the decision making of the vehicle being an event or not. I made myself clear and I am right being mad about gaijin not adding anything for the Mig-29 line for 3 whole years now. And when they get the chance to finally do something good they smear it good with sum good old event vehicle that will break the matchmaker. The usual run.
1 Like
Probably it will be nerfed. I doubt it will go to live server with that agility what it have on dev.
1 Like
I don’t see it changing much
Idk but ability of pulling 8-9G constantly is too much. Well, at least that’s how I see it right now. I could be wrong.
That’s the case at low altitude, at least in game right now.
Yep. I think that plane is not finished yet and many stuff will change until it gets to the live server (mainly radar which missing MTI).
It has MTI, but you have to be hugging the floor and point the nose downwards. Not sure why gaijin did that to the MiG-23 radar and now MiG-25s. There’s a manual override for that.
when do you think they will add the MiG-31?
I’d hope next year sometime…
1 Like
Do you think its a little unfair that the Sukhoi line was getting all the “glaze”?
no because sukhoi was just better. all other are just like side support.
Comparing in statshark, it’s very dependent on fuel fraction; they sized it so that at 100% fuel it’s limited to 7,52 G (1.5 x 5G) and 16.56º max sustained turn rate, but with 1% fuel it goes up to 13,3 G and 29,49º max sustained turn rate. Maybe the empty weight is a bit suspect (it shows 18850.0 kg as opposed to the commonly listed 20 000 kg), but given the wing loading should be pretty close to the f104 it’s obvious that the max cl and oswald efficiency are way off…
Check this discussion. Its a table which you can work with, there’s a sustained Gload chart too somewhere there
Are you sure? Last time I used aim9B, Es and Js couple years ago there was a limitation on Gload while launching. I dont think they removed it
1 Like
Yeah, I don’t know about this. The iraqi nor soviet manuals mention a thing about them
Ah yeah, it also overperforms in acceleration…
1 Like
comparing for 500 meters altitude, 5500kg fuel, it’s doing 4G at 500 km/h instead of 3 G, 4,72 G at 600 km/h instead of 3.75 G and going up to 1240 km/h VNE while it doesn’t even chart at 650 km/h and above on your table. At 8000 m altitude on stat shark it peaks at 6,7 G sustained turn rate at 1100 km/h (real, not indicated), while on the real life chart it peaks at a sustained 2.85 G at 700 km/h indicated - presumably just below mach 1.
Even allowing for the fact the real chart is adding the weight and drag of the missiles while stat shark sees a clean airplane, it’s still nowhere near close.
Every type of russian made aircraft had their own purpose. Sukhois were for longer range operations while the Migs were generally for frontline work and fast interception hence the nickname of the MiG-29 being the “Pocket Rocket”.