Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25 & MiG-31 Foxbat / Foxhound - History, Design, Performance & Dissection

We have recent interview of Indian MiG-25 pilot who literally said that they flew past 2.83 and that “He has never heard of an engine melting” btw

If you want to limit it at 2.83 because thats what manual says fine but to say its a “hard cut off line” is just false

Timestamped

“What is the fastest youve been in the MiG-25 Foxbat?”

“Oh we were limited to 2.83, the aircraft held a speed record of 3.2, we have exceeded 2.83 lets put it that way, You will find write-ups that the engine melted above Mach 3, thats why the limit is 2.83. We have not had an engine meltdown and let me tell you that we have exceeded 2.83”

Do with that what you will but this is one of many claims that make it clear that even past 2.83 it doesnt melt lol

8 Likes

Yeah i slightly mis read the graph

I mean in terms of the shape of the line, it’s perfectly straight that’s why it looks like hard cut off (similar to lines where the missile runs out of battery like r27er graphs where the missile itself still has more range but is limited by battery ) Same kind of line appears in the mig-31 manual. As it is something that is imposed by designers like I said and not the real limit like I said

Overperforming available g load report accepted
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/DFT4pGe6HJjN

That document is a manual, 4 different manuals from different eras each say the same thing. And where is this from? A “magazine”?

Again, its all time limited, you can go to 3 as the thrust clearly allows it but you can’t spend much time there and if you while staying under that maximum heat limit you will have no issues whatsoever with the engine.

The “magazine” is interviewing lead designer of the MiG-25 btw. And lets not ignore the fact that many many pilots have said 2.83 is not a hard limit and that theyve broken it without engine issues. see indian pilot above

1 Like

He’s not arguing that it’s a hard limit at 2.83. He says that it’s simply time limited at Mach numbers above that high

Which is also wrong. See screenshot in russian

Interesting, where is it from

Ka bot 15 video

Oh yeah I remember now.
But I can’t use that as a source or anything cause it’s just pilot interview

I dont care about the plane being accurate in-game (I have long given up on that) . And if everyone wants to they can deny it. I just want it out here in the forum that it infact did not instantly melt past 2.83 and that that limit was extremly conservative

Oh no I’ve long known that it can go over Mach 3 irl. I just want it to be limited to Mach 2.83 in game because other planes are also modeled to their typical safety limits in service so it’s fair for mig-25 to share that

@MaMoran20-psn is it right that the saphir 25 have acm? I thought it didn’t have acm

Not sure what he is refering to but this is one which he mentions on the report but here “Scaning zone, Shift” says that it is fixed or 0.5 in auto or 5º on manual, but the scaning zone is still ±30º
image

Then he also uses this, but reading it i think that this mode just fixes the range between 2 positions, not the elevation or azimut
image

Overall i dont think that this referse to an ACM mode

I’m confused, are we trying to get the aircraft nerfed so it can’t go past Mach 3?

i think the issue with other jets is that u wont have as much sources as u do for the mig25. there are so many secondary sources claiming it could fly over Mach 3.

Yeah I prefer primary sources when they’re available, it’s why most of my bug reports use brochures or manuals or stuff of that sort instead of secondary sources, I try to avoid using secondary sources as much as possible as they’re sometimes unreliable

1 Like

limiting it to mach 2.83 would be significantly more unrealistic than limiting it to mach 3 or even mach 3.2

2 Likes

yes

because according to gaijins standards for Mach limits it shouldnt be able to in game