Well look at stuff like su-27 that are modeled similarly. Or mig-23. Or f-15. It’s fair for mig-25 to have this same treatment
then f16 should have had its 9 g limiter but it does not.
It did then it got removed.you can bug report it tho if u wanna idrc, its prolly not gonna be added back which is why im not gonna report it
But it can, and I highly doubt Gaijin is going to strip the aircraft of it. It’s goofy to even attempt it.
1 Like
Then why are other planes subjected to this treatment then? I’ve done the exact same thing for sukhois but you don’t see as many people talking about that for something reason
thats a completely different thing
gaijin has established standards for how IAS and Mach limits are implemented
that includes using the values from the manual if available
so why should they not follow their own standards here?
1 Like
idk what to tell you
because thats how gaijin works, theyve already done the same to lots of other planes
this exception for the mig25 would make it far more realistic , while making it for the f16 made it significantly more unrealistic.
There’s nothing stopping the pilot from flying past Mach 3 but some words on a piece of paper telling them not to, if I decide to hold W and rip into pieces at some point that’s my own choice.
ok its upto gaijin lets see what they do but will u think they are biased if they dont go through with the nerf
Definitely, it would be unfair to other planes
how so ? so we get to be picky with where they make exceptions ?
Because the exact same thing is happening to other planes. Just rn i have the su27 or mig-23 example.
I’m sure @Alpharius11348 has the f15 example. So no exceptions at all is better imo.
Also Wym by picky? I’m saying there should be no exceptions which is why mig-25 should be limited to Mach 2.83 in game
do they have as much secondary sources as we do for the mig25 sources claiming it can fly at mach 3
because them not following their own standards for the implementation of rip speeds would absolutely be a form of bias
Primary sources over secondary sources mate, also I’m speaking form PRIMARY sources for mig23 BTW. Just look at my post in the mig23 thread
secondary sources dont matter,
they take the VNE from the manual and apply 1.05 multiplier for IAS, and I think there isnt a multiplier for mach
Ya.
That’s why in game mig-31 is going to be much better than the mig-25 on the deck just like irl, but will be essentially the same at high altitude due to both of them being limited to Mach 2.83
Tad bit off topic, but if anyone on DEV can you check if MiG-25 got generic jet pilot model or an actual own appropriate pilot model?
Irl it’s not the plane that’s ripping it’s the engine life reducing. But in game Mach limits are modeled as wing rip. Why should the mig-25 be the exception? The exact same thing happens to su27 at their Mach limit, it’s the engine not the wings. But in game the wings are the things that snap off. So in game mig-25 should not get special treatment, and its wing should snap off at its mach limit like other planes.
