Would be an okay vehicle ~10.0.
The one off test beds are probably the best candidates. PDSG/PDSL, BVP-50-60 chaff/flare dispensers and spo-15L on the PDSG would be the one I would want to see most.
6 Likes
I chose that specific photograph to ensure the community understands that the MiG-25PD could carry up to four R-60 missiles, not just the heavier, low-maneuverability long-range missiles. It also displays a MiG-25PD carrying both R-60s and Flare/Chaff dispensers. Many in the community might not have been aware of this fact until now, which has often led to major scrutiny and skepticism about the MiG-25’s viability in-game. Clear visual evidence helps clarify this point and counters misconceptions about its loadout options from the get go.
P.S There are images in the suggestion with the USSR markings. I have added your provided photograph to the conclusion.
9 Likes
Didn’t know these had countermeasures. I suppose that takes them from a no to a maybe. Somewhere around 11.0 considering the insane speed and all-aspect missiles on an otherwise quite poor aircraft.
I like the idea of being able to use the R-40s against ground targets. I wonder if the guidance seekers could work in that role too… +1 for sure!
It couldn’t be guided in flight, only launched. I believe this feature was intended as a backup option for engaging bombers in the event of heavy radar jamming, allowing the pilot to attempt a hit even without active radar guidance. As mentioned earlier, it wasn’t typical to carry four missiles during high-speed intercepts.
Although, in the manual, the switch literally states “air to ground”, so this is very confusing and I have no explanation for that.
If you watch the second video, you’ll find more details about this feature.
1 Like
This one looks hard to balance quite frankly.
For RWR were talking SPO-15, right?
1 Like
for anything outside of PDSG/PDSL its SPO-10.
1 Like
Some PDs might have been fitted with SPO-15
1 Like
Oof.
Well i cant imagine BR this would be balanced at.
Flight performance wise, id imagine it would be uncatchable for lot of older planes.
Armenr wise, i cant see its radar missiles being good, even against tomcats at high alts.
+1
I can see it working at maybe 11.3/11.7 or 12.0 area provided it gets SPO-15 and CMs.
This 405 error is starting to get annoying…
Those would be done by or for export customers and thus not applicable to a VVS or PVO aircraft. Hence why the one off experimental aircraft of PDSG/PDSL are my vote for implementation.
1 Like
Remember, realistic stats have nothing to do with in-game stats. Particularly when it comes to missiles.
I say the R-40R/T should have 15Gs, while the R-40RD/TD should have 20Gs. With Phoenix being just a little better in all variants.
1 Like
I’d argue this little detail should be quietly overlooked, as it might get in the way of countermeasures as well.
What BR would this be?? it has a crazy powerful enegine and can push beyound Mach 3 on high attitude if i remember correctly.
You really think 9.0s should see a foxbat with R60s and countermeasures?
Maybe 11.0, alongside the 104G? seems like a fair enough comparison to me
1 Like
The mirage f1C (not the CT) has an even worse rwr and its at 12.0, and i heard the flight performance of the mig25 is actually pretty bad under like 8k meters (very draggy and sluggish) so i could see it being around 11.0
Don’t see why you can compare this to a Mirage F1C… The only reason the F1 is 12.0 is the Magic 2+ radar missile set. MiG-25 is really weak in the flight performance department due to its weight (built with mostly nickel/steel if I recall correctly)
Make it 11.3 with R-40 Missles. Both R-40R and R-40T