The leaks implied that 4/4.5 Gen planes will get next gen missiles to compensate, but that still leaves the earlier 4/4.5 gen planes completely useless.
Theres a very high chance a base EFT will be facing an F-35, and that’s very bad.
Yeah. And even then, if its ARH missiles like Meteor, the stealth means that any possible advantage might be gone.
Im just hoping that for the F-22, Su-57 and J-20, the stealth does bugger all, and for the F-35 it doesnt do much
It depends on what other fixes/features they add to Gen 4.5 planes.
Fuck it we ball
3 Likes
Consider How much they’ve done for the F-14A “Early” over the years.
Best you can hope for is that they don’t break too much and forget about said airframes.
Actually the F-22A early versions would have aim-9m and aim-120b, the 9x and 120c/d were only integrated afterwards
the last time they added a star jet in a truly early service airframe configuration was the F-14A
True, and that’s a bummer
I mean, what is left for F-14A in terms of open reports?
ALR-23 IRSTS / AXX-1 TCS & sensor Missile guidance support
AIM-9L
AIM-95
VTAS III HMS
AoA functionality(alternate wing sweep program(s))
Reverting erroneous changes to flaps and slats deployment regimes
AIM-54 “Bank to Turn”
AIM-54 Loft
Fuel COG
add LANTIRN TGP & LGBs
etc.
2 Likes
Do you have link to the reports for these:
AIM-54 loft
AIM-54 bank to turn
AIM-9L
AIM-95
VTAS III HMS
Quite interesting. There is a chance that Captor-E would be able to detect it around that range but no confirmed report about it actually doing it
5th gen are not gonna be added this year
Most were submitted on the old forums. Not the bug reporting portal.
J-20 came from the heavy configurations of the J-9 project. Magazine page from 2011 Issue 8 of Aviation World, a magazine by AVIC Publishing and Media Co., Ltd. Article written by Bai Wei (based on interview with Shenyang engineers), who also made the 3D render.
Not this again… MiG-1.44 only has 2 pylons, only a testbed for the MiG-1.42 that never came, yet people keep thinking that it’s gen 5 material?
The MiG-1.44 suggestion was deleted cuz they couldn’t even find any evidence of those 2 pylons being wired to fire nor it even has a radar.
6 Likes
Hey buddy, instead of worrying about 4.5th-generation fighters facing 5th-gen ones, maybe we should be more concerned about dogfights between 5th-gen fighters themselves.
Judging by Gaijin’s recent track record, I have a strong suspicion that when 5th-gen jets are finally introduced in-game, the Su-57 will receive the best possible, fully-realized version shown on PowerPoint slides. Meanwhile, the J-20 will likely be limited to early prototypes with Russian engines; the F-22 might not even come equipped with a helmet-mounted sight system; and as for the F-35—I’m pretty sure Gaijin will hand it out to every NATO tech tree.
Maybe in the future, Russia will rule the skies in WT. (Some might argue it already does.)
3 Likes
Very cool chart, thanks for sharing it. About the F-35 0.0015 figure, wouldn’t that mean the F-35 idealized front aspect is larger than the F-117 idealized front aspect?(Around 0.001 according to Skunk Work engineer).
And if I’m reading that chart correctly, that means the F-22 in ideal frontal aspect, so around 0.0001 estimated RCS, would be pretty much invisible to even the Irbis at around 25km?
The rcs isnt a fixed value.
Those numbers are likely from very specific and irrelevant angles and frequencies, an average X band return would be higher
I know, hence why I said idealized front aspect.
Front aspect =! Specific angle
Even extremely low poly models fails to reach -40dbsm