Problem is that these models are not 1/1 poly replica, and do not account for RAM. The only way to get the proper number would be to laser scan a stealth fighter and then get accurate RAM value on top of it.
Low poly models give a lower return than high poly ones 99% of the times
Regarding RAM, yeah thats classified as hell
I think it is a very dangerous decision to join the 5th generation of fighters in the future. The argument of rcs will tear the whole community apart.
I know, I know :)
Just saying its hard to get an accurate value without a laser scan, low poly or not. And apparently Gaijin seems to go on the lower end of RCS as of right now if the F-117 is already hard to detect at around 30km by even some of the real good AESAs like the APG-63(v3)
The problem is, people will just doing a couple of googke searches makes wild ass claims.
I want gaijin to do their own simulations and make it public, and then add the ram effects over the simulation. (For sake of balance, every nation should get equal reduction). But gaijin can change the overall ram values to make sure 5th gens dont curbstomp 4.5 gens.
Well，you know.👊🇷🇺🔥
I have no expectations for the balance problem.
Please forgive me if this offends you.
3 Likes
Jokes aside i really dont see gaijin doing that.
Just look at fox 3 missiles seeker (ignore the odd one out mica em)
I hope everyone will be satisfied with the future 5th generation of fighters.
This is my wish.
I just don’t want 5th-gen fighters to get flattened into 4.5-gen equivalents for balance, because if they’re modeled properly they’d likely overwhelm 4th and 4.5-gen jets. On top of that, depending on what actually gets added, top tier would probably just turn into F-35 vs F-35 matches most of the time, with maybe an Su-57, J-20, or F-22 here and there. That also risks becoming pretty boring, since most nations would realistically only have a single 5th-gen option.
Does anyone know how much does AIM-9X block 2/2+ pull irl?
Exact numbers classified; most open sources put AIM-9X Block II/II+ at roughly ~60 g peak.
4 Likes
Hello,
You need to keep in mind that the F-22’s AIM-9X and AIM-120D won’t be added on its own. There will be “equivalents” (depending on who you ask, the next-gen IIR and radar missiles USA has is subpar compared to everyone else; at least in the context of what the F-22 uses) in the game by then, making this “advantage” (if we can call it this) a non-issue.
Pretty sure there are some RCS figures flying around from official (or close enough) sources. It’ll largely be a guess game, but at a minimum we already know the F-22 has the lowest RCS figure out of every stealth aircraft, including being equal to or close enough to the B-2’s RCS.
Every single vehicle in 14.3 is capable of at least contending with the F-22 medium to close range. Almost everyone at that BR has an aircraft with a powerful AESA or PESA radar. They won’t be undetected forever, though early game will be difficult to spot them from far.
Going back to what I said about everyone receiving equivalent missiles, everyone will (or should) have missiles with two-way datalink, which means even if the missile’s radar doesn’t see it, it’ll prioritise the launching aircraft’s information to the F-22’s location and operate like a SARH in that regard.
I don’t think there’s any need to rework anything at this point. The F-117 iirc is the only aircraft with an RCS value, the only thing that would need to be ‘worked on’ is simply finding various sources stating the F-22’s (and others) either best estimated RCS or whatever’s closest to official source.
Stealth fighters won’t be invisible, especially not to anything with infrared search and track (IRST). The current top tier SPAA/SAM we have are perfectly capable of at least seeing it within the Ground RB maps we have today. They can also target anything flying within 30-40 km. It’s not like we have 300 km ground maps.
Whether or not we can actually hit them is another story (at least, for the SPAA/SAM that doesn’t rely on just ARH and has ARH + IR guidance).
All of the SAM you mentioned only really bring additional engagement ranges, nothing to note of improvements to tracking or anything of the sort.
Chaff works correctly… Are you even bothering to notch and include evasive manoeuvres or are you just flying straight or perpendicular-ish and hoping for the best? A missile’s no-escape zone not only depends on its motor and launch aircraft it also depends on you the target. If you’re slow? Of course it’s going to hit you. The R-27ER has a NEZ of about 17 km from rear aspect when fired high and fast (Mach 1.5+). The R-77-1 is slightly more at 19. Everything else (bar the MICA?) is around 13 - 15 km.
Also, lol.
Saying everyone will get “equivalent missiles” doesn’t fix anything.
Missile parity doesn’t cancel first-look or first-shot advantage, especially in WT where early awareness decides fights long before missile stats matter. And only the U.S. has the F-22. Everyone else either gets their own 5th gens or some F-35 variant, which means top tier becomes F-35 vs F-35 most matches, or the F-22 gets toned down so it doesn’t dominate. Neither outcome is good.
On stealth, we don’t have hard public RCS numbers for modern jets.
Everything out there is a narrow estimate from specific angles or frequencies. Treating stealth as “pick a number and move on” just turns it into a simple detection-range modifier. That works for the F-117 because it’s a bomber with a totally different mission profile.
5th-gen fighters aren’t about “hard to see at one angle” — they’re built to degrade tracking, guidance quality, and engagement timelines. The F-117 is not the same category.
Saying 14.3 aircraft can fight an F-22 at medium or close range misses the point.
5th gen exists specifically to avoid fair medium-range fights. AESA, IRST, and datalinks don’t remove that advantage — they just mean the jet won’t stay invisible forever. It doesn’t stop the F-22 from getting the first shot.
Same with SPAA.
Extending SAM range only “works” if stealth is treated as binary. At that point you’re not balancing 5th-gen behavior — you’re balancing a slightly stealthier 4.5 gen that just gets spotted later.
And about the chaff thing, because this keeps getting twisted:
I’m not saying chaff should be an off-switch. In real life it degrades tracking as part of a full EW picture. In WT that EW picture isn’t modeled. WT has a very simplified chaff system, so its effect often feels negligible unless timing and geometry are already perfect. That’s a modeling limitation, not a skill issue.
Chaff is supposed to create competing or false returns that degrade the radar track, not instantly break it. Modern missiles do try to push through chaff, but they aren’t immune to it — especially SARH.
That’s the core problem with adding 5th gens right now.
Either they get flattened to fit WT’s current mechanics, or the game mode has to bend around them. If you flatten them, they stop behaving like 5th gen and become just very advanced 4.5 gens.
2 Likes
Even if Gaijin gave every F-35-operating nation access to their own missiles (GB, IL, and JP), the only ones that could realistically be considered better than AIM-9X or AIM-120D are Japan’s AAM-5 and, if Gaijin adds planned integrations, the AAM-4B. And even those aren’t universally better — they just trade strengths.
On top of that, only around 8 out of the 10 WT nations even have access to 5th-gen aircraft, and only three countries actually operate their own true 5th gens: the US (F-22 and F-35), Russia (Su-57), and China (J-20). Everyone else either ends up with F-35A/B variants using AIM-9X and AIM-120D, or don’t have 5th gens at all.
1 Like
Which ones do not? The only questionable one is Germany since their F35s are not delivered yet but they are supposed to start next year so depending on when the update drops that might not be a problem. Sweden? They can just get it via Denmark or Norway if the finnish ones dont arrive in time and France has the Dutch and Belgian ones
You need to notch the missile, not the radar
AIM-9M, hello?
Until recently, the F-22’s primary IR missile was the AIM-9M
https://www.edwards.af.mil/News/Photos/igphoto/2001059788/
9X Block II is already in game on ground vehicles, AIM-120D will most likely be as easy to notch as any other ARH missile
Lie (or playing arcade)
Surprise surprise, one of the first stealth jets isn’t actually very stealthy
what is the F-22 gonna do in grb? maddog ARHs at spaa?
The same dcs slop which cant model missile proxy…
What would be interesting is the upcoming official f35 moduke, not some mod slop
I was just wondering how it looks in another game…
For these machines, we will only be guessing what their data is for a long time, this will be secret for a long time…
And the stealth system?
AB/RB markers, clearly displayed up to 10 km, then I just need to be closer than 10 km to any enemy vehicle in the game and I shine like a Christmas tree again…
Maybe the Simulator would need to be improved, but just go to the AirSim forum and I will quickly learn that this mode is stagnating…
Sir, this is War Thunder, not DCS. While we may not be able to see (or track) stealth fighters from distance, we’ll sure as shit be able to see the missiles they fire and can take appropriate action whenever we want. “First-shot advantage” lol.
Gaijin has never needed exact declassified data to implement a vehicle, weapon or mechanic. Most flight models and armor values in the game are ‘calculated guesses’ based on public performance data. Stealth would likely be implemented as a simple detection range multiplier (e.g., you appear on radar at 15km instead of 50km), which is how they already (somewhat, with some nuances) handle RCS in the game’s code.
Yes… they exist for that reason… in real life. War Thunder is quite different. Everyone is stuffed into 131 x 131 km maps, everyone with very powerful radars or IRST. Someone will see you eventually. Like I said earlier, your missiles aren’t invisible – neither to radar nor RWR. There’s no such thing as “first shot advantage” in war thunder (or at least in top tier) if we can, again, see your missiles right when you fire them.
(Got tired of segmenting replies, so here’s a full block of text)
By range I didn’t mean radar range lmao. I meant kinetic range of its missiles. That’s literally the only change from what’s on offer today. Every single multi-vehicle SAM in the game has similar radar characteristics as most of the big hitters in air defence with only marginal (and IMO? entirely based around “maybe it can see it” dressed as buzz word marketing) differences.
The chaff thing is not getting ‘twisted’. You’re simply using it (or at least, your ChatGPT thinks you are) as if it’s the same as flares when it’s really not.
Chaff already does this all. The whole point of it is to give radar missiles or enemy radar (though ESAs are less susceptible to this) something to bite on in the right circumstances to evade the missile.
Like I said before, learning defensive manoeuvres (properly!) will help you a lot more than simply coming here and just complaining that chaff doesn’t work. Learn how the missiles work, learn what (or rather, how) chaff is most effective and I promise you won’t even bother making up threads like this again.
In summary… 5th gen will clearly outperform all 4th gens, 4.5 gen included. There will be differences and these will be modelled… Worrying about something far into the future today is a waste of time and you’re just pre-disappointing yourself this way by only your assumptions.
If you’re worried about the game ‘bending’ around 5th gens, look at how the game ‘bent’ for the F-14 or the Su-27. We got a lower multipathing limit, various new mechanics added and I’m not even going to be surprised if implementing larger and larger air maps is on the agenda. The idea that Gaijin can’t just tweak a detection slider for stealth is ignoring 12 years of them doing exactly that for every other ‘unbalanced’ technology.
1 Like
Yeah that part’s on me — I don’t keep track of all the sub-trees for France or Sweden. I was mainly thinking about the main tree nations themselves, not taking their sub-trees into account.