There remains the possibility they won’t stay the same.
Gaijin has to give F-15EX the capability to carry up to 22, because that’s what precedent they (very recently) set.
If an aircraft is technically capable of carrying x munition in y quantity, then it will be added. It’s the same rationale of F-15C GE getting 4 additional AMRAAM or multiple aircraft getting weapons their country never used (like British/Italian Typhoons having SPICE 250 despite never having it and only having it because German Typhoons do). This is the same for (eventually) the F-15EX.
10 less pounds up front (smaller warhead), 10 more pounds in the back (heavier booster), sidewinder all boost rocket fuel (ingame should have ~20% more thrust) double the fragments in the C5 than the B.
I put some of this info in the aim-120 thread.
It’s a completely new actuator/control package for the fins rear so it may be able to pull harder or at least the same G’s as the old ones. Can’t prove it though.
😂 Sure, but then you throw away any semblance of balance in the game which, to be fair, I highly doubt Meteors will ever be added to F-35 in any US/UK tech tree as long as Lockheed keeps playing hardball with MBDA. And by then, the AIM-260 should also be in service by then and Meteor will just be redundant/worse (in war thunder) anyway for any tech tree that isnt GB
Honestly… Gaijin attempting to balance top tier at the expense of either historical accuracy of loadouts/flight performance will upset people eventually, so I don’t hold much hope for that. IMO, they should take the DCS approach and just release stuff for aircraft as-is to real-life and let individual player skill (and luck!) rule. But of course, with actual BR decompression according to capability (± a generation apart) instead of years active in mind.
I really do hope so. Then i would be able to carry that which should be better in game (as having ram jet won’t really matter as maps are small) in my hopefully not nerfed F-22 :)
Fixed missiles, there is no need to have the absolute best 4.5 gen, if we had usable missiles it would be more than enough to have s competent one until 5th gens come. F15ex would be a perfectly good future top tier if the amraam’s were worth a damn.
Notching doesn’t work on the aircraft irl, but missiles are a different story. Once your missile goes active and stops receiving updates from aircraft, notching will always work on it (unless it’s a missile with two-way datalink like AIM-120D, AIM-174B, Meteor, R-37, PL-15, etc., then you pray).
Not that much, really. The onboard seeker cannot replicate the processing power and frequency agility of a jet’s main radar and there’s only so much tinkering you can do to tech to make it less susceptible (but not to the degree you’re suggesting) to overcome a physical impossibility. The only way you negate this is by using AWACS + datalink where it becomes entirely irrelevant.
Also, you can’t accurately say “it’s not something that is done” without concrete proof that it’s never been done (unless of course, you want to fill us in on any classified after mission reports of air-to-air engagements?). What is proven is that Air Forces around the world still include it in pilot training because it’s still viable and one of many tactics to avoid air-to-air missiles.
5th gen won’t work here anyways because maps are WAY too small for 5th aircraft. Stealth coatings are only good against radars looking at you above 50km. Ingame with the average engagement distance being 20km at top tier, you’d get a nice lock on an F-35/F-22/Su-57/J-35 without any issues.
The F-35 would be the worst of the bunch because its not even built to dogfight because the F-35 is built to engage targets from between 50 and 100km away, so you take a fat plane not built to dogfight and is slower than all its counterparts against dogfighting kings like the Typhoon/Rafale/Su-33 MKM and you’ll have a pretty nice pinata.