Its loadout is very limited compared to any Gen 4.5
Its equipment (Radar, RWR, EW, etc etc) isnt any better than most Gen 4.5
Its FM is very limited, barely supersonic most of the time. As far as I am aware, it cant even supercruise.
The only thing really going for it is its stealth. Which is fine if you only need to deliver a small number of weapons onto a target. Good for SEAD, but pretty mediocre for anything else.
For 99% of missions though, any Euro-Delta will do just as well if not better, usually a lot cheaper
Not a big deal IRL as real combat is not a 12v12 deathmatch and most jets that can carry a bunch if missiles will irl never take off with that many for an actual mission.
Just because 2 things are considered AESA radars don’t make them just as capable as the F-35s radar.
once again not a big deal irl planes rarely break mc 1 in real combat
At the end of the day the most useful things in modern combat are stealth, Situational awareness and bvr all things the F35 Excels at if the Eurofighter was better the UK would not have bothered getting F-35s in the first place.
Typhoon’s during OP Shader were operating with 2+4 weapons fit plus fuel tanks plus A2G loadouts, usually 4x Paveway IVs and 6x Brimstones.
F-35 cant do that.
And you are just assuming the F-35s radar is more capable? We dont know, but F-35 cant gimball its radar like ECRS Mk2 can.
The F-35 didnt replace the Typhoon though, it replaced the Sea Harrier and even then, its highly controversial whether it was worth it. Especially given the US went back on the deal regarding allowing us to intergrate our own kit onto it.
Stealth is niche though, useful, yes, but not the be all and end all of combat. and in the context of war thunder. if you take away or mitigate that stealth heavily. What does it have left?
Well the point was if the plane is good irl and for sure the Eurofighter is a better multi role platform but keep mind you need to actually get to a target alive to use that payload in the first place you only need 1 bomb to hit to take out a target. and If both aircraft are equipped with the same missiles The plane that can shoot first usually wins.
Also every country on earth wouldn’t be investing in stealth if it was niche.
and like I said, F-35 is good for SEAD sure. But if you dont need the stealth, like saying, providing CAS? then why bother taking an aircraft with a smaller weapons load?
You know that makes it sound like Gaijin has classified documents right? A theoretical weapon we don’t even know isn’t just vaporware?
If the general public doesn’t have it. but gaijin does. Then that seems mighty strange. Even if it’s some unlikely scenario where some really insane collector was able to get some strange non-classified piece. It’s still a completely theoretical weapon since it’s never been test fired.
With that logic, Add the AIM-7F Multishot to the phantom, give the Amraam with the Ramjet.
Give the AIM-120E even though we have NO clue what changes it makes besides being better because we now have proof that it exists.
A good 90% of the bug fixes is fixing spaghetti programmed code that probably goes back to 2009. Mixed with shoehorning in Tanks, modern jets and infantry.
The last 10% is not what I call a “bug fix” But a historical correction. And those that’ve reported have been sitting for years.
But we need to make new slop planes that won’t perform correctly for money! Sure, and you continue the degradation of player confidence for short term gain. Why should I spend money when I know the aircraft is going to be a rush job, and not made with the care to keep it accurate?
You can see this live when the F-4E was added. They panicked because they didn’t know what block model they wanted it to be so they cycled between an agile eagle and hard wing phantom and so now we’re left with a frankenstein monster of a DMASS phantom with a 60’s cockpit missing it’s digitalization upgrades.
Same thing with the F-5E and F-5C. F-5C shouldn’t even have flares, F-5E is a composite of every single F-5 variant because Gaijin knew they could shove the plane into multiple trees if they made it good.
Mig 21bis is overperforming in Acceleration and turn rates which gaijin hilariously says “Da comrade, dis fine.” Even though it’s rating better than the F-4E when that shouldn’t be the case.
Or gaijin making just straight up speculative changes, like with the P-47 flaps they just did recently. Basically taking a huge steaming dump all over the aircraft.
Literally just recently with the AMBER racks. When the Golden Eagle was added it was the worst 14.3 in the entire game, only deciding later to add the AMBER racks. Meanwhile the Russian SU-27SM and Su-30SM got belly racks that they never carried before and have been only carried by the Su-35.
Funny part about the F-15E is that if they gave it AESA, they would have a reason to move it up, helping with decompression, and you would have an identifiably different version compared to the F-15C Golden Eagle where you may not get AMBER racks but you give up extra missiles for going Mach 2.
The simple solution is to not rip vehicles apart kitbashing them for “balance” But then say “But we’re realistic!” If it’s going to be OP and you think it will be OP. Here’s the solution:
not really the point tho is it, in that kind of environment you mite as well use an A10 over a Eurofighter then, my point is simply that in its role as a fighter the F-35 is good aircraft for modern air to air combat. a plane being worse at cas doesn’t somehow make it not a good aircraft.
No not necessarily. Gaijin collects public documents as well and just never publicly shares them with the community.
If a public member has it, doesn’t mean the Warthunder community has it. In fact, I’ve been shown things that as far as I’m aware of, only Gaijin has when it comes to declassified documents. For instance, Gaijin years ago changed VT1 missile from 35G to 50G, when I pressed Smin for the reason of this change, since I could not find anything stating 50G publicly, he showed me this:
Because if no one has known proof of it ever being test fired, Gaijin doesn’t present the evidence or sources of why they added it or make changes, mixed with their prior history, it’s easier via Occam’s Razor to conclude that gaijin is just speculating again.
They have made thousands of changes or additions without presenting evidence or sources. They have internal researchers who pass forward documents and they already commented that the task of presenting all the documents for the public is too much effort (which I believe).
Lack of presented evidence is not a claim of its own.
Gaijin already commented on this, have you not bothered to see why it is the case?
Some of the bug reports provided here have better sources than others, some sources are found in multiple reports. There is not a wealth of information about Chinese military technology, but most of the sources cited are legitimate. Also, without even having to look at sources, a <40 km range in War Thunder and a 70 km range IRL is a massive mistake.
First bug report states that the PL-12 has a range of only 32km and not 70km. Testing in-game shows PL-12 can actually reach a range of 70km.
Second bug report makes two statements. One statement is that the PL-12 is comparable to AIM-120C in performance, in fact, in-game implementation does show that the PL-12 is arguably to many players better than the AIM-120C as the PL-12 has more manueverability while having less range than AIM-120C. But many pro-players regard the PL-12 as better than the AIM-120C anyway. Second statement is that the PL-12 is better in range than AIM-120A and worse in range than AIM-120C, but this is speculative as the Chinese do not have the AIM-120s themselves.
The rest of the bug reports do not make any coherent sense or is asking for the visual model to change.
Stop believing nonsense, PL-12 has a range greater than 40km in-game. All fox-3s do. In fact at 10,000m altitude and Mach 1.2 for both the pilot and target, the PL-12 can hit 70km.
I can tell you haven’t read half of them, literally taking 8 minutes between you reading my response, looking through one or two reports, and typing this long response out. Congratulations.
I would like you to demonstrate PL-12 meeting its real life capabilities in War Thunder, including max speed, energy retention, and range. This has already been done in the bug reports, so the burden of proof is now on you. Edit: It appears that you have not played any China air/ground at all (this is rather unsurprising).
This is what happens when you merely take a glance at the text and not take the time to read through them. You can only blame yourself. I recommend you use a translation software to view the source materials, and learn even the basics about this topic, before trying to speak with authority on it.
Bad flight performance is a myth. It’s comparable to the f16C and the F35C is more like a f18. The only non maneuverable one is the f35B for obvious reasons
I didn’t mentioned, only replied specifically to @Matheus87679 questions. But is obvious that the game’s health is more important than any addition, but it’s to be expected bugs after any update, so this one future update might have some heavy issues with radar signatures and stealth mechanic, which I hope is part of Gaijin’s priority if those ever happen.
You are literally projecting. You even linked reports talking about the 3D model when I asked for what reports show the range is underperforming. You even regurgitated the first report’s claim of the missile having less than 40km range even though this is outright false. I can demonstrate to you that the PL-12 can even have 100km in range in the game which is of course fired from very high altitude and high speed.
Also, the bug reports do not demonstrate anything and the technical moderators agree. This isn’t to say that the PL-12 is correctly modeled, just that there’s nothing demonstrating anything is incorrect.
Yes, Gaijin uses the international Standard Atmosphere. While the manual uses STD-10
But I still don’t trust them :)
“Too much of a bother.” sounds like a cop out. In the old forum you literally had a single sub forum where a dude posted google excel sheets of the performance of each aircraft in the game. It wasn’t perfect but it offered decent insight.
They unironically could use the tagging features and just slap all the documents up on here in the forum in it’s own sub forum. They should already have the files stuffed into a server somewhere unless they literally just have them spread out amongst their staff’s computers.
Here’s some other famous claims:
“We won’t sell top tier premiums” sells top tier premiums
“We aren’t adding missiles” Adds missiles
“We can’t do night vision, it’s too complex.” Adds night vision.
“Volumetric shells are impossible” Adds volumetric shells
“We won’t add super sonic jets.” Adds super sonic jets
Their newest claim is “We won’t add aircraft that are better than their tech tree counterparts.”
It’s hard to take their statements seriously. At least with the Volumetric shells and Night Vision you could rationalize it as “Well, we found out we could.”
But with the Kh-38MT. we’re going by a metric where there’s so many unknowns to the weapon that people don’t even believe that it was real besides a supposed MAYBE marketing claim. Making it where the missile is one of the most broken CAS loadouts in ground RB. And then they proceed to slap it on continuously more capable platforms. So you have a broken strong missile with dubious origin. And if we run with like what you said, we don’t know if it ever test fired.
So I propose the Sparrow X to be quietly added to Phantoms. Because OBVIOUSLY this is the right direction to go. (I hope you understand this is sarcasm)
It’s one thing to drag out paper airplanes and tanks, because at least there’s precedent. But when you start whipping out missiles we didn’t even know exist and starts randomly dominating out of the blue? That’s stupid. Gaijin just pulls this thing out of the ether and a huge forum post is made doubting the thing’s existence because you could barely find any evidence of it.
