In the past, big games companies were bullied by weapon manufacturers (which includes large scale weapons like jets and helicopters) into paying licensing fees, because they were reproducing the distinctive look of these products, which are covered by copyright.
Recently, EA basically told them all to shove off, and declared that depicting real products being used in a realistic way, when making a game with a realistic setting, is "fair use", and they stopped paying the licensing fees.
In books this is how it usually works -- authors mention real products so that as a reader you can relate to the world of the book, you can imagine the product that the character is using, because you've seen it yourself. That's standard "fair use", and now EA has declared that they're following the same doctrine.
I'm not aware if anyone as sued EA yet in order to test whether a court agrees with them or not...
Copyright infringement like this isn't against the law such that the police will knock on your door. It's against the law in that someone can take you to court because you've somehow harmed them, and the court might agree and take measures to right things. Until you're in the courtroom hearing the decision, there's often a lot of grey between legal/illegal.
Personally, I would go ahead and do what you're doing... but the manufacturer of an F22 could still possibly decide that you're ripping off their look and sue you.
In any case, no matter what you do, a completely different manufacturer might sue you because your plane kinda-sorta looks like one of theirs (and if it went to court, they would probably lose, but it's still possible). All you can do really is adjust your level of risk, but never eliminate it (people sue for all sorts of crazy stuff!).