Because the AMRAAM and Meteor have softened radar cross sections and are basically stealth themselves. The pylons are going to be VLO and about the only thing on them they won’t be able to totally hide is the connector to the missile.

With EOTS/EODAS and LOAL, you don’t need to have the -9X/ASRAAM externally carried, however with stealthy pylons, they’d be less of an RCS penalty.

No.

Edit: As i commented previously in a response to yourself which it appears you have decided not to acknowledge; i believe it is the things that do not get said that are more interesting than those selected elements that do.

Thus there is no lying taking place, merely economies with the truth.
There are those who are happy to accept things said at face value…whilst they play with their friends the fairies…and then there are others who apply a little critical thought to things.

Please remember that the term critical does not have to mean negative.

I understand the nuances, but….. I find it hard to accept that his “real” view of the plane would be significantly different than the very positive statements he’s made, if he’s been telling the truth.

The S-3s have a lot of airframe life left. IMHO it was a big mistake retiring them, and getting rid of the organic capabilities they provided a carrier battle group.

The F-22 and F-35 don’t know what ranges they are in danger in – LOL – they don’t have the data for the enemy radar’s uploaded to them from god himself, do they?

Secondly, I highly doubt that close range SAMs would emit until EWLRS systems advise them to.

Thirdly, good luck hitting anything moving, like a TOR or Pantsyr with an SDB – LOL.

They know their RCS from different angles, and if anything is emitting, then their ESM systems(or those systems on other platforms) can work out the threat rings around emitters based upon analysis of the signal(and its POO), and the electronic order of battle. If nothing is emitting, then it doesn’t matter how high or low their RCS is, unless somehow someone lucked out in detection with passive systems that just happened to be in the area.
As for the TOR/Pantsyr- are you saying that they’re constantly moving? Presumably they’re stationary at somepoint. In any case, SDBs can hit moving targets, and have demonstrated that capability.

Passive, so called “5th gen” stealth is nice option, as long as the price payed for it isn’t too high, unlike F117, F35 and to a lesser degree F22, have payed.

That’s all a matter of opinion as to whether the price to pay was too high. It’s by no means a settled issue.

However, programs for modernization jamming equipment are permanent and even F22 that was originally envisaged without any jamming equipment whatsoever is scheduled to receive it and US made a tender for ALQ-99 replacement.
This unambiguously shows current level of threat and VLO platforms’ ability to remain unseen against modern SA/AA systems.

A- there are still a lot of legacy/non-stealthy platforms that will be in service for some time to come, which absolutely require EW support.
B- EW combined with VLO platforms is a synergistic force multiplier. Not only does it raise the noise floor, enhancing their element of surprise. It also makes it more difficult for the defender to understand what is going on, in order to make timely decisions.
C- It increases the effectiveness of the stand off weapons by making their presence more difficult to determine, and more importantly to target with point defenses.

Ah, I see…
So why don’t you just scan them, then?
That should be simple enough…

Several problems there-

A- it’s been quite some time since I had the material to look at
B- I’m pretty sure scanning it would violate copyrights

With all the interest for VLO a/c not just in the US but also in Israel, the UK, Japan, Russia, India, South Korea, Australia, etc. etc. it seems to me that the “ECM” we’ve got today cannot really be called “active stealth”.

And why would France launch a program to develop “active stealth” if they already got it?

Because he’s under the impression that deceptive jamming/DRFM is the panacea.

Wrong.. Note the It can also mean…

It can only if you ignore a lot of other information.