The article says ‘such as the AMRAAM’. A larger missile would be a lot bigger so it would be even less likely it would carry 100 missiles, maybe 20 or something.

Converting B52 to Arsenal plane would increase air to air missiles available to a networked F35 from two to about 100 missiles

That’s the worst idea since communism. Not only are they going to lose the B-52, but they’re going to lose 100 good missiles with it.

Perhaps an homeland security fighter with AiM9X II (ER) for the ones that are truely supersonic.

Thanks for the link b/w.

With a podded IRST maybe.

The chart literally only mentioned skin temperature

But the increase in skin temperature is not that much. It is increasing slowly in fact, the increase seems to be independent of the transsonic regime per se.

So what causes that sudden increase in detection range around mach 1? Is it the compression of air molecules in the shock wave that produces heat or what?

F-35 wont face stealth aircraft all the time either

Non stealth aircraft have IRSTs so they can detect the stealth planes if the detection range increases that much.

An aircraft at mach 1.0 is detected twice as far away as an aircraft at mach 0.8, Mach 1.4 is 2.7 times, Mach 2.0 is 3.4.

If you are going to go supersonic, you shouldn’t be low supersonic. 1.8 is actually pretty decent, still not worth the increased detection range, design compromises and fuel burn though, imo; the F-22 is short legged enough as it is.

What causes this peak in transsonic? Wouldn’t that involve the use of AB in transsonic by chance?

The F-35 would also probably go supersonic to launch. The ability to be capable of mach 1.6 and the focus on transsonic acceleration is not there for nothing.

And the F-117 has existed since 1983, so the argument does hold valid.

Well it isn’t an interceptor, that much is true, but trends in air combat studies have shown that higher speed increases detectability. There’s little point in taking measures to improve IR stealth and then flying at such a speed that it makes them almost irrelevant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmGRn7GirS0

I don’t see the point you’re trying to make with the F-117, the F-117 is not a fighter.

Why did the USAF want more than the 187 F-22 if that kind of performances is not needed? Clearly the ability to supercruise is an advantage for a pure fighter.

Also how does the friction increase the IR signature? I would argue that if the plane flies faster, it can fight higher where there is less friction, so that would partially reduce the problem. Also the enemy sensor will have a detection range proportional to the square root of IR signature.

I am not sure the level of speed of the F-22 would be needed ( around mach 1.75 supercruise), but enough supercruise capability to stay above the transsonic regime would be an advantage. Drag decreases at mach 1.1-1.25 or so, so if say the F-35 had 10% less drag, that could be enough to go beyond that transsonic range and get substantial supercruise capability.

The drawings look static to me.

Even when the drawing looks kinda similar to the YF-23? i.e. the LM drawing.

Mmh not too convinced… Check the drawings for the 6th gens, they look damn fast. I think you simplify things too much. In some cases fighters have to go supersonic. That’s when the SHTFs for your IR sig and fuel reserves. But it some cases using slow tactics could work ( that’s what I said btw in the rafale thread ) .