.
PS: the 120D won’t be available before several years.

No, it won’t. Mostly because it wasn’t even scheduled to be until the (then notional) block 4/5.

The Aim-120D was excluded from the weapons integrated in SDD due to the requirement that all SDD weapons be mature. Integration is still ongoing, OT wasn’t complete until 2014 and the SIP 1 IOC was this fall. Integration on the F-22 is due to be complete in 2018.

Should the USAF feel the need, integration of the Aim-120D could be pushed forward. But, considering how tight the SDD schedule and budget is, there is zero chance that the -120D would have been added before 2018. In any case, FY 2017 defense budget RDT&E does not include a timeline of integration of the Aim-120D on the F-35 (FY 2017-21).

Integrating the Aim-120D shouldn’t have any issues from- carry, separation, vibration testing. The -120D did require some hardware/software modifications to the launch aircraft for integration on the F/A-18 E/F, F-16, and F-15. I don’t know if the F-22 requires the same modifications, or the F-35.

More on PCA:

he USAF Scientific Advisory Board announced its fiscal year 2017 studies last week, which will focus on PCA, nuclear recapitalisation programmes and an assessment of the service’s test and evaluation facilities. In January, the service will begin an 18-month analysis of alternatives that will help determine the PCA platform by examining the ability to reach supersonic speeds in different configurations while maintaining a stealth signature and manoeuvrability. The advisory board’s work would complement that effort, examining documents from the USAF’s air superiority enterprise capability collaboration team (ECCT) and providing a technology roadmap to meet the PCA’s 2030 timeline

That means thinking outside the box about what the definition of a fighter might be. In the classic sense, a fighter is a short-range jet capable of flying at 9Gs, with a single seat, he says. The ECCT is emphasising range and payload, but the platform may not require 9Gs. Unlike most fighters, the PCA will not be short-range, but what space the aircraft will fit into will depend on cost and how the platform fits into the USAF’s tanker fleet. The air force also wants a stealthy signature for survivability, but also a speedy, manoeuvrable platform, he says.

http://www.scientificadvisoryboard.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1088921/air-force-scientific-advisory-board-takes-second-look-at-penetrating-counterair

“the F15 has scored over 100 dogfight victories with zero loss”…

Rrriiiggghttt

Nic

Between USAF, RSAF, IAF, the F-15 has over 100 victories (not dogfights). There is zero credible evidence of any losses. What exactly are you sceptical of?

Good Article on USAF aggressors-
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Documents/2017/April%202017/0417_Tirpak_Aggressors.pdf

Another AFM article on PCA (Air Force Magazine April-May proving to have some very interesting reading)-
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2017/April%202017/Saving-Air-Superiority.aspx