aim-9x on f-35 are kept on the outside wingtips while other air to air missiles are kept inside the bay
Their not when in stealth but they can do that when they need to
Their is no stealth coating
Weapons not in the bay hinder stealth
the stealth coating means that when the 9x are carried on the wingtips, the aircraft will be more survivable. ofcourse these changes mean that f-35 will be able to carry more medium/long range missiles inside the bay instead of having to carry 2 short range missiles in the bay due to stealth concerns. Being able to carry more missiles without compromising stealthiness makes the f-35 also more survivable.
That is 2 aspects of survivability that the stealth coating gives - ability to carry more missiles safely, and the 9x’s would ofcourse have a smaller impact on the rcs of f-35 with the coating.
it does compromise the stealth their is no coating
It doesn’t compromise with the argued coating and ofcourse you aren’t able to point out any flaws in my logic.
Your logic is literally circling in itself
=> “aim-9x does not have coating”
=> “therefore it does not increase survivability”
=> “therefore it does not have coating”
It’s just a claim that goes back to the initial claim, no real logic.
It’s just “because i said so”-.
Please provide a theory for what else it could be, because those words definetly mean something. What else do they mean if not what i suggested?
Those words are not meaningless. they mean something, and by logic, stealth coating/other stealth design features are the only thing that can indeed increase survivability of the f-35.
You’re not going to have a ballistic parachute coming out from the aim-9x that recovers the aircraft incase of lost control
survivability doesn’t mean it has stealth coating
Thats exactly what it could mean, its reasonable, its plausible its implementable and completely logical.
Tell me what else it could mean that is more likely or tell me why its not reasonable/implementable?
to me, that is the only thing that it can mean in the context of being carried by f-35. Ofcourse in the context of a non stealth aircraft it would make less sense, however the context is f-35.
no it doesn’t mate you are just full of bad takes
okay so you’re not providing any reasoning as to why it could not be a stealth coating and you’re not providing any reasoning on what else it could be, you’re just saying that my opinion is bad without any reason.
No point in conversing with you because you don’t provide anything conversable other than critiquing me as “full of bad takes”
How can a reasoned logical take that is implementable be bad?
btw (i shouldn’t have trusted you because you misinformed me)
you haven’t show anything to say it has a stealth coating
do worry i found the info mydelf and it wasn’t just coating but a change to the missile
Still doesn’t make it better then ASRAAM and IRIS-T just means they can’t be used on wingtips
What change? Provide a source.
i provided a logic as to why when they say survivability it means stealth. You so far have provided misinformation + ignorance towards this.
i literally showed you how it can’t be used inside the aircraft.
Right now you’re continuing to misinform me so im gonna require you to send sources for your claims.
Another point that supports my logic is that a stealth missile that would only be used for stealth aircraft doesn’t make sense to be used on any other aircraft and that is exactly how they’re treating the missile. They’re treating the missile as if it did indeed have stealth charasteristics.
I have sent sources, additionally “i found a source” is not providing a source. Send the source.
this is irrelevant. it doesn’t matter.
Read this reply fully.
As per my source, “incorporates specialized external materials to enhance F-35 platform survivability,”
This can’t be anything else other than stealth materials, simple as that. https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/18pres/Highlights_book.pdf
1 Like
i found a source i got nothing from you
and F35 can fire ASRAAM
Read my above reply where i address your above answer and provide the source you mentioned.
1 Like
AIM 9x cant
ASRAAM can
this is literally completely irrelevant to our current argument. We aren’t arguing wether the asraam can be fired from inside of f-35 or not.
1 Like
ok i don’t care ASRAAM is better the 9x
IRIS-T is better then 9X
that was the point
im blocking you by the way
“i don’t care about anything asraam better than 9x regardless of anything im blocking you”
are you even 16…
2 Likes
The AIM-7 is missing that often. I’ve given up using them at this time because they are broken. The R-27 and R-24 are far more consistently accurate.
I hate playing this way but I’m exclusively running AIM-9Ms
I mean this has gotten really off topic but the AIM-9X Block II+ does have stealth coatings to reduce the radar crossection.
The AIM-9X Block II-plus features specialized external > materials to enhance aircraft survivability for the F-35. > Until another version of the AIM-9X is developed that >will fit inside the F-35’s enclosed weapons bay, the AIM->9X Block II-plus has stealthy coatings and structures to >help reduce the missile’s radar cross-section when the >F-35 carries these missiles externally.
This was just the first Google search but there are quite a few other articles detailing it.
İt doesnt.
Your personal experience doesnt show the truth, cause in my experience Super530D’s are the worst and İ’l take Sparrow anyday over that missile.
1 Like