Or it's provision to use gradually decreasing Luneberg lenses in those cases or in a progressive escalade???

Or it's provision to use gradually decreasing Luneberg lenses in those cases or in a progressive escalade???

 

I rather doubt that the F-22 or F-35 would be sent into harm's way of, say, S-400 or S-500, with Luneberg lenses in place.

No, my idea is to show a progressive smaller signature (with a sucession of progresively smaller Luneberg lenses) in a crisis to cheat the adversary, to not unveil the actual dimension of real stealth, only at last in case of total war.

Reported out-of-contract special test F-35 for Israeli Air Force:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjY4t5UBSQY

F-35s at Luke Air Force Base grounded after pilots suffered oxygen deprivation (DefenseNews)

F-35 cleared for (relatively) more aerobatics, with video:

https://theaviationist.com/2017/06/12/f-35a-filmed-rehearsing-its-new-flight-demonstration-routine-in-preparation-for-paris-air-show-2017/

JPO, Lockheed Play Fast and Loose with F-35 Costs (Defense Aerospace)

The F-35: Even the engine is compromised (American Thinker)

 

 

 

... the TSFC of the F-135 engine, which powers the F-35, is 0.889 lb/Hr/lb.

Not sure if this vídeo was previously loaded, but I don't want to lose the link:. https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=OFzCNdTeKDI

At last, the real demo flight in Paris:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/143822619011193/?multi_permalinks=1443575185702590&notif_t=group_activity&notif_id=1497909720807460#

F-35B first visit to Okinawa, from the near Iwakumi-based VMFA-121 "Green Knights":

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/06/26/f-35b-stealth-fighters-make-first-appearance-on-okinawa.html

For comparison, Su-35 in Paris Air Show 2017, but remember F-35 was not designed for air superiority:

http://www.flixxy.com/sukhoi-su-35-rocks-paris-air-show.htm

F-35 to receive inmediantly capability to attack moving targets, with the fast integration of GBU-49:

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/raytheon-pushing-gbu-49-as-quick-fix-to-give-f-35-ability-to-hit-moving-targets

Great explanations in this comment on the same article by Spudman WP, quote: "The original requirement for Block 3F was to hit a 40mph target. This applies to a vast majority of the military targets on the battlefield. The F-35 has already demonstrated the ability to hit these “normal” moving targets.

Plans were already in place for an upgraded EOTS at Block 4.2 that would handle higher speed targets using normal munitions (ie not Hellfire or specialized LGBs like the Raytheon bomb in the article). However, with the increasing use of higher-speed targets (read: "Technicals") on the battlefield, there was a growing need to hit targets up to 70mph sooner rather than later. Raytheon and others have proposed a low-cost adaptation of an existing bomb that would be close to 3F compliant and allow a 3F F-35 to hit “high-speed” targets.

The reason that Raytheon even has this bomb in the pipeline is that most LTPs cannot hit high-speed targets using normal Paveways & LJDAMs on their own, just like the F-35."

Incidentally, for Wikipedia:

• GBU-49 Enhanced Paveway II – BLU-133 500 lb (227 kg) bomb. Raytheon's Enhanced dual-mode GPS and Laser guided version of the laser-only GBU-12.

In my personal notes GBU-49/B is EGBU-12 Enhanced Paveway II.

For flight comparison, German Eurofighter 29 June 2017: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QNNDK0s-ljo&feature=youtu.be