Mind you, eventually this will be correct... just it's been declared prematurely for 60 years and so this still may not be the correct moment to say so.
> The F-35 pilot just needs to point their head towards the enemy to lock on.
Missile performance won't be equal in this case; if the enemy can launch missiles with higher pkill, well..
The enemy COULD pop out from just behind the mountain/hill in front of you, and force you to have to resort to short ranged (FOX 2) missiles or even guns.
Still, though, this is not enough to prioritize extreme agility over stealth today. The F35 is more than agile enough for the few times this occurs, especially if there is a wingman around.
I remember reading an interview with a pilot who flew in the Iraq war after major hostilities were over. He described a situation, iirc, where he got a radar contact. He notified his superiors (can't remember the exact term he used) and they said they no friendlies should be flying there. It was ok for him to shoot it down. Something felt off and decided to try to id the plane first. It turned out to be a civilian plane carrying contractors or dignitaries (can't remember which).
I can try to find the article again if necessary. The main point is that there are some cases where you do need to "ask questions first" (ie. id the plane) and then shoot.
My understanding is that the "dogfighting is over" rhetoric stopped being proven wrong during the Iran-Iraq war, when Iraqi fighters started mysteriously exploding in the sky during operations.
If you can safely entirely rely upon on IFF and deconfliction, all is great.
If you ever have to close to identify targets, then you might end up with some significant maneuvering, etc. Of course, the F-35 isn't terrible at this, and stealth and efficiency lets it better choose the terms of this engagement.
The F-35 comes with a bunch of other technology that make it truly formidable. The cost has also come down substantially, so it’s probably the cheapest option out there as well.