All jets are designed with stealthy constraints.

But the kind of all aspect high quality stealth of the F-35 only matters when you're surrounded by advanced radar capabilities.

That's high power radar and high coverage to capture scatter at different angles..along with the bandwidth (processing) needed to detect coincident events.

Most of the time you want to destroy those assets and you have cheaper jets like the F-16/18 respond to every ping with an anti radiation missile.

F-35 should be able to do SEAD quite well actually, because it can safely get in closer without being detected. This is always an advantage.

>> when you're surrounded by advanced radar capabilities

Like maybe when you are defending a border against waves of incoming fighters?

>> cheaper jets like the F-16/18 respond to every ping with an anti radiation missile.

If those pings are in range of air-launched anti-radiation missiles, then those launch platforms are well within the range of the much larger ground-launched sams beside those pings. SEAD with non-stealthy aircraft is a much more complex mission than simply throwing harms at pings.

Being able to see (and hopefully shoot at) the opponent before they can do the same gives you an edge in every engagement, offense or defense.

If you want to avoid "being seen", you must not use radar.

Then, to launch missiles, you need to network with a distributed group sharing sensor data. This mode of operation is possible in all modern fighter jets, and capabilities are being added continually with avionics/software upgrades. This is true for F-35, but also for Rafale, Eurofighter, and Gripen.

Dodging missiles depends on kinetics, but it's possible existing Russian radar homing missiles can't lock on to an F-35. In this respect, it is has an advantage.

Sharing sensor data is always a good idea and helps with being stealthy since you can see the opponent sooner (without giving yourself away as much). Reduced radar cross section then helps further, because the opponent sees you later. Combine both for best results.

I expect that most or all radar guided missiles (modern and historical) can be used to engage an F-35 (or any other stealth-y aircraft). The effective engagement range will be lower than against a less-stealthy aircraft though.

Dodging missiles does not rely exclusively on kinetics. There are several ways to try to break a lock or at least temporarily confuse a missile. (eg. notching, chaff, ECM) . Having improved sensor fusion and reduced RCS can obviously make these tools and tactics a bit easier and more effective too.

> The effective engagement range will be lower than against a less-stealthy aircraft though.

It should depend on its operation. If the missile is receiving guidance updates in the beginning phase from a sensor network, and only relying on its own sensors in the final phase (if at all), then spectral stealth will make less of a difference. But older missiles and platforms can not do this.

This is the gamble of the F-35; compromise the non-updatable specs in order to achieve safety from present day known threats.

If you're thinking of say an AIM-120: it is always going to be helpful to be less visible to all sorts of sensors; in the launching aircraft, in other aircraft on the datalink, in addition to the built in radar when the missile goes pitbull.

If the opponent has less accurate data when compared to the less-stealthy situation; then the opponent will have a harder time guiding their weapons compared to the less-stealthy situation. It may also be easier to spoof, dodge, and/or hide.

Modern missile systems are getting smarter and smarter no matter what, you may need to stack several advantages in order to defeat them.