bumpy surface is worse than flat surface for stealth. in this particular case eyeballing is as reliable as radar dark room measurement. just like eyeballing is enough to determine that F-22 is better than F-35.I have no idea why this conception exists: that the "bumpy" underside of the F-35 was some unsolvable tradeoff as if it wasn't developed, modeled and refined with 2000s methods. The same thing as RF "Experts" eyeballing the J-20/J-35/SU-57's radar signature.
eyeballing is only wrong when doing something you can't eyeballing like how much worse F-35 is.


