You realise that stealth OFFICIALLY only reduces the aircraft visibility to 20-50km range Stop. Stealth reduces the radar cross section. The detectability range changes for each radar. Theres no set threshold that says hey it appears at this range. Stealth is obitimized for the radar band that all seeker heads, and fire control radars use. You cant get a lock on them because the cross section is to small for the seeker head or control radar to see it/not filter it out from clutter.
Well you got to stop here. 20-50km is what's known as visual range. There is simply no way and reason to be "that invisible". You can even get a spectral sample of the chemtrails at this range, so yes there is a limit. Why you no read? The whole point of stealth is to engage far BVR hoping they don't see you. If you think a rocket "can't get a lock on you" from 20km then you are delusional. I know there is a dogfighting test where a pilot claimed that they can see the plan but the radar couldn't track it, this was just a crappy tuned radar. Stealth is mostly frontal anyway.
Dont talk about radars please. Read a book first. Let me tell you about the inverse square law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law . When you shoot any EM beam you get only a small fraction of that energy to hit the target and then a VASTLY smaller fraction reflects back to you. AESA is no exception. If you shoot a beam out the enemy knows exactly where you are. Hell, in stealth mode you can't even do IFF or comms without everybody seeing you. No matter what radar you have you only see 100 times weaker energy signal than what your target receives from your radar. It's physics, no way around that. Countermeasures have a significant advantage over the radars due to this law and this is why they cost so much less. The go read a physics text book made me chuckle. You do realize that. AESA is different why? beacuase it has the ability to scan on multiple frequencys and a random pulse frequency. Like I said before if you jam, but not on the frequency youre doing no good and making yourself a target.
Any radar can scan multiple frequencies. What you mean is AESA can split the beam energy into two beams on different frequencies. But when you split the energy you just end up with a weaker radar. There is nothing special about AESA. AESA's strongest mode is to work as PESA. Radom frequency chirping and hopping is a well known and crappy method. Like I said your AESA will emit energy X, energy X/100 will hit the target, and then energy X/1000 will reflect back. So if the target is hit with X/100 energy it can spend 100 times that energy to jam 100 different channels at the same time wile spending exactly the same energy that was originally emitted. AESA radar cells have a discrete distance between them limiting their effective range of frequencies to just a handful BTW (Read a fucking book again), others are possible but they damage the accuracy and power even more. Look, people have been designing these things for a long time and the physics are well known. You can' improv with your naive suggestions. The science has moved on way beyond what you can think of right now.
I think you are picturing ICBMs. No, AEGIS is for small and medium range only. They are very small and only the deployed warhead travels for most of the path. The warheads generally steer and they are very low observable once the booster is released. I mean just go check a few rockets would ya? No I was talking about the AEGIS BMD because you were talking about tracking soemthign form a 2000km distance. No lone AEGIS system can track that. You physically cant because the earth is round. Not sure where you got that warheads are leaving the boosters for small and medium range. Go check out a few missile systems would ya?
Earth is round but the rockets fly high so it's not a problem.