Basically, its saying RWS not less than 350-400 Km in 100 Sq Degrees. RWS ranges are usually pretty much the same as TWS which takes a bit longer to build up track files and VS ranges would be even longer (upto 20%). Given the Su-35 uses only ARH weaponry, this should be enough to cue weaponry. This looks to me like a long range cued track or snipe mode to engage low RCS targets with.

What do you suppose the detection range of ESM/RWR systems will be against a fighter using a power level to reach out to 400km? That’s much like the spotlight in the dark analogy. The ESM/RWR systems will spot that beam long before, being illuminated/detected/tracked.

Here is where this topic gets into the realm of speculation, by reading statements by Lockheed Martin or of Russian radar or SAM manufactures you hear that the F-35 is hardly detectable but the Russians say they can detect stealthy targets (a RCS at 0.01 square meters) is said to be detected at 90km by the Tikhomirov NIIP Irbis-E radar, this is by a fighter radar not an AWACs or a SAM defence system.

But the detection ranges go down considerably against smaller RCS targets, so in this situation, the Su-35’s IRST would likely see the F-35 before its radar.

More modern radars will data link information, so it is hardly specualative if the F-35 will survive or the Su-35 will detect or not the F-35.
Here is where the supercruise and thrust vectoring become an advantage for the T-50, F-22 and Su-35BM if they detect the F-35.

Neither the Typhoon nor Rafale have thrust vectoring, and I don’t hear anyone complaining about their lack of agility. As for cruise speeds of the Su-35 vs. F-35, that’s speculative too. The definition being used, when it’s said that the F-35 doesn’t supercruise, is M1.5 or greater. Russia(and European manufacturers) use M1 as the threshold.

I do believe T-50 has greater speed potential. In an official report that has long since ~2 years been removed from internet, F-22 top speed has been limited to just over M1.8 due to heat build up in the tail section. (annoyingly i didn’t save it when time was so i can’t prove it, it was up less then a month, but i also won’t change my position until another official report says otherwise, or F-22 routinely is observed going M1.9+)
Then again it is also possible that T-50 will run into some issue.

That was a pre-IOC condition that has been remedied.

1. >50 degrees AOA
4. and now >50K LBs of thrust demonstrated
5. and according to LM, better ITR/STR than the F-16 or F18.

The UN recognizes the rights of coastal nations to extend their claims 200 nautical miles or more(up to 350nm), under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

AFAIK, national airspace just extends out to 12 miles from the coast, same as territorial waters.

Not necessarily- Canada regards the airspace above its continental shelf, as Canadian airspace, and that extends out considerably more than 12 miles.

A MiG-31 surely can fly 35-40 minutes at M2.35.
MN * Speed of Sound [kts] * Time [hrs]
2.35 * (295*3.6/1.852) * 35/60 = 780nm
But that would pretty much use up all the fuel and leave no reserves.
We can – using a sketchy estimation – consider that the range at supersonic speeds is proportional to the fuel fraction. Note that fuel consumption increases with Mach number.
The motto “was designed for supersonic” is only valid in the eyes of Yefim Gordon believers: designing for supersonic is easier than many think. Reducing the supersonic drag however requires drastic measures that have a severe penalty on the rest of the envelope. See Concorde and Blackbird. The MiG-31 is designed for supersonic by more heat resistance than F-teen fighters and the engine intakes. Supersonic drag is probably the same as for the F-15, with some advantages due to the higher wing loading.

Realistically, we need to consider take-off and climb fuel, and also the fuel required to come home plus reserves. The quoted “720km” radius at M2.35 are probably a typical air dominance mission with take-off and subsonic climb. Then acceleration to supersonic speeds and supersonic cruise for maybe 500km (or about 15 minutes). Fire missiles, turn away and subsonic cruise home.

That’s a much more realistic view, rather than a supersonic 720km leg, plus the subsonic legs.

If we are honest we know both aircraft will avoid close combat, but what MiG-31 achieves by having better maneouvrability is denying the F-14 from trying to tangle at close combat because MiG-31 can beat it, this forces again the F-14 for a long range duel, but here again MiG-31 has more cards, it is faster and can fly longer distances, if the F-14 tries too catch up, it will run out of gas at Mach 2.2, while the MiG-31 can keep that speed for at least 35 minutes.
if F-14 disengages in close combat has either to engage in long range or go home.

You’re being disengenuous with with the speed/duration. You’re always assuming that the Mig is at a high fuel state, without taking into account how far it may have flown before getting in range of the F-14(or F-15 for that matter). I’m still not so sure that 35-40 minutes at M2.35 is realistic in any event.