If we extrapolate the data given on Astra 2, another solid rocket,
which has a head on range of 150 km and a tail chase of 34 km (both high alt)
then we get a head on range of 300 km and a tail chase of 68 km. (high alt)
This missile is thicker tho, and it also has strakes for extra glide,
these strakes will cause formidable deceleration in any turn.
Range at low alt. will be pitiful.
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1835045&postcount=7

it is like comparing LCA with Su-35. Different level of experiance and budgets.

R-77 in terms of weight, size, range, seeker etc etc, is equivalent to MICA AR. R-27RE and R-27AE outranges both by a quite margin. Then we have MICA IR, which is roughly matched by R-27T, and outranged by R-27TE. WHEN Meteor is finally integrated on Rafale, its range will easily be matched by R-27RE and R-27AE missiles.

.

how is R-77SD equal to Mica. Mica is slightly heavier than R-73. R-77SD is in Meteor weight class.

1- in real war situation AWACs can give information to gripen to launch meteor
2- i dont know whether AWACs was in the test or not but as explained before they dont have to test the max range of missiles from the gripen
3- meteor can be carry by EF-2000 , gripen , rafale , f-35 so the limited range of gripen radar now doesnot mean meteor range is limited as well
4- gripen will also have long range AESA radar in future
5- the fact that AWACs fly lower than Flanker has nothing to do here , explained before ,it only harder to lock if enemy fly lower and that is due to ground clutter , also AWACs dont launch missiles themselves so their altitude different here doesnot really mean anything
6-su-35 engine doesnot out perform Wedgetail engine ,in dry mode it produce lower thrust , it only produce more thrust in afterburner mode ( Wedgetail engine dont have that mode as it dont need it )
7-AWACs have much more internal space for power , electric equipment

AWACS have more internal space for people and fuel tanks. Not necessary means more power. for smaller AWACS like ERIEYE, E-2, Wedgetail etc It is the smaller AWACS with there slower speed, low altitude and less radar power that are most vulnerable.
why you keep insisting that they dont have to test Gripen for maximum range of Meteor?.
harder to lock on lower is when your cruising at tree top. which is not case with AWACS.

compared the size of E-3 , Kj-2000 , Wedgetail , A-50 , E-2 and the su-35 and you will see which one have more space for equipment , power ..etc , not to mention for AWACs their engine is on the wing so they have even more space internally for equipment

I have only mentioned smaller AWACS for which Gripen is supposed to test Meteor.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=impressive+weapon+load you can see a lot of aircraft carry heavy load from F-16 to f-15 to ef-2000 ..etc ,ABLE TO CARRY HEAVY LOAD doesnot mean your performace will not decrease with small load

All strike aircrafts can carry heavy loads but it does not mean they have Flanker like performance with most powerfull engines in 4.5 generation fighter and most internal fuel. and sleek design that is atleast half to One generation ahead of Rafale. Any thing you attached to Rafale showup as external bulge.

compared the size of meteor and mica vs RVV-BD and you will see
also Rafale clean RCS is 0.1 m2 => the cocpkit have nothing to do here

rcs 0.1sqm ?. it is 1980s design hardly anything new.
Rafale problem is that any thing you attached to it. It protudes out. It has poor drag. considering slow top speed.

1- no one say that they test the Meteor on gripen with max range => your argument about it is nonsense
2- as i said like a billions time before deceptive jamming dont need extremely high power ( also noise jamming can be really easy to defeat by HoJ which almost every radar guide missiles have )
3- who say the su-35 will have rcs = 3 m2 with weapon ??? ( remember that your RVV-BD is much bigger than meteor or mica , the su-35 weapon rack also bigger => affect rcs more

it is not much bigger that it is adding sqm. infact missile look more out of place on Rafale. cockpit is too much raised.

Iran can fly arms because no one is stopping. If Jordan/Israel/Saudi or Turkey decide they can easily intercept it in Iraqi aerospace. Iran airforce is short range and obsolete
China is far away, still dependent on Oil/ suze canal and may not take strong stand. Russia $700b rearmament programe is going to have big impact on Middleast that is big protection for countries. China is still spending money in learning. It has no reliable transport and gunship choppers. no modern trainer aircraft for building new airforce. Light weight JF-17/J-10 still lacks carrying strike weopons on scale of MIG-29M. I haven’t seen any heavy jamming pods integrated into Chinese aircraft. There is lack of reliable engines for tanks. See Russian/UKranian tanks/engines export to hot countries and compare it to China.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/04/02/iraqi-intelligence-says-syrian-and-iraqi-islamic-extremist-groups-ramping-up/
Ministry of Defense spokesman Staff Lt. Gen. Mohammed al-Askari said that in Iraq’s last weapons deal with Russia, Baghdad requested aircraft and heavy weapons to try to seize control of the Iraqi-Syria border region where the groups are operating.
We are very concerned about the security situation in Iraq,” said Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Moussawi. He said Iraqi ground troops and the country’s tiny air force were unable to quell the militant activity in the border zone.

base on what russian have more money than USA ??? or you just blow it out of your ass :confused:

based on projects that Russia is doing Russia has more surplus money to spend. see $30b spending on Valdivostok in less than 5 years. It is city of about half a million. only Qatar can spend this much money on so few people. so it is reasonable assumption that Russia may take less military projects simulataneously like not too many AWACS/UAV or fighter types. but what ever is approved will get top money as needed.

btw rafale , f-35 ,ef-2000 and gripen have strong radar too , and there is nothing wrong with prepare for future , your excuse is so dumb ” because gripen have short range radar now so meteor can’t have long range ????” and you also eliminate the use of AWACs for no reason

They have strong radars but not in class of Su-35. just the engine power and nose size is not at that level. Gripen is weakest link and it is sufficient for Meteor.