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.

+AWACs even the small one will have more internal space for electric equipment, power than su-35 ( their engine is in the wing , contrast to su-35 )
+AWACs are not that vunerable , they have high power radar => detect enemy from very long range => escort fighter will take care of enemy
+ about the meteor => re-read several pages ago and you know why i said that
+ i was just explain that flying higher doesnot make it harder for radar to lock

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.

su-35 is also bigger , heavier , RVV-BD is 2 times heavier , bigger than most AAM

Supersonic flight is limited by the G load of the fighters, at 9Gs at 30k feet @ M1.5 translate to 11.07 deg/s turn rate. Obviously too low, however pulling 9Gs at these circumstances deplate energy fairly quickly, around -1500 FPS specific excess power, and if fighter needs to avoid a missile, it can always perform a high yoyo to trade airspeed for altitude, pull tighter instantenious turns, and dive to regain energy.

On the other hand flying high and fast is a must in BVR combat if you want to a) give your missiles better boost b) maintain a clear LOS c) maintain a good energy state for evading maneuvers or for merge.

AIM-120 is said to acquire its target at 19 km away;

9B-1348E seeker head on R-77 acquires targets at 15 km.
9B-1101K seeker head on R-27RE acquires targets at 25 km.
9B-1103M seeker head on R-27AE acquires targets at 20 km.

If their rated targets is the same -that is a very big if I must admit- R-27 variants are still comperable in terms of target acquisition range. However they are rated for targets pulling up to 8Gs.

**********

Whatever the missile’s capabilities are, an opponent will still have to break lock and waste its energy to make evasive maneuvers. In any scenario that max range really matters, most (if not all) BVR missiles would be expanded long before their effectiveness become a question.

For example lets assume Su-35 carries R-27R (not RE) variant. It has 75 km max range and according to Su-27 manual it has
42.5 km head-on and 7.5 km tail-on effective attack range. From these values, we can calculate;
25 km effective range that is running perpendicular to launching aircraft

Meteor has a big 25 km range advantage over R-27R so i will estimate (pull some numbers from my a**) just for the sake of argument;
100 km max range
60 km head on max range
35 km running perpendicular effective range
10 km tail-on effective range

On the first part of the BVR only range matters. Pilot would know he could be hit if he doesn’t evade, and seeker capabilities are irrelevant here.

-from 100 to 75 km distance, Meteor can be fired and will reach Su-35 but only disturb it, and wont be effective.
-from 75km to 60 km distance, both missiles can be fired and force their enemies to make evasive maneuvers, but wont be effective.
-Meteor can be fired at 60 km, but will be countered by Su-35 simply changing approach angle, same goes for Rafale after 42.5 km.

Until 35 km, each missile would only force enemy to disadvantegous position but would not kill. Huge range advantage (also equals higher kinematic advantage in less than max range shoots) of Meteor on this scenario would put Su-35 in a less favourable position (as it would be more difficult to evade more energetic Meteor missiles) This is a position where Su-35 pilot should know he is in danger and break off while he can.

At this point, with both aircraft approaching at ~1 km per second there is a little superior range and kinematics can do, and all it matters is type and effectiveness of seeker heads.

After 35 km, Su-35 requires to make 90+ deg turns from the target and would need to break its target lock. By now, Su-35 pilot has lost its SA and the ability to fire back because it needs to illuminate target to guide SARH missiles, and cant do so while evading incoming missiles. In this scenario combat should over if a missile manages to hit Su-35, or Rafale will merge in a extremely superior energy state and finish with Magic IIs or gun.

If Su-35 also had fire and forget ARH or IR missiles, he would have forced Rafale pilot to lose his SA, and chances would be more or less equal, with Su-35 having wasted more energy to defeating Meteor missiles.

My point is, 10-20 km range advantage of any BVR missile is not a key factor in its effectiveness, as they will be fired only to be wasted on their extreme ranges. And my second point is R-27RE can do the same job in this case. So a mixed payload of R-27RE/AE, R-77, R-73 would equal Meteor and Magic combination in most of the real life circumstances.

i think that for the same class of missiles => longer max range = longer NEZ ( most of the time ) , btw meteor max range is 160 km not 100 km ( even in normal source meteor always rated as having range > 100 km )
in my opinion ramjet missiles have much better terminal , cruise speed , but they seem to be easier to be detected by IRST than normal missiles

btw i just realise that only mig-31 ( or may be t-50 ) will be able to carry RVV-BD

what these AWACS have to do with Gripen. did Gripen used them in Meteor tests?. These AWACS will fly lower than Flanker. and Flanker engine power outperforms Wedgetail engine

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

These AWACS dont carrying external pods.

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

Su-35 can launch 6 Kh-31 720kg each. and 4 R-77. so hardly any problem for 5 RVV-BD.

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

Yep, and that hurdle must F-22 also overcome with its radar.

And for those flying at medium altitude, well they can look up and detect without any ground(background) klutter.

But then its the Missile NEZ penalty all over again.. the missiles have to climb up and chase after the Foxhound. Not a good situation for starters..
Remember there is no free lunch in this game.

Edit:
The survivebility of Mig-31 increases with its altitude. The higher the better.

in head on situation , the high speed ,and low maneuver of mig-31 is actually increase the enemy missiles engagement envelop , but yeah it does help when running away