it does not say anything about range despite SD-10 being 15 year newer missile than R-77 and R-77 likely to be export down graded. Its only electronics upgrade.

read it carefully it talk about testing condition , ranking of missiles , even the range of Meteor

AIM-120 came two decades later than AIM-9 and RVV-BD came two decades after AIM-120. or you think world stands still during that time.

you dont get my point :(:(
what i mean is one of them is for medium range , the other is for dogfight => different purpose => it kind of dumb to say that one is better

it is only calculation at mach 1.2.

when Su-35 see Rafale at 400km and has intention to launch attack. It will accelerate at full speed towards the Rafale and at about 200km range it will launch RVV-BD. Rafale pilot will be confused as such fast moving things coming after him and with load of missiles. Rafale pilot can only make decision at last 100km due to limition of Meteor range.

the max range of meteor still classifed it likely have the same range as ramjet R-77M
btw you should read this

Some translations and points discovered by Hyperwarp in the AFM concerning an magazine published article of an interview with the designer of the SD-10.

“Efective combat altitude 0-25Km.
Ability to engage target 10kms higher or lower than launch altitude.
Range at 10Km altitude at M1.2 target at same altitude =70Km.
No escape zone for F-16 type target = 35-45km
Max overload=38G, Speed =4M
Plans to be also used as SAM system.”

“Designer was asked at end to rate BVR AAMs. He rated Meteor as best BVR AAM, then AIM-120C, then his SD-10, then AIM-120A/B, R-77, Skyflash at equal fourth, then Derby, and last of all, MICA.”

“What the designer said is that they used the same way AIM-120 calculated its range. target and launch aircraft flying at each other at 1.2 mach and at 10000 metres. The range is 70 km under such circumstance.
Also interesting is the designer basically said the russians “cheated” with R-77, as they calculated the max range with target and launcher flying at each other at 1.5 mach and at 12000 metres altitude.”

A more detailed translation by Dongdong posted in the AFM forums:

“I just bought the BING GONG KE JI magazine with the SD-10 designer interview. The interview is pretty informative. Add my points for translation:

Ahout the max shot range:
The Deputy Chief Designer of SD-10 said: The parameter of “max range” is determined by the relative position of missile’s carrier and the target aircraft. The assumed conditions by various countries are different. So what the Russian said the max range 100Km may not be better than what we said the max range 70Km. The max range 70Km in SD-10 marketing promotion brochure is measured under the condition that both the missile’s carrier and the target aircraft are flying at 10Km’s altitude, both the missile carrier’s velocity and target’s velocity are 1.2Mach, their flying direction is reverse(head to head). AIM120’s test condition is similar to SD-10. However Russian’s propaganda is a little more exaggerated. For example, R-77’s test condition is: carrier and target are flying at 20Km’s altitude; each has 1.5M’s velocity, head to head flying. Under such a condition, the max range is 100Km. The problem is higher altitude means less aerodynamic resistance, plus the faster velocity for both the carrier and the target. The range is naturally longer. So you shouldn’t only consider parameters isolated with each other. In fact, our SD-10’s range is better than AIM-120A/B, a litter less than AIM-120C, almost same as R-77’s.

About ranking MRAAM:
Designer : It’s not easy to rank …..Various persons have various standards…
First of all, Euro’s Meteor should be No.1. This missile’s performance is very advanced, its range reaches 160Km.It belongs to next generation missiles. Next, I think the AIM-120C is more advanced. For original AIM-120 missile, whatever components, materials and craft are world first class. Now it is upgraded to Type C, it makes new progress on range, precision and anti-jamming capability. Following, It should be our SD-10. Then AIM-120A/B, R-77, Active Skyflash at equal fourth. Then Israel’s Derby, Derby has a comparable overall performance with the above missiles, but its range is relatively short. Last of all, MICA, its tech is not bad, however it’s a tradeoff between BVR and dogfight, so is naturally inferior to dedicated MRAAM.

Reporter asked : Our SD-10 has a good ranking. Why do you say our SD-10 is more advanced than R-77?
Designer: We adopted some technologies more advanced than R-77’s, so SD-10’s overall performance is better than R-77’s. For instance, our strap-down initial navigation system, signal processing system are more advanced than R-77’s. Our missile was developed relatively later than R-77.Some new technologies were not mature when R-77 was developed, so R-77 didn’t use the new technologies, but when SD-10 was developed, the new technologies became mature, so we adopted the new technologies in SD-10.

SD-10’s milestones:
Designer: We started the pre-research work for advanced radar guidance air to air missile in mid of 1980….
Phase1:mid of 1980 to beginning of 1990, key technologies study
Phase2;Started from mid of 1990, sub-systems development
Phase3:Started from end of 1990, missile overall performance verification test
Phase4:After entering 21st century, demo verification test
Now, the development of SD-10 has been completed.”

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-strategic-forces/81157-sd-10-vs-aim-120-latest-versions-11.html#ixzz2P9yuc6Qh
BTW i think Rafale can carry Aim-120D too

highly doubt Su-35 is going to be heavier than Su-27 as it has identical range with more powerfull engines and 4AAM. and its fuel capacity is 11,300kg. i highly doubt you even understand 3D TVC.

su-35 have less top speed than f-15 = more drag ( if it have more powerful engine => this even more true ) , btw you still havenot gave me any link to support your point that su-35 can go beyond mach 2 with weapon
TVC only improve instantaneous turn rate not sustain turn rate no matter it 2D or 3D

optimum condition for which aircraft?.

i was talking about how thay calculate the ma range for missiles

you simply dont understand concept of surplus power and surplus fuel capacity along with long range radar survellence. Su-35 pilot from the start will go into high altude mode. (it has 3600km rang with 4AAMs). while Rafale pilot will still plannning when to drop fuel tanks and what should he do when he does not have long range battlefield pix.

you put it in long range mission when bigger fighter have advantage against smaller fighter , but that not always the case , how about a fleet of su-35 want to attack an aircraft carrier with rafale on it 😀 ..etc , also what will happened when su-35 able to see an rafale with fuel tank from 400 km and su-35 pilot attack with missiles , then rafale drop it’s fuel tank => su-35 lost track on radar => waste missiles for nothing

There is TVC to compensate for less agility.
Su-35 top speed is different than old top speed of Su-27/F-15. It is aircraft with more power. so likely that with weapons its top speed will be higher.

TVC dont improve your sustain turn rate
su-35 is heavier than Su-27 , it’s top speed also slower , how come it have higher top speed than F-15 ???? , and i dont really think su-35 have more engine power than F-15

so R-73 from MIG-21/MIG-29/MIG-31 has same range.
Mica is missile for M2K/Rafale whose top end performance dont differ that much.
Those 18km is old specification from 2007. Now it is 19km for Su-35.
Su-35 is not F-15. it is much sleeker profile with more powerfull engines.

0- mica can be use by F-16 too and the performance between mirage , F-16 , rafale are very different
1-both the range for Mica and R-73 are in optimum condition , and Mica do have muc hlonger range than R-73 ( aircraft fly at mach 1.2 against target fly in opposite direction at mach 1.2 at 25.000ft if iam not wrong ) dont try to turn it other way round
2-doesnot matter much , 2 km is not really a big deal compared to the max range of missiles , also , higher altitude your aircraft will also be less agile due to thinner air
3- F-15 have better top speed than su-35 so i dont think su-35 have sleeker profile ( i agree that it look sleeker but thing are not what they seem all the time )

These are American missiles. EU does not have a single better missile than Russians. EU should not even enter into missile field as end result is super expensive slow production missile due to lack of experiance and procurement money.

it just an example to show you that bigger , heavier missiles doesnot simply equal longer range
btw
Mica , IRIS-T , Aim-132 , Python-5 is better than R-73 , Meteor is better than R-77 ..etc
both USA and Russian dont have missiles equal ASMP ( equal size , equal performance )

easily defeat?

read about noise jamming and you will understand why it can be defeat by HOJ
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=noise+jamming+hoj

Rafale supercuise when its internal fuel is practically empty and very light load. No heavy external pods.

biased
Rafale can even supercruise with fuel tank , and 6 missiles , please use google before you say any thing

Meteor is 200kg class missile. not much fuel and certainly not strong motor. and combine with lack of experiance compared to Vympel and slow production rates. it will not get the continous upgrades needed.

experience is not really a valid point here because Vympel dont really have monopoly in AA missiles or anything
weight of missiles doesnot say everything about range , cruise speed , terminal speed or how strong the motor is , bigger missiles doesnot automatically equal longer range
EX : PAC-3 range vs ESSM range
AIM-7 vs Aim-120
RIM-67ER vs RIM-156