It does not matter in both cases or what was fitted later on. The pilot/crew will be informed by the own network about targets and directed to that. Just near-by the own radar will be activated to track the target and to generate the data for the own weapon-system available. The behavior of the “target” decides what weapon will be choosen and the crucial IFF problem was solved before. 😉

So they are almost equal. And I even think Mirage F-1 is not a pure fighter for air-combat but an attacker, whereas Mirage F-2 was designed for a2a originally.

If the undercarriage of JH-7 was designed as Tornado alike with tandem wheel like Viggen, there will be enough space left for weapon loading.
If the JH-7’s air-inlet was designed as VG air-intakem, just like Tornado’s, then AL-31 could be a substitution for JH-7’s powerplant.

After the post above, I think it could be some misguiding.
Let’s give some kind of example.
Let’s say, is it possible that MiG-29K as a model can load Kh-41 like Su-33?
The same question would be something like this below:
Is it possible that a Kh-41 can be load under F-15’s belly?
It will be not a problem concert to a port which can be easily changed in new production for various weapon, but a physical limitation of entire redesign.

Freehand,
Let me try this again……Does anyone know if the earlier generation MiG-29’s (i.e. MiG-29 Fulcrum-A, MiG-29S/SD/SM Fulcrum-C) can carry more than two R-27 AIR-TO-AIR MISSILES (notice no mention of fuel tanks)? Was four a possibility?

Didn’t see early version of MiG-29 with four R-27s in image.
However, I also don’t see any impossibility for what you said.

What capacity of this one carried will be than?

Let’s do something reasonable.

Perhaps I can stop the arguing for a moment with a question relating to earlier MiG-29 variants…

I’m glad someone posted that photo of the Luftwafe MiG-29 with the R-27 because it got me wondering……how many R-27’s can the earlier MiG-29’s (Fulcrum-A, Fulcrum-C) carry?

Is two on the inboard pylons the limit or is it possible to carry four on the inboard and middle underwing pylons? Are the full complement of R-27 models supported? (i.e. R-27R, R-27T, R-27ER, R-27ET?)

Look forward to any answers. Thanks!

The post in which some implication by MSphere before yours has already answered your question I think.
For extending combat radius, MiG-29SMT can load 2×1500 underwing DTs and 1×2000L DTs (some report it is 1900L) whereas ony 3×1400L could be loaded by F-18 and I have been never seeing outboard pylons under F-18’s wing loaded 2×2 ARMAAM while inboard occupied by DTs.

It is true that only 8 ARMAAMs could be carried by MiG-29 if 8 underwing pylons occupied fully meanwhile F-18 can load 10, but by this time, the combat radius for F-18A/B/C/D will be much less than MiG-29, also even loading 3×1400L DTs, the combat radius enlarged for F-18 won’t surpass the MiG-29SMT significantly because DT’s fuel merely be equivalent to 0.8 internal fuel.
This is a simple math:
3×1400=4200L given a s.g. =0.75 we have 3150kg external fuel for F-18
1900×1=1900 given s.g. as well, we have 1425kg external fuel for MiG-29SMT
Now we have total fuel 6242kg equivalent weight for MIG’s internal
and total 7650kg for hornet’s.
It seems that fuel weight for Hornet is greater than Fulcrum, please wait a moment……..
Given the total fuel carried in which 3150kg by DTs would not contribute the same combat radius as total fuel by Fulcrum.
Exchange those DTs to be internal fuel, then we got 3150*0.8= 2250kg for Hornet and 1425*0.8=1140kg.
Now we have total internal fuel that really extending combat radius for Hornet is 2250+4500=6750kg and 1140+6100=6240kg for Fulcrum.
Apparently, Hornet win the fuel loading, but you forget at this time, only 2 ARMAAM could be loaded under Hornet’s wing and 2 would be loaded under inlet.
Now it is your turn to seek any real foto in which Hornet were carrying 3 DTs and 4 ARMAAMs underwing.
Even if you can find that, your ARMAAM stay 6 at top still, and Fulcrum are capable for 8 underwing.
No matter how, Hornet will never win the competition if its rival is Fulcrum.
If you are wise enough, take my suggestion, don’t compete with wide-body fighter for potentialilty of payload.