PL-17 is more of a capability gap for the USAF because the PL-15 is a lot closer to the 120D’s range and probably is at the very least being matched by the 260’s performance. The Navy has AIM-174B but Air Force does not.
And anyways, as far as payload goes the flankers might be the absolute worst modern combat aircraft considering their weight and size
Yes, it can shoot down a fighter, but the question is though, how hard is it defeat at long range?
Especially being that fast, is it able to turn well enough?
I dont know the details, but if it was an older aircraft or the missile was in the RWR blind spot, then the pilot may have had no warning. How it would fair against a Typhoon, Rafale, F-35, etc is a different question entirely.
CFTs affect your flight performance tho, not as much as drop tanks but still
su-27 is able to take 9,000 kg of fuel
i dont have a exact number for the su-35 but i know that they made space for an extra internal fuel tank
and it is able to take drop tanks like the Su-34 (mainly meant to ferry the planes tho iirc)
if we belive the statement made by ROSOBORONEXPORT it has a combat radius of 1800km
Not actually that surprising. Russia is huge, makes sense that range was a key strength/design requirement. Though I do wonder at what alt and speed that is required to achieve that range
yeah they really would need that range to do patrols or even perform offensive actions from airbases deeper in Russia (flanker is a cold war jet after all)
Yes. R-37 is a threat, even at greater ranges than the Aim-120D or Meteor could be fired at, but both the Aim-120D and Meteor are far far more dangerous weapons when they get within range