R-37M is a different class of missile, and its not ideal against fighter sized targets.
That is not true... it can engage 8g targets, which means it is not like the R-33 which was mostly for use against large aircraft like inflight refuelling aircraft and AWACS and also bombers like B-52s and B-1Bs and B-2s.
The fact that it has not been widely deployed for all Su-35s etc does not mean it wont... the weapon bay of the Su-57 is supposed to be compatible, though I suspect the product 810 fits better.
Also all medium to long range AAMs use lofted trajectories, making them have a huge energy advantage over intercepting missiles. You keep claiming that AAMs can destroy other AAMs. Has this ever been tested by any air force? If yes, which one, when and what was the probability of successfully hitting them.
Most Soviet/Russian SAMS are designed to shoot down HARM type weapons... they have proximity fuses and don't actually have to hit anything to be successful.
During the cold war the Soviets had the R-27P and R-27EP which are passive radar homers that home in on enemy radar and jammers.... for instance if you are flying along and suddenly get illuminated by an F-15 that is launching a SPARROW SARH missile at you you can fire an R-27EP at him which will home in on the radar signal from the F-15s radar that is illuminating your aircraft for his missile to hit. Your missile is faster and has longer range... more importantly when you launch your missile you are free to manouver as you please because it is fire and forget... the target is in illumination mode and wont detect your missile so your missile hits first and the illumination stops so his missile misses.
There is no reason why such a missile could not be used against ground based radar illuminators, or indeed missiles like AMRAAM which carry their own radar illuminator...
The 9M100 missile that is part of the ground based S-350 air defence system and is also part of the naval Redut SAM system that is optimised for short range self defence (CIWS) is also reportedly being developed as an air to air missile for self defence because it can be carried internally and fired without a target lock, with its lock on after launch capacity.
Originally it was supposed to be an IIR guided weapon like LMUR, but it seems they went for ARH for full all weather capability... either guidance option would be precise enough for anti missile use.
Btw those numbers are full of shit because they won't disclose the real value to the enemy.
Another important factor is these are ideal conditions launches... just because they state an AMRAAM can hit a target at 80km that normally means the launch aircraft is above 10km altitude and flying fast... probably supersonic, and the target is a closing target, so even when they say you can launch it against 80km targets the fact that the target is closing distance throughout the engagment means the actual flight distance of the missile might be 65 or 70km.
Of course against an Su-57 it might have problems getting a reliable lock when it gets closer.
How do we know that the AIM-120 D doesn't have 180km range and the MBDA meteor doesn't have 250km range? That could be their non doiwngraded range.
So far the record of the west for product performance figures has been very weak...
Their armour penetration claims for ATGMs from the 1980s and 1990s were outright lies.
The R-77 has more subsonic e drag due to grid fins and is a smaller missile than the R-27, so it's believabls that it has lower no escape zone
Hahahaha... and how much of its flight profile will be be flying subsonic?
The tiny little control surfaces on the AMRAAM that give it low drag also means its turning performance is actually pretty weak which makes evading it much easier.
The grid fins of the R-77 means it can turn harder without stalling and hit targets that might have dodged another missile.
BTW if you think grid fins are high drag then ask yourself why they use them on the Tochka SSM... the longer ranged Iskander uses thrust vectoring for manouver so it eliminated external control surfaces completely.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
lancelot
Presumably the same is true with the F-22. 
, no winglets ! That makes it a MS-21
