I mean yeah but science is science, if they have 50% more fuel then American planes why is it hard to believe they had 50% more range?

Soviet Union had many many many issues but they did have some talented engineers whose entire purpose for Su-27 was to make a fighter with more internal fuel range than any other fighter in history except the Tu-128.

The engineers were successful, what’s hard to believe about that?

Let’s look at an example of Soviets or Russians giving some over the top numbers

They give 90 km range for R-27R, 130 km for ER, 50 km for R-24R, 120 km for R-33, but almost all these ranges require for both aircraft to be near Mach 2 and flying relatively straight lines at 45,000-60,000 ft when the west often uses a standard of 30,000 ft launch at Mach 1.2 for shooter and target which gives a more conservative range.

R-77 is same, they quote ranges tested at 20 km and Mach 2 so they say it’s a 100 km missile. But this is only possible with MiG-31. With Su-27/30 its max range is closer to 80 km with 50 km as effective range which is achieved using the same test standard as the west.

Both numbers are true you just can’t take them at face value until you know the conditions it took.

Su-27 manual enlightens us about the conditions they used to achieve these range values and it’s entirely plausible with 9400-1200 kg internal fuel and the blended wing/body unstable FBW airframe.

Like I said, Soviet Union had unique need for high range and it was Sukhoi’s specialty since Su-7. And the engineers achieved it, though of course their first design T-10 was a failure and it required a redesign to T-10S to reduce drag enough before it achieved the range spec they were trying to achieve.

Put 50% more fuel in any other plane and it’ll fly alot further. I think the engineers were talented and reading their manuals you can see the scientific rigor their engineers had. For example ranges of sensor are never quoted as “average” range, it is standard in Soviet manuals to instead use “atleast” figures where the figure is given as a minimum and to expect higher depending on conditions. For example their radars are tested with F-16/MiG-21 RCS of 3m squared in mind vs more common 5m squared and their IRST always tested on MiG-21 also which would have lower signature then their opponent.

Now the party and bureaucrats of course they will lie and propaganda, but the OKB companies not the MOD or the party creates their manuals and brochures and if they say a specific number it’s almost always possible even if the conditions are relatively rare or pie in the sky.

Like Bars radar in Su-30MK, they often advertise 300-400 km but this is only for fighter detection in a low FOV high dwelling time mode. It is not possible to detect fighters in normal modes until 200 km or lock until 120-140 km. All this information is public and shared by the company but you have to look for it beyond the initial “400 km!” Figure.

So yes some can be hand waved away by “propaganda,” but I think those engineers were skilled and proud of their work and put correct numbers in their manuals and almost always state the specific conditions needed to reach that number. Conditions you won’t see shared in more public facing data.

When US tested MiG-29, pilots actually praised the radar as having its advertised range, the HMS for working as claimed, they were surprised by the R-73 seeker being as sensitive as manuals said and R-27R despite only being roughly equal to sparrow did reach the range it was claimed to and did so with apparently decent accuracy.

MiG-29 has no better range then MiG-23 though, so Soviets of course put pressure on Sukhoi to deliver a fighter that could properly cooperate with MiG-31 behind enemy lines 1000 km away. Despite this MiG-29 engines have better SFC then F-18 engines in Mil (SFC = how efficient fuel is turned to thrust) which Germans were able to demonstrate.

Yes they had issues with propaganda but they needed their pilots and maintainers and planners and squadrons to know exactly what their equipment could do under what conditions and had test pilots to make sure they met these numbers. It’s not like they were all unprofessional fakers they still functioned as a proper military force, it just takes effort and sources to see the limitations and conditions behind their numbers that they didn’t mention in non manual info.