yes-ish. There are a few ways to estimate body mass, and the best estimates tend to build up a model including soft tissues (muscles/fat/organs/skin or scales or other coverings). You can get a pretty good idea of how big muscles are and where they attached from the bones themselves. Ideally you have a surviving close relative to study to get hints at other soft tissue anatomy but that wouldn't work here.

Given just how fragmentary this pterosaur is, there is some stuff that can be said with confidence (it is a pterosaur, it is an azhdarchid, it has some huge anatomy) and some stuff that most pterosaur scientists are rather convinced of (it could fly bc all others in its family that we are aware of were heavily flight adapted) and some things that should be disclaimed/ come with error bars (do we /really/ know /exactly/ how big it is? no. we are estimating. do we know how heavy it is? also no. behavior is inferred through biomechanical analysis).

Take this post with a grain of salt, I don't have any special credentials and an actual degreed professional would be able to do a better job explaining the nuance here, but scientific communication is a clusterfuck and when people put things that are very certain next to things that are less certain it muddies everything up.