With ever advancing technology, the accuracy of missiles is also improving. So while arsenal aircraft sound very tempting, they also show up on radar much sooner than smaller aircraft. To top it off, regardless of AESA or not.. more shooters from different angles are always better than one shooter with lots of missiles.Sir, with today's ever advancing technology, there aren't much "tactics" left. Its all Situational Awareness and Electronic CM's and EMJ. So the number of missiles a jet can carry with an AESA radar does matter as dedicated beams can steer various missiles.
Soon, in the next 3-5 years, having 6-8 BVR missiles minimum, wouldl become a standard AA configuration for even the smaller 4th gen jets upgraded with an AESA and MERs. Just watch how it plays out.
The USAF is even testing B1 types of an aircraft for a missile truck role, to support a few F-22's or F-35's from way behind where. Imagine that over 50 AMRAAM D's chasing after 30 SU-30's or J-11's, guided by like 4 F-22's and fired by 1 B1 Lancer.
Theoretically, you could take out over 100 interceptors in less then an hour and by only using one squadron of F-22's! Thanks
That is what the PAF has endeavoured to do, and that is what it has achieved with the JF-17. It already enjoys a healthy advantage in pilot to airframe ratio over the IAF and it looks to remain so despite the IAF's well intention-ed efforts.