17 Apr 2018, 15:39
An educated guess would indicate roughly and at best two thirds of the range of its counterparts.
Typhoon, without CFT, loads up two ALCMs, 1x 1 000 L centerline tank, 4-6 AAMs. Tops off at 5,5 tons of fuel (a bit less than 5 tons internally and 800 kg externally).
Hornets with similar ordnance loads up 2-3x 330 gal. tanks, so does the Super Hornet, respectively topping off at 7-8 tons and 8,5-9,5 tons of fuel. Rafale with 2-3x 2 000 L tanks tops off at 8,2 to 9,8 tons of fuel. For comparison with the raid, Tornado launches with 2x 2 250 L tanks, 2 AAMs, that makes 8,6 tons.
The trend is clear: the Typhoon holds roughly a 33 to 50% less fuel than its counterparts for equal ordnance. I will not go into fuel consumption and drag indexes calculations, as these data aren't reliably available to the public anyways. That wouldn't change much, since M88s, F404/414s and EJ200s are roughly similarly efficient (the latter sucking up slightly more fuel at its higher thrust rating however). The RB199s are known to be mildly optimized for med/high altitudes.
There's no need for a crystal ball to deduce Typhoon's range will be severly impared, for any mission profile (hi/lo/hi...). As for the centerline Storm Shadow, I don't have any technical figure to share, but eyeball analysis pretty clearly shows this is impossible. The facts that it is not even marketed in Eurofighter's PR efforts, let alone witnessed on development aircraft, confirm that.