Around 500 kg, it however vary depending from versions for 4,2 lenght and 31 cm diameter.
Warhead is about 250 kg, so it sits quite exactly between Kh-25 and Kh-29 in terms of weight (i think so that almost the former will survive for a while for when a lighter punch would be preferable).
New Aspide -like pentagonal fins are clearly for the Su-57 or for a three-pack storage.

Yes, it is not that al the world revolves on just a tender, even if so big as the T-X.

Actually the same fact that before the T-X program the market of new generation trainers was limited in the west to two planes (Golden Eagle and Master) and actually there are almost five to compete is somewhat of a change.

@ Spitfire9
You can add the 18 italian ones: they are also full standard not degraded.

Gripen has the advantage they can pool its maintenance with their neightbours (Czechs, Hungarians and with all the probability Croatians also) so not to spend what would take to replace the Typhoon logistic with an almost completely new one.

Austria has deliberately requested that their own Typhoons would had to be downgraded even in comparison to the first batch standard, so this jerk is actually making jokes of his own nation, not of Eurofighter.
However even Italy has put on the market a part of its own first tranche planes.
That’s because the eurofighters from batch 8 onward are designed with an open architecture allowing to plug&play new capability just updating sowtware while the previous one would require a much more greater effort to be taken at latest standard.
To avoid what happened with the Tornado, built at a common standard but updated separately by each partecipant so to became uncompatible one with the others, it was envisaged to develop updates by a common standard but to leave each nation to adopt them or not.
It doesn’t worked perfectly, thank to Good Puppy urge to appease Doublya that lead Uk to implement some A2G capability on its own (and pay them in full) but such a possibility was actually implemented by the others but only on the plug & play versions.
Still batch 5 planes are actually an hell of good air defence planes so he idea was to offer them to eastern Nato Members, problem is that they have Gripens or are planning to adopt them, so even if they would be offered for free the same maintenance cost of a plane like typhoon would made them not would made them not convenient in comparison.
Just spare us the renegate Su-27 story please : actually i think more probable to see in future a renegate western pilot fleeing from Europistan to a still cristian country than the other way round.

Ok, now that it will seem that5 the confrontational part has dwindled down, let me try to revive the thread talking about what were the initial expectatives for the Tornado, where it delivered fully and were instead shortcomings were found in its operational use.
How was said earlier the Tornado was not conceived as a single use plane but, very ambitiously to cover about all the roles previously by a wide array of different attack planes.
It was conceived not just an european ecquivalent to F-111 or Su-24 i.e. a tactical bomber for deep strike missions but a multirole able to perform about the whole range of the battlefield environment including Cas/Bai for what two powerful 27mm were installed. and even anti-shipping and marine reconnaissance roles for german Marineflieger.
Obviously low quote high speed missions and in particular the counter aviation one remained the ones of foremost importance but considerable efforts were made to enhance its flexibility in performing other roles.
It sported so a FBW system, first one on an Europlean plane to ease control of plane and optimize their performances at the various flight pattern its wide range of mission would require plus two unique features for a military plane like tilting wing pylons to allow them to be used even in missions requiring an in-flight wing swept and thrust reverser to allow for the shortest possible landing space.
Despite those features the plane ended up to be reliable and safe to operate at the point that Italy decided to modify a part of their IDS directly to the ECR variant instead of building new onesas initially planned due the inferior number of worn out loss from what was initially expected.

So, if for what regard the technical aspect of the plane everything went well, where some shortcoming would be found.
First one is however the same complexity of the plane, acceptable for what it concern the greater european nation that get involved but too much for the other initial partecipant to the project (Canada, Belgium and Netherlands) or for the export perspective of the model.
Even the presence of a dedicated ADV variant made little to alleviate it, being it completely opposed to the flexibility of IDS variant, a very niche model with a VERY problematic development.
More than the acquisition cost it was however the maintenance ones to be found really heavy, above all by AMI who has never had heavy planes like Phanthoms, Bucaneers and Litenings in its own inventory before:
With an hourly cost of about 34.300.000 it. liras the tornado was a quite a shock when compared to
the previous planes it had:
G-91Y: 6.135.000
F-104: 5.900.000 (average between different models)
MB-339A: 2.800.000
G-91T: 2.650.000
Add that even when it was decided to develop the two engine, two crew model italian government decided not to cut down accordingly the initial order of 100 planes to understand how much of a burden it was for an already cash-strapped airforce like ours (and even more to the other two armed forces as if AMI cried, they screamed in pain).
So if even the Tornado was found capable to cover a wide range of missions, it was decided to kept on to develop and field a cheaper attack plane in the form of AMX (and in this case it ended out to be excessively cheap instead) to perform almost a part of the lower end missions.

@TomcatVIP,
Where have you taken it? Storm Shadow is for an example a quite stealthy design and still use nap of the hearth profile for a precise choice, sacrificing a part of the possible the possible range for being able to fly like so.
Simply put it still follow the same attack pattern that Tornado would have in order to reach the same objectives the former would had in a overcrowded and heavily defended airspace like the european one is supposed also now to be.
Seems you doesn’t consider that trivial fact than an european plane or weapon is designed even now to operate according to european (or better of a specific european armed force) requisites and in an european theatre first.

Let’t add the guns, Mrmalaya to be used in CAS/BAI missions.
Most powerful package in Nato after the one of A-10.