Case for Su-34 as MMRCA

[migflug]

what is wrong with iaf. They can go for 1.9 billion upgrafe for mirage and 2 billion for jaguar . But they cant buy su 34 or 35 because they are russian junk and those upgraded are supa supa western stealth 5th gen plane

 

[Ind4Ever]

Mission 1 - Brahmos cruise missile attack against an high value target in the Tibet region.

Su 34MKI - load config

Centerline - Brahmos missile
Inner wingstation - BVR missile or additional A2G weapon
Mid wingstation - BVR missile
External wingstation - WVR missile
Wingtip - ECM pod

Crew - 2 pilots
Approach - gain high altitude and speed, to provide Brahmos with maximum range and impact


Same mission with an upgraded Su 30MKI:

Centerline - Brahmos missile
Inner wingstation - BVR missile or additional A2G weapon
Mid wingstation - BVR missile
External wingstation - WVR missile
Wingtip - ECM pod

Crew - 2 pilots
Approach - gain high altitude and speed, to provide Brahmos with maximum range and impact


Mission 2 - EA role to protect a strike package

Su 34MKI - load config

Centerline - High power jamming pod
Intake station - BVR or anti radiation missile
Inner wingstation - anti radiation missile
Mid wingstation - BVR missile
External wingstation - WVR missile
Wingtip - ECM pod

Crew - 2 pilots
Approach - gain high altitude to lure the enemy to activate radar and air defences, as well as gain advantages in target attacking or jamming.


Same mission with an upgraded Su 30MKI:

Centerline - High power jamming pod
Intake station - BVR or anti radiation missile
Inner wingstation - anti radiation missile
Mid wingstation - BVR missile
External wingstation - WVR missile
Wingtip - ECM pod

Crew - 2 pilots
Approach - gain high altitude to lure the enemy to activate radar and air defences, as well as gain advantages in target attacking or jamming.

I could go on with CAS, carpet bombings, anti ship attacks..., but the fact that both fighters have the same base, will use the same weapons and systems in the same manner, by 2 pilots won't change. The Su34 has it's advantages and in certain roles, they will be useful but it's certainly not in a different league in A2G, while that could be said about the A2A advantages of the Su 30MKI compared to the Su 34.

If thats the case then Su27, Su 30 su 35 are same? No Sancho . Huge difference. They may look alike but very different beast. SU34 is made for deep Strike missions. Su30 for air dominance, partial bombing raids unlike su34 which can use terrain mapping to sneak into territory without getting noticed by enemy radars. Thanks to it's EW suits and structure which support it fly very low just over the terrains Supply 30 can't do this which is crucial for Deep strike missions. Please don't involve bramos to make comparison. Soon Mig29 T ed has will have mini versions. but it doesn't mean Su30 Tejas are same

 

[IND151]

If thats the case then Su27, Su 30 su 35 are same? No Sancho . Huge difference. They may look alike but very different beast. SU34 is made for deep Strike missions. Su30 for air dominance, partial bombing raids unlike su34 which can use terrain mapping to sneak into territory without getting noticed by enemy radars. Thanks to it's EW suits and structure which support it fly very low just over the terrains Supply 30 can't do this which is crucial for Deep strike missions. Please don't involve bramos to make comparison. Soon Mig29 T ed has will have mini versions. but it doesn't mean Su30 Tejas are same

Agreed

But it's one of the best in Deep strike bombings . Let's say a bombing mission Let me explain why I prefer both . but note this force of Rafael is for F3 which we don't want French to sell for mmrca...

...... Equipped with this configuration, two Rafale aircraft represent the same potential as six Mirage 2000 class aircraft

This configuration comprise a full increment of six air-to-air and six air-to-ground weapons. The air-to-ground ordnance includes six Sagem/MBDA Hammer guided weapons (AASM), carried on two triple-ejector racks, designed specifically for the weapon. The AASM is deployed with one of three optional guidance methods utilizing a GPS guided, laser homing or thermally guided seekers. To extend its range the Hammer is also equipped with a rocket booster. Four MICA air-to-air missiles and two very long range Meteor missiles will be complementing the fighter’s air-to-air capability. The MICA missiles are operational and can be employed with IR or radar guided. These Meteor missiles are yet to enter service – but they are expected to be fielded with the F3-R variant by 2018. In addition to that impressive weapons complement, Rafale will retain its Nexter 30M791 30 mm internal cannon, firing 2500 rounds/min. According to the manufacturer, equipped with this configuration, two Rafale aircraft represent the same potential as six Mirage 2000 class aircraft.

In the current configuration Rafale carries two Scalp cruise missiles or four direct attack weapons (Hammer/laser guided bombs), with our MICA air-to-air missiles. : French Air Force

Now let's look at this Su34 beast . Remember this can be upgraded with 5th Gen characteristic like proposed Su35S

....... incredible crew ergonomics, where both members could work in a shirtsleeve, pressurized, side by side environment for maximum crew coordination. Further, designers included a chemical toilet, a galley and even a bed down area just aft of the main cockpit for long endurance missions. Also, seeing as Russia has always lagged behind in systems integration and man-machine interface, the side by side seating would help compensate for those deficiencies. Another area where the Fullback differs from the Flanker is in the very back. The tail cone is much elongated to house a rear warning radar to enhance the crew’s situational awareness as well as to compensate for the total lack of rearward visibility imposed by the side-by-side cabin configuration. Also the landing gear is very heavy-duty for rough field operations under heavy takeoff weights and allows more clearance for the attachment of massive cruise and anti-ship missiles. Also of note are the canard foreplanes, similar to those on the carrier borne SU-33. These foreplanes help compensate for the massive nose as well as offering enhanced trimming at transonic speeds.
Although the Fullback retains much of the SU-27′s legendary maneuverability, the aircraft is a bit limited in comparison when it comes to top end speed, due to a fixed intake system instead of the Flanker’s maneuvering intake system. This is hardly a factor though as rarely would an aircraft like this need to speeds above mach 1.5, if even that. No doubt the biggest positive factors in the Fullback’s design come down to fuel volume, loadouts and adaptability. In the SU-34 Russia has a large aircraft that can strike deep into enemy territory with loads of guided munitions, while defending itself when egressing into and out of the battlefield. In the SU-34 it also has a fantastic long range anti-ship weapon delivery system via the Kh-55 Kent ASM missile and even an anti-AWACS missile delivery system via the KH-31 “Krypton” anti-radiation missile.
Although these are roles that not even the F-15E is slated to cover, the SU-34′s potential is so much more than that. Due to its massive size and crew design the Fullback could make one hell of a standoff jammer, something closely along the lines of the US’s prematurely retired EF-111 “Sparkvark,” an Electronic Warfare (EA) and Suppression/Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD/DEAD) platform without comparison. Furthermore, because of its unique frontal “platypus nose” design, the SU-34 has a MASSIVE radar aperture to work with. This frontal real-estate is absolutely priceless when it comes it AESA (ActiveElectronically Scanned Array) radar technology, as the larger the aperture, the more transmit and receive modules can be installed and more power brought to bare, vastly increasing detection ranges and resolutions. Further, such an array can work as an electronic attack weapon all its own, frying enemy electronics or even transmitting massive amounts of data over huge distances. It could even act as a mini AWACS (Airborne Warning And Control System) with such a large AESA, sending targeting information to other players remotely via data link. Another area where the SU-34 is very well suited for is in the maritime patrol mission. The aircraft’s long-range and room for missionized equipment, even its long tail boom where a Magnetic anomaly Detector (MAD) could be installed, along with its radar mapping and attack capabilities could make for a ground breaking tactical sea control platform. Finally, the SU-34 could be one hell of a tactical tanker, filling up its hard points with fuel tanks instead of missiles and bombs would allow the big fighter-bomber to haul one massive amount of fuel to refuel a transiting attack package all the way to the target and back while also providing offensive counter air and even electronic attack support for the strike package.
The massive internal fuel volume of the airframe allows Fullback to cover regional distances without performance and air defence compermised



what do we even have to retire? Jags are too old with very less playload. we dont use Mirage for deep strike missions . They were carried out by jags and Mig 27 . We need Su34 kind of fighter bomber if we are seriously thinking about taking on China. Yes we have Su30 but it's also a Multirole with limited Bombing missions and more air superiority. Since we are looking to operate some 270 su30 we won't face difficulty to maintain Su34 . And even think that any future Indian aircraft will have this range and playload Capacity.

We also need something like Tu 22M.

 

[Ind4Ever]

Agreed



We also need something like Tu 22M.

stupid Congress rejected joint development of future bomber offered by Russian. Hope this new into will work on this project. Aiming at future conflicts with china

 

[migflug]

Su-30 MKI 12 pylons and 8 tons of weapons, and internal fuel (3000 kms Range) thus for a long range mission with say 1 aerial refueling.
Su-30 MKI 12 pylons (5- 6 heavy pylons as case may be) 8 tons of stores on these

Now Rafale has 14 pylons and 9.5 tons can be carried, internal fuel of 4700 kgs (5600 litres) which allows it about 1500 kms or so range,
NOW if Rafale has to complete the mission as same as Su-30 MKI then it has to carry 3 drop tanks thus 3 X 2000 litres (1800 kgs)
Thus now 5.4 tons out of 9.5 will be used for carrying the external fuel tanks, leaving available just 4.1 tons of stores thats 4100 kgs.
Rafale 3 pylons for Fuel 11 pylons (2 heavy available) for weapons Total of 4.1 tons of weapons only

On other hand Su-34 also has 12 pylons also, and carries 12.1 tons fuel (15400 litres) internal fuel thus in a way more than Twice the fuel of Rafale, Further on its 12 pylons it can carry 12 tons of War load, (5-6 heavy pylons)

Thus for a mission of range of 3000 kms, Rafale just does not have the legs and has to use 3 of its pylons and 5.6 tons of fuel externally hence allowing 11 pylons (2 heavy) and about 4100 kg of available stores.
But for the same mission Su-30 MKI will be able to carry 8000 kgs of stores on its 12 pylons out of which 5-6 pylons are heavy pylons.
Su-34 (12.1 tons) does way better, it carries more internal fuel than Su-30 MKI, and carrying a useful weapon loads of 12 tons on its 12 pylons with 5-6 pylons being rated for heavy loads

On the basis of the above, one Su-34 will be able to carry similar useful strike load as 3 Rafale (12 tons vs 4.1 tons of stores, 6 heavy pylons vs 2 heavy pylons for going the same range)
Thus in a way, it makes more sense to buy just 42 Su-34 instead of 126 Rafales they will do the same job,
Also it cost less than 40 million a piece

 

[sancho]

If thats the case then Su27, Su 30 su 35 are same? No Sancho . Huge difference. They may look alike but very different beast. SU34 is made for deep Strike missions. Su30 for air dominance, partial bombing raids unlike su34 which can use terrain mapping to sneak into territory without getting noticed by enemy radars. Thanks to it's EW suits and structure which support it fly very low just over the terrains Supply 30 can't do this which is crucial for Deep strike missions

As I said, all Su 3... have the same base, they only differ in some modifcations, specific to the roles! The Su 34 has more range, but as shown can't carry more or different weapons th MKI couldn't carry . It has specialised A2G radar modes and avionics (not EW) for low level flights, which is just a matter of upgrading to add the same to MKI too.
You can see the same differences in the Mirage 2000 as well, where the strike versions have specific radar modes and avionics, to set them appart from the "normal" interceptors, but other than that, they remain with the same base.

So there other than the range advantage, only the added amor will be benefits that you can't add t the MKI, without major re-designs. But that won't make the Su 34 much more capable or different. Btw, the I showed the Brahmos attack mission, since that will be our prime choice for long range attacks against China, since the opponent is simply far too capable to do long range strike attacks and for Brahmos, it's not important to fly low, but to fly high since that offers more range.

Further on its 12 pylons it can carry 12 tons of War load, (5-6 heavy pylons)

That's wrong, since it carries the same payload as the Su 35 or the Su 30:

maximum ordnance, kg 8,000

Sukhoi Company (JSC) - Airplanes - Military Aircraft - Su-32 - Aircraft performance

 

[Ind4Ever]

As I said, all Su 3... have the same base, they only differ in some modifcations, specific to the roles! The Su 34 has more range, but as shown can't carry more or different weapons th MKI couldn't carry . It has specialised A2G radar modes and avionics (not EW) for low level flights, which is just a matter of upgrading to add the same to MKI too.
You can see the same differences in the Mirage 2000 as well, where the strike versions have specific radar modes and avionics, to set them appart from the "normal" interceptors, but other than that, they remain with the same base.

So there other than the range advantage, only the added amor will be benefits that you can't add t the MKI, without major re-designs. But that won't make the Su 34 much more capable or different. Btw, the I showed the Brahmos attack mission, since that will be our prime choice for long range attacks against China, since the opponent is simply far too capable to do long range strike attacks and for Brahmos, it's not important to fly low, but to fly high since that offers more range.



That's wrong, since it carries the same payload as the Su 35 or the Su 30:



Sukhoi Company (JSC) - Airplanes - Military Aircraft - Su-32 - Aircraft performance

I think your are missing both of us point me and migflug. Su30 just can carry 8 t where as Su34 can carry 12 T with 5 hard point wwhich can carry 5 heavy weapons like atleast 3 Heavy Anti ship /Other missiles . With range of 4000 without any refueling. With Air to Air refueling Missions deeper inside China can be taken Care of. Even with stealth way points going around them. Now this is something IAF have to have I'm large numbers. Rafale is a good fighter. Chinese jets will have serious headache for getting it Locked . Its enough for Operation with in few kms of China.

for example we can take our Agni series. Agni 1for Pakistan 2 is for parts of china Same like Mirage I(upgraded ) jags tejas. But we don't stop there We came up with Agni3 now this is more or like same as MMRCA and Amca. Little more deeper so China don't forget of backlash if they mess with us.

Then Agni 4 with deep strike capabilities same like our Su30 . Your point is when we have Agni 3&4 why we need Agni 5 ? Because just a few more capabilities but we went with Agni 5 which is this Su34 with much assured distruction . And you are wrong when you said All su30s carries same weapons. NOT. Su35 carries. ore and much more Advanced weapons than our mighty MKI and S34 is in different league altogether. Even if don't buy them it don't change the fact that these 34 are to be produced in 200s but Su30 SM and 35 are less in orders. This fighter will keep SCS disputes at our arms length. As most of the times enemy must think twice about consequence. these Su34 are Bombers which can fly low with EW to do so at the speed of 1.5 while terrains hugging. So none can stop the. from carrying out bombing raids.

to complete my missiles example . Like upcoming Agni 6 we can Logically compare with PakFa with new capabilities . So we lack abilities to strike deep into China. Which we must have. Now our long IOR can be protected by this beast too. Placing them in Andaman SCS and IOR will be kept in check.

so we need both Su34 and Rafale. We can wait for AMCA without Rafale. But how and when will we induct Su34 capabilities

Su-30 MKI 12 pylons and 8 tons of weapons, and internal fuel (3000 kms Range) thus for a long range mission with say 1 aerial refueling.
Su-30 MKI 12 pylons (5- 6 heavy pylons as case may be) 8 tons of stores on these

Now Rafale has 14 pylons and 9.5 tons can be carried, internal fuel of 4700 kgs (5600 litres) which allows it about 1500 kms or so range,
NOW if Rafale has to complete the mission as same as Su-30 MKI then it has to carry 3 drop tanks thus 3 X 2000 litres (1800 kgs)
Thus now 5.4 tons out of 9.5 will be used for carrying the external fuel tanks, leaving available just 4.1 tons of stores thats 4100 kgs.
Rafale 3 pylons for Fuel 11 pylons (2 heavy available) for weapons Total of 4.1 tons of weapons only

On other hand Su-34 also has 12 pylons also, and carries 12.1 tons fuel (15400 litres) internal fuel thus in a way more than Twice the fuel of Rafale, Further on its 12 pylons it can carry 12 tons of War load, (5-6 heavy pylons)

Thus for a mission of range of 3000 kms, Rafale just does not have the legs and has to use 3 of its pylons and 5.6 tons of fuel externally hence allowing 11 pylons (2 heavy) and about 4100 kg of available stores.
But for the same mission Su-30 MKI will be able to carry 8000 kgs of stores on its 12 pylons out of which 5-6 pylons are heavy pylons.
Su-34 (12.1 tons) does way better, it carries more internal fuel than Su-30 MKI, and carrying a useful weapon loads of 12 tons on its 12 pylons with 5-6 pylons being rated for heavy loads

On the basis of the above, one Su-34 will be able to carry similar useful strike load as 3 Rafale (12 tons vs 4.1 tons of stores, 6 heavy pylons vs 2 heavy pylons for going the same range)
Thus in a way, it makes more sense to buy just 42 Su-34 instead of 126 Rafales they will do the same job,
Also it cost less than 40 million a piece

Nice one!!, Rather we could go for 124 MMRCA plus 50-60 Su34. Combo will be great. One for taking out border radars clearing the way for deep strike missions . While our Tejas gaurd our skies along with mighty su30.

This one Aircraft will send China into Panic mode than ICBM . Because now we can fire cruise missiles at any part of China. with serious armaments.

 

[sancho]

I think your are missing both of us point me and migflug.

I do get what you say, the problem is, that you both get to false conclusions, based on paper figures that are even wrong! As the Sukhoi website clearly states, it can't carry 12t weapons, but 8t, just as the Su 30s too. So there is no difference in carrying capability between the multi role flankers!

Also you look at the ferry range, without external loads in one direction and conclude that it could fly 1000s of Km into China, which simply is not realistic, because you completely ignore the capability of the opponent Air Force and their ground defences, let alone the fact, that the combat range which includes payloads and enough fuel to return, is the important one! Unless you have a stealth fighter like FGFA or UCAV, there is no way, we can send fighters let alone larger bombers deep into China and THAT's why we need longer ranger missiles to do the job, be it Agni' or simpler cruise missiles like Brahmos / Nirbhay (for MMRCA's that would e Scalp / Storm Shadow).
Brahmos launched from ground has limited range, but launched from an MKI at high altitude, adds several 100Km, even if launched from within Indian airspace and if the MKI cross over, it will remain in a safe distance to return home and let the missile do the rest.
You guys also look only at the wiki figures for payload, but not on the weaponload configs, to see which weapon can be used at which hardpoints. Su 30, 34 and 35 have all 3 hardpoints to carry KAB 1500 for example. So no matter, if they still have around 3t payload left on paper, you can't add more such heavy weapons, because of weight limits of the other hardpoints. So it's no so simple as you might think and you need to consider more things.


WRT terrain avoidance systems, as said before, there is no issue to add that into MKI too if IAF wants it, since it's just a matter of avionics and radar modes, the structural chages of the Su 34 have nothing to do with it. But with Rafale having these systems to and even excelling in that role, there hardly a need to worry about IAF on that regard. We even took the Israeli radar for LCA, because of it's good A2G modes, the same once we want to upgrade into the Jags, which also tells something about IAFs balanced approach on their multi role fighters.

And you are wrong when you said All su30s carries same weapons. NOT. Su35 carries. ore and much more Advanced weapons than our mighty MKI and S34 is in different league altogether.

Not really, they only use upgraded varients of the R73 or R77 that we currently have in our stock, but are on offer for us too. However most of the current upgrades are limited and the really new weapons are aimed on Pak Fa, which then will be passed to legacy fighters too. But they currently use the same R73/R77 A2A combo, with KAB bombs, Kh 29, 31, 35 and 59 too. In fact our MKIs already can use Israli LGBs and the Litening pods, with Brahmos and possible other Indian or Israeli weapons, the MKI strike pack is even improving beyond the one of the Su34 / 35 today.

 

[SQ8]

BS Case

Somebody please tell the buffons at that blog what the term "Medium" means. They are insult to Defence Analysts worldwide.

 

[MilSpec]

Somebody please tell the buffons at that blog what the term "Medium" means. They are insult to Defence Analysts worldwide.

Catchy buzzwords and BS drives clicks.

 

[IND151]

stupid Congress rejected joint development of future bomber offered by Russian. Hope this new into will work on this project. Aiming at future conflicts with china

@sancho @Capt.Popeye

Is this true?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

@sancho @Capt.Popeye

Is this true?

Do you believe in flying carpets?

 

[India defense]

we are buying Rafale.....nothing else...... so stop all these nonsense

 

[IND151]

Do you believe in flying carpets?

I have read about them......

Point? Are you saying person I was quoting posted wrong info?

Su-30 MKI 12 pylons and 8 tons of weapons, and internal fuel (3000 kms Range) thus for a long range mission with say 1 aerial refueling.
Su-30 MKI 12 pylons (5- 6 heavy pylons as case may be) 8 tons of stores on these

Now Rafale has 14 pylons and 9.5 tons can be carried, internal fuel of 4700 kgs (5600 litres) which allows it about 1500 kms or so range,
NOW if Rafale has to complete the mission as same as Su-30 MKI then it has to carry 3 drop tanks thus 3 X 2000 litres (1800 kgs)
Thus now 5.4 tons out of 9.5 will be used for carrying the external fuel tanks, leaving available just 4.1 tons of stores thats 4100 kgs.
Rafale 3 pylons for Fuel 11 pylons (2 heavy available) for weapons Total of 4.1 tons of weapons only

On other hand Su-34 also has 12 pylons also, and carries 12.1 tons fuel (15400 litres) internal fuel thus in a way more than Twice the fuel of Rafale, Further on its 12 pylons it can carry 12 tons of War load, (5-6 heavy pylons)

Thus for a mission of range of 3000 kms, Rafale just does not have the legs and has to use 3 of its pylons and 5.6 tons of fuel externally hence allowing 11 pylons (2 heavy) and about 4100 kg of available stores.
But for the same mission Su-30 MKI will be able to carry 8000 kgs of stores on its 12 pylons out of which 5-6 pylons are heavy pylons.
Su-34 (12.1 tons) does way better, it carries more internal fuel than Su-30 MKI, and carrying a useful weapon loads of 12 tons on its 12 pylons with 5-6 pylons being rated for heavy loads

On the basis of the above, one Su-34 will be able to carry similar useful strike load as 3 Rafale (12 tons vs 4.1 tons of stores, 6 heavy pylons vs 2 heavy pylons for going the same range)
Thus in a way, it makes more sense to buy just 42 Su-34 instead of 126 Rafales they will do the same job,
Also it cost less than 40 million a piece

Thanks for Info

I do get what you say, the problem is, that you both get to false conclusions, based on paper figures that are even wrong! As the Sukhoi website clearly states, it can't carry 12t weapons, but 8t, just as the Su 30s too. So there is no difference in carrying capability between the multi role flankers!

Also you look at the ferry range, without external loads in one direction and conclude that it could fly 1000s of Km into China, which simply is not realistic, because you completely ignore the capability of the opponent Air Force and their ground defences, let alone the fact, that the combat range which includes payloads and enough fuel to return, is the important one! Unless you have a stealth fighter like FGFA or UCAV, there is no way, we can send fighters let alone larger bombers deep into China and THAT's why we need longer ranger missiles to do the job, be it Agni' or simpler cruise missiles like Brahmos / Nirbhay (for MMRCA's that would e Scalp / Storm Shadow).
Brahmos launched from ground has limited range, but launched from an MKI at high altitude, adds several 100Km, even if launched from within Indian airspace and if the MKI cross over, it will remain in a safe distance to return home and let the missile do the rest.
You guys also look only at the wiki figures for payload, but not on the weaponload configs, to see which weapon can be used at which hardpoints. Su 30, 34 and 35 have all 3 hardpoints to carry KAB 1500 for example. So no matter, if they still have around 3t payload left on paper, you can't add more such heavy weapons, because of weight limits of the other hardpoints. So it's no so simple as you might think and you need to consider more things.


WRT terrain avoidance systems, as said before, there is no issue to add that into MKI too if IAF wants it, since it's just a matter of avionics and radar modes, the structural chages of the Su 34 have nothing to do with it. But with Rafale having these systems to and even excelling in that role, there hardly a need to worry about IAF on that regard. We even took the Israeli radar for LCA, because of it's good A2G modes, the same once we want to upgrade into the Jags, which also tells something about IAFs balanced approach on their multi role fighters.




Not really, they only use upgraded varients of the R73 or R77 that we currently have in our stock, but are on offer for us too. However most of the current upgrades are limited and the really new weapons are aimed on Pak Fa, which then will be passed to legacy fighters too. But they currently use the same R73/R77 A2A combo, with KAB bombs, Kh 29, 31, 35 and 59 too. In fact our MKIs already can use Israli LGBs and the Litening pods, with Brahmos and possible other Indian or Israeli weapons, the MKI strike pack is even improving beyond the one of the Su34 / 35 today.

Please elaborate.

 

[sancho]

[QUOTE="IND151, post: 6967955, member: 33483"
Please elaborate.[/QUOTE]

Different launch profile, from the ground it needs to use it's own propulsion to take off and gain altitude, launched from the MKI, from high altitudes to benefit from the glide phase and not only the propulsion will then extend the range. Launched from the ground in a low level fligh profile, the range is given with around 140Km, with a high flight profile up to 290Km and launched from the MKI it's estimated between 400 and 500Km.

You can also compare it to AASM 250 at Rafales, which have a range of around 60Km if droped from high altitude with a longer glide phase, while a low altitude launch limits the range to around 15Km, because it's limited to it's own propulsion and a different launch profile.