Eurofighter Typhoon

F-2 said:
Hey you know what I just realized? That mock up has the AMK kit
Click to expand...
How expensive, and how complicated is that anyway? For the performance gains and tiny amount of hardware I'd think it would be pretty cheap and well worth it. It has already flown so the the software exists. I'm surprised no one has jumped on it.
 

Attachments

  • strakes.jpg
    strakes.jpg
    78.4 KB · Views: 118
apparition13 said:
F-2 said:
Hey you know what I just realized? That mock up has the AMK kit
Click to expand...
How expensive, and how complicated is that anyway? For the performance gains and tiny amount of hardware I'd think it would be pretty cheap and well worth it. It has already flown so the the software exists. I'm surprised no one has jumped on it.
Click to expand...
They say under a million per plane and only a few kilos
 
Testing is the expensive part that no one wanted to pay for so far. Needs to clear the full envelope and adapt the FBW controls.
Depending on what kind of stores they want to mount on the inner wing hardpoints, EF EK might need the AMK kit though. It allows heavier stores to be carried there iirc.
 
eagle said:
Testing is the expensive part that no one wanted to pay for so far. Needs to clear the full envelope and adapt the FBW controls.
Depending on what kind of stores they want to mount on the inner wing hardpoints, EF EK might need the AMK kit though. It allows heavier stores to be carried there iirc.
Click to expand...
Apparently the Eurofighter is not particularly found of asymmetric loads either which would need to be felt with for any kind of SEAD or strike load.
 
Spanish publications are reporting that, likely following the election in December 2023, that there will be a Project Halcon 2 to replace the remaining EF-18 Hornet. It will be made up of an additional 25 x Typhoon and 25 x F-35. The original Project Halcon is for 20 x Typhoon to replace the oldest EF-18 based on the Canary Islands. The variant of the F-35 is not known, or stated in the article, obviously it will be either the A or B variant. The B variant would make the most sense as it would effectively replace the AV-8B+ operated by the Spanish Navy from the Juan Carlos I. It's noted that the article mentions '5th Generation' rather than F-35...but it couldn't be anything else.

It's worth noting that after the initial Project Halcon buy of 20 Tranche 4 Typhoon to replace the oldest EF-18, that that still left 64 EF-18 in service, and 13 AV-8B+ for a total of 77 combat aircraft. So there is the possibility that this won't be an end to Halcon...there could be a Halcon 3 to roughly maintain force numbers, which more than likely would be 25 x F-35, unless Airbus et al can get a result on the political front again. So the Spanish MoD request to the US for details on 50 F-35, made up of 25 x A and 25 x B, could still be in play.

Google Translate of Spanish Language Tweet
"Attentive to the new issue of the MinisDef Aeronautics and Astronautics Magazine, we find interesting things: In the section "A look at 2023": Advancing in the Falcon 2 program, Eurofighter + 5th gen mixed solution, we continue to avoid talking about the F-35 explicitly."

Gareth Jennings also makes a good point...perhaps the Airbus lobbying has been successful and removed the F-35A to be replaced by Typhoon, leaving the F-35B only.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1619650230680711168
View: https://twitter.com/GarethJennings3/status/1619650230680711168
 
Last edited:
F-2 said:
Apparently the Eurofighter has unwanted Yaw and Roll at high AoA and as such was AoA limited. The AMK works by preventing this. Originally the Eurofighter was supposed to have a G/AoA override but it was apparently not activated on operational Eurofighters.
Click to expand...
This was due to moving from the double delta on EAP to single sweep on Typhoon, encountering something else in flight test, and generally running out of money / spending on higher priority areas. AMK is one potential fix.

Typhoon has carefree handling rather than the many pilot observed limits of earlier aircraft. Difficult to square away an override with that.
 
red admiral said:
F-2 said:
Apparently the Eurofighter has unwanted Yaw and Roll at high AoA and as such was AoA limited. The AMK works by preventing this. Originally the Eurofighter was supposed to have a G/AoA override but it was apparently not activated on operational Eurofighters.
Click to expand...
This was due to moving from the double delta on EAP to single sweep on Typhoon, encountering something else in flight test, and generally running out of money / spending on higher priority areas. AMK is one potential fix.

Typhoon has carefree handling rather than the many pilot observed limits of earlier aircraft. Difficult to square away an override with that.
Click to expand...
I suppose thrust vectoring would have been another fix
 
Posted this elsewhere as a summary of the current production and order books and potential orders for Typhoon...

Orders still being built...
28 x Typhoon Tranche 3 to Kuwait
24 x Typhoon Tranche 3 to Qatar
Total - 52 Typhoon

Ordered or 'due to be...' - On contract in Bold
28 x Typhoon Tranche 4 to Germany under Project Quadriga
24 x Typhoon Tranche 3 to Egypt - Not ordered yet but must be close
15+ x Typhoon EK to Germany - Now called EK instead of ECR. Airbus has said is unlikely that just 15 will be ordered.
20 x Typhoon Tranche 4 to Spain under Project Halcon, to replace oldest EF-18
Total - 87+ Typhoon, including new EK variant

Potential Orders...in order of probability...
25 x Typhoon 4 to Spain under Project Halcon 2, to replace some of the remaining EF-18 (64 in total remaining, plus 13 AV-8B+). Close to putting this in the 'due to be' list...
50 (up to) x Typhoon Tranche 4 to Germany to replace non-nuclear Tornado - Moved to potential as unclear what Germany is up to...the impact of inflation on the German one off budget increase has caused issues, still highly likely though...
48-72 x Typhoon Tranche 3 to Saudi Arabia - still in the works allegedly, but very quiet.. - Added in 72 as increased buy has been mentioned. Large Saudi delegation recently at Warton as well...
25 x Typhoon Tranche 4 to Spain - Potential for another 25 under a 'Project Halcon 4', probably won't happen though, more likely F-35.
12-24 x Typhoon to Malaysia - An ongoing saga... since the 2000's. The MRCA requirement. However, Malaysia has had issues with SU-30MKI reliability and their concerns will only increase post Ukraine war, FA-18D is also, generally, on the way out. They can't afford to be an orphan operator for long post 2030 with 8 a/c. Issues around EU palm oil ban, but the UK being out of the EU could help...either way its a slow burner...still serious finance issues. I think they're unlikely to go Russian or Chinese, KF-21 likely frontrunner after the recent TA-50 win for S.Korea in the LCA competition, however that is mired in the usual corruption allegations...
Total - 160-196 x Typhoon (assumed all new Turkish production and 50 to Germany)

Rumours...old and new
20+ x Typhoon Tranche 1 to Chile - Ex-RAF aircraft. Can't see it myself, but still rate it higher than Turkey.
24-48 x Typhoon to Turkey - Probably cobblers, 'sources' have said '2 Sqn's' Or 48 Tranche 3A.
? x Typhoon Tranche 1 (second hand) to Serbia - a very distant possibility, probably no more than 12-16. Unlikely given current developments.
? x Typhoon Tranche 1 (second hand) to Indonesia - a exceptionally distant possibility, probably no more than 12-16. These were the Austrian Typhoon Tranche 1. However, indications are that Austria intends to retain until 2030 and replace with F-35A (if the US will allow them...).

Realistically...
I think there will definitely be at least 160 new build Typhoon (excluding the Kuwaiti and Qatari ones that are already being built and delivered). But it could reach 240 with a following wind. Any more than that would be a massive bonus....and a big surprise.
 
Last edited:
F-2 said:
red admiral said:
F-2 said:
Apparently the Eurofighter has unwanted Yaw and Roll at high AoA and as such was AoA limited. The AMK works by preventing this. Originally the Eurofighter was supposed to have a G/AoA override but it was apparently not activated on operational Eurofighters.
Click to expand...
This was due to moving from the double delta on EAP to single sweep on Typhoon, encountering something else in flight test, and generally running out of money / spending on higher priority areas. AMK is one potential fix.

Typhoon has carefree handling rather than the many pilot observed limits of earlier aircraft. Difficult to square away an override with that.
Click to expand...
I suppose thrust vectoring would have been another fix
Click to expand...
I really, really, want to see an ultimate Typhoon. AMK with thrust vectoring EJ230 or (if it would fit) EJ270. AMK has flown, thrust vectoring was tested on land, and EJ 230/270 were under some form of development. It would be an even better super-cruiser, and I'd like to see if anything could match it WVR.
 
apparition13 said:
and I'd like to see if anything could match it WVR.
Click to expand...
With all of those improvements there isn't anything, even F-22, that could come close. Thrust to weight, sustained turn, acceleration, climb would all be best in the world ever. I suspect it would even outpace F-22 in supercruise by a margin.
 
apparition13 said:
F-2 said:
red admiral said:
F-2 said:
Apparently the Eurofighter has unwanted Yaw and Roll at high AoA and as such was AoA limited. The AMK works by preventing this. Originally the Eurofighter was supposed to have a G/AoA override but it was apparently not activated on operational Eurofighters.
Click to expand...
This was due to moving from the double delta on EAP to single sweep on Typhoon, encountering something else in flight test, and generally running out of money / spending on higher priority areas. AMK is one potential fix.

Typhoon has carefree handling rather than the many pilot observed limits of earlier aircraft. Difficult to square away an override with that.
Click to expand...
I suppose thrust vectoring would have been another fix
Click to expand...
I really, really, want to see an ultimate Typhoon. AMK with thrust vectoring EJ230 or (if it would fit) EJ270. AMK has flown, thrust vectoring was tested on land, and EJ 230/270 were under some form of development. It would be an even better super-cruiser, and I'd like to see if anything could match it WVR.
Click to expand...
I had an AWST that Ej270 was meant for potential single engine applications while the ej230 was a Eurofighter growth option. Everything else I absolutely agree with and I always wonder what might have been.
 
timmymagic said:
apparition13 said:
and I'd like to see if anything could match it WVR.
Click to expand...
With all of those improvements there isn't anything, even F-22, that could come close. Thrust to weight, sustained turn, acceleration, climb would all be best in the world ever. I suspect it would even outpace F-22 in supercruise by a margin.
Click to expand...
Not sure, the Typhoon in the famous infamous (depending on your perspective)Joust Study was a ton lighter than the production aircraft and had the Full AoA capability of the EAP. Typhoons have been claimed to have done well against raptors have been described as light or clean. I think the uprated(ej230) aircraft would be in the broadly similar ball park.
 
I think the ultimate Eurofighter (AMK with EJ230, CAPTOR-E, optional CFTs etc.) might well become a reality if the main European operators decide to donate their tranche 1 aircraft to Ukraine and replace them with newly built aircraft. I am of the opinion that there is a need for greater numbers of air superiority fighters amongst Western air forces considering especially the rise of China and the "return to more conventional warfare" we have witnessed since 24th of February. I also think that my country (Finland) should have chosen the Eurofighter instead of the F-35, as the main duty of the FAF would in any case be air defence in a war with Russia.
 
Topi said:
I think the ultimate Eurofighter (AMK with EJ230, CAPTOR-E, optional CFTs etc.) might well become a reality if the main European operators decide to donate their tranche 1 aircraft to Ukraine and replace them with newly built aircraft.
Click to expand...
We can dream.

main-qimg-43a3e4dfe859a680720fdc0c002551b0-lq
 
timmymagic said:
apparition13 said:
and I'd like to see if anything could match it WVR.
Click to expand...
With all of those improvements there isn't anything, even F-22, that could come close. Thrust to weight, sustained turn, acceleration, climb would all be best in the world ever. I suspect it would even outpace F-22 in supercruise by a margin.
Click to expand...
I suspect so, especially the combination of decoupled canards and thrust vectoring since both ends of the aircraft could pitch. A bit like four wheel steering in a car? (I don't know if the aerodynamics would actually work like this. Someone feel free to tell me if pitch controls at nose and tail would be more effective than at just one end.) Although G tolerance is still G tolerance so barring better G suits that wouldn't change. It would be capable of direct lift and sideforce, and off axis nose pointing. The studies into the MD-265 included a delta canard aircraft that looks like EFA which was fully capable of decoupled maneuvering and vectored lift.

Supercruise I have my doubts about. F-22 is above 1.8, I suspect around 2, or so I've heard (I think one of the F-22 pilots on Aircrew Interview hinted as much during a Q and A). Typhoon at present is 1.5 with an Air to Air loadout. How much would that increase if mil thrust went from 27000 lbs (120kN) to 32400 lbs (144kN) for two EJ230s, since it looks like the EJ270 (35000/156kN) might be too large?
 
apparition13 said:
timmymagic said:
apparition13 said:
and I'd like to see if anything could match it WVR.
Click to expand...
With all of those improvements there isn't anything, even F-22, that could come close. Thrust to weight, sustained turn, acceleration, climb would all be best in the world ever. I suspect it would even outpace F-22 in supercruise by a margin.
Click to expand...
I suspect so, especially the combination of decoupled canards and thrust vectoring since both ends of the aircraft could pitch. A bit like four wheel steering in a car? (I don't know if the aerodynamics would actually work like this. Someone feel free to tell me if pitch controls at nose and tail would be more effective than at just one end.) Although G tolerance is still G tolerance so barring better G suits that wouldn't change. It would be capable of direct lift and sideforce, and off axis nose pointing. The studies into the MD-265 included a delta canard aircraft that looks like EFA which was fully capable of decoupled maneuvering and vectored lift.

Supercruise I have my doubts about. F-22 is above 1.8, I suspect around 2, or so I've heard (I think one of the F-22 pilots on Aircrew Interview hinted as much during a Q and A). Typhoon at present is 1.5 with an Air to Air loadout. How much would that increase if mil thrust went from 27000 lbs (120kN) to 32400 lbs (144kN) for two EJ230s, since it looks like the EJ270 (35000/156kN) might be too large?
Click to expand...
We should probably make a separate topic because this an absolutely fascinating topic I’ve thought about for a long time but I fear we risk clogging up a news topic.
 
I think the canards are already decoupled. If not, that would sound antic (see how J-20 use asymmetrical canards for yaw).
 
Topi said:
I think the ultimate Eurofighter (AMK with EJ230, CAPTOR-E, optional CFTs etc.) might well become a reality if the main European operators decide to donate their tranche 1 aircraft to Ukraine and replace them with newly built aircraft. I am of the opinion that there is a need for greater numbers of air superiority fighters amongst Western air forces considering especially the rise of China and the "return to more conventional warfare" we have witnessed since 24th of February. I also think that my country (Finland) should have chosen the Eurofighter instead of the F-35, as the main duty of the FAF would in any case be air defence in a war with Russia.
Click to expand...
Personally I'm holding out for EJ270's (the so called Stage 2 EJ200)....:)

But I'm afraid CFT's were long ago ruled out. Couldn't be made to work due to aerodynamic issues. 3D thrust vectoring was very much doable though...and desirable.

Donating T1 to Ukraine is something I've been in favour of for a while. So many upsides with near zero downsides....particularly if the AESA antenna was added.

I'm not sure we need more air superiority though....between the US and Europe we massively outclass any threat in the near to medium term to a ludicrous degree, so much so that getting our enablers and weapon stocks in order makes more sense, with an eye on the future like GCAP and NGAD. And particularly reducing dependence on the US who really need to be gearing up to the Pacific now.

Finland made the right choice with F-35A I believe, as much as I'd love to see a Typhoon in FAF colours....what we need to see with Typhoon is the current operators get the most out of it as they can and maximise exports.
 
TomcatViP said:
@Sea_Vixen : South Korea. That was probably during the times Boeing was pushing for a stealthy F-15.
Click to expand...
Iirc that thing is not from the 3rd F-X program. It's probably either from the KF-X related international seminar in the 2000s (during which SAAB offered P306) or during 2014~15 period when it still wasn't decided if they'll go clean sheet or a modified design based on existing fighter for KF-X. On the latter, Boeing for example offered a stealthy variant of their International/Advanced Super Hornet model.
 
Lupa produced to BAE order ... South Korea, Greece, Saudi Arabia, Croatia, Serbia, Finland (HX)
 

Attachments

  • FB_IMG_1675196882040.jpg
    FB_IMG_1675196882040.jpg
    75.1 KB · Views: 60
  • FB_IMG_1675196879293.jpg
    FB_IMG_1675196879293.jpg
    45.5 KB · Views: 44
  • FB_IMG_1675196874999.jpg
    FB_IMG_1675196874999.jpg
    70.4 KB · Views: 40
  • FB_IMG_1675196871816.jpg
    FB_IMG_1675196871816.jpg
    44.8 KB · Views: 40
  • FB_IMG_1675196868680.jpg
    FB_IMG_1675196868680.jpg
    63.7 KB · Views: 60
  • typhoon-scale-model.jpg
    typhoon-scale-model.jpg
    226.8 KB · Views: 25
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
timmymagic said:
Personally I'm holding out for EJ270's (the so called Stage 2 EJ200)....:)
Click to expand...
XG-40-2 was producing 108kN (>24,000lbf) back in the '80s.
Click to expand...
I saw that on German Wiki, is that true though? As I under stood it the second XG40 was just the complete engine.


On the updated EJ200
EUROJET INVESTIGATES EJ200 DERIVATIVES

PROPULSION TECHNOLOGY

STANLEY W. KANDEBO

MUNICH

The Eurojet group is investigating whether its EJ200 could provide the basis for engines that could power alternatives to the embattled European Fighter Aircraft.

The propulsion study and a complementary aircraft investigation were begun in late July because of Germany's threatened withdrawal from the four-nation EFA program. German Defense Minister Volker Ruehe has repeatedly stated that the EFA partners should substitute a lighter, less expensive aircraft (AW&ST July 6, p. 20).

Program officials said the purpose of the studies is to assess the cost and performance of derivative engines and airframes based on the EJ200 and EFA, respectively. However, they also are seeking to determine how much of the research and development investment could be salvaged if a lighter EFA were to go into production.

The studies are scheduled for completion in mid-October and are being performed at the request of NEFMO, the NATO European Fighter Aircraft Development, Productions and Logistic Management Organization. NEFMO serves as the contracting agency for the multinational group that is designing and producing the EFA and EJ200.

In parallel to these cost and performance analyses, EFA member nations Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain also are reevaluating the military requirements that led them to develop the EFA (AW&ST Aug. 10, p. 19). Unless the military requirements for the aircraft change, the design is likely to stay fixed, program officials said.

However, given the budget pressures in Germany, the technical criteria for the aircraft could be strongly influenced by political concerns.

Under the cost and performance studies, Eurojet is examining powerplants with thrust levels 10-20% above and below that of the EJ200. The lower thrust engines could support a twin-engine, lighter-weight aircraft, while the higher thrust engines could power a single-engine EFA derivative, officials said.

Rolls-Royce deputy chairman and chief executive, Sir Ralph Robins, has said versions of the EJ200 could be used to reengine Panavia Tornados, Lockheed F1 17s and McDonnell Douglas F/A-18s. Rolls-Royce also has had discussions with Northrop.

Rolls has a 33% share in the Eurojet group. Other members are Italy's Fiatavio (21%), Spain's ITP (13%) and Germany's MTU (33%).

The current EJ200 specification calls for a powerplant capable of generating 1 3,500 lb. of dry thrust and 20,000 lb. in afterburner. However, if thrust requirements changed as much as now being studied, "it could mean just scaling, but that's not always easy to do. It really means a different size engine," program officials said.

Additionally, any significant change in thrust will affect funding. "If the need to change the thrust of the engine happened a couple of years ago when we were at the point of demonstration, the change would not greatly affect the program. That's not the case now," they said.

EJ200 TESTS have reached the point where flight clearance is expected near the end of the year. Plans now call for the EJ200 to power the third EFA prototype. The first two aircraft will be powered by Turbo-Union RBI 99s. Twenty-eight EJ200s will eventually support the threeyear Eurojet flight test program.

The EJ200 demonstrator and full-scale development engines have accumulated more than 160 hr. in tests. Powerplants run under simulated service conditions have demonstrated they are robust enough to last about four times as long as contractually required. "The development program is on track, the engine is meeting its milestones and the development contract is solid," Michael J. Roberts, Eurojet's managing director, said.

The program, though, has not been perfect, he added. "Earlier this year we

had blade vibration and stress problems in the compressor. But rig tests of a compressor incorporating improvements indicated about two months ago that the problem has been corrected," he said.

One additional, lingering problem has been the digital engine control units. "In broad terms, the problem is hardware, not software. The hardware must be light enough and reliable enough for flight test and it is not," Roberts said.

The control unit has not affected development or test of the engine because the problem is solely with flight weight hardware, he added.
Click to expand...
 
F-2 said:
Forest Green said:
timmymagic said:
Personally I'm holding out for EJ270's (the so called Stage 2 EJ200)....:)
Click to expand...
XG-40-2 was producing 108kN (>24,000lbf) back in the '80s.
Click to expand...
I saw that on German Wiki, is that true though? As I under stood it the second XG40 was just the complete engine.


On the updated EJ200
EUROJET INVESTIGATES EJ200 DERIVATIVES

PROPULSION TECHNOLOGY

STANLEY W. KANDEBO

MUNICH

The Eurojet group is investigating whether its EJ200 could provide the basis for engines that could power alternatives to the embattled European Fighter Aircraft.

The propulsion study and a complementary aircraft investigation were begun in late July because of Germany's threatened withdrawal from the four-nation EFA program. German Defense Minister Volker Ruehe has repeatedly stated that the EFA partners should substitute a lighter, less expensive aircraft (AW&ST July 6, p. 20).

Program officials said the purpose of the studies is to assess the cost and performance of derivative engines and airframes based on the EJ200 and EFA, respectively. However, they also are seeking to determine how much of the research and development investment could be salvaged if a lighter EFA were to go into production.

The studies are scheduled for completion in mid-October and are being performed at the request of NEFMO, the NATO European Fighter Aircraft Development, Productions and Logistic Management Organization. NEFMO serves as the contracting agency for the multinational group that is designing and producing the EFA and EJ200.

In parallel to these cost and performance analyses, EFA member nations Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain also are reevaluating the military requirements that led them to develop the EFA (AW&ST Aug. 10, p. 19). Unless the military requirements for the aircraft change, the design is likely to stay fixed, program officials said.

However, given the budget pressures in Germany, the technical criteria for the aircraft could be strongly influenced by political concerns.

Under the cost and performance studies, Eurojet is examining powerplants with thrust levels 10-20% above and below that of the EJ200. The lower thrust engines could support a twin-engine, lighter-weight aircraft, while the higher thrust engines could power a single-engine EFA derivative, officials said.

Rolls-Royce deputy chairman and chief executive, Sir Ralph Robins, has said versions of the EJ200 could be used to reengine Panavia Tornados, Lockheed F1 17s and McDonnell Douglas F/A-18s. Rolls-Royce also has had discussions with Northrop.

Rolls has a 33% share in the Eurojet group. Other members are Italy's Fiatavio (21%), Spain's ITP (13%) and Germany's MTU (33%).

The current EJ200 specification calls for a powerplant capable of generating 1 3,500 lb. of dry thrust and 20,000 lb. in afterburner. However, if thrust requirements changed as much as now being studied, "it could mean just scaling, but that's not always easy to do. It really means a different size engine," program officials said.

Additionally, any significant change in thrust will affect funding. "If the need to change the thrust of the engine happened a couple of years ago when we were at the point of demonstration, the change would not greatly affect the program. That's not the case now," they said.

EJ200 TESTS have reached the point where flight clearance is expected near the end of the year. Plans now call for the EJ200 to power the third EFA prototype. The first two aircraft will be powered by Turbo-Union RBI 99s. Twenty-eight EJ200s will eventually support the threeyear Eurojet flight test program.

The EJ200 demonstrator and full-scale development engines have accumulated more than 160 hr. in tests. Powerplants run under simulated service conditions have demonstrated they are robust enough to last about four times as long as contractually required. "The development program is on track, the engine is meeting its milestones and the development contract is solid," Michael J. Roberts, Eurojet's managing director, said.

The program, though, has not been perfect, he added. "Earlier this year we

had blade vibration and stress problems in the compressor. But rig tests of a compressor incorporating improvements indicated about two months ago that the problem has been corrected," he said.

One additional, lingering problem has been the digital engine control units. "In broad terms, the problem is hardware, not software. The hardware must be light enough and reliable enough for flight test and it is not," Roberts said.

The control unit has not affected development or test of the engine because the problem is solely with flight weight hardware, he added.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
The XG-15 was the engine for a single-engined fighter - a potential replacement for the Harrier with up to 126kN. Two XG-40 engines were built, one with a 10:1 TWR and the other a 12:1.

de.wikipedia.org

Eurojet EJ200 – Wikipedia

de.wikipedia.org de.wikipedia.org
 


I think their is some kind of mistake

These are the two sources given, the first is from 1984 and mentions thrust around 22500lbf. However in contrast to the German wiki it refers to a 10:1 thrust to weight ratio compared to 12:1 on wiki. 10:1 is the XG-40 design goal. 1984 was also two years before the engine was run which makes me think this is just an estimate number.

The second is 1988 and nearly mentions the growth potential of the ej200 by 15-20% which matches the EJ230.


I think this is a German language group misunderstanding English sources. Their where multiple XG-40 demonstrators but I don’t think they where very different from one another.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom