EUROJET, the consortium responsible for the EJ200 engine installed in the Eurofighter Typhoon, today signed a contract with the NATO Eurofighter & Tornado Management Agency (NETMA) to provide 56 new EJ200 engines for the German Air Force.
The contract, signed in Munich, between Miguel Angel Martin Perez, General Manager of NETMA, and Gerhard Bähr, CEO of EUROJET, covers EJ200 engines for a new order of Tranche 4 Typhoon fighter aircraft.
Production of the engine modules will be carried out locally by the four partner companies of the EUROJET consortium; Rolls-Royce, MTU Aero Engines, ITP and Avio Aero. As partner for the German Air Force, final assembly of the engines will take place at MTU Aero Engines with deliveries to the German customer scheduled to begin in 2023.
Commenting on the finalisation of the contract Mr Bähr stated:
“This contract signature is a clear statement of confidence in the platform and of the performance and sustainability of the EJ200 engines which power it. In addition, it also demonstrates a high level of confidence in the consortium and its European industrial base, and will secure highly skilled workplaces in the aerospace industry in the coming years.”
Since delivery of the first production engine in 2003, well over a thousand EJ200 production engines have been delivered to nine nations, and the EJ200 engine has achieved in excess of 1 million engine flying hours.
I thought the German order was for 38 Typhoon, should they not be ordering 76? They don’t intend for the air frames to share engines do they?
They are replacing tranche 1 air frames so would be reusing many of those engines.
I thought the tranche 1 ej200’s weren’t compatible with current production spec?? Re the order, they will have received additional engines with Tranch2/3 orders, so these will be used along with maintenance reserve. The reality of this is that the Luftwaffe will have some lovely shiny new machines to fly, but not a single one will ever be used in combat, unless German soil is directly attacked. It’s one of the reasons NATO needs to be reformed. Germany fully enjoys the protection of NATO, yet, since the end of the cold war it has been allowed to ride the coat… Read more »
I know some Germans who are ashamed they haven’t done more on the NATO state.
However, you need to temper that with the burned in message of “we got it very wrong twice”
No, you would not be correct. Germany has been involved in peacekeeping missions in both Afghanistan and Mali. In Afghan they operate in the North of the country based around Mazar-e-Sharif. They have been operating there since 2003 to the present day. They have lost around 50 troops in fighting and accidents. It was also the first place that the Boxer IFV was first operationally deployed. Since 2013 Germany has been involved with the UN mission MINUSMA An air detachment has been operating since 2017, where one of their Tigers lost a main rotor blade in flight killing the two… Read more »
A while back I read ‘Unwinnable” by Theo Farrell. I can’t recall much about the Germans in Afghanistan except they kept out of the fighting as much as possible (and I doubt Mali is any different) so YES the Germans don’t pull their weight.
Well done for taking the trouble to rebut ignorant claims.
Hi John The Luftwaffe flew SEAD missions, in the support of NATO allies, with its Tornado ECR variant (armed with HARM missiles) during the Kosovo conflict of 1999. Over 400 sorties were flown, and 200 HARMs fired – see Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Air_Force More recently, the Luftwaffe has flown reconnaissance sorties over Afghanistan. I think the Germans do want to play their part in international coalitions, and they have funded military interventions by NATO partners. But the country does have an unfortunate history of waging aggressive war on its neighbours! During 1999, even amongst allies, there was still some sensitivity about seeing… Read more »
Well said ?
Whilst I share your frustration about Germany today I would suggest you have a read of this article, “How Germany remembers the world wars.” It is quite moving and gives a significant insight into the modern Germany psyche and describes the feelings about all things military from the Germany perspective way better than I could.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-54924973
Worth the read.
Cheers CR
All valid points guys, yet the Germans still don’t pull their weight. like I said, compare the German effort to the danish effort in Afghanistan. The plucky Danes with their tiny armed forces made a huge contribution (in relation to their size) and earned a fearsome reputation for their professionalism and fighting spirit. The Germans on the other hand are very, “you get stuck in and we will watch your bag and cheer from the side lines” in the school yard fight. Not good enough…. What would happen if Britain, France and others held back in the same way, NATO… Read more »
I think you need to read more material regarding the German armed forces. It is very easy to get sucked in to believing certain things are actual facts when they are far from it just because you have read a few articles from people that want to peddle myths. Now, some things are indeed true and Germany really ought to spend more on defence so it can contribute more to NATO, but then other things are far more complex than simply listing monetary figures etc. I mean I still hear how the French helped Argentina during the Falklands war and… Read more »
“more than happy”? You mean back in the days when the West German Army made up the majority of NATO ground forces?
Nor should we pretend that British and American forces where station in Germany out of altruistic good will.
We stationed 50,000 men and woman in West Germany Dern at enormous economic cost to the UK.
Yep the German used to pull their weight, thanks for pointing that out…
My point being that in the last 30 years they simply haven’t, they have made the very bare minimum effort they could get away with regarding NATO!
And they want an independent EU military structure too, they certainly do have a cracking sense of humour!
Yup and we didn’t do it for altruistic reasons, so lets not get high and mighty acting like it was.
And yeah, that’s not at all true, for the last 30 years everyone has been reducing military spending, including the UK. Now Germany spends more on defence than we do, so maybe stop with the finger pointing.
Hmmm, I haven’t mentioned defence spending Dern, I am pointing out their considerable lacking when it comes to getting stuck in….
Oh look at that, if you actually bothered to answer some of my points you’d have noticed I pointed out they get considerably more stuck in than many other NATO nations. But oh well, you’re more interested in ad hominems than conversations. Good day.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
The psyche is largely what controls both spend and deployment.
Yes, the Germans have done some great things for the alliance but this is limited. Germans don’t really want to get involved in offensive operation.
Kosovo was different as that was prevention of genocide and was UN supported peace keeping.
Shockingly a soverign country should have control over it’s own constitution. Given Britains little spat over soverignety with the EU it’s really hypocritical to complain about the German Consitution. As for pulling their weight, maybe bitch about some of the countries that pull even less weight than Germany? Spain? Canada? Germany enyoing the full protection of NATO? Germany is a European power surrounded by friendly countries it enjoys good diplomatic relations with, it doesn’t “enjoy the protection” of NATO, if anything NATO is the only mechanism Germany will be drawn into a war through in any sort of near future… Read more »
Generally agree with you but surely we all enjoy the protection of NATO surrounded by friends or otherwise as that would apply to a great many of the European members.
I mean I raised that specifically for the point on “enjoying the protection of NATO.” Germany isn’t really “enjoying” the protection of NATO, if it wasn’t in NATO it, like Austria, would almost certainly still be on friendly terms with it’s neighbouring countries, and at low risk of going to war, and yes the same can be said of many Western European Powers. So when someone says “Oh you should pay more for your own protection” it’s perhaps understandable when the come back is: “But we aren’t in danger.” German Military spending is an asset to NATO, and defending Germany… Read more »
Hi Dern You’ve made some interesting points: today, other than Russian nuclear blackmail (unlikely, but I guess we shouldn’t rule it out these days!), there is no direct threat to Germany – but NATO membership does push her defendable border several hundred miles to the East – into an unstable region of Europe. Using that argument, without NATO membership, Poland would be a large, useful populous buffer state, by dint of her geography aiding German security. But I think NATO membership today is still a price Germany is happy to pay. Because of German history, she still seeks international respectability… Read more »
Oh I agree, Germany is better off in NATO than out, but more for foreign relations with it’s neighbours than for it’s own security because like you say, the only thing that might threaten Germany is a nuclear blackmail at this point and… well why would Russia do that? It gains nothing and even without NATO that act would be suicide on the international stage.
Dern you are very defensive of Germany. Germany has committed to spend the 2% and when it does so, I think much of the critism on here will evaporate. Discussions about countries with a far lower GDP or countries who break the rules does not excuse Germany (or any country) of breaking the rules. As for the risk of war I thought that was the point of the 2% – if Germany feels it is too much it should argue its point within NATO.
It’s probably because there is a very noticeable anti-german sentiment on this site Mark.
Lots of countries have commited to the 2% of the GDP rule and don’t make it yet you don’t see people blasting them like Germany (note the size of GDP doese not make a difference since it’s a PERCENTAGE of GDP, not a total expenditure. 1% missed by Spain is the same as 1% missed by Germany in this context).
Many countries are on their way to 2% including Germany. I think you should should consider thinking about this from a different angle. Most of the people on here (correct me if I’m wrong guys) think of the Germans as a strong military nation and are disappointed to see it underfunded. You mention other nations … we never had any great expectation of their contribution if the s**t hit the fan. Germans should take it as a compliment not an insult!
Seriously Dern, going for a tied remoaner EU crack, its all over, move along now.
Wow, the Canadians and Danes, seriously, have you any idea how effort these countries have spent in the sand box, they have more than pulled their weight over the years.
The German Constitution regarding this a total fudge, it guarantee’s them an easy ride and they will never change it, quite happy to let others sons and daughters bleed for them…
Very wrong regarding the Germans dusty stockpile of ordnance, I would accept ‘slightly’, at a push….
Yeah, look if you are big on being a soverign country then you can’t get angry at other countries soverign constiutions. Sorry you are a hilarious hypcroite and you hurling remain insults around because someone pointed out a fact is just sad and pathetic. Really? Because Canada and Denmark spend considerably less % of GDP on defence so… freeloaders. Not to mention the Greeks, remember them in “the sandbox”? No? Shocker… but hey the Germans deployed there. So spend more than the Canadians, deploy more than the Greeks, yet the main target of Europhobes. And nope, unlike you I do… Read more »
“Sorry you are a hilarious hypcroite and you hurling remain insults around because someone pointed out a fact is just sad and pathetic”.
” Given Britains little spat over soverignety with the EU”
You started the remoaning Dern, not me, so I would suggest you are looking in the mirror when you make your comments…
Unfortunately, its generally the case when someone is loosing the argument that they start to get offensive…
Oh dear,never mind, have a good evening…
Sorry that’s not a remoan that’s pointing out a fact kiddo. Britain voted for Brexit largely over soverignty issues, are you denying this? No? Good, then we can move on. If Britain voted over soverignty issues then it’s pure hypocricy to demand changes to other nations systems of government. QED. If people starting to loose the argument become offensive then… oh dear. Please look at your first comment, looks like you lost out of the gate. But hey, don’t bother to try to address any of the actual points I’ve raised (can you even? Seems like you’re little Brexit/Remoan rant… Read more »
Sorry Dern, How remiss of me, I generally get a notification on my phone.. Righto, interesting that you are extremely defensive of Germany… Are you a German, you seem to take it as a personal insult to the fatherland… The point I am making (and you seem to be dodging), is that the Germans always avoid putting troops in the line of fire and leave other NATO partners to to it instead. I have not mentioned their defence GDP, just pointing out that they stand back while others bleed for them… Are you saying that this isn’t the German position???… Read more »
Oh gotta love the attempt at strawmanning by going for the further insults. Perhaps I’m defensive because of narrow minded little nationalists who seem to still be living in the battle of britain constantly focusing on Germany when there are considerably greater offenders within NATO. No this isn’t the German position. But given that you’ve shown multiple times that you don’t actually know what you are talking about and your only recourse is to go for trying to discredit the person rather (hell you couldn’t even muster the intelligence to come up with an original ad hominem, instead copying one… Read more »
Oh dear, I’ve clearly upset your snowflake millennial (oddly Germanic)sensibilities… Buckle in Dern… “Narrow minded Battle of Britain Nationalists” Yes, I am a proud British person, thank you for the compliment, sorry that upsets you … A line only a Guardian reader would use as a weapon and actually think it an insult… Your refusal Dern to admit that Germany doesn’t pull its weight in regards to putting its armed forces into the fight, is loud and clear and very telling indeed.. Your framed and narrow mined protectionist view that Das Vaterland, is beyond reproach in its ability to keep… Read more »
The Tranche 1 incompatibility with the later tranches is the design of the airframe, it isnt strong enough for additional components to be bolted to it as drilling holes for attachments will weaken its integrity. The Tranche 1 also lacks cooling connections to the nose required for AESA radar and uses copper rather than fibre optic cable.
Ah, I see, I though there was an incompatibility issue with the Fadec regarding tranche 1 ej200’s and later examples?
I though that was part of the reason for dismantling early T birds to keep the single seat Tranche 1’s flying?
Airbus and Leonardo have a modification program to enhance a Tranche1 aircraft to a Tranche 3 equivalent. It is not a cheap option as it includes replacing the whole bulkhead that the radar fits to. Italy have had a number of aircraft upgraded through this program, but its not a whole lot cheaper than buying a new Tranche 3 aircraft. Which is probably why Germany has opted for the new buys.
Will those engines not be part of the proposed Indonesian buy of German and Austrian Tranche 1 aircraft?
A British engine with a German H.Q. and C.E.O. Just to show we can all be Good Germa … Europeans.
A German subsidiary of a British Company, MTU is a 100% subsidiary of Rolls Royce Engines.
It will be interesting to see what happens with the engine on the Future Franco German design. If RR is excluded will they need Chinese walls for MTU? It wouldn’t make a lot of sense. Maybe sinmecca or whatever it’s called will become part of eurojet. The investment required for these next gen engines would prob require a single solution for both Tempest and the FrancoGerman offering.
Doubtful China, they havent managed to get the engine for their latest fighters to work properly, keeps melting. Problem of copying foreign designs but not having access to the same metallurgy.
Eurojet is a jont venture ownd by Rolls Royce and MTU Aero Engines AG, and Avio.
So Rolls Royce cannot be excluded because it part owns Eurojet.
Rolls Royce don’t own MTU Aero Engines they only acquired what’s now (Tognum) Rolls-Royce Power Systems.
That is correct MTU Aero Engines is a different company in partnership with RR to own Eurojet.
MTU Aero Engines is a different company to MTU which is a Rolls Royce subsidiary.
RR acquire Tognum.
Ha ha ha, Don’t mention the War Barry, I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it!
I remember as a kid in 1950’s London when the aftermath of the War was still very much with us, buying stink bombs labelled “The Biggest stink since Hitler” 🙂 One wonders what a different world we would live in if Hitler had died or been imprisoned for life around 1930? The impact of that single human being on the planet is something to reflect on. I never felt any animosity toward’the German people’. I am sure there was widespread revulsion among ordinary Germans toward Hitler and the Nazis but it was surpressed by fear and propaganda.I just hope the… Read more »
Very true Geoff, in many ways, it’s a shame we aren’t cooperating on a pan European Gen 6 fighter, but the political situation (seemingly trying to block any UK input from the very start) and the French insistence on a Carrier capable design, with its inherent limitations, makes this impossible. Certainly Typhoon is British at its core, the key components, like the engine and radar, fly by wire (British lead) and many other areas of this excellent design are directly based on British technology. Without British technology, it would have been somewhat lacklustre, that’s for sure. We shall see if… Read more »
Hi John. As a wee boy, I caught the Belfast Ferry out of Liverpool many a time to go stay with family in Antrim. As you know there was/is a sizable community from both sides of the divide in Liverpool so there were bound to have been some IRA sympathisers among them. Lets hold thumbs for Tempest and a solid partner-the Swedes would be a natural shoe in. As you say a Pan European consortium would be best in terms of volume but I wonder how efficient a manufacturing base split over many sites and countries really is as opposed… Read more »
Absolutely, we need a single Tempest production line. It’s very hard to see the Swedish wanting a large twin engine strike fighter, it doesn’t really fit their past operational ethos… Perhaps they will use the tech to make a baby Tempest, with a different single engine airframe, using Tempest avionics, construction techniques and powerplant? I can certainly see the Franco German effort descending into a big euro bun fight, as the French insist on being in charge and the Germans constantly trying to reduce the spec to keep the unit price down!! Good luck to them, they are going to… Read more »
I agree. The UK requirement differs from the traditional Swedish requirement. We traditionally require a long range heavy aircraft that is used to intercept threats as far away from the shore as possible. Therefore, it will need not only the duration but a heavy missile load out as well. Sweden being the ham in the sandwich between NATO and Russia, require an aircraft that can operate from dispersed sites, has a quick turn-around time and can do a multitude of roles. So is more of a get up – attack the target – return to the dispersal, in the quickest… Read more »
Morning Davey, Oh ohh, don’t mention TSR2! An abject lesson on how not to build a strike aircraft …. Though it was a big and undeniably very beautiful mistake!!!
I think however an attempt to shoe horn the differing requirements of Sweden and the UK would take us down the F35 ‘ all things to all men’ route, with the same predictable issues.
Perhaps Gen6 rapid prototyping and 3d printing will allow two air frames and the same avionics and engine to be used, our Swedish friends can bring a great deal to the table, that’s for sure..
That’s also my thoughts. There would be too many compromises to designing an airframe that met both Nations requirements, i.e. long range interceptor and STOL. Sweden has a very good reputation in electronic countermeasures and warfare, as well building an impressive aircraft on not a lot of budget. The UK through BAe, Qinetiq, DSTl, MBDA, Thales, Leonardo and Rolls Royce are at the top of the game against other defence manufacturers. So there is a very good prospect that Tempest will come to fruition and hopefully won’t be a money pit that stagnated Typhoon and has plagued the F35. TSR2… Read more »
I absolutely agree Davey. I’ve had a fascination with TSR2 since I was a kid,I have everything that’s ever been written on the subject and digested it. As you quite rightly say, much of the technology that went into the aircraft (a remarkable ground breaking machine), by way of materials (engine/airframe) etc, was re-used in Concorde and later in the Tornado programme. In fact UK work on the later cancelled Anglo French AFVG (particularly wing pivot joint and centre box) proved extremely helpful with regards to Tornado. The UK has been the main contributor to both Tornado and Typhoon European… Read more »