simi_av8r 0 Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 ...you said that you'd need to see a pig flying, before you saw the following... So, here's the pig: and here's A400m flying... Yes, it's official. A400M flies! All the info is at the Airbus Military website...but here's a quick snippet to whet the appetite For its first flight the aircraft took off at a weight of 127 tonnes, carrying 15 tonnes of test equipment including two tonnes of water ballast, compared with its maximum take-off weight of 141 tonnes. As planned, the six-man crew extensively explored the aircraft's flight envelope in direct law, including a wide speed-range, and tested lowering and raising of the landing gear and high-lift devices at altitude. After checking the aircraft's performance in the landing configuration the crew landed back at Seville.In the first half of 2010 MSN 1 will be joined by two sister aircraft, MSN 2 and MSN 3, followed by MSN 4 by the end of the year. A fifth aircraft will join the programme during 2011. This fleet will be used for some 3,700 hours of test-flying between now and first delivery to the French Air Force at the end of 2012. This will be followed by additional military development flying. The type will be certificated by both the civil and military authorities. Enjoy!! Simi Link to post Share on other sites
mutley 4,498 Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 I am pleased it's in the air at last, she should make a great lift and shifter, the pilots seem to enjoy flying her. Thanks for posting. Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 Simi, I'm one of those skeptics, but don't recall saying anything about pigs flying. I'm not surprised it flew and I'm happy it's looking good. The primary concern seems to be the economic viability. Many of the prospective customers are very concerned about the weight-bloat issue which seems to compromise it's capabiltiy to handle a modern armored fighting vehicle as originally intended. If the anticipated customer-nations fail to line up as initially hoped, it may not be a flying pig, but rather something white, with big ears and a trunk... John Link to post Share on other sites
wisemanp 0 Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Hardly heard anything about this! Amazing how something so large and with parts (I'm assuming) built in the UK, gets no coverage, just because it's not a new passenger plane or supersonic fighter. Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Phil, I agree with you. That long-anticipated first flight should have been big news on both sides of the Atlantic, but particularly on yours. It was not - the 787 first flight a few days later got much more press coverage. The engines in particular have some UK input and are the second most powerful turbo-props ever prodcuced, taking a back seat only to those on the Tu-95 Bear and its variants. As you suggest, there are probably a host of other UK-origin bits and pieces in the A400M, but the engines are the only ones I'm aware of for sure. Rolls-Royce has about a one-quarter stake in that part of the project. John Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted January 6, 2010 Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 From AVwebBiz... Big Airplane, Big Price Tag, Big Decisions Airbus Threatens To Scrap A400M Airbus has threatened to scrap the A400M heavy transport project unless its customers, seven European countries, agree, by the end of the month, to help cover the huge cost overruns it has piled up. The big four-engine turboprop flew for the first time Dec. 11 but the controversy over Airbus' demand that customers accept a 25-percent price increase still hasn't been settled. Airbus CEO Tom Enders issued an ultimatum on Tuesday, warning that the company will simply drop tools rather than shoulder the whole burden. "We need to stop this constant drain on resources," Airbus said on Tuesday. "We've asked the governments to take their share of the burden and this needs to be done as soon as possible." Germany is the largest customer for the transport and is also reported to be the holdout in the negotiations, a charge it denies. The airplane is about three years late and Airbus missed a first flight deadline in 2009. The stakes are high for all concerned. If Airbus drops out, it will have to pay back about $8 billion in seed money provided by the governments and admit failure in its attempt to break into the defense market dominated by U.S. companies. On the other hand, without the airplane, the European countries will remain without the heavy airlift capacity they need for their own requirements and for their NATO commitments. Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted January 12, 2010 Report Share Posted January 12, 2010 Airbus leads Boeing but A400M problem lingers "...but the CEO warned a troubled military transport jet program is endangering the rest of the company." "...said Airbus should cancel the delayed and over-budget A400M military plane project if customer governments fail to commit more funds soon because it is swallowing money and valuable resources." Not only can it not lift a full-sized armored fighting vehicle because of weight-bloat, apparently it can't lift the weight of it's expenses either, due to cost-bloat. Maybe there's life left in the C-130 line after all, and there's still the C-17. http://my.earthlink.net/article/int?guid=20100112/fed88f0f-09c0-4e22-8dcf-dfa6cf57698a John Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 Airbus: "We'll cancel crap A400M unless we get more Link to post Share on other sites
simi_av8r 0 Posted February 24, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 an intriguing report there John.... have you seen the news over at ="http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/12/15/336102/eads-builds-case-for-a400m-sale-to-usaf.html]FlightGlobal.com?? If EADS gets its way, maybe we'd not be alone in supporting it. If it all went swimmingly for EADS, and with the US on board, you could be certain that the cash hole tipping the Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 That's not likely to happen. American politicians couldn't even stomach the A330 based tanker as a replacement for the KC-135R, even though it was better in almost every way than Boeing's B-767 based alternative. It wasn't American so they wouldn't buy it and sent the Air Force packing, back to square one to re-bid it. The jury is still out but I'll bet that somehow Boeing will be the successful bidder next time, despite the fact that it will stick the AF with the wrong airplane. Politicians don't care about that. In that tanker situation, there's a real need and even then a "foreign" aircraft was not considered palatable. For airlift, we have C-5, C-17 and C-130s, with the production lines still up and running on the latter two. There's not much of a gap to be filled, even if the A400M was a viable entry, which it is not. It has too low a payload, too short a range and is far, far too expensive. Where's the advantage? So to summarize, there's no need, it costs too much and it's not American. It's not going to happen, even if the A400M were to actually go into production - I consider that unlikely at this point as well. John Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted March 2, 2010 Report Share Posted March 2, 2010 EADS Breaks A400M Finance Deadlock "Chacon said they had reached an agreement in principle between the seven partner countries and EADS..." "The seven nations (Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Spain and Turkey) offered a total of Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted March 7, 2010 Report Share Posted March 7, 2010 More details on the latest deal. Financing of Airbus A400M appears resolved Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 A400M woes push EADS into the red "...said it lost euro1.05 billion ($1.44 billion) in the three months to December after booking charges of euro1.6 billion for the A400M military project and euro240 million for the A380 in the period." "EADS reached a last-ditch agreement with customer nations on Friday, who agreed to inject another euro3.5 billion (nearly $4.8 billion) into the A400M project, allowing it to continue." "EADS CEO Louis Gallois, who had threatened to halt the program if no deal was reached, said that the project is "now back on track."" "Airbus doesn't expect to make any money on the first 180 planes for its launch customers Link to post Share on other sites
allardjd 1,853 Posted March 18, 2010 Report Share Posted March 18, 2010 "The prospective cut in orders by London is smaller than expected, with previous estimates going to six fewer units than the original 25 planes purchased, because of the cost overrun.." "Those prospective cancellations came under the agreement which limits the maximum cancellations to 10..." "Under the agreement reached, the customers waived 1.2 billion euros of penalties for delays and will speed up pre-delivery payments between 2010 and 2014 to ensure a "minimum treasury" for EADS. The exact amount of those payments remained to be negotiated, along with a clause covering cost inflation on materials..." "EADS Chief Executive Louis Gallois said last June before the Paris Airshow the company was making the A400M at a loss and would only make money on export orders." "The overall agreement also provides for a staged delivery of capabilities, with an initial operating capability of the basic transport mission, followed by air drop, aerial refuelling and finally low-level flight and automatic terrain following..."[/i] ...and finally, this gem... "The cost of buying a mix of C-130Js and C-17s as interim solutions would have been 15 percent more costly than buying the A400M aircraft at the higher price..." ...which entirely ignores the fact that the Hercs and C-17s actually exist, with design and development complete, production lines up and running and sales prices and operating costs known. Uncertainty and risk in that option is reduced to near-zero. As for that being an "...interim solution...", interim until what occurs? John Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now