Airbus A400M - Atlas C1

Michel Van

Michel Van

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
13 August 2007
Messages
8,446
Reaction score
11,004
after 4 year of Delays and €5 billion over budget - (source the French Senate )

the first Prototype take off for 3 hour testfly near Sevilla.
Chef-Testpilot Edward "Ed" Strongman explane after that "it was Fantasic"

on development problems, there a lot of Information in press
not the ability to airlift 32 tons cargo (by overweight or underpower engine),
problem with engine and its software etc
after German Luftwaffe EADS will delifer there first A400M at 2014

www.spiegel.de

Neuer Militär-Airbus: Kostenzank trübt Jungfernflugjubel

Erst Freude, dann Frust: Der A400M hat seinen Erstflug erfolgreich bewältigt - doch schon steht das Geschacher um die Kosten für den Transporter wieder im Vordergrund. Vor allem Deutschland fürchtet ein Milliardendesaster.
www.spiegel.de www.spiegel.de

IMHO
had EADS take a joinventure with Antonow and build An-70
the Aircraft were long in Series production...

Picture source:
www.spiegel.de

Airbus: Jungfernflug des A400M

Das Militärflugzeug A400M ist erstmals geflogen. Ein Prototyp der Maschine absolvierte am Freitagvormittag in Sevilla seinen Jungfernflug. Ursprünglich war der Start schon für Anfang 2008 vorgesehen gewesen.
www.spiegel.de www.spiegel.de
 

Attachments

  • image-40376-galleryV9-sxzc.jpg
    image-40376-galleryV9-sxzc.jpg
    50 KB · Views: 1,044
  • image-40400-galleryV9-hmbd.jpg
    image-40400-galleryV9-hmbd.jpg
    16.6 KB · Views: 996
Yeah, overweight /too expensive / too late : usual bussiness in aeronautics since the 60's (alas).
Many things will be corrected over the next machines, as happen frequently.

At least it flies ! But Transalls will fall from the sky long before the A400M replace them. We need more CASA, surplus C-130H and loaned C-17s or An-124 to bridge the gap. Oops, expensive... ::)
 
"And sure, the Antonov An70 is in production and even in service in Ukraine or Russia ?"

Don't want to say the An 70 is dead, but at least it's in a very deep hibernation. Two prototypes were
actually built, no production aircraft and although it was brought into the discussion about the new
transport aircraft for the germany, IMHO there was never a real chance, since the multi-national
agreement was signed.
 
From Flight International December 15, 2009:

"EADS builds case for A400M sale to USAF"
by Stephen Trimble

Three factors could sway the US Air Force within five years to buy the Airbus Military A400M transport, believes EADS North America chief executive Sean O'Keefe

The A400M, which achieved a first flight in December, could fill an anticipated airlift gap created by a wave of Lockheed Martin C-5A retirements, Boeing C-17 programme termination and Lockheed C-130J size and performance limitations, O'Keefe says.

EADS anticipates that the A400M would be the USAF's only option to address the gap, which could occur slightly before the middle of the next decade, he says.

EADS analysts have identified the three factors based on an internal assessment. The company has not shared its findings with the USAF, nor discussed plans with service officials for an A400M acquisition, O'Keefe says.

The EADS assessment conflicts with USAF plans to continue buying C-130Js and flying all 59 C-5As, although the latter were removed from the reliability enhancement and re-engining programme (RERP) in 2008 to save money.

The USAF has attempted to shut the C-17 production line every year since 2007, but Congress has added funds to buy 33 more airlifters beyond the USAF's stated requirement. Congress is debating conflicting proposals to add between three and 10 more C-17s in the fiscal year 2010 budget.

"That doesn't fill the [airlift] gap at all even if Congress buys a few more," O'Keefe says.

The A400M's future, however, is itself uncertain. Airbus has asked its customers to agree on new contract terms to absorb cost overruns reportedly greater than €5 billion($7.25 million).

The A400M programme is scheduled to complete the flight-test phase and enter service in 2012.
Click to expand...

URL: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/12/15/336102/eads-builds-case-for-a400m-sale-to-usaf.html
 
On fightglobals report on the Prime Minister visiting the seventh and final C-17 at Brize Norton, there is an additional paragraph about the RAF selecting the name for their A400's

Airbus Atlas C1 sounds rather good for them, and in keeping with the Hercules naming, trouble is will any of the other European nations decide to use the same name, assign their own or just stick to the A400M title ?
 
Jemiba said:
Don't want to say the An 70 is dead, but at least it's in a very deep hibernation. Two prototypes were
actually built, no production aircraft and although it was brought into the discussion about the new
transport aircraft for the germany, IMHO there was never a real chance, since the multi-national
agreement was signed.
Click to expand...

Two prototypes were built, one crashed in 1995, one survived till now. Two production machines were ordered for the Ukrainian air force, one with the delivery date this year and second next year.

Thorvic said:
Airbus Atlas C1 sounds rather good for them, and in keeping with the Hercules naming, trouble is will any of the other European nations decide to use the same name, assign their own or just stick to the A400M title ?
Click to expand...

What about the current official name Grizzly? Wont it be used as the international name for the aircraft?
 
Matej said:
Thorvic said:
Airbus Atlas C1 sounds rather good for them, and in keeping with the Hercules naming, trouble is will any of the other European nations decide to use the same name, assign their own or just stick to the A400M title ?
Click to expand...

What about the current official name Grizzly? Wont it be used as the international name for the aircraft?
Click to expand...

Nope that the call names for the test aircraft, Airbus indicated that this would not be the formal name
 
...
 

Attachments

  • A400 3-view.jpg
    A400 3-view.jpg
    151.4 KB · Views: 1,152
A400M To Be Operational in 2014
Posted by Robert Wall at 3/21/2012 5:50 AM CDT

Source:

The French air force is projecting that the Airbus Military A400M airlifter will become operational in 2014.

The service expects Airbus Military to deliver the first of the aircraft in March 2013, as contractually required under the latest schedule.

But thereafter, the 1/61 squadron will first undergo a period of training and familiarization with the aircraft. Once that process is complete, the unit is to reach operational status formally in 2014, the service says in announcing progress on building up the base infrastructure for the aircraft.

France plans to base all 50 of its A400Ms at the Orleans-Bricy air base.

Two of France’s A400Ms are now in the final assembly process at Airbus Military. Both aircraft are due for handover next year.
 
Only representative of the MSN 002:
 

Attachments

  • A400M_02.jpg
    A400M_02.jpg
    198.6 KB · Views: 399
  • A400M_01.jpg
    A400M_01.jpg
    196.4 KB · Views: 863
Triton said:
A400M To Be Operational in 2014
Posted by Robert Wall at 3/21/2012 5:50 AM CDT

Source:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3ab193f1d1-5aeb-4f37-bcc8-e65849a71c2b&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

The French air force is projecting that the Airbus Military A400M airlifter will become operational in 2014.

The service expects Airbus Military to deliver the first of the aircraft in March 2013, as contractually required under the latest schedule.

But thereafter, the 1/61 squadron will first undergo a period of training and familiarization with the aircraft. Once that process is complete, the unit is to reach operational status formally in 2014, the service says in announcing progress on building up the base infrastructure for the aircraft.

France plans to base all 50 of its A400Ms at the Orleans-Bricy air base.

Two of France’s A400Ms are now in the final assembly process at Airbus Military. Both aircraft are due for handover next year.
Click to expand...

vite, vite. The Transalls are essential flying ruins.
 
Airbus Military's A400M has been formally named 'Atlas' by all its European Customer nations at a ceremony at the Royal International Air Tattoo.

The aircraft had already been called Atlas by the RAF.

So I think we will all be calling it 'Fatlass'. ;D
 
falcon said:
Airbus Military's A400M has been formally named 'Atlas' by all its European Customer nations at a ceremony at the Royal International Air Tattoo.

The aircraft had already been called Atlas by the RAF.

So I think we will all be calling it 'Fatlass'. ;D
Click to expand...

Let's just hope deliveries come on schedule, or it may get the alternative nickname of "At last"!!!
 
EADS North America promotional video for A400M appears targeted to the United States Air Force/Army.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5RTljDRMV4&feature=share&list=UU-gc9j9xDuE7IKz7Zo4l5XA
 
I would regard this more as an attempt to threaten the European purchaser, that the production
could be moved to the USA, leaving the European countries without any return in the form of
workshare.
 
Jemiba said:
I would regard this more as an attempt to threaten the European purchaser, that the production
could be moved to the USA, leaving the European countries without any return in the form of
workshare.
Click to expand...


this could change,
if US generals at Army or US Marines see this Video and come to conclusion:
"Hey that exactly what we need as replacement for our aging C-130 fleet !"
 
Michel Van said:
this could change,
if US generals at Army or US Marines see this Video and come to conclusion:
"Hey that exactly what we need as replacement for our aging C-130 fleet !"
Click to expand...

And even if those US generals rant and rave for something, that doesn't mean, that it would
be purchased by the government. To replace the Herk would be a REALLY big order and to
accept such a bid from a foreign country .... well, that probably would need A LOT OF political
courage by the then current US government !
 
Jemiba said:
that probably would need A LOT OF political courage by the then current US government !
Click to expand...

Courage... or insanity?? A market of that magnitude would generate so much employment and cashflow that I can see no government, whether conservative, democrat or liberal, turn down the possibility of having it built at home!
 
Could be built at the EADS facility in Alabama that's going to house an A320 assembly line.

I just don't know whether the Air Force is interested enough in the Joint Future Theater Lift program to actually buy anything. If they do buy something, I'm sure it's not going to be as fancy as Speed Agile, so maybe the A400M would have a shot.
 
The problem is manifold, I think. To turn down such a proposal, because of "not invented here" just isn't
"political correct" nowadays, not even if you can asure the taxpayer, that in the end the foreign product
would be cheaper to purchase and to operate. A loss of jobs can be experienced directly and demonstrators
at closed factory gates never are good publicity for those in charge. On the other hand, if costs are spread
over decades, it is hard to proof, that they would have been much lower, if the original decision would
have been different. And above all: Where's a government, that really makes decisions, that are aimed at
longer times, than the current legislative period ?
In this sense, I think, that economy really has more hindsight. And in the light of the just spoiled merger of
BAe and EADS, such a proposal could be seen as a signal not only to the US, but to Europe, too, I think.
 
That didn't stop the United States Army from buying the UH-72 Lakota from American Eurocopter. It could be argued that EADS North America is a United States company and the A400M for the United States Air Force or United States Army might be built in Mobile, Alabama.

Wouldn't it be ironic if Lockheed Martin manufactured the A400M under license from EADS since Lockheed was originally a member of the consortium to create a replacement for the C-130.

There is also the Embraer KC-390.

I don't know if we will see a repeat of the KC-X competition, but EADS has since invested in production lines in the United States instead of trying to find a partner in the United States like Northrop Grumman.
 
DonaldM said:
That didn't stop the United States Army from buying the UH-72 Lakota from American Eurocopter.
Click to expand...

No, but it sure killed the Merlin-based VH-71A...
 
Stargazer2006 said:
No, but it sure killed the Merlin-based VH-71A...
Click to expand...

I believe that Lockheed Martin is to blame for the cancellation of the VH-71 Kestrel rather than any issues with the AgustaWestland AW-101 design.

Delays and engineering issues plagued the VH-71's development. By 2007, the estimated cost of developing and modifying the aircraft had risen by 40% to $2.4 billion and had passed the $4.2 billion expected for the production of the fleet. In March 2008, the program cost had risen and was projected to cost a total $11.2 billion, or about $400 million per helicopter.
Click to expand...

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_VH-71_Kestrel

I don't believe that it was cancelled due to any anti-European sentiment.
 
Stargazer2006 said:
DonaldM said:
That didn't stop the United States Army from buying the UH-72 Lakota from American Eurocopter.
Click to expand...

No, but it sure killed the Merlin-based VH-71A...
Click to expand...

Yet they did award that contract, despite having an "all-American" candidate from Sikorsky.

Maybe if the VH-71 had been an American airframe, it would have avoided cancellation, but I doubt it. The exploding cost estimates, coming at a time of terrible economic news, is what really killed the VH-71.
 
The AgustaWestland AW101 design won over the Sikorsky S-92 in the original VXX competition.

Further, Boeing considered licensing the AgustaWestland AW101 in 2010 for a new VXX competition.

The KC-X competition was a very strange animal. It was originally conceived as a means to continue the Boeing 767 production line in Everett, Washington by manufacturing new tankers and leasing them to the United States Air Force. This leasing scheme was rejected by Congress. Then the decision was made to buy the tankers instead and then we had the procurement scandal, etc.

I guess the KC-45 cancellation is seen by Europeans as anti-European sentiment in the United States. But the original plan was conceived as corporate welfare to the Boeing Company to keep the 767 production line open.

Is the Super Lobster/Super Frog program at Boeing dead?
 
Fundamental issue for the USAF Inc. , A400 has propellors. That is so 20th Century. Then there is the issue that the aircraft does not come close to any requirements the U.S. Army has for the future so they would not consider giving up any funds to the USAF for the aircraft. The USAF Inc., cancelled the effort that the U.S. Army spent ten years working on.
 
A C-130J fits into the existing supply & service chain while a A400M would require a completely new one thus being more expensive to support.
 
Airbus A400M model in United States Air Force markings on display at the Association of the US Army Convention 2011.

Size comparison of Boeing C-17A Globemaster III, Airbus A400M Atlas, and Lockheed Martin C-130J Hercules.

Source:
http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:9c732d49-efb5-4fbc-98e7-14fe73417d5c
http://www.aviation-news.co.uk/archive/a400m.html
http://far-maroc.forumpro.fr/t2466p30-avions-de-transport-tactique-lourd
 

Attachments

  • A400MUSAF.jpg
    A400MUSAF.jpg
    715.1 KB · Views: 447
  • c17comp1qw.jpg
    c17comp1qw.jpg
    12.1 KB · Views: 429
  • a400m_4.jpg
    a400m_4.jpg
    13 KB · Views: 416
  • infogr10.jpg
    infogr10.jpg
    212 KB · Views: 427
DonaldM said:
The Lockheed Martin C-130J is granted an exemption because it's a legacy?
Click to expand...

How many times has USAF Inc., tried to halt C-130 production only to have the Congressional delegation from the great state of Georgia ensure that the USAF Inc. buys a few every year. I think that the Japanese or Brasilian aircraft have better chance than A400. I mean, really who in USAF Inc., wants turbo-prop time? You can't get a good paying job with all your hours in turbo-prop. Why do you think C-17, KC-10 and K/R/C-135 are so popular with pilots. Thats where the money is.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom