A400 M is behind schedule. 17th Oct

[TheStrawMan]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/7048103.stm
17th Oct 2007


Military plane launch is delayed

Airbus has announced that delivery of the A400 M military transport plane is behind schedule.
The aircraft, whose composite wings are made at Filton near Bristol, will replace fleets in seven NATO nations. The European aerospace group, EADS, designer of the plane's digital map technology, is expected to issue a statement with details on Wednesday. The A400 M's first flight was scheduled for January 2008, but it may now be delayed until July 2008.

[South Bound]

Strange that it is not yet on the Airbus Military (http://www.airbusmilitary.com/press.html) website

[ZH875]

Strange that it is not yet on the Airbus Military (http://www.airbusmilitary.com/press.html) website


On the Airbus Military Website Countdown (http://www.a400m-countdown.com/)page, the program timeline at the bottom, shows First Flight as 2008 Q2.

Firts flight of Flying Test Bed is still listed as 2007 Q4

[120class]

Not hugely surprising as Airbus resources are channeled into A380, however, not what the RAF C130 Fleet needs to hear at the moment.

[South Bound]

Just funny that the latest press release (from Apr 07) is entitled 'A400M Delivery Programme on time'!!!

ZH - don't think those dates have changed yet, IIRC they are the original ones.

I am not knocking this programme, I have lots of confidence in the A400M and Airbus delivering it. All programmes of this scale suffer setbacks, I wish them luck with keeping delays down to there current levels.

[Boldface]

It strikes me we shouldn't be buying it. Spend the money on giving the C-130J fleet the bells and whistles they need so the K can be retired (it must almost be at critical mass now anyway), a few more C-17 and we've got a far more rational AT fleet (ignoring the thorney issue of FSTA!) based on 2 types.

[Skeleton]

Another military project delayed. :ugh::ugh::ugh:
No news here then. Move along please.

[GasFitter]

Just spent 3 days in France. This appreared to be quite big news. They reported that the aircraft was overweight and that the RR engines were not 'man enough' to cope! It reported that the '6-month delay' would probably mean 2 years (minimum).
http://www.france24.com/france24Public/en/news/business/20071017-airbus-delivery-late-one-year-flight.html

[herkman]

I really cannot understand how Airbus have got themselves into this situation. The airplane is years late already, some customers I suspect will walk over to Boeing for the C17. They must be rubing their hands with glee.

How can they be over weight with todays accuracy of CAD design.

If I was Airbus I would now be very worried about big cancelations.

Regards

Col

[On_The_Top_Bunk]

Some more delay info. (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/airbus-a400m-program-delayed-6-12-months-04032/)

[South Bound]

Herkman

I guess that cancelling is not an option. Contract Airbus has is watertight and does not allow anyone to back out without compensating the other nations for the lost work (effectively customer pays anyway). We all know how much military projects are fettled with after contract signature - it would be easy for Airbus to blame the customers for the delays and not provide a refund! The crime here is the original ambiguous and wishy washy contract that did not adequately describe exactly what we required.

That said, I can't think of a company that could turn around a new programme like this as quickly as Airbus. Delays are our fault, as usual...

[herkman]

Yet another delay with a A400M, must really have people scratching their heads of what to do.

Allowing for the fact that it will take some time, after delivery to get the aircraft operational, it looks like three years before you have a real asset.

Cannot see the K models going that long without heaps of money and time being spent.

Airplane too heavy will mean.

Perhaps a lower payload at maximim range.

Perhaps lower air speed, which also could impact on range.

Pushing the HP up on the engines could mean higher fuel burn, with corresponding drop of in range and engine life.

There is still the chance that like the Belfast, it will fly too slow, which could agravate all of the above.

Perhaps more C17 may be the way to go.

Anyone any thoughts or comments.

Thank God the RAAF did not buy

Regards

Col

[roony]

To be sung to the tune of "she'll be coming down the mountain".

[South Bound]

Don't get carried away, let's keep this in perspective. C17 was an absolute dog when being developed - hugely over budget, very late and with some nightmare tech problems. In time that has sorted itself out and become everyone's favourite toy.

A400M will be a good piece of kit, it may just take a bit longer than expected, but we are used to that....

[XV1979]

When have we ever recieved a bit of equipment on time and to budget. I'm sure the extra C-17s will come in handy! How long will the Herc K last? What will be the interim replacement of the VC10s? Will we totally lose the AR capability until FSTA comes in? Twas ever thus!:ugh:

[glum]

How about the OTHER AAR asset, the Tristar?

[BEagle]

If it's ever serviceable.....:rolleyes:

But only 1 hose (at a time), so of somewhat limited use in busy situations.

[Brain Potter]

What will be the interim replacement of the VC10s?

There will be no interim replacement of the VC10. Either the old girl will soldier on until FSTA arrives, or one of those dreary phrases such as "capability holiday" will be trotted out.

The TriStar fleet is so committed to the Afghan airbridge that it would struggle to provide more than 2 aircraft for the AAR duties. In the absence of the VC10, one of these would have to be on QRA, leaving the RAF with a grand total of zero gusting one tanker for ops, trails and routine trg.

Shares in Omega anyone?

[glum]

The ones comitted to Afghan ops don't have hoses. The other six do!:)

But I agree it's a shame the IPT's never paid for the wing pods...:*

[StopStart]

What do you care anyway Potter? You filthy splitter.....

:ok:

[wz662]

So the French are blaming the Rolls Royce 28% of the T400 for the engine delays, presumably Snecma's 28% is perfectly blameless. :confused:

[BEagle]

Most of the delays, in any case, stemmed from vacillating procurement decisions - particularly in Germany.

If you've collected A400M brochures over the years, you'll have noticed the engine e.s.h.p figures creeping ever higher.....

And C-17A? Excellent, but expensive aircraft whose production is soon to cease.....

[Green Flash]

I wonder how many C-130's are lurking in AMARC at the moment. Just an idle thought, you understand ..... :E


http://www.amarcexperience.com/AMARCDB.asp?SessionId=23146734&SortOrder=2&Include=3&Type=3&Code=C130
Ah ha! Answered my own question!

[herkman]

What is in AMARC at the moment is mainly worse than the K models.

Would not think that would be even a short term solution.

Some of those airplanes are older than the K models.

Regards

Col

[Green Flash]

Herkman

Ok, understood. So, lets think the unthinkable. In the not too distant future the K's become (even more) clapped out, a pile of A400 bits are still festering on the rig - where do we get more AT from? Lets call it a dozen frames. Suggestions? (I draw the line at the Indian registered Cub that used to go lurking out of Kabul on three engines:eek:)

[Brain Potter]

The ones comitted to Afghan ops don't have hoses. The other six do!


And 4 of those 6 have certain other bits of kit fitted that are nothing to do with AAR. As a result they are heavily committed to the AT support of both theatres. There is virtually nothing left to be squeezed out of this particular fleet.

It would take the fitting of a buddy-pod to Typhoon for those at the top to be interested in AAR.

Stoppers - have you been practising writing your name with all those shiny new letters after it? :}

[US Herk]

What is in AMARC at the moment is mainly worse than the K models.

True - the overwhelming majority of the E-models are '63 vintage with -7 engines hanging on the wings.

A new center wing box section cost IVO $7M. Then you really need the -15 engines hung on the wings with associated gearboxes. Last figure I saw for this conversion/upgrade was IVO $32M & that was probably 10 years ago. Let's say it hasn't gone up. That's $39M, a 9 month wait for CWB, plus purchase price from Uncle Sam.

You're better off with more J-models @ $65M/ea.

Take advantage of the 2:1 exchange rate...

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

More J models.............you heretic :E

[VinRouge]

problem is, where are they going to train the crews for these Js?

[Ayla]

How are the RAF coping for Flight Engineers with the "legacy aircraft" having to soldier on. They closed the school some years ago and dismantled the Sim, I thought they were supposed to have almost withered by now!

[OmegaV6]

Ayla

According to PMA there are more than enough air engineers to go around ... no need to train any more ... I wonder which pile of sand their heads are in today .. :(

[Cannonfodder]

I was talking to someone "in the know" yesterday who said they are seriously considering this option.
Rotary wing ALMs with their knowledge of ac systems seems to be a sensible solution to the Air Eng shortage.

[Door Slider]

As a rotary wing ALM i would love the chance to have a change of scenery and re-train to Air Eng. Unfortunately our manning is in dire straights, I fail to see how anyone would be released :*

[VinRouge]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=adntD5Dm8KHs&refer=home

Ouch.

Airbus, the world's biggest maker of commercial planes, may hand over the first A400M a year late after setbacks in engine development, EADS said Oct. 17. Airbus fell two years behind schedule with the A380 superjumbo at a cost of $6.8 billion and was forced to redesign its A350 model to win acceptance from airlines, pushing deliveries five years behind Boeing Co.'s 787.

Instead of making airbus pay charges, hows about we wangle a few more 400m's instead and call it quits?

[South Bound]

VinRouge

guarantee the charges are not in the form of payments to customers. Whatever the truth, if Airbus cannot blame the delays on the procrastination, spec changes and confusion among the partner nations, then they really are not very bright. Charges will be in the form of additional finance costs etc...

And I AM a fan of the programme!

[philrigger]

;)
Door Slider

As a rotary wing ALM i would love the chance to have a change of scenery and re-train to Air Eng. Unfortunately our manning is in dire straights, I fail to see how anyone would be released


What has this got to do with the A400M ?





'We knew how to whinge but we kept it in the NAAFI bar.'

[cyrilranch]

The first flight test example of the Europrop International TP400-D6 (http://www.europrop.aero/) engine for Airbus Military’s A400M (http://www.airbusmilitary.com/home.html) transport will commence ground vibration testing in late February or early March using a modified Lockheed Martin C-130H transport, with the UK’s Marshall Aerospace (http://www.marshallaerospace.com/) having recently installed the power plant’s Ratier-Figeac eight-blade propeller at its Cambridge airport site in the UK.
“Engineering the installation of the engine onto the Marshall-owned C-130 has been a very demanding exercise,” says Mick Milne, the company’s marketing and business development director. A new engine display and throttle box have been installed in the aircraft’s cockpit and three test consoles added in its rear fuselage to monitor the performance of the approximately 11,000shp design.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/02/20/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=21559
Ground runs totalling more than 30h are required before the modified transport can make its first flight carrying the new engine, says Marshall Aerospace, while Airbus recently confirmed that the testbed will be required to log at least 50 flight hours before the A400M can fly.
EPI has meanwhile delivered its first two TP400s to the A400M final assembly line in Seville, Spain, with the other two to follow in the near future. Lead A400M stakeholder EADS expects the transport to conduct its delayed debut flight around late July.



http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/02/20/221682/picture-a400ms-flying-testbed-to-enter-vibration-testing.html

"First flight in later July" that should be seen to belived:O

[XV208 SNOOPY]

The Herc is the ex MRF W Mk2 Snoopy.

Anyone got any pics?

[Could be the last?]

With the budget stretched and the threat of further funding cuts by Brown, surely this must be one project for the chop. Why are we wasting time, money and effort when solutions are already in the sky? I.E. More Js and 7/8/9/10 C17s. The reality is that this ac will never be putting SLF or equipment anywhere near the sandpits for decades, so why not cut our losses and run now?

Just a thought!

[hulahoop7]

Singapore 2008: Boeing predicts 'good year' for at-risk C-17 transport
By Craig Hoyle ([email protected])


Boeing is expecting a good year for its at-risk C-17 (http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/c17/index.htm) strategic transport programme, with potential fresh sales to existing users the UK and the USA on the horizon, along with first-time purchases being awaited from NATO and an undisclosed nation.
"There's an opportunity to have a pretty good year on the programme," says Michael Marshall, the company's senior manager, international business development for global mobility systems.
Much of Boeing's optimism rests on a possible double-digit order for the C-17 which could be included as part of a March supplemental budget to support the Bush administration's "global war on terrorism", while the USAF has also listed the type among its unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2009. "We're cautiously optimistic of more airplanes coming from the USA," says Marshall.
Boeing has delivered 171 of the USAF's planned 190 C-17s, with production at its Long Beach site in California to halt next year unless fresh sales are secured.
Speaking at the Singapore air show (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/02/20/221424/singapore-airshow-2008-the-latest-news-pictures-and-videos.html), Marshall underlined the importance of gaining a "solid USAF base" to underpin production of the C-17 at its current rate of 15 aircraft a year. However, the company is also "looking at what happens if we go to 12", he says. Although this would have a negative effect on the transport's unit cost, the company says the US dollar's current weak value means the aircraft "is more affordable than ever".
Export sales during 2008 could include a long-proposed deal for three NATO-operated C-17s, with one of these now expected to be acquired using funds supplied solely from the USA. Two aircraft could also be acquired by an undisclosed nation, which Marshall says is close to finalising a contract and has already had delivery slots allocated to it. Discussions have also taken place with the UK, which will take delivery of its fifth of six currently contracted aircraft on 22 February, with the nation believed to be interested in acquiring two further examples to boost its in-service fleet (http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/index.cfm?storyid=1CC6ABFF-1143-EC82-2E6B0B6849628E8F).
Boeing has also identified India as a possible future buyer of the C-17, and last October gave its air force a full briefing on the type's strategic lift capabilities. "The C-17 is tailor-made for India," says Marshall. However, with New Delhi expected to conclude a $1 billion contract for six Lockheed Martin C-130Js later this year and discussing options on six more, a short-term procurement appears unlikely.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/02/21/221747/singapore-2008-boeing-predicts-good-year-for-at-risk-c-17.html

[airsound]

Here's the latest from Airbus Mil
http://www.a400m-countdown.com/ (http://www.a400m-countdown.com)

airsound

[aw ditor]

Lots of pressure on Marshalls' to get the Test Bed' Herc flying?

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Cue the Ex shiny Captain to reassure us that all is OK :p

[hello1]

Things that a certain Cambridge based company can't produce:

An advanced and VERY EXPENSIVE C130J modification that actually works - you know exactly what I'm talking about.
A 3-engined tanker/transport glass cockpit on time - or are you saying that there are no delays to this programme.
An A400M engine in the air (perhaps a little harsh as they don't build the engine but never mind)

So why would we want to hear from the ex 216 dude that they employed and would only spout how great his new employer is; or, for that matter, the ex 101 dude that has an interest in saying how great Airbus products are.

So guys, please spend more time on your test plans and getting our aeroplanes into service (late) rather than dripping here on company time (oh, sorry I meant time really funded by the UK taxpayer) telling us how great it all is. I for one do not believe you.

:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[BEagle]

hello1, a most interesting post....:confused:

The summer first flight target date for the A400M is indeed heavily dependent on Arfur Daley Aviation getting the C130 test bed flying and testing, so there's no reason to suspect that there will be any further delay just as long as the TP400 tests go OK.

Will the A400M fly before the 7-late-7? That'll be interesting to see.

As regards other military Airbus programmes, one of the air forces who already have their fine new tankers in service will be using one to deploy fast jet receivers next week across the USA. Doubtless whilst they are there, they will be able to congratulate the USAF for having had the good sense to choose the superior KC-X contender.......:ok:

[cessnapete]

Hope the glass cockpit Tri Star mod going well. Certainly need something to help the ailing beast at Brize. Huge serviceability problems there at moment with daily trip cancellations and delays.