A400M - bit of fun

[Captain Gadget]

I've just been trawling some old posts (try it, it's great fun!) and have dug up these gems re the old Herc K/Herc J/A400M debate (C130J - Getting nowhere fast thread). And emphatically, just for fun...

From BEagle, 16 Jul 03:

But by 2012, Brize will have 4-prop aircraft capable of cruising at M0.72 and up to FL 370......

A400M will make the digitally re-mastered C130 seem positively ancient by comparison - not that it isn't currently doing a good, albeit slow, job.

An extra hour to crawl back from Cyprus......good grief. Will that accord with the latest EU ruling on moving livestock around in trucks?

From StopStart, 17 Jul 03:

Mr BEagle sir! I admire your faith in the mighty A400M Euroluftenkargogecarryen Flugzeug!
By 2012 I reckon they'll have just about thrashed out what material to make the seat covers from and be starting on the basic airframe aerodynamics..... But then I have become rather cynical of late

BEagle again, 21 Jul 03:

What - another American promise which turned out to be not quite what was expected?

Well, Stoppers me old aerobationphobe, at least Das EADS A400M Wunderschöner Uberflugzeug has been designed by a team who know what they're doing - a digitally re-mastered 1950s design, it is not!

More BEagle (31 Jul 03):

Ahh - but Stoppers, old bean, have you seen the .jpg s of the A380 flight deck? Well, the A400M will be getting the same technology. Less buttons and several gucci screens......!!

Good luck on the digitally re-mastered 130. Who says you can't polish a turd?

Yet more BEagle (1 Aug 03 - sorry, mate!):

Also, as the capabilities of the A400M will be considerably superior to those of the 130J, it looks like EADS should have a pretty good product range for you to play with in 5 years' time or so.

Still 'polishing turds' for Britain nine years later - discuss.

Just for fun, obviously.

Gadget :ok:

[BEagle]

Your point being.....???

[GreenKnight121]

That reality normally falls halfway between the extremes of the program-bashers (StopStart) and the fanboys (BEagle).

It is neither in full operational use (BEagle's prediction) nor still in pre-flight development (Stop-Start's prediction).

[BBadanov]

Your point being.....???

BEags, I guess his point is that A400M is still a long way off FOC, or even IOC, but the C-130 just keeps on truckin'...

[StopStart]

I'm rather touched that our prophetic Internet ramblings of nearly 10 years ago have been dusted off. Never really considered myself to be an A400 "program basher" though - I think my position at the time was more one of defending the mighty C130J.
I've subsequently done 10 years on the J and have now moved on to the 737. My opinions remain the same although I must admit I was a couple of years out on the A400 development. I still give it another 8 years before it can take on all the C130 roles.
I expect to see this post quoted in late 2020....

:cool:

[ExAscoteer]

I think his point was that Beagle (being a Shiney Merchant) knows about the square root of **** all about Albert!

[SVK]

Personally, I'll give it a few years yet until the J finally takes over all of the K roles.

Without resorting to a pure, out and out, K v J bashing (which was boring 10yrs ago), how long would it take for the F(Atlas)S to take over the same roles?

[downsizer]

Is the Klassic OSD still looking like Oct 13.... Who wants a bet it gets extended?

[BBadanov]

Is the Klassic OSD still looking like Oct 13.... Who wants a bet it gets extended?

Well, talking of OSD, our C-130Hs were retired yesterday. 4 are going to Indonesia, and possibly a further 6 may as well.

I would just like to put this in the context of the C-130K. The RAF 'K' was basically a C-130E - but with mods of an astrodome (remember that, haha) and tons of glossy middle eastern cam. The 66 a/c were USAF serials between 65-13021 and 66-13550 (c/ns 4169-4275). The oldest have been in service for 46 years.

In Oz, we had already operated the C-130A (57-0498 to 57-0509, c/ns 3205-3216) between 1958 and 1978 (20 yrs). These were supplemented by the C-130E (65-12896 to 65-12907, c/ns 4159-4190), which were operated from 1966 to 2000 (34 yrs).

The 'A' was replaced by the C-130H in 1978. I did two of the ferries from the US. They were a commercial buy, not FMS, so have no USAF numbers (c/ns 4780/4793). Being WFS yesterday, they have too served for 34 years.

The 'E' (i.e. my point) were replaced by the C-130J (c/ns 5440/5468) in 2000, so are 12 years old, but now, like in UK, to some extent play second fiddle to the C-17A for strategic airlift.

This ends my C-130 phase brief and now most of you have fallen asleep. But probably the C-130K may not disappear in 2013 - problem is, it is so long in the tooth, and the RAF should not have pressed it for so long.

[VinRouge]

Tell that to the nav union....

[SOSL]

Ooooh, you bitxh. Are you jealous of him?

Rgds SOS

[herkman]

If I recall correctly some astra domes were purchased for the H models, for what reason I know what but I was also told that they had to be stowed in a special container when not being used because they were so expensive.

The K models were going down the line at the same time as our E models and they had lots of RAF mods including their unique floor. The Smiths auto pilot was a disaster with aircraft having to be hand flown for the first part of their service. Radio equipment was RAF supplied as were flight handbooks.

The K model was worked hard with too many AUW for take off at 175,000 lbs, this figure was a maximum overload but the centre section and wings were not designed yo be continually flown at such a weight. If memory is correct they also had the dash 15 engines with more HP, shame we had not the same mod.

The K model would have up till the arrival of the C17 been the best transport aircraft the RAF ever had, shame it was not treated a bit better would still be capable of more service.

regards

Col

[Two's in]

Just for fun, obviously.

Capt G - What was your opinion 10 years ago? All well and good demonstrating that some posters here had the courage of their convictions, but how steadfast was your approach to procurement? There are plenty of examples out there, like the C-17 which failed static testing multiple times in addition to missing weight, fuel burn, payload and range specifications - oh, and McD D (as it was at the time) took a $1.5B bath during the development phase.

My point? Few military procurements are on time, within budget or performing to spec at delivery (see PPrune ad nauseum), but despite that, some of them turn out to be game changing pieces of kit. The A400M may be no exception to this, but nobody knows yet. Let's come back in 10 years and see who was the budding Nostradamus and who was the Mystic Meg.

[VinRouge]

Indeed. If you read this, you will see the problems faced by 400 seem to be pretty simple compared to those encountered at the evaluation stage by c17.

Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on C-17 review - Google Books (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DD4F48oIOGMC&lpg=PA3&ots=xfojck7viC&dq=c17%20static%20testing&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q&f=false)

[airsound]

This just in from Airbus Military.
IOC 1st quarter 2013, they say. My bold.
AM 27/2012 S


Airbus Military A400M completes critical flight-test phase On track for full certification and first delivery

Airbus Military has successfully completed the 300 hours of Function & Reliability (F&R) flight-testing of the A400M new generation airlifter which is a key requirement prior to full certification.

Data from the F&R programme, which was performed entirely using the first production- representative aircraft – MSN6 / Grizzly 5 – is now being examined by the civil and military certification authorities for the A400M – respectively EASA and a committee appointed by OCCAR.

Having received the restricted Type Certification begin May this year, this phase of the flight test programme was the last major requirement prior to full Type Certification. It is expected that the aircraft will receive the full civil Type Certificate and military Initial Operating Capability in the first quarter of next year subject to the approval of the relevant authorities. First delivery to the French Air Force, of MSN7, is planned for the second quarter, and a total of four aircraft will be delivered during the year in line with the schedule.

The F&R testing was completed in just 32 days, during which the aircraft made 52 flights and visited 10 different airfields. The exercise is intended to examine the aircraft ́s behavior in conditions representative of normal in-service experience, including both routine and simulated abnormal operations in a wide range of weather and locations. It helps minimize the risk to operational crews, particularly on new aircraft entering service, of malfunctions and failures that increase pilot workload.

This intensive testing demonstrated the excellent reliability of the A400M and its systems as well as its TP400 engines even under an exceptionally demanding schedule.

Airbus Military Head of Flight and Integration Tests Fernando Alonso said: “During this F&R campaign the A400M has really been put through its paces. It has flown an average of two flights and 15 flight hours per day over a 26 day timeframe with only 6 days devoted to routine maintenance activities.The crews have been greatly impressed with the performance of the on-board systems and engines, and we are confident that we have a sound basis for completing the civil and military certification in the next couple of months.”



airsound

[herkman]

yes but what about the engines, understand there are some issues to be addressed.

if the engines cannot be left on the wing versus say for the C17 time will not the operating costs greatly increase.

regards

Col

[bvcu]

its replacing the Herc not the C17 so shouldnt you be comparing it to T56 on wing time ? If it doesnt beat that it will be bad !! Also the C17 has what was seen as the inferior engine for reliability on the 757 !

[JFZ90]

whats the typical time on wing for a c17 engine? (derivarive of the 757 pw2000).

interesting to compare to the rb211 - one of those managed 42,000 hours on wing on a 757.