A400M Flight Testing Progress

[keesje]

From what I understand the 4th proto is flying.

Soon they will start soft runway testing and inflight refuelling.

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/a400mduo.jpg?t=1295973792

Flight performance seems ok, the envelope has been validated during the past year.

Any idea if the A400M is meeting range and payload requirements?

Some videos of tests completed late last year:

Test preparing for soft runway tests:
YouTube - a400m unprepared (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5-IJothzk8)

A400M Ground Loads Trials:
YouTube - A400M Ground Loads Trials (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2Rsi1xLr9s&feature=related)

Late november medium size bird ingestion test were passed. Around that time EADS said "Now there are no more technical tests left before certification. It is just a matter of paperwork."


A certification tests with simulated icing shapes attached to the wings and tail completed.
Preliminary tests of protective kits for rough-field operations completed in preparation for next year´s trials.
Flight and ground load testing is complete
Measurement of cruise performance is completed
All major aircraft systems have been tested
Flutter tests throughout the flight envelope are close to completion.
TP400 in-flight relight capability has been successfully demonstrated
Ground starts following an overnight cold-soak recently performed.
APU performance so far excellent, it has been started at 40,000ft.


Fourth Airbus Military A400M makes first flight | Shephard Group (http://www.shephard.co.uk/news/mil-log/fourth-airbus-military-a400m-makes-first-flight/7973/)

[keesje]

Grizzly 2 experienced temperatures as low as -21ºC as it underwent tests on its powerplants. It was accompanied by an Airbus A340-300 carrying support equipment and the test team.

It will experience further cold weather testing in Kiruna and at other locations this winter and next says Airbus Military.


http://www.a400m.com/Portals/0/Imgs/English/Press/02_08_2011.jpg

Airbus Military A400M begins cold weather trials in Sweden (http://www.a400m.com/PressRelease/tabid/112/ArticleId/123/Airbus-Military-A400M-begins-cold-weather-trials-in-Sweden.aspx)

& for those who like detail ;)
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/aircraft-pictures/assets_c/2011/02/Kiruna%20003-114186.html

[keesje]

It seems today inflight refueling testing started, with a VC-10 of the armée de l'air britannique.

L'A400M fait ses premiers essais de ravitaillement en vol - 15/02/2011 - leParisien.fr (http://www.leparisien.fr/toulouse-31000/l-a400m-fait-ses-premiers-essais-de-ravitaillement-en-vol-15-02-2011-1316854.php)

http://in.reuters.com/resources/r/?m=02&d=20091013&t=2&i=11930067&w=460&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=img-2009-10-13T200138Z_01_NOOTR_RTRMDNC_0_India-431282-1

not officially confirmed though..

[Algy]

Thanks for your interest Keesje, but just to clarify your post #1, the quoted comment about certification applies to the engine, not the aircraft, and it is not from EADS. (In fact nobody knows where it´s from as it was an anonymous Reuters "source familiar with the project".)

[keesje]

Algy thnx, issue with anonymous "source familiar with the project" is that they are often right too, but apparently not in this case.

Anyway the trails hit the news today, dry contacts.

http://www.a400m.com/Portals/0/Imgs/English/Press/02_16_2011.jpg

[The Helpful Stacker]

Like a chunky front row lad trying to make a move on a MILF.;)

[keesje]

The Airbus Military A400M transport aircraft programme has successfully completed its Maturity Gate milestone, it was announced on 18 February.

A400M milestone clears way for production (http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdw/jdw110223_1_n.shtml)

[Willard Whyte]

Grizzly 2 experienced temperatures as low as -21ºC as it underwent tests on its powerplants.

-21ºC?

But did they go drinking in those temps, and attempt to stagger back to Sinbads via a 10' snowdrift? I think not.

Poofs!

[keesje]

Airbus Military's A400M "Grizzly" has completed sufficient simulated flight-cycle testing on a full-scale airframe to achieve civil type certification of the airlifter by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).
The test specimen has undergone 1,665 cycles.

The test programme is required to simulate flights at least one year ahead of the actual operations performed by the aircraft.

Grizzly hits EASA test benchmark (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/03/03/353908/grizzly-hits-easa-test-benchmark.html)

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/aircraft-pictures/assets_c/2011/01/Dresden%202011%202-thumb-560x270-112534.jpg

[airsound]

'nother Grizzly trial. Text and pix from Airbus Mil.

The Airbus Military A400M has completed a challenging series of tests to determine the lowest speed at which it can take-off – known as minimum unstick speed or Vmu. During the tests, performed at Istres in France, the aircraft’s nose was raised until a special ‘bumper’ fitted to the rear fuselage struck the ground at the maximum pitch-up angle of 13º. In the close-up photo sparks can be seen flying from the bumper as it drags on the runway.

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/airsound/LowSpeed1.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/airsound/LowSpeed2.jpg

airsound

[keesje]

Apparently an A400M visited RAF Filton today

YouTube - (HD) Airbus A400M Maiden Flight Filton(Bristol).24/3/2011

[Frazzled]

NICE I want one:)

[moggiee]

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/airsound/LowSpeed1.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/airsound/LowSpeed2.jpg

airsound

Give it a couple of days and some American Airbus basher will be circulating those photos around the internet with the title:

"Crappy Euro Herc Flight Control Software Fault Causes Tail Strike - A400M Unsafe, Full Redesign Required - RAF To Buy More Boeings"

[LowObservable]

-21C?

Or as we used to call that in Minnesota, a sign of Spring.

[Kengineer-130]

Nice video from Filton. I have to say, I am surprised how slow the props turn, they must be absorbing a massive amount of power:eek:

[hello1]

It's because the rubber bands have completely unwound resulting in the props rotating more slowly.:ok:

[keesje]

I guess Ed Strongman made sure he had to do this mission?

[FTE Pruner]

Nice video from Filton. I have to say, I am surprised how slow the props turn, they must be absorbing a massive amount of power

Please tell me that was a joke :ugh:

[Ken Scott]

The A400 paid a visit to the secret Wiltshire airbase on Friday afternoon - nice couple of flypasts. Pity they're not going to be based there, it would've made a great tactical AT base, much better than the Oxfordshire shiny airport!

[pr00ne]

"it would've made a great tactical AT base"

Except for the slightly inconvenient fact that the A400M wouldn't fit in any of the existing hangars...

[Kengineer-130]

Please tell me that was a joke

Waaaahhhhhhh! :ok:

[Ken Scott]

Except for the slightly inconvenient fact that the A400M wouldn't fit in any of the existing hangars...


For the enormous cost of moving everything to Brize you could've built the mother of all hangars......

[pr00ne]

"For the enormous cost of moving everything to Brize you could've built the mother of all hangars...... "


Er, but you'd still be running two large stations, which surely is around twice as expensive...?

Really don't see the point as then you'd have about twenty aircraft at each station. Rather expensive don't you think?

[Ken Scott]

Cost of relocating Lyneham to Brize is around £200 million, payback date around 15 to 20 years provided nothing else changes....

That's more than enough to run Lyneham for many years, and you get 2 more runways, a Crash cat 4A diversion/ PD in the south of England, you can fly 24/7 without much complaint from the locals (Tac/NVG at Brize - I don't think so!), even circuits at the weekend at Brize is pushing it.

This argument has been thrashed out endlessly, Lyneham will close, but don't let anyone be fooled that it will save any money, except perhaps in the very long term, but it's now that we're short of cash.

Besides, in 10 or so years when they want to make more cuts, they'll have nothing left to close! (Mil ramp on the side at Birmingham maybe?)

[airsound]

Mil ramp on the side at Birmingham maybe?

Yes, but you wouldn't be able to wear your uniform......

airsound

[airsound]

News from Airbus Mil and EADS
A400M contract amendment finalised with customer nations

Leiden/Seville, 7 April 2011 – EADS and Airbus welcome the conclusion of contract amendment negotiations with OCCAR and the seven A400M launch customer nations. The contract amendment was signed today in Seville by Patrick Bellouard, Director of OCCAR – Executive Agency, and Airbus Military CEO Domingo Ureña, in the presence of Spanish Minister of Defence Carme Chacón. National armament directors and other representatives from customer nations also attended the ceremony.

The Contract Amendment now implements the changes which were agreed in principle by the Participating Nations with EADS and Airbus Military in the Frame Agreement signed on 5th March 2010.

“This is a major milestone, and EADS is particularly proud to have the support of all governments involved in this cooperation programme that represents a strategic capacity for Europe and its defence, and for the new generation of military transport worldwide. The A400M is a fantastic new aircraft already flying with outstanding and unrivalled capabilities", said EADS CEO Louis Gallois.

“From an industrial point of view, the programme is on track. This enabled us to agree, with full confidence on the industrial go-ahead of the programme over a month ago,“ said Domingo Ureña, Airbus Military CEO. “We are also very satisfied with the progress of the Flight Test programme which confirms day by day the soundness of the aircraft. Also, all the pilots of the Air Forces who have already tried and flown the aircraft, expressed great satisfaction about its agility and capabilities. We are sure that, once it gets better known, many more Air Forces around the world will be keen to have it in their fleets”.

With four aircraft flying, the A400M has achieved over 1,400 test flight hours and close to 450 flights. The fifth aircraft is complete and has started the final control phase prior to a first flight in early Fall. Civil Certification is to be achieved before year end, and first delivery to first operator – the French Air Force – by the turn of the year 2012 /early 2013. Today Airbus Military holds 174 firm orders from eight nations, the seven launch nations (Belgium, France, Germany, Luxemburg, Spain, Turkey and the UK) for 170, plus four for Malaysia.
airsound

[VX275]

Much to my digust I was told that Airbus use American English as an official language. This was after I was repremanded for changing the word airplane to aeroplane in all the documents I was sent to review.

[airsound]

VX, as a 'bus fan, and an English wordsmith, I am absoutely horrified by that news....

I have no problems at all with American English, which is often unreasonably maligned this side of the pond. But surely, if Airbus stands for anything, it stands for Europe competing successfully with the US. Anybody might think that the French don't include England in greater Europe.....

How very sad - but thank you for bringing us the news.

airsound

Incidentally, 'fall' does not need a capital 'f'....

[Jig Peter]

Bit of pernicketry first - I hope VX's command of "English English" usually extended to his spelling of "reprimanded" when checking Airbus documentation ... Mustn't let the side down, you know ... :E:E

A private rule I used during my years of writing material for my Airbus colleagues was "always think of who your intended readers are". As most likely perusers of, for example Tech Docs will have learned their English outside UK, they'll follow your reasoning a bit more easily if you use the probably American spelling they also use. Similarly, if you're words are directed to BA or British Ministers, don't cause potential offence by using US conventions. And, if the person above you insists on US usage, and you can't abide "airplane" - why not choose "aircraft", which is neutral and possibly more learned-sounding ?

UK (unfortunately?) is a very small proportion of the world market in any case, and however much many of us regret that, (shades of "Empire of the Clouds") British spelling of English is a minority affair.

BTW - There were, though, lots of unusual flavours (probably still are) in documents produced by many a multi-lingual service - lots of fun in that, which could be smoothed out with a bit of tact.

PS I also once worked in Germany on Docs produced by many subcontractors across the world. We reckoned the notice on the office door should read "Hier est Anglofranzoski gespoken". The MD liked the idea too ...

[forget]

A private rule I used during my years of writing material for my Airbus colleagues was "always think of who your intended readers are".

Similarly, if you're words are directed to BA or British Ministers, .....

You've lost this Geordie. :hmm:

British spelling of English is a minority affair.

I question that. Webster's influence was very limited.

[Jig Peter]

Mea maxima culpa - please delete the apostrophe and the final "e" in "you're".
Petard, own, hoist with ... :uhoh::uhoh:

[forget]

In any case :-

Aeroplane, originally a French loanword with a different meaning, is the older spelling. The oldest recorded uses of the spelling airplane are British. According to the OED, "[a]irplane became the standard American term (replacing aeroplane) after this was adopted by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics in 1916. Although A. Lloyd James recommended its adoption by the BBC in 1928, it has until recently been no more than an occasional form in British English."

In the British National Corpus, aeroplane outnumbers airplane by more than 7:1 in the UK. The case is similar for the British aerodrome and American airdrome, although both of these terms are now obsolete. Aerodrome is used merely as a technical term in all of Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The prefixes aero- and air- both mean air, with the first coming from the Ancient Greek word ἀήρ (āēr). Thus, the prefix appears in aeronautics, aerostatics, aerodynamics, aeronautical engineering, and so on, while the second occurs (invariably) in aircraft, airport, airliner, airmail etc.

In Canada, airplane is more common than aeroplane, although aeroplane is not unknown, especially in parts of French Canada (where it is however used only in English – the French term is avion, and the French word aéroplane designates 19th-century flying machines).

[airsound]

What a masterful exposition, forget, thank you!

I would only add that the UK CAA, presumably taking its cue from legal documentation, uses 'aerodrome' (not airfield), but 'aircraft' (not aeroplane).

Sorry about the thread drift - but I've always been mildly fascinated by the fact that Americans wear flight suits and talk about flying safety, while Brits wear flying suits and talk about flight safety.

And don't get me started again on 'base' versus 'station'.....

airsound

[forget]

And don't get me started again on 'base' versus 'station'.....

I think the founding fathers were happy with 'camp'. Then again, I don't recall Camp Routine Orders.

MoD Web says camp is OK.

ROYAL AIR FORCE GIBRALTAR – A BRIEF HISTORY

The first two RAF camps were constructed in Gibraltar at the beginning of the second world war, The first was North Front Camp which was previously a racecourse, this was to become the main camp. The second was New Camp which was built on reclaimed land next to Montague Bastion.

[airsound]

And I don't recall ever coming across a camp commander, or, perish the thought, a camp wo. Ooh-er missus

airsound

[Biggus]

Surely a Station is a place from whence one catches a train or, heaven forbid, a bus?

[Algy]

I'm here chum. Actually in Airbus PR we still use British English. I think the Fall was EADS-influenced, where things are not so simple. :hmm:

[moggiee]

I would only add that the UK CAA, presumably taking its cue from legal documentation, uses 'aerodrome' (not airfield), but 'aircraft' (not aeroplane).

There is justification for their choice of words.

Aerodrome covers airfields, airports and (I suspect) heliports and such.
Aircraft cover balloons, helicopters and such which are all part of the CAA's remit.

If anyone wants to question the use of aeroplane, may I suggest that they think about the fact that aeroplanes fly thanks to the exploitation of the laws of AEROdynamics (not AIRdynamics)? That settles it as far as I'm concerned!

[LowObservable]

I have heard it said that Airbus people speak a patois all their own.

As a transplant I have managed not to get upset about "airplane", since "aeroplane" itself is a bit of a Greco-French mutt of a word. And to get back to the original point, I have learned to prefer the Anglo-Saxon "fall" to the Froggy import "Autumn".

[surely not]

Oh boy, I had a look at this thread because I thought it had updates on the A400M Flight tests..................but after the opening page it has changed into a lot of wittering about words!!

Anybody able to get the thread back onto its topic!

[Biggus]

surely....

After 8 years and 1,250 odd posts you "surely" should be familiar with thread drift by now, it normally happens by about the 4th post! Perhaps nobody has any "new news" on A400M testing to impart - no doubt when they have, they will!! :ok:

[LowObservable]

Until we have some more news released or some journo goes to report on the program, we might as well continue talking about Anglo-American language.

Like the fact that when I listen to my neighbour, who was born near Richmond, Virgina, I am unaccountably reminded of some of my Hampshire aunties...

[Really annoyed]

Oh boy, I had a look at this thread because I thought it had updates on the A400M Flight tests..................but after the opening page it has changed into somebody complaining about a lot of wittering about words!!

Anybody able to get the thread back onto its topic! :E

[Jig Peter]

At a recent ceremony in Toulouse, La Dépèche du Midi newspaper reported Louis Gallois as saying, (inter alia) that he expected A400M sales to reach 400 - 500. This is, I think, a bit of a change in EADS' attitude, as until now, their top managers have been saying, rightly but rather stiffly, that their main focus is on producing the 170+ at present on order, without mentioning any efforts to go for any further sales.

GO GRIZZLY !!!!

PS - Nearly back on thread ?
It's nice to hear the distinctive note of the A400's engines quite regularly in the TLS area, as it indicates that flight testing is making progress. Quite possibly we won't get much more news about it until Le Bourget in about 6 weeks, so this thread will stay quiet ...

[keesje]

video coverage fuel transfer with VC-10 and mission preparation

YouTube - The A400M showcases its mission flexibility with the start-u

Last week the TP400 engines received certification

A400M gets a lift, as EPI engine secures civil certification (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/05/06/356352/a400m-gets-a-lift-as-epi-engine-secures-civil-certification.html)

http://content.ll-0.com/tmcm/a400m-engines2.jpg

[green granite]

The consortium has previously outlined a target of mid-2012 to also receive military certification for the engine

Could someone please explain why the military need a separate certificate for the engine? Why not accept the civilian certificate and save a few million? Or at least just test the bit that not covered by the civy one?

[VinRouge]

Gets very difficult I would imagine when dealing with FADEC and the like. Plus, ruggedisation.

Anyone know why bus are going for the joint certification? Are they looking at an A400F civilian variant at some stage?

[sangiovese.]

Nice VC10 video with a certain ppruner on it

::E

[FTE Pruner]

Quote:
The consortium has previously outlined a target of mid-2012 to also receive military certification for the engine
Could someone please explain why the military need a separate certificate for the engine? Why not accept the civilian certificate and save a few million? Or at least just test the bit that not covered by the civy one?


I expect it is due to the military role requiring different requirements to that of the civil role. For example, the engine may use a different control law whilst in the AAR role or at low level than it does during in normal civil type ops???

They will clearly gather the clearance data for the civil role earlier in the programme. Since it is highly likely that Airbus will try to target the civil market, it seems logical to apply for that certification ASAP and then the military certification afterwards (which would be the same package of data plus the extra mil delta).

Otherwise they will have to retrospectively apply for a civil clearance by deconstructing the mil package and deleting the mil elements, which would probably take more time.

Also, it is no doubt good press to tell the world that the engine already meets the stringent civil cert requirements, which will be confidence boosting for their customer (and future customers).

FTEP

[Rory57]

Anyone know why Airbus are going for the joint certification?

So that HeavyLift will have an easier time when they buy the A400M fleet from the RAF just after they have been nicely run in. Another Belfast lesson learned.

[keesje]

Could someone please explain why the military need a separate certificate for the engine?

Doesn't it have to do with A400M being allowed to operate civil airways above busy Europe in the future? I believe that's also behind the M.7 cruising speed.

The civil certification of the TP was the reaso for months of delay. Some folks neglected the paperwork and lots had to be done all over.

[VX275]

Civil Cert is the prefered way to go with the manufacturers and the PT who think that just because the process works with airliners it should work with military transports, which let's face it, spend a lot of time in airways flying routes.
The A400M is not novel in going down this route, the J Herc was built as a civil cert aircraft and then militarised the same process the A400 is going through.
The big problem with this process is that the civil authorities will not certify an aircraft system that has redundant capability ie a more demanding military role, so following civil certification a lot of systems will be ripped out and replaced with the military kit and the process begun again. :ugh:

[Trim Stab]

The big problem with this process is that the civil authorities will not certify an aircraft system that has redundant capability ie a more demanding military role, so following civil certification a lot of systems will be ripped out and replaced with the military kit and the process begun again.


Huh? Civilian certification is about flight testing to establish that an aircraft has performance that meets or exceeds minimum performance requirements decreed by civilian authorities. If an aircraft exceeds those performance requirements, then it will be certified. Having "redundant" capability is irrelevant.

Please clarify your argument.

[VX275]

A typical Civil cert nonsense is having to install a civil crew Oxygen system that is only designed to keep the crew alive whilst they carry out an emergency descent to a safe altitude. Whereas the military system would keep them alive whilst flying straight and level depressurised at 40K ft plus as required by the aircraft specification.
If you had a cargo hold full of paras/passengers and had a pressurisation problem at altitude the military Oxygen system would still allow the emergency descent as its a more capable system
EASA insisted that for civil cert of the A400M only a 'civilian' Oxygen system was allowed on the aircraft. Other military equipment/systems were required removed by EASA as the 'covered or inhibited during civil cert testing' option was not an option.
So rather than a civil certification falling off the back of a military one we waste money testing an aircraft no one has bought - a civilian cargo aircraft.

[Rigga]

I think you've all missed the point that EADS/Airbus/Airbus Military/EC/EC Military/CASA are all based on the methods of building civil aircraft and the military models are almost a by-product of their civil-based profits and expertise. They will, naturally, develop any airframe for export/multiple uses first.

Welcome to "proper" design and continued airworthiness management.

I believe that only line maintenance is to be let out to the customer units and that any base maintenance (Part 145) needs will be approved/controlled from EADS/Airbus Mil as the maintenance managers (Part M).

Only a token appropriately ranked signatory needed for a "PT" then?

[bvcu]

I'm guessing the civil cert is to enable flight test in what is a multi country programme , otherwise which military system would you use. It will obviously be eventually be certified by each countries own military. C130J was done to FAA cert , i'm guessing because US wasnt lead cutomer.

[Tonkenna]

Nice VC10 video with a certain ppruner on it

... and it was useful to prove to Mrs T that I did do some work out there!

Tonks :ok:

[Trim Stab]

A typical Civil cert nonsense is having to install a civil crew Oxygen system that is only designed to keep the crew alive whilst they carry out an emergency descent to a safe altitude. Whereas the military system would keep them alive whilst flying straight and level depressurised at 40K ft plus as required by the aircraft specification.

The civilian certification requirements are MINIMUM standards required. If a manufacturer wishes to install systems that have BETTER performance then there would be no objection from the certifying authorities. In your example the oxygen system would be superior to civilian certification standards, so there would be no certification issues at all.

I still don't understand why the need to meet civilian certification standards is a problem.

[VX275]

there would be no objection from the certifying authorities

That's not the EASA I recognise.

[Algy]

Airbus Military video via Aviation Week. (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:0eea146e-b82a-49aa-a328-f3d36cbead8c&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest)

[Less Hair]

That's just an Airbus Military video straight from youtube:

YouTube - ‪A400M VMCG Testing‬‏

[keesje]

Airbus cold weather video added two weeks ago..

YouTube - ‪The A400M begins cold weather trials in Sweden‬‏

[keesje]

Following on from the IOC configuration, which equates to an aircraft suitable for basic logistic transport tasks, comes SOC1. To be declared in late 2013, this will add basic aerial delivery to the A400M's performance range. Each following after roughly one-year gaps, the subsequent 1.5 and 2 standards will respectively add full aerial delivery and tanker capability and enhanced tactical mission management and new functions such as polar navigation and time-on-arrival management, says Airbus Military.

Arriving in late 2017, SOC2.5 will deliver "enhanced tanker capabilities and search-and-rescue patterns". The final, SOC3 standard will bring in advanced capabilities including low-level flight functionality.

The company plans to start proving the aircraft fully to its customers next year. "Our objective for just after SOC1 is that we'll have demonstrated all the capabilities," says Airbus chief test pilot military Ed Strongman. "All the functionality on the aircraft will be there, but the full FMS and human/machine interface will come later." Ureña says this will give the air forces "the confidence that when they take the aircraft they can operate it".
....
Test pilots will soon perform a so-called "ultimate flight", during which the aircraft will be tricked into thinking that it has lost all onboard power by switching off one of its engines after isolating power generators to the other three, which will be run as normal throughout. June should also see water ingestion trials conducted at the French military's Istres test centre, plus maximum brake energy rejected take-offs.
...
By mid-May, 55 pilots had flown the A400M, with 12 of them drawn from a core team from Airbus and Airbus Military. Recent additions have included operational air force personnel from partner nations France, Germany, Turkey and the UK, with others from Spain and Malaysia to follow soon. "All of them are coming back with a smile on their face," says Strongman.

http://m.wsj.net/video/20100719/071910fbasa400mtest/071910fbasa400mtest_512x288.jpg

Program update presentation: An Update on the A400M Program | SLDInfo (http://www.sldinfo.com/?p=19759)

[LowObservable]

Whenever I see that guy's name, I imagine him checking into a hotel anywhere is Asia, and all the half-suppressed filthy giggles from the receptionists...

[keesje]

New livery & camera to monitor ice forming..

http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/galleries/images/84732/500x400/a400m-test-flight.JPG

High resolution photo via Flightglobal Airspace:

http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/commercial_aviation/images/84729/a400m-testbed-deglo-marks.jpg

.

[keesje]

We have competition Airbus thought it was nice to have their own test A400M test flight page :)

Crew (http://dev-flighttest.unusualfactory.com/Crew.aspx)

[Trim Stab]

Judging from the curve of the prop blades (as shown from the close up photos in post 62), the rotation of props one & four would appear to be supra-convergent, which is what one would expect if the designers had the luxury of specifying the engine/gearbox/prop configuration.

But why do props two & three appear to be supra-divergent?

If the A400 had a conventional tail, I would guess that it could be to reduce drag from the horizontal tail surface. But with a high T-tail, what benefit does this give?

[LowObservable]

It was to avoid asymmetric swirl affecting the airflow over the wing - as had been painfully experienced by another four-engine, six-blade-prop transport just before the A400M finished preliminary design.

[Trim Stab]

It was to avoid asymmetric swirl affecting the airflow over the wing - as had been painfully experienced by another four-engine, six-blade-prop transport just before the A400M finished preliminary design.


I don't understand that reply. If all four props were supra convergent (which is what one would ideally design into a multi-engine prop driven aircraft) there would be no asymetric airflow over the wing.

[herkman]

He is talking about the C130J which had problems in this rea

regards

Col

[Trim Stab]

Yes, I can see that the C130J would have asymmetric problems as all four props rotate clockwise - presumably it was too expensive to make props 3 & 4 rotate anticlockwise.

But if the designer has the luxury of choosing the direction of prop rotation on a multi, you generally make the props supra-convergent to minimise P-factor*

What I don't understand on the A400M is that 2 & 3 are supra divergent. I guess I'll have to ask on the Flight Test forum.





* Exceptions being multis designed as ground attack aircraft such as P-38 Lightning, Henschel 129 & OV-10A Bronco where supra divergent props gave greater stability as a gun platform.

[sedburgh]

This page Technology (http://www.a400m.com/Technology.aspx) has a diagram showing the 'engine rotation' ( I assume they mean propellor rotation) with a brief explanation. I thought I read some time ago that another advantage was that the airflow at the left and right paratroop doors was consistent.

(http://www.a400m.com/Technology.aspx)

[Algy]

It is a complicated argument, which one day I'm going to get someone to sit with me long enough to go through, but meantime this will help a bit (http://www.icas-proceedings.net/ICAS2008/PAPERS/362.PDF).

[Jig Peter]

Over the week-end -end July - I saw a note in AvWeek to the effect that, while A400M flight testing is continuing, engines destined for later aircraft are having to be used on the test fleet while Avio tries to find out what's causing the problem with the gearboxes.
This, says the paper, could lead to delays, as the problem has already eaten up the advance that had been gained when things were going well ...

Pity ...

[Algy]

Still going pretty well actually. 18 flights on four aircraft last week.

[Rengineer]

That sounds pretty good, Algy. I've been trying to find news of the icing and other tests recently, but the world press, and certainly Airbus PA, seem to have gone on summer break where the A400M is concerned.

In any case, the rumours that that gear would be the most tricky part of new technology for the plane seem to be not so unfounded after all. It certainly must be the lightest gearbox of its class by far.

BTW, the other wild speculation I heard was that the freight handling system would make difficulties. How's that coming along?

[Algy]

I don't think any manufacturer provides running commentaries on flight-test, for well-documented reasons. Been quiet lately just because the nature of the flying has been relatively routinely hitting the gzillion test points for certification, including civil certification of course. Gets more interesting in the autumn.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Still going pretty well actually. 18 flights on four aircraft last week.

How's it all going at the mo as it's been a bit quiet in here for a few weeks :ok:

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

AIRSHOW-New engine glitch hampers A400M Paris debut | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/19/airshow-airbus-a400m-idUSLDE75H0AD20110619)

I know this goes back to Jun but there is a rumbling out there that says there is more to this than is being let on :confused:

[BEagle]

The current four flight-test aircraft have logged a combined 684 flights totalling just over 2100 hours by 4 September.

Flight test activities being conducted from Toulouse and Seville, are "progressing steadily", and involve sorties flown with crews from the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). Three aircraft are routinely available and are each flown up to twice per day, while a fourth is typically undergoing work to upgrade it to the latest equipment standard.

Currently the focus is on the completion of the handling qualities, performance and systems certification tests. It's hoped to secure civil type certification from EASA before the end of this year.

The programme's fifth and final development aircraft, MSN6, is expected to join the flight-test campaign in late 2011.

Seems to be going fine....

[Jig Peter]

It's encouraging to see A400s regularly flying over the small village where I live "between the river and the mountains" - their "grizzly growl" sounds quite different from anything else, and at what look like quite high speeds there's a distinctive "howl" as well ... gets the neighbours out to scan the skies in appreciation !
GO Grizzly ! (even if the nickname gets certain Airships the heeby-jeebies).

PS I still think it'll look better stretched - if that gearbox could take more power ! :cool:

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Seems to be going fine....

Phew thats good news then, hate to think of it being any later than it is :ok:

[keesje]

Jig Peter I saw somewhere the TP400 engines are build with growth potential included, so I guess the gearbox too..

Yrs ago I sketched a stretched US A400M. The A400M seems volume limited when operating from regular air fields. 40t can be a lot of low density load.

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/C-43MultiRoleTransportAircraft.jpg

[Jig Peter]

What might satisfy SFFP (and give Their Airships yet more vapours) on the day the A400M enters RAF service would be to arrange a tagger to add a "t" at the end of the name* their 'Ships have given it ... only to be revealed when the drapes covering the name fall ceremoniously away ...

:E:E:E










(* "Atlas" for the unwary)

[BEagle]

Or perhaps an 'f' and an extra 's'?

Everyone knows that ALMs like a fAtlass....:eek:

I don't see much need for a stretch, given that the max. payload has already increased from the 25 tonne of 'Euroflag Solution 20' through 37 tonne in 2003 to the present 40 tonne.

[ksimboy]

Beags,
always remember the larger lady is always more grateful . Big girls need loving too (and they kept one warm in the snowy wastes of Newfoundland and Labrador!):\

[Modern Elmo]

Keesje, where's the JATO STOL package, the sonobuoy dispensers, and the refueling boom?

And shouldn't you also have a drawing of an A400 equipped with ski landing gear for snowy operations?

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Any pictures of it flying in the last couple of days :ok:

[Jig Peter]

Sorry, Sir - too busy trimming roses and suchlike, but I can assure you that A400 airborne sightings occurred (and one probable, but only heard) at least twice in the Toulouse area during the second half of last week. Also, photos of aircraft lining up for approach at, say 1000 ft, aren't what one would hang on one's sitting room wall. (and I ain't got a camera anyway).
France's summer break was over a week or so ago, and it was good to see Grizzly/Atlas getting on with the testing programme. Dunno about events in Spain, but I can assure you that the "special" A400 sound is good to hear, at least for me, as well as other Airbus products on test, or in service (after all, that's what pays some of my pension ...).
Another thing - the RAF would be further forward in the queue if only the various UK ministries involved had shown some urgency - but 'twas ever thus, wonnit ?:{

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

So nothing since last week............

[ShortFatOne]

And if it makes that much noise it'll be bugger all use as a replacement MPA before anyone suggests it!

[keesje]

Keesje, where's the JATO STOL package, the sonobuoy dispensers, and the refueling boom?

Elmo, the A400M has hose and drogue. Sonobuoydispensers are more for naval aircraft, a JATO stoll package such as on the C130? Never heard of it for the A400M. Probably too big an aircraft for the mission.

[VX275]

If I can heave smoke floats and an ASRA kit out of a Herc para door I'm sure a few sonobouys will be no problem for the A400M's larger para door.

[Jig Peter]

OK, so I rise to SFFP's bait again, but his post on a Sunday saying "so nothing since last week" rather flabbers my gasts - perhaps I should have made it clear that I meant "7 - 9 September".
This Monday's quiet, though: little air traffic of any kind, so the photo-snappers round the airport won't have much to click their shutters at, which will probably give SFFP something else to sneer about ...

Personal Ignore list - "GO". Out

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

JP,

It was a genuine enquiry, nothing more nothing less.

[Jig Peter]

SFFP

Understood - though wondering on a Sunday if there has been more activity since Friday ... !!!:eek::eek:
I believe they're making good enough progress for "Stakhonovitis" not to be imminent.
Ignore list - "Delete last entry - GO"

[Winchweight]

Its currently busy on certification work and to reassure the doubters it flew past my window not an hour ago. :ok:

[Ken Scott]

And if it makes that much noise it'll be bugger all use as a replacement MPA before anyone suggests it!

Why would we need a replacement MPA?

According to the coalition government this maritime nation doesn't require any aircraft for the role!

[keesje]

Modern Elmo,

Keesje, where's the JATO STOL package, the sonobuoy dispensers, and the refueling boom?

And shouldn't you also have a drawing of an A400 equipped with ski landing gear for snowy operations?


Care to comment on the stealthuy Transport, Tanker, Bomber Gunship approach the americans are taking?

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/09/13/front%20shot%20credit%20usaf.jpg

IMAGES: Lockheed's stealth C-130 successor revealed - The DEW Line (http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/09/images-lockheeds-stealth-c-130.html)

Maybe a good time to start adjusting your an MPA is an MPA, a tanker a tanker and a transport a transport view. Reality doesn't seem to agree no more.

[Wycombe]

Doesn't look like a very good engine layout for rough strip ops!

[WillDAQ]

Reality doesn't seem to agree no more.

Wind tunnel models do not a competitor make.

[engineer(retard)]

Bit shy on the nose aspect RCS as well, unless the engines are retractable

[keesje]

ouch they forgot about the engine RCS.. ;)

the final design is to have 4 smaller engines

these are real engines (Williams) apparently good enough for these tests

most tunnel test are to confirm computer modelling these days

this is a big model, which could mean they are past conceptual testing (smaller milled models)

maybe ground effect testing?

It seems to have big wings, offering space for lots of fuel.

[Algy]

...the two not connected, I hasten to add.

Here's the latest. (http://www.airbusmilitary.com/PressRelease/tabid/133/ArticleId/158/A400M-passes-key-certification-test.aspx)

[Safeware]

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/09/13/front%20shot%20credit%20usaf.jpg

is surely a contender for the caption competition???

sw

[LowObservable]

Pierre - Is anyone listening?
Klaus - No, ve are safe.
Pierre - I cannot believe the plans are working this well. Nobody in the USAF realizes that they will not have the monnaie for this connerie volant any time before 2050.
Klaus - Yes, and Simon and Jacques are doing the same over at the Army, selling them on Quad Tilt Rotors...
Pierre - Yes, Airbus C-48A by 2020, it is in the bag.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Why are those skipping homs wearing safety harness's on a platform as benign as that......:rolleyes:

[sisemen]

Now where have I seen that shape and concept before........hmmm

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3292/2851081613_08cb703e17.jpg

[keesje]

Pierre - Is anyone listening?


LowObservable, probably righty. While smart, heavily subsidized & proud techies design game changing, revolutionairy concepts, EADS will do a US tour in 2012 with the A400M.

Around 2015 the game is on when LM and Boeing have re-read DOD RFI's on the topic & see A400M people visiting washington too often & the US Marines considering an order.

They'll probably pull the patriotic card again, using fear and xenophobism to avoid a "french"" aircraft entering service. We've seen it with the tanker. The JSF, Apache, F18 and Hawks must have a fair chance in every foreign competition, but if the home forces are concerned the masks are off & flag waving takes over.

It seems the A400m recently successfully completed high-energy rejected take-off tests.

http://www.airbusmilitary.com/Portals/0/Imgs/English/Press/09_22_2011_2.jpg

[LowObservable]

Pretty much my read on the situation.

I haven't seen anything realistic from the US services or industry other than building C-130s in perpetuity. If the Army downsizes (as it will) there will be a lot of capacity for basic trash-hauling for a while, until the older C-130s start running out of hours, but there will still be niche missions.

Actually, if the F-35B survives and proves capable of austere-base operations (that is, doesn't blow a huge hole in the runway every time it lands) the A400M would be a good support aircraft.

[Modern Elmo]

Actually, if the F-35B survives and proves capable of austere-base operations (that is, doesn't blow a huge hole in the runway every time it lands) the A400M would be a good support aircraft.

Keesje, how about a drawing of an A400 landing on a USS America-class LHA? Don't forget "Marines" markings.

Also, put some armament on your A400m:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Harvest_Hawk_KC-130J_with_Hellfire.jpg/800px-Harvest_Hawk_KC-130J_with_Hellfire.jpg

[Modern Elmo]

That photo of aircraft in the test set-up: I can't identify it. It doesn't look like a mock-up or wind tunnel model. The aircraft looks almost like it is intended to fly, except for the lack of landing gear.

As other people have said, the engine intakes are not stealthy.

And how do the exhausts exhaust? Maybe there are hot nozzles we can't see.

Looks to me like the cool air is ducted upward into and through the wings to achieve jet flap effects.

[keesje]

Modern Elmo:

how about a drawing of an A400 landing on a USS America-class LHA? Don't forget "Marines" markings.

Also, put some armament on your A400m:

Sorry, I don't know what you are talking about. You mean an A400M landing on a flight deck ?!

[GreenKnight121]

http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_America_%28LHA-6%29 (http://http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_America_%28LHA-6%29)

USS America LHA-6 concept drawing

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1c/USS_America_%28LHA-6%29_-_050718-O-0000X-001.jpg

[Modern Elmo]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/C130-Forrestal.jpg

[Modern Elmo]

This is of topic but it interests me ... People You Used To Know Who End Up In
Surprisingly Bad Way Dept.:


The U.S. Supreme Court won't hear the appeal of J. Reece Roth, a 74-year-old former UT professor emeritus convicted in 2008 of violating federal arms control law....

Roth's next stop will be prison, where he must serve a four-year sentence. He'd been free on bond during his appeal. ...

... Roth, a professor emeritus of electrical engineering, worked as a consultant on an Air Force project to develop technology for unmanned drone aircraft. He used graduate students from China and Iran on that project and took documents from the project to China in 2006 — even though the university and his contract had warned against doing either.

U.S. Supreme Court turns down retired UT professor's appeal » Knoxville News Sentinel (http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2011/oct/03/us-supreme-court-turns-down-retired-ut-profs/)

I took a course under good old Perfesser Grease Broth in 1981.

[Rengineer]

This Spanish-language site (http://fly-news.es/aviones/airbus-military-a400m-grizzly-pruebas-de-ingestion-de-agua/) has a nice photo of water ingestion test apparently performed last week. I could not find any other reporting of that event, and my Spanish isn't up to much, but the gist seems to be it went well [EDIT: So-so - See posts below from Trin Stab and Algy -- end EDIT], and the pic is certainly worth a look.

@Elmo: Tough. But people do strange things at times.

[Trim Stab]

gist seems to be it went well


Actually it says that there was water ingression into the main gear wells which caused damage to an (unspecified) part.

[Rengineer]

Oh thanks for the info, Trim Stab. Probably should've checked that dictionary. So here's a Google translation:

Last October 15 was carried out one of the most spectacular, the water intake.

This was rolled to a development aircraft over a pool of entr2 2 and 7 cm deep, set on a track. The A400M Grizzly made ​​several passes in different configurations at speeds up to 90 kt, even with the propellers into reverse without water projected by the landing gear came into the engines. The test, however, damaged a piece main landing gear hatches related to the extent gravity of the train. Apparently, the water created a pressure on one side of the trap that ended up causing the failure of the part.

[Algy]

Thanks for the interest. It did in fact go very nicely.

The damage occurred to a "pad" which protects the LG door from the wheels under gravity lowering. Some of the wash was unexpectedly forced into the void between the wheel and pad. It's a minor issue.

[keesje]

water test

A400M water test - YouTube

[Algy]

Full Grizzly fleet now up and running. (http://www.airbusmilitary.com/PressRelease/tabid/133/ArticleId/179/Fifth-Airbus-Military-A400M-development-aircraft-makes-first-flight.aspx)

[BombayDuck]

Airbus Head of Flight Operations Fernando Alonso said

I didn't think he'd take losing the F1 championship this badly...

[onboard]

Now where have I seen that shape and concept before........hmmm

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3292/2851081613_08cb703e17.jpg

Hmmmm indeed:

Horten Ho 229 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229)

My point is not that it was german, but rather the date. :)
Nice picture, by the way.

[keesje]

Royal Air Force (RAF) pilots test Airbus A400M - YouTube

Video suggest they like it

[StopStart]

we look forward to seeing the military aspects of the aircraft integrated with the pure flight aspects at some point in the future

TAC aspects of the FMS still a little "immature" then...? :E

Good stuff though - good to see it progressing and the delivery date dragging slowly closer. :ok:

[Cannonfodder]

Still not as capable as the C-17.

[The Helpful Stacker]

"Not as good" in what respect?

Are you trying to compare apples and oranges?

[WillDAQ]

Still not as capable as the C-17.

Unless you want to land somewhere other than an airbase...

[crystal10]

Ed Horne still looks about twelve years old.

[Neptunus Rex]

I noticed that Flt Lt Whitnall, the evaluator pilot, belongs to 206 Squadron. What is their relationship, or lineage, to the well-known "F Troop," erstwhile of Ice Station Kilo?

I think we should be told!

By the way, it's great to see three "Desk Officers" putting their pens aside and getting airborne for a change. What's a Rate 1 at Toulouse these days?

[BEagle]

What's a Rate 1 at Toulouse these days?

3º / sec?



.

[keesje]

it seems to me the RAF folks just had a real good ride on a real cool machine, are still in a rush and then suddenly have to look professional & say serious things.

[NorthernKestrel]

Good video interview with Ed Strongman on RAeS site here.

VIDEO: Interview Ed Strongman - Chief Test Pilot Military, Airbus | Aerospace | The Royal Aeronautical Society (http://media.aerosociety.com/aerospace-insight/2012/01/27/video-ed-strongman/6175/)

One more flight (icing?) to go before EASA Type Certification of the beast...!

[Green Flash]

Wonder if it will be at RIAT this year?

[dagama]

N Rex:

This extract answers the question re: 206 Sqn

On 1 April 2009, the Heavy Aircraft Test & Evaluation Squadron at Boscombe Down (Air Warfare Centre (http://www.pprune.org/wiki/Air_Warfare_Centre)) gained the 206 Squadron numberplate, as 206 (Reserve) Squadron. Currently split between RAF Boscombe Down and RAF Brize Norton 'B Flt' C130 specialists moved from RAF Lyneham in June 2011 to their new home at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire to continue the Hercules Test and Evaluation process.

[WASALOADIE]

" watch out for it at Farnborough and RIAT this year"

[zero1]

The chief test pilot gave a good interview, nice to see the aircraft is on track. :ok:

[Old Fella]

willDAQ, this looks pretty much like an undeveloped airfield to me.

C17 Landing on dirt runway - YouTube

[juliet]

Oh bless, Ed and Stevie are all grown up!

Shame we didn't see footage from inside the flight deck during their ride.

Is the RAF still planning on replacing the whole Herc fleet with A400? Its a big aircraft, will it be too big for some strips? There is some tight ground maneuvering required for the J on some Afghan strips, how will the A400 cope?

edit: just watched the C17 video. Takes a bit of stopping doesnt it!

[StopStart]

The "plan" (a ho ho ho) is that the J will live on until about 2022 with the Mk5s and the last few Ks going when the A400 eventually appears. The J fleet is however colossally f**ked and has been for a while. I get the impression that despite the best efforts of those involved with it on a daily basis AIR and the MoD are rather hoping it will just limp on quietly, with minimum investment, until the A400 arrives and "saves the day".

Without wishing to get all parochial and "Changi slip" about it i still think there will be ongoing niche roles for which the A400 will be unsuitable and for which the retention of a small fleet of C130s would be the sensible course of action. I say that not as a dyed-in-the-wool Herc person but as someone who had, until recently, been rather hoping to get onto the A400 Initial Cadre.

[Bismark]

There is some tight ground maneuvering required for the J on some Afghan strips, how will the A400 cope?

Surely we will be out of Afgh by the time A400 arrives in service.

[Mach Two]

That's fine if you think Afg is the last place we'll have to operate transports into. As usual, we need to be prepared as much for the future we can't predict as the one we think we can.

[Rosevidney1]

I fervently hope so.

[juliet]

Bismark,

I guess the point I was making is that it would be better to have a mix in aircraft size. The Herc is already too big for some jobs, the A400 will exacerbate that problem. Can you imagine moving 2 land cruisers and 8 men with something the size of the A400?

Im sure it will be an excellent aircraft but I think having that size aircraft as the smallest in the fleet will be too much of a compromise.

[Old Fella]

Don't think 20 seconds from touchdown to taxy speed with the C17 is too bad in those conditions. Could have held reverse in longer and sucked lots of dirt in I guess. I think around 3000' minimum runway length required, but that would be on a sealed runway I guess.

[Ken Scott]

Without wishing to get all parochial and "Changi slip" about it i still think there will be ongoing niche roles for which the A400 will be unsuitable and for which the retention of a small fleet of C130s would be the sensible course of action.

I have to agree with Stopstart on that one. I can't imagine an A400 getting into somewhere like Al Amarah, Monserrat or Andros, to name a few of the smaller places I've been in a C130. You might say that there's no longer a requirement to land at said type of place but it still would amount to a loss of capability & who knows what the future holds? Certainly not any of the planning staffs.

[giblets]

According to Flight Global, the C130J is not set to retire until 2030. (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/raf-faces-tough-choices-over-future-air-transport-fleet-346672/). Although it does state:

Combined with having made regular rough field landings, also during the UK's involvement in Iraq, the type, although younger than 15 years old, is already showing worrying signs of premature ageing.

A report published by the UK National Audit Office in June 2008 warned that the effects of deployed operations were so severe that wing replacement work could be required on some of the RAF's C-130Js from 2012

[sprucemoose]

I think you're referring to a pretty old Flightglobal article, Giblets. The J's retirement date was brought forward as part of SDSR, which was about 16 months ago. I'm not sure the plan to see them all gone by 2022 is realistic, given the delayed A400M programme, but the fleet has taken a battering, so who knows?!

[JFZ90]

I have to agree with Stopstart on that one. I can't imagine an A400 getting into somewhere like Al Amarah, Monserrat or Andros, to name a few of the smaller places I've been in a C130. You might say that there's no longer a requirement to land at said type of place but it still would amount to a loss of capability & who knows what the future holds? Certainly not any of the planning staffs.

From what aspect do you think A400M won't get in to those places?

a) CBR?
b) Runway length?
c) Turning space?

Not sure about the last point, but for a given payload, would the first 2 issues be worse on an A400M than on a C130J?

[theboywide]

A400 will certainly be able to do all of those ken!
CBR is better than the j as more wheels.
It's performance will be damn close to the j but will be able to carry 85% of the army's inventory as opposed to the hercs 50% and will fit a FRES.
Cant see the J past 2022 but then again we won't see the k past 2012........
It's just too damn costly to keep both support contracts up.
Be nice to have a fleet of C27, C130J , A400M and C17 but sadly the bean counters wouldn't like it!!!

[Ken Scott]

Comments were based purely on size, those places were a squeeze for a C130 so it's hard to see how something the size of the A400 will fit.

As I said you might not need or choose to go to those places but not being able to is a loss of capability. Stoppers was I believe referring to the A400 being too large for some of the SF taskings.

[VX275]

In the early days of the A400M project a colleague looking through the aircraft specification saw the CBR requirement and said "I see the Germans still want to operate during the thaw on the Eastern Front".

[Rengineer]

It's been rather quiet on here. What's with the civil type certification, wasn't that supposed to be achieved some weeks ago? I remember Ed Strongman saying something in an interview like they only needed to complete natural-icing test or so, can't have been that hard in the recent wheather?:confused:

[flugholm]

A major milestone: On April 30th EASA issued the Restricted Type Certificate (RTC) for the A400M.
:ok:

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

A major milestone: On April 30th EASA issued the Restricted Type Certificate (RTC) for the A400M.
:ok:

Marvellous, any update on when we might actually get them :rolleyes:

[airsound]

A little bird in blue told me this morning that the Grizzly (sorry, the Atlas) is pitching up at a secret Oxfordshire air base today for a couple of days testing.

And, blow me down, when I used my secret channels of communication to speak to said base, they admitted as much.

airsound

[Ken Scott]

A little bird in blue told me this morning that the Grizzly (sorry, the Atlas) is pitching up at a secret Oxfordshire air base today for a couple of days testing.

Did the little bird mention that the ac is currently u/s and so might not be there on time?

It should fit in just perfectly with the other types at EGVN!

[airsound]

I'm told it did arrive at lunchtime today Wednesday - maybe a good sign for future schedules, Ken?

Apparently due to depart Saturday.

Regardless of all the negatives - cost, delays and the rest - I'm inclined to think that having this and the other big beast at Brize is rather encouraging.

Or is that just naïve?

airsound

[Ken Scott]

Or is that just naïve?


The A400 was originally intended to replace the Ks so the early withdrawal of the C130Js as well is a massive loss of capability principally as a result of running the fleet into the ground on Ops whilst failing to properly invest in its support facilities - lack of spares, engineers etc.

The C130 (both types) has been integral to every RAF operation for decades and the RAF will regret its departure, whatever the lift capacity of the 2 remaining types - they can only be in so may places at once - 50 odd ac replaced by 22.

[airsound]

I know all that, Ken - and I don't disagree.

But can't you find it in your heart to rejoice just a bit when two great big brand new beasts are actually, finally, there at Brize?

Even if one of them is only there for a day or two.

airsound

[Buster the Bear]

Well according to FR24 F-WWZ (something) was heading in that direction today.

[Less Hair]

Cottbus-Drewitz in Germany seems to be next for testing. 1500 meters of grass runway available.

[VinRouge]

Its a real shame that the J didnt have active stress monitoring across all frames. We were hammering jets into strips very rarely in the Stan, despite landing on natural surfaces 4-5 times a day.

Crews very quickly seemed to realise that hammering the jet iaw the manual onto a rollered strip like bastion wasnt very sensible. People very quickly were using pretty standard landing techniques on a strip that was pretty flat and I daresay consumed far less fatigue index than the sortie profile gobbled up on the database.

I dont doubt the Block 16 CDS and 2 hours at low level on tac sorties hasnt helped, but I would be really interested to see the results of a NDT test programme on the outer wing boxes - I wonder if for once there would be a pleasant surprise.

Or, am I completely wrong and are the wings showing physical signs of cracking? I heard there were problems with flap hinges, but this is a completely seperate issue from the wing spar fatigue issues and down to our modus operandi.

Out of interest, is the 400 spar metal or composite?

[Rulebreaker]

The A400m has composite skins stringers and spars with metallic ribs.

[cyrilranch]

AAR - A400M gets up close and personal with Voyager tanker

By Craig Hoyle on May 9, 2012 12:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0) |ShareThis
An A400M has made its first "dry" air-to-air refuelling (AAR) contacts behind an Airbus Military A330 multi-role tanker/transport, with one of the company's "Grizzly" development aircraft having achieved the milestone last week.

Airbus Military, which supplied the image below, says 30 contacts were made with the hose basket trailing from the A330's Cobham-supplied fuselage refuelling unit. This is a unique configuration so far, having been implemented for the UK Royal Air Force's AirTanker-supplied "Voyager" fleet.

"The tests demonstrated the stability of both aircraft when flying in close formation and while refuelling," says Airbus Military. Previous work had been performed behind an RAF Vickers VC10 tanker flown out of Toulouse, France.

The fresh activity represents good news for the UK; the only A400M customer nation so far to also be buying the A330 as a tanker. The "Voyager" aircraft involved in the work has previously conducted "wet" refuelling trials with Royal Air Force combat aircraft, during which hose stability and fuel venting issues were encountered, as I wrote in a feature article late last month.

Fresh trials are expecetd to occur in the UK from later this month to assess whether both problems have been solved.

AAR - A400M gets up close and personal with Voyager tanker - The DEW Line (http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2012/05/aar---a400m-gets-up-close-and.html)

[pilot9248]

Hi,

A400M gets initial certification, as engine problem strands MSN4 (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/a400m-gets-initial-certification-as-engine-problem-strands-msn4-371572/)

apparently they have replaced one pre-production engine of MSN6 with one of the first four production engines. How is this going to work out? Will they just use the next four engines for MSN7?

Has Airbus Military released any information on the MSN4 engine failure so far? They're not really running out of serviceable engines, are they?

Let's hope it is not the HPC again.

[keesje]

This week soft runways trails will start in Cottbus, Germany, with Grizzly 2.

Grizzly 2 heads for unpaved runway trials - The DEW Line (http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2012/05/grizzly-2-heads-for-unpaved-ru.html)

http://www.airbusmilitary.com/portals/0/Images/Aircraft/A400M/About/09.jpg

[VinRouge]

Not uncommon with prop ac. Checking my songbook, I managed to shut down 3 engines in 6 months on the J when the response to an eng vibration changed.

Sounds as if the oman shutdown was more electric wiggle if they don't know what caused it...

[Flap62]

VinRouge,

from your earlier:

hammering the jet

Jet? Really?

[Ken Scott]

Jet = colloquial expression, common amongst air forces, to describe an aircraft.

The props are driven by gas turbines so not strictly inaccurate. No ones calls it a 'prop'.

[keesje]

Not much to do with flight testing just fun/PR I guess..

X3 : THE ENCOUNTER 2

X3 : THE ENCOUNTER 2 - YouTube

[keesje]

and .. first shots of A400M driving around the German countryside..:D

Airbus Military A400M Testfahrt - YouTube

I think specially the high energy stops are crusial (~4:50). A lot of effort went into not damaging soft strip for continued opeartions..

[Rengineer]

Looks great keesje!
What's with the reports they had to interrupt testing that same day, and fly home? Did they taxi over the airfield manager's flowerbed, or was it something serious?

[Edited: Even more serious...]

[keesje]

Renginee, it seems the left mainwheels chewed into the grass during the max energy stop.

"The left-hand main wheels went through the upper surface of the runway at the end of a maximum braked rejected take-off exercise,"

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getasset.aspx?itemid=45887

Soft ground cuts short A400M landing trials (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/soft-ground-cuts-short-a400m-landing-trials-372340/)

[VinRouge]

I hope after our afghan experience they are planning to see the effect of stony strips on the aircraft.

[theboywide]

Gravel strips are on the test plan!

[pilot9248]

The Oman shutdown of a flight test engine was due to a failure of the propeller gearbox (again...). The engine is currently scheduled for maintenance.
The production engine has been disassembled for further examination in order to determine the source(s) of excess vibration.

[wiggy]

Great to see a very impressive and very noisy stream of 5 of the beasts heading south out of Blagnac this lunchtime....:D

[BEagle]

Yes, I saw a nice photo earlier this evening of all 5 together!

The gearbox incident was an indication / false alert, wasn't it?

Looking forward to seeing the aircraft at Farnborough!

[airsound]

Your word is my command Beags

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/airsound/5Grizzly/5Grizzly3.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/airsound/5Grizzly/5Grizzly2.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/airsound/5Grizzly/5Grizzly1.jpg

Good innit

airsound

[keesje]

:D impressive pictures..

[stilton]

Seems like a very capable Aircraft. Does anyone know if the flight control system operates similarly to the Airbus Commercial transports ?


For example:


Non moving Autothrottles and hard limits on manoeuvering / g limits / under/ over speed protections etc ..

[BEagle]

Flight envelope protection is included in the A400M's FBW software, so it therefore has the benefit of allowing 'carefree' manoeuvring up to the extremes of the envelope without the risk of structural damage.

The A400M is very agile for its class - as anyone attending Farnborough or RIAT will be able to witness. 2.5G has always been the manoeuvre value assumed in the A400M technical review brochure, with a structural ability to cope with sustained 3.0G turns at lower weight.

[keesje]

video of 5 ship formation

Airbus Military | Multimedia (http://www.airbusmilitary.com/Multimedia/A400MVideoGallery.aspx)

[pilot9248]

BEagle,

the PGB has been removed from the engine and is going to be replaced. That's all I know. Reconditioning will probably involve some modifications as well.

[SWBKCB]

From Flight Global:

RIAT: A400M reborn as 'Atlas' (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/riat-a400m-reborn-as-atlas-373861/)

[swp53]

Grizzly is a more punchy name in my opinion. Is Atlas the son of Noratlas. Like someone already said add a T at the end and have Atlast did the P.R. sales guru's not think that would happen?

[VX275]

Its not a letter T that needs adding to Atlas, its an F at the start and an S at the end, as befits such a portly design.

[Heathrow Harry]

The MoD has run down the stock of "Z"'s available for documents so they had to chose something else

[thesimtech]

Just noticed this on the Beeb, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-18765784. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-18765784)
Looks like good news for the secret Oxfordshire airbase!:D:D:ok:

[Ken Scott]

Just the one sim? Doesn't leave much redundancy for faults nor any capacity for when software & other upgrades take place. And £50m for one sim? Seems a tad expensive to my eyes, unless that's a whole package - training facility, staffing etc.

[Blue Bottle]

And a new Hangar

BBC News - Plans for new hangar at RAF Brize Norton (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-18064576)

[BEagle]

And a new hangar

A West Oxfordshire District Council planning sub-committee is set to discuss the proposals....

I was at that meeting for a completely unconnected reason. However, I was able to provide some technical information to 't Committee - no, aeroplanes may not test their engines inside hangars, as one noise-concerned Councillor had asked...:rolleyes:

[Ken Scott]

Said new hangar is already under construction & not far off complete, for the C130s at the moment & eventually for the A400s.

[HectorusRex]

FARNBOROUGH: Airbus Military pulls A400M out of flying display

By: Dominic Perry London
11:21 5 Jul 2012
Source:FARNBOROUGH: Airbus Military pulls A400M out of flying display (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/farnborough-airbus-military-pulls-a400m-out-of-flying-display-373767/)



Engine issues have again curtailed the participation of the Airbus Military A400M in the flying display of a major air show after the manufacturer announced the type would only be shown on the static park at the Farnborough air show, which starts on 9 July.

"The decision to have the aircraft on static display only is based on engine issues that happened last week which need further investigation," says Airbus Military.

Instead, it will show the first production representative example, MSN6.

a400m airbus military

Airbus Military

The A400M will not be taking off at this years Farnborough

Last year the airframer was forced to pull out of the flying display at the Paris air show after a flight-test problem in one of its Europrop International TP400-D6 turboprop engines halted all non-essential flights.

Flight testing continues at an "aggressive pace", it adds. "It is beginning to show the level of technical maturity required at first delivery, and we are pleased with the overall performance of the aircraft.

"Despite some engine maturity challenges, we are confident that we will find the right solutions and provide our customers with an aircraft that fully meets or exceeds the expectations."

At the end of June, the A400M had completed 1,180 flights, accumulating 3,535h since its first flight in December 2009.

[keesje]

The programme, to comprise intensive flight activity totalling 300h, was interrupted earlier this year after a problem with one of the aircraft's Europrop International (EPI) TP400-D6 turboprop engines
Atlas programme gets lift, as Airbus Military resumes A400M reliability flights (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/atlas-programme-gets-lift-as-airbus-military-resumes-a400m-reliability-flights-379118/)


Nice HD video from last ILA.. move to 2:27 :D
ILA 2012 A400M - YouTube

[VinRouge]

Don't they mean Restart the reliability test? Any word on any prospective project delay now for uk1?

[Lower Hangar]

Retired now but spoke to one of my ex Thales colleagues (in Tescos !) and they're in the process of breaking down the 1st A400M sim ( at Crawley) for shipping to Spain presumably for Airbus passing off airframes to future customers.

[theboywide]

I don't think there's any delay on UK1

[VinRouge]

Good news, keeping fingers crossed.

[sprucemoose]

No, VinRouge, they are resuming the reliability test, not restarting it. While some parts of the work covered in the previously completed 160 aircraft flight hours might need to be covered again, they don't have to repeat the entire process.

[Algy]

The final assembly line actually looking like, well, a final assembly line (http://www.airbusmilitary.com/LatestNews/tabid/176/ArticleID/226/ArtMID/681/First-three-production-Airbus-Military-A400M-aircraft-take-shape.aspx)

[GreenKnight121]

Interesting... thread shows a "page 11" with "posts 201-203", but won't let me access page 11. Lets see if this gets me in.

{edit: well, it says this is post #201. Fun.)

[keesje]

For folks that like high definition: first three production A400M's on the production line, for delivery next year.

http://www.sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A400M-on-Finishing-Line-November-20-2012.jpg

[haltonapp]

It must be siesta time, not a soul in sight in the photo link in the previous post!

[Genstabler]

Look again. It's the scale.

[VX275]

There's a person walking alongside the rear wall, possibly two more at the top of the fin of the far aeroplane and the ghost of someone by 0008's No3 engine (Obviously a visiting foreign engineer who moved too fast for the camera shutter). Siesta time it is.

[green granite]

I make it 12 people in that picture.

[keesje]

green granite,

9-10 in the lane in the back,
3 close to the nose of msn 9,
1 making a call under its wing,
1 in the office under the msn 9 wingtip
3 guys working the tail of msn 10(?)

and a few maybe's.

At least 17 :8

;)

[GreenKnight121]

So a full work-shift then!

:E

[TEEEJ]

Nice to see an A400 over Lincolnshire, yesterday. Routed over Coningsby and Cranwell. :ok:

[glad rag]

Wot no flying carpets? BORING



Seriously though, nice set up with the staging.

Ah happy [mostly] memories of Toulouse indeed.

[zero1]

I see the French are on yet another tea break... No engineers around or are they hiding inside the aircraft...

Nice picture...:ok:

[Green Flash]

TEEEJ - it got as far as Lossiemouth too!

[TurningFinals]

Was nice to see it up at Lossiemouth.

[Algy]

The A400M FAL is in Seville.

[glad rag]

Yep.












;)

[keesje]

The F&R testing was completed in just 32 days, during which the aircraft made 52 flights and visited 10 different airfields. 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.

http://www.airteamimages.com/pics/160/160113_800.jpg

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 2013 subject to the approval of the relevant authorities.


Airbus Military A400M completes critical flight-test phase - Airbus Military (http://www.airbusmilitary.com/LatestNews/tabid/176/ArticleID/230/ArtMID/681/Airbus-Military-A400M-completes-critical-flight-test-phase.aspx)

[dragartist]

Some of you may beinterested in the forthcoming RAeS A400M lectures. 9th Jan atBedford ARA and 7th Feb Ed Strongman (test Pilot) at Cambridge. Thisis our Sir Arthur Marshall named lecture at Downing Coll and if last year isanything to go by it will be standing room only.

Come and find out thereal story. I can’t stand the BS on here particularly about 02 certificationand Certification generally. We had AvP 970 which became Def Stan 00-970 withclear guidance and pass/fail, go/no go criteria. These days things are moreflexible and tailored.

I know the C&Qteam have worked hard with other nations and stood up to airbus on occasion. Afew things are certain: the T&E will be over budget. (Q2 will see to thateven thought they are embedded in the Combined Trials Team they will advise theIPT not to accept advice from other nations T&E organisations. – I hope theIPT stand up to them)

The aircraft will be astep change in capability over the C130.

The x locks in the CHSwill never meet the 10 to the minus 9 criteria but I am no longer the poorbugger that has to recommend that bit is signed up.
I am looking forward to seeing it in UK servicebut we will never have enough of them. Just hope that when the time comes wecan afford it.

[Algy]

Here's the BBC take on the visit to BZN on Friday 1 March. BBC News - Taking to the skies on RAF's new transport plane (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21650779)

[ian16th]

Airbus Military's A400M aircraft is poised to take off - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/defence/9906144/Airbus-Militarys-A400M-aircraft-is-poised-to-take-off.html)

Also in today's Torygraph!

It appears that someone has pushed the 'publicity' button.

[Dysonsphere]

Remind me what was the orignal in service date.

[ORAC]

Defense news: Joint Venture To Train RAF Crews on Atlas A400M (http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130304/DEFREG01/303040012/Joint-Venture-Train-RAF-Crews-Atlas-A400M?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE)

LONDON — Royal Air Force crews set to fly the new Atlas A400M airlifter are to be trained by a joint venture company set up by Airbus Military and Thales UK. The deal is contracted to run for 18 years at a cost of 226 million pounds ($340 million), the joint venture company, known as A400M Training Services, announced Monday.

Separately, the Ministry of Defence revealed it is spending 80 million pounds to modify the Atlas aircraft so it can be fitted with a large aircraft infrared countermeasures system.

The training facility being built at the Brize Norton home of the RAF’s airlifter and inflight refueling fleets is scheduled to be completed in spring 2014, just ahead of the delivery date of the first A400M to the RAF. Air crew and ground maintenance and support personnel will be trained at the Atlas facility using Thales-supplied simulators and other synthetic systems. Thales secured the simulator supply deal in 2007 following a competition.

RAF personnel are already being trained at an Airbus training facility alongside the Seville, Spain, assembly base for the aircraft

[Trumpet_trousers]

First production Airbus Military A400M makes maiden flight - Airbus Military (http://www.airbusmilitary.com/LatestNews/tabid/176/ArticleID/255/ArtMID/681/First-production-Airbus-Military-A400M-makes-maiden-flight.aspx)

Just returned, nice to get a FF under my belt! :D

[Courtney Mil]

Good for you! Can you tell us more? :ok:

[BEagle]

Hey TT - good to hear from you! Great news that the first production aircraft has made its maiden flight...:ok:

I'll bet you're glad I poached you from 99 and started you off on your civvy career - you wouldn't have had so much fun in what's left of the RAF!

It was good to see you at F'boro last year - despite the pi$$ing b£oody rain!

[Trumpet_trousers]

CM and Beagle, not much more to say really, the PR sums it up nicely, apart from which, I have to whizz off for the celebration dinner in town! :ok:

[flugholm]

Slightly different shade of grey on MSN 7. "Merde gris" is what someone called it on another discussion board. :=

[flugholm]

EASA Type Certificate EASA.A.169 was received today.
http://www.easa.europa.eu/certification/type-certificates/docs/aircraft/EASA-TCDS-A.169_Airbus_A400M-03-13032013.pdf
:ok:

[Courtney Mil]

For some reason I just read the certificate. Why?

I did notice something interesting, though.

It describes the aircraft as

Four turbo-propeller engines, medium range tactical transport aeroplane, large aeroplane category.

And goes on to define

18. Minimum Flight Crew
Two (2): Pilot and co-pilot

However, we then find that

19. Maximum Seating Capacity
No other occupants apart of the minimum flight crew are allowed on board

20. Baggage/ Cargo Compartment
No loads shall be carried in the cargo compartment

Transport aircraft aren't what they used to be, are they? :cool:

[theboywide]

This must be the restricted type certification with full to come.
I didn't look in any great detail but this only clears up to 31000ft when the ac operates up to at least 37000ft.

[flugholm]

theboywide wrote:
>This must be the restricted type certification with full to come.

No, the RTC was already issued April 30th, 2012.

[GreenKnight121]

So you are claiming that this, which forbids carrying any passengers or cargo, is the full type certification?

For a gawddam cargo plane?

[kbrockman]

MTOW is also almost 20,000lbs below original spec (132T iso 141T) which gives limited room for cargo and pax at all, certainly when you look at the
Max Landing Weight of 117.7T(originally122T) and empty weight of 77T,
with full fuel that would make 127T and thus only room for 5T of Cargo.

Temporary restricted type certification, I would like to think.

[Courtney Mil]

You reckon? Either that or it's a hell of a big beast just to transport two pilots around the world. Not even a hostie. :eek:

[John Farley]

There may be some confusion here between the stage the aircraft has reached with respect to its civil as opposed to its military certification.

[keesje]

Pretty normal in militairy programs.

Futher testing, analyses will lead to expanded capability approvals and the final operating configuration.

This aircraft will go through the qualifications of a passenger transport on civil airways, tactical transport on soft short runways at night, tanker for jets and helicopters, receiver. Mountains of certfication and paperwork..

Airbus Military's A400M: in pictures - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/defence/9905825/Airbus-Militarys-A400M-in-pictures.html?frame=2498383)

[keesje]

The UK has no requirement to use its future fleet of Airbus Military A400M Atlas tactical transports in a secondary tanker role, minister for defence equipment, support and technology Philip Dunne has confirmed.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Assets/GetAsset.aspx?ItemID=49856

No tanker role for UK A400Ms (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/no-tanker-role-for-uk-a400ms-383509/)

But:

The A400M will be delivered with an in-built tanker capability, with some nations expected to acquire hose-and-drogue refuelling pods and/or hose drum units to provide an in-flight refuelling capability to support fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters.

So if the Brits change their minds in say 3 years they can still order kits.

[BEagle]

The UK has no requirement to use its future fleet of Airbus Military A400M Atlas tactical transports in a secondary tanker role, minister for defence equipment, support and technology Philip Dunne has confirmed.

So, nothing to do with the AirTanker contract then.....:rolleyes:

I guess the UK has no plans to refuel helicopters?

[A2QFI]

The Argosy reborn at higher cost perhaps?

[dragartist]

I am enjoying this thread. You guys are great.
I think I have previously exposed my concerns about this A400M. (I becme loosely involved in 1995 and then on several A400M working groups before I finsihed last year- does that qualify me to comment? - I refer to another thread)

my point is that there is the art of the possible. A400M could probably do much of the role. not to the same extent as Nimrod so far as ASW goes.

Then there is the art of the affordable. we just have to face it as a nation we are destitute.

When I started work with the HJPT (before J and K merged then TriStar and then us S&AD people joined) there was a whole team looking after a proposed tanker version of the J. They were soon reallocated other dreamsheet tasks. One of those was an ASRA pallet.

We always finished up with something far less capable than desired. Difficult job to ballance the art of the possible with the art of the affordable.

I have no doubt that A400M (although late) will be worth waiting for and when in service it will grow the arms and legs to make it do all these wonderful things.

Now I must knock up some sketches to show how to drop torpedos and sonobuoys, fit a MAD boom and ESL pods (Fraudian slip for those Nimrod R men) Ah, there's another idea we will fit an ISO container full of Rivet Joint electrics. Sorry I think they did something similar on Snoopy.

A400M all things to all men. just need a good few more of them

[keesje]

Which aircraft will refuel RAF helicopters?

http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_EH101_Merlin_HC3_lg.jpg

[dragartist]

Re #240

I rest my case - we are not joined up. who allowed squillions to be spent equipping Merlin with probes without the means to exploit them when we were broke.

The money could have been better spent or left in the pot to be spent on benefits for us pensioners.

In years to come when we have all saved our pennies we will probably have enough to pay Airbus for the Mod kit. the French will have completed all the trials so nothing left for Q2 to investigate. And the major stakeholder in the CTT is?

[Rigga]

The TCDS is a full Type Certificate.
It has, however, been issued with Limitations which, when cleared, mean the TCDS will be raised to Issue two.

That's EASA-speak for "Fudge".

[Trumpet_trousers]

.....and then there were 2....

[Algy]

It's all true. (http://www.airbusmilitary.com/PressCenter/LatestNews/tabid/176/ArticleID/268/ArtMID/681/Second-production-Airbus-Military-A400M-makes-maiden-flight.aspx)

[flugholm]

The first delivery to a customer occured today:
MSN7 was handed over to the the Armee de l'Air at the big show in Le Bourget.
:D

[Algy]

That is not correct. MSN7 was not at the Paris Airshow and has not been delivered.

The aircraft in the static park at Paris was MSN8 - the second aircraft for France - and the display was performed by another aircraft altogether. On Thursday night MSN8 left the show and returned on Friday from Villacoublay with President Hollande on board for his visit to the show.

MSN7 will be delivered to France in the coming weeks and is due to fly in the Bastille Day parade on 14 July.

[keesje]

http://www.airbusmilitary.com/Portals/0/ImagesPress/06_18_2013%202.jpg