Airbus A400M as a maritime aircraft ?
Airbus A400M as a maritime aircraft ?
In the days when A400M was 'FLA', one of its intended roles was as the intended RMPA. However, the design requirements for a sturdy, austere base transport aeroplane with a freight floor and those of an MPA with a need for sensors and weapons carriage were, to an extent, mutually incompatible.
The A321 would, however, be a reasonable platform upon which to base an MPA.
Although whether it would be affordable is a different matter.
The A321 would, however, be a reasonable platform upon which to base an MPA.
Although whether it would be affordable is a different matter.
..even I have a ticket for 321's!
Roll on the civvy contract? I'm sure that's the only way the RAF will get them.
If they buy 20-yr-old frames I'm sure some Northern company could modify them in just a few short decades.
Roll on the civvy contract? I'm sure that's the only way the RAF will get them.
If they buy 20-yr-old frames I'm sure some Northern company could modify them in just a few short decades.
So basically we're having this conversation http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...sion-uk-4.html again but with a bigger airframe?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAAB 2000?
I believe they as in the MOD had a look at using the above.
Cheap, fast, modest platform, just a shame they do not make them anymore but Eastern have a few.
I would be pleasantly surprised to see the A400 perform its prime role without further Airbus related cok ups and delays before thinking about maritime roles.
Cheap, fast, modest platform, just a shame they do not make them anymore but Eastern have a few.
I would be pleasantly surprised to see the A400 perform its prime role without further Airbus related cok ups and delays before thinking about maritime roles.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London
Age: 64
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the European Maritime patrol aircraft are getting long in the teeth.
With the A330 Tanker fiasco with the Americans, I don't forsee a lot of enthusiasm to buy the Boeing P8?
Obviously the Europeans would want a european solution. Enter the dedicated maritime A400M. The freight door would be removed and the aircraft would contain all the weapons, sonor bhoys, electonics etc needed.
Most of the cost would be the electronics, so it is important to have a longish production run to bring the cost of the aircraft down. As in the Boeing P8.
Since the maritime version would be the same as the original version, apart from the freight door. There is a chance this could be achieved with the A400 Maritime.
The alternative is for the whole of Europe to buy American.
That is unacceptable.
With the A330 Tanker fiasco with the Americans, I don't forsee a lot of enthusiasm to buy the Boeing P8?
Obviously the Europeans would want a european solution. Enter the dedicated maritime A400M. The freight door would be removed and the aircraft would contain all the weapons, sonor bhoys, electonics etc needed.
Most of the cost would be the electronics, so it is important to have a longish production run to bring the cost of the aircraft down. As in the Boeing P8.
Since the maritime version would be the same as the original version, apart from the freight door. There is a chance this could be achieved with the A400 Maritime.
The alternative is for the whole of Europe to buy American.
That is unacceptable.
Last edited by Stuffy; 15th Mar 2013 at 14:09.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously the Europeans would want a european solution
A while back I sketched a euro concept that can transfer fuel to other MPAs and helicopters, as well as move 20 people/ cargo and carry optional gun turret (counter piracy). Single purpose platforms proved risky in dynamic times.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...ceptkeesje.jpg
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In another thread a european command was discussed with three main bases (northern UK, Portugal, Southern Italy) and a number of helicopter stations. A standarized long haul MPA type, a smaller coast ops optimized type and mixed european crews. Aircraft could be rotated between the bases as required.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London
Age: 64
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How the Nimrod took so long to complete, is anybody's guess. I think I few heads needed knocking together. All that money spent for scrap metal.
A while back I flew a Boeing B737-800 from Mumbai to Bangkok.
Sardines in a tin. The engines and wing may be modern, but it is still a cramped 1950's fuselage. Not the greatest flight.
There will be problems with the Boeing P8 Poseidon.
Two engines, no bomb bay to drop things. Trying to do too much with a small airframe. Where have we heard that before ?
Maybe we should update the Nimrod ? Errr, sorry, cancelled.
Only two engines on the Atlantique ? Yes, but it has a bomb bay.
Lots of MPA aircraft in Europe getting old. Replacement needed, come on Eurozone, you have loads of money. You keep telling us that things are fine.
No, not the Airbus 321, it is an airliner, and it has two engines.
A400M expensive ? Depends on the production run. Most of the expense will be the electronics on board. Which need, an aircraft that is quite large for many reasons. The crew need a rest on a long flight.
The A400M has quite a good rough/short field performance, and a inflight refueling probe. It is quick for a turboprop.
Nearly getting there are we?
The bomb bay, might be a problem. Still, much can be done with a big aircraft. Lots of space inside means lots of flexibility. I am still thinking Of that flight to Bangkok, sitting by the window and asking the passengers to move so I can go to the toilet. It would, probably make quite a good business aircraft. Done already you say, OK fine. Boeing Business aircraft.
Back to square one. The Nimrod should never have been cancelled. It was just mismanaged. Well, we know how smart managers are?
Airbus A340-300. Ideal, send a few up to Marshalls at Cambridge, conversion time.
Back to square two.
1)Four engines for an MPA
2)A nice big bomb bay to drop things.
3)Lots of electronic power and cooling.
4)Somewhere for the crew to eat and sleep.
5)An aircraft not designed in the 1950's. Nimrod, yeah I know, but it looks nice.
In the end, the Europeans will keep their ancient crates going, and the British will buy the Boeing P8.
Won't they Liam ?
A while back I flew a Boeing B737-800 from Mumbai to Bangkok.
Sardines in a tin. The engines and wing may be modern, but it is still a cramped 1950's fuselage. Not the greatest flight.
There will be problems with the Boeing P8 Poseidon.
Two engines, no bomb bay to drop things. Trying to do too much with a small airframe. Where have we heard that before ?
Maybe we should update the Nimrod ? Errr, sorry, cancelled.
Only two engines on the Atlantique ? Yes, but it has a bomb bay.
Lots of MPA aircraft in Europe getting old. Replacement needed, come on Eurozone, you have loads of money. You keep telling us that things are fine.
No, not the Airbus 321, it is an airliner, and it has two engines.
A400M expensive ? Depends on the production run. Most of the expense will be the electronics on board. Which need, an aircraft that is quite large for many reasons. The crew need a rest on a long flight.
The A400M has quite a good rough/short field performance, and a inflight refueling probe. It is quick for a turboprop.
Nearly getting there are we?
The bomb bay, might be a problem. Still, much can be done with a big aircraft. Lots of space inside means lots of flexibility. I am still thinking Of that flight to Bangkok, sitting by the window and asking the passengers to move so I can go to the toilet. It would, probably make quite a good business aircraft. Done already you say, OK fine. Boeing Business aircraft.
Back to square one. The Nimrod should never have been cancelled. It was just mismanaged. Well, we know how smart managers are?
Airbus A340-300. Ideal, send a few up to Marshalls at Cambridge, conversion time.
Back to square two.
1)Four engines for an MPA
2)A nice big bomb bay to drop things.
3)Lots of electronic power and cooling.
4)Somewhere for the crew to eat and sleep.
5)An aircraft not designed in the 1950's. Nimrod, yeah I know, but it looks nice.
In the end, the Europeans will keep their ancient crates going, and the British will buy the Boeing P8.
Won't they Liam ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London
Age: 64
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The good old P3 Orion.
A geat aircraft in its day, but old. Those maintenance costs upset the accountants.
Probably another option, better than the P8 though.
A geat aircraft in its day, but old. Those maintenance costs upset the accountants.
Probably another option, better than the P8 though.
Last edited by Stuffy; 16th Mar 2013 at 02:52.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stuffy. When it comes to P-8, I'm afraid you are wrong. It is not too small. Please don't compare to a passenger 737. It's a different beast.
