A400M vs Belfast

[Wander00]

Just read this comparison between A400M and the Belfast - had not realised before the similar capacities of the two airframes. Clearly other capabilities vastly different.

Clash of the titans! Airbus A400M Versus Shorts Belfast | Hush-Kit

Would be interested in the comments of the AT experts

[Madbob]

Wanderer00 here's a copy of an earlier post I made that you may have missed on another thread which compares the A 400 with the Belfast, C-133 and C130H.......

At the time it was based on the predicted performance of the A400 versus those venerable workhorses of the air which in design terms date from 50 (yes 50!) years ago. The max payload of the A400 is 82,000 lbs, C 133 110,000 lbs, Belfast 80,000 lbs and the Herc (C130 H) 45,000 lbs. Max cruise speeds are very similar, 350 mph, 359 mph, 358 mph and 336 mph respectively.

The range of the A400 with a 20 tonne payload (btw this would be a full load for a Herc) is projected at 3,753 nm for the A400 and with 23.5 tonnes the C133 could go 3,560 nm, the Belfast could do about 3,600 miles and the Herc only 2,050 nms.

The A400 has 4 x 11,000 shp, the C 133 4 x 7,500 shp, the Belfast 4 x 5,730 shp and the C 130 4 x 4,300 shp.

The real question is what would each aeroplane cost to build in today's prices and whether the A400 really is giving us value for money for what might seem a modest improvement in performance.





General characteristics - A400M

• Crew: 3-4 (2 pilots, 3rd optional, 1 loadmaster)
• Capacity: 37,000 kg (82,000 lb), 116 fully equipped troops / paratroops, up to 66 stretchers accompanied by 25 medical personnel
• Length: 43.8 m (143 ft 8 in)
• Wingspan: 42.4 m (139 ft 1 in)
• Height: 14.6 m (47 ft 11 in)
• Empty weight: 70 tonnes (154,000 lb)
• Max takeoff weight: 130 tonnes (287,000 lb)

• Total Internal Fuel: 46.7 tonnes (103,000 lb)
• Max. Landing Weight: 114 tonnes (251,000 lb)
• Max. Payload: 37 tonnes (82,000 lb))

• Powerplant: 4× EuroProp International TP400-D6[10] turboprop, 8,250 kW (11,000 hp) each

Performance

• Maximum speed: 300 knots CAS (560 km/h, 350 mph)
• Cruise speed:Mach 0.68 - 0.72 ()

• Initial Cruise Altitude: at MTOW: 9,000 m (29,000 ft)

• Range: at Max. payload: 3,300 km (1,782 nmi) (long range cruise speed; reserves as per MIL-C-5011A)
  • Range at 30-tonne payload: 4,800 km (2,592 nmi)
  • Range at 20-tonne payload: 6,950 km (3,753 nmi))
• Ferry range: 9,300 km (5,022 nmi)
• Service ceiling 11,300 m (37,000 ft)

• Tactical Takeoff Distance: 940 m (3 080 ft) (aircraft weight 100 tonnes, soft field, ISA, sea level)
• Tactical Landing Distance: 625 m (2 050 ft) (see above)
• Turning Radius (Ground): 28.6 m

General characteristics - C133 Cargomaster

• Crew: six (two pilots, two engineers, navigator, loadmaster)
• Capacity: Designed as a logistics transport, the C-133 carried only small numbers of passengers, usually associated with the cargo.
• Payload: 110,000 lb (50,000 kg)
• Length: 157 ft 6 in (48.0 m)
• Wingspan: 179 ft 8 in (54.8 m)
• Height: 48 ft 3 in (14.7 m)
• Wing area: 2,673.1 ft² (248.34 m²)
• Empty weight: 109,417 lb (49,631 kg)
• Loaded weight: 275,000 lb (125,000 kg)
• Max takeoff weight: 275,000 lb (C-133A) / 286,000 lb (C-133B) (125,000 kg (C-133A) / 130,000 kg (C-133B))
• Powerplant: 4× Pratt & Whitney T34-P-9W turboprops, 7,500 shp (5,586 kW) each
• * Cargo deck : 86 ft 10 in (26.47 m)

Performance

• Maximum speed: 312 kt (359 mph / 578 km/h)
• Cruise speed: 280 kt (322 mph / 519 km/h)
• Range: 3,560 nm with 52,000 lb (23,587 kg) payload (4,097 mi / 6,590 km)
• Service ceiling 32,300 ft (9,800 m)

General characteristics - Belfast C Mk 1

• Crew: Basic aircrew 4 (two pilots, engineer & navigator/radio operator) plus reserve crew
• Capacity: 11,750 cu. ft.
• Payload: 80,000 lb (36,288 kg)
• Length: 136 ft 5 in (41.70 m)
• Wingspan: 158 ft 10 in (48.1 m)
• Height: 47 ft (14.33 m)
• Wing area: 2,466 ft² (229.1 m²)
• Empty weight: 130,000 lb (59,020 kg)
• Max takeoff weight: 230,000 lb (104,300 kg)
• Powerplant: 4× Rolls-Royce Tyne R.Ty.12, Mk. 101 turboprops, Hawker Siddeley Dynamics 4/7000/fully-feathering airscrews of 16 ft. diam., 5,730 ehp (4,270 kW) each

Performance

• Cruise speed: 358 mph (576 km/h)
• Range: 5,200 miles (8,368 km) with capacity fuel load of 80,720 lb
• Service ceiling 30,000 ft (9,100 m)
• Rate of climb: 1,060 ft/min (323 m/min)
• Range with maximum payload: 970 miles (1,560 km)

General characteristics - C 130 H

• Crew: 4-6: at least 2 pilots,1 flight engineer (eliminated in the J variant, replaced by crew chief), and 1 loadmaster; additional loadmaster and navigator are usually part of the crew
• Capacity:
  
  • 92 passengers or
  • 64 airborne troops or
  • 74 litter patients with 2 medical personnel
• Payload: 45,000 lb (20,000 kg) including 2-3 Humvees or an M113 Armored Personnel Carrier
• Length: 97 ft 9 in (29.8 m)
• Wingspan: 132 ft 7 in (40.4 m)
• Height: 38 ft 3 in (11.6 m)
• Wing area: 1,745 ft² (162.1 m²)
• Empty weight: 83,000 lb (38,000 kg)
• Useful load: 72,000 lb (33,000 kg)
• Max takeoff weight: 155,000 lb (70,300 kg)
• Powerplant: 4× Allison T56-A-15turboprops, 4,300 shp (3,210 kW) each

Performance

• Maximum speed: 329 knots (379 mph, 610 km/h)
• Cruise speed: 292 knots (336 mph, 540 km/h)
• Range: 2,050 nm (2,360 mi, 3,800 km)
• Service ceiling 33,000 ft (10,000 m)

[Herod]

That's all very well, but has the A400 got crew rest facilities that compare with the Belfast?

[Pontius Navigator]

Originally Posted by Madbob

The real question is what would each aeroplane cost to build in today's prices and whether the A400 really is giving us value for money for what might seem a modest improvement in performance

You posed the question then posted leading particulars for each type, but what of costs?

Do you have any costings and adjusting for today's prices?

[Father Jack Hackett]

I was working in Shorts back in 93 / 94 when we had a delegation from the Future Large Aircraft Group, later to become Airbus Military, who picked over every bit of data that Shorts had retained on the Belfast. A400M is to a very large degree the Son of Belfast.

Back in the early days of the Belfast, Shorts had a concept for a high-performance version of the aircraft involving grafting a C-141 wing-set and engines onto the Belfast fuselage. Those who can remember that far back will recall that the original FLA concept was a jet......

[Easy Street]

Looking at the differences in thrust I suspect the A400M's runway performance is significantly better than any of the old-timers.

[MAINJAFAD]

One "what if" scenario that has always interested me is what could the Belfast have done as regards the build up to the Argie invasion of the Falklands in 1982 in reinforcing the islands before the Argies came ashore on 02 Apr had the aircraft not been removed from RAF service in 1976 and the US allowed operations from Wideawake.

Was the AAR system in the aircraft usable?
Could the aircraft do para drop or do LAPES to get some form of heavy weight weapons down there? I assume that the runway at Stanley would have been too short to do a landing and take off.

Of course the Belfast was invovled in moving stuff to Wideawake from the UK in the colours of Heavylift.

[500N]

MAINJAFAD

Could you explain this a bit further for those not in the UK forces ?

"and the US allowed operations from Wideawake."

[AGS Man]

I remember some years ago when the A400 was known as the FLA and was having the usual development problems a working group was formed by the consortium to sort things out. It was called Best FLA which interestingly enough is an anagram of Belfast!

[VX275]

General characteristics - A400M

• Crew: 3-4 (2 pilots, 3rd optional, 1 loadmaster)
• Capacity: 37,000 kg (82,000 lb), 116 fully equipped troops / paratroops, up to 66 stretchers accompanied by 25 medical personnel
• Length: 43.8 m (143 ft 8 in)
• Wingspan: 42.4 m (139 ft 1 in)
• Height: 14.6 m (47 ft 11 in)
• Empty weight: 70 tonnes (154,000 lb)
• Max takeoff weight: 130 tonnes (287,000 lb)

• Total Internal Fuel: 46.7 tonnes (103,000 lb)
• Max. Landing Weight: 114 tonnes (251,000 lb)
• Max. Payload: 37 tonnes (82,000 lb))

• Powerplant: 4× EuroProp International TP400-D6[10] turboprop, 8,250 kW (11,000 hp) each

Performance

• Maximum speed: 300 knots CAS (560 km/h, 350 mph)
• Cruise speed:Mach 0.68 - 0.72 ()

• Initial Cruise Altitude: at MTOW: 9,000 m (29,000 ft)

• Range: at Max. payload: 3,300 km (1,782 nmi) (long range cruise speed; reserves as per MIL-C-5011A)
  • Range at 30-tonne payload: 4,800 km (2,592 nmi)
  • Range at 20-tonne payload: 6,950 km (3,753 nmi))
• Ferry range: 9,300 km (5,022 nmi)
• Service ceiling 11,300 m (37,000 ft)

• Tactical Takeoff Distance: 940 m (3 080 ft) (aircraft weight 100 tonnes, soft field, ISA, sea level)
• Tactical Landing Distance: 625 m (2 050 ft) (see above)
• Turning Radius (Ground): 28.6 m

I have a manufacturers brochure for The Blackburn B107 (Beverley development stage 3) which fell foul of Duncan Sandys in 1957. This is what Blackburns were claiming for it.

Crew: Six, 2 x pilots, Navigator, Flight Engineer, Signaller, Air Loadmaster.
Capacity 53 000 lb. 124 to 148 passengers (192 in high density), 100 paratroops, 2 x HSP.
Length 120 ft span 166 ft height over fin 31 ft 6in
Basic operationally equiped weight 85 500 lb
Design all-up-weight 167 500 lb
Maximum payload 53 000 lb
Maximum fuel 69 980 lb
Powerplant 4 Rolls Royce Tyne stage 2
4 x 16 ft dia 4 blade de Haviland propellors
Range at max payload 1600 miles
max rage with full fuel 4200 miles
Balance field length (167 500 lb AUW) 4540 yds
Landing distance from 50 ft (145 000lb) 1000 yds

Cruise performance at ISA - 150 000 lb mean weight
Max speed 325 kt at 22 000 ft
Ceiling 34 500 ft

Notice the description (Beverley developent stage 3), what the B107 would have been was a Beverley wing and tailplane mated to a new pressurised fuselage and four turoprop engines.
Of course the Belfast was similar originally a similar concept, being a new fuselage using the Britannia's and four Tynes, which is why in its early days it was called the Britannic.

[MAINJAFAD]

Could you explain this a bit further for those not in the UK forces ?

"and the US allowed operations from Wideawake."

Wideawake airfield is on Ascension Island and though the island is a British territory, the airfield at the time of the Falkland’s war was operated by USAF. After the Invasion of the Falklands, this of course happened.

The question is would the Argies have backed down if a couple of hundred Paras and some weapons bigger than a 84mm Carl Gustav suddenly appeared on the Falklands the day before they intended to invade because a Belfast or two with Victor tanker support had been able to get them down there (with of course the British government advertising the fact).

[500N]

Thanks

Interesting question.

Well if you look at how much damage 18 or so Royal Marines did on South Georgia, a couple of hundred Paras would probably have put a serious dent in the invasion plans. Whether it would have held up any reinforcements, who knows.

The problem would also have been one of re supply to the Paras once they were there as is always the case behind enemy lines.

[ancientaviator62]

The Belfast was not cleared for any airdrop, neither paras or stores.

[dragartist]

AA62, your comments about Belfast not being cleared for AD got me thinking. Neither is our [UK] C17. They were just arriving when I attended an ABFOG meeting in town. Col Parkinson (recently deceased God bless him) remarked during the discussion of the possibility of dropping from them: "Look guys its not going to happen. We are only getting a few and can't afford to have one at Boscombe for as long as they have had the J. Just paint them white and park them up at Brize Norton" Little did we know at the time how busy they would be shifting stuff to the sand pit.

I am really looking forward to seeing the A400M do what it says on the tin.

[MAINJAFAD]

AA65

Thanks for the clarification on the question about the Belfast's lack of airdrop capability.

[MAINJAFAD]

Thanks

Interesting question.

Well if you look at how much damage 18 or so Royal Marines did on South Georgia, a couple of hundred Paras would probably have put a serious dent in the invasion plans. Whether it would have held up any reinforcements, who knows.

The problem would also have been one of re supply to the Paras once they were there as is always the case behind enemy lines.

I was thinking more of the deterrent effect of the Argies realising that the British would actively defend the place and calling the invasion off. However seeing that even if the RAF had still got the Belfast in service at the time, the aircraft could not have done the task required in the time scale required.

[Willard Whyte]

The Belfast was not cleared for any airdrop, neither paras or stores.

Cleared and capable are two distict, different, states. Particularly during conflict.

[500N]

Main

Yes, if the Argie knew it could be done and was going to be done,
you never know. If they had been any good at planning, then they
should have factored that in.

[MAINJAFAD]

If they had been any good at planning, then they
should have factored that in.

If they had been any good at planning they would have waited until the Hermes and Invincible had been sold and Endurance scraped.

Cleared and capable are two distinct, different, states. Particularly during conflict.

Quite so, Willard, seeing what other capabilities evolved in the 6 week period from 2nd April 82 onwards, clearing the Belfast to do AD would have very likely happened.

[Tester07]

I think you're getting your IASs and TASs mixed up here, aren't you? The idea that the Belfast and A400 have roughly the same performance is surely wide of the mark. Certainly the A400 max cruise is quoted as CAS, and the C130 is TAS, so you are comparing apples and oranges I think.