Reports of A400 Crash, Saville, Spain
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding of the Tactical fuel management is that it schedules the fuel in such a way that it minimises stress/fatigue due to the more dynamic manoeuvring required for the tactical role, up to +3G.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Trumpville; On the edge
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KenV
Yes, that is my understanding of the system. It is, in effect, an autonomous 'wing relieving' system specifically for the tactical role.
If you look at any of the A400M display videos out there, the penultimate manoeuvre before the 120 degree wing-over at the conclusion of the display is a 3G pull-up.
If you look at any of the A400M display videos out there, the penultimate manoeuvre before the 120 degree wing-over at the conclusion of the display is a 3G pull-up.
Thanks, TT, that's what I thought.
The term 'trimming', much as the term 'strong banking', is probably the result of poor translation by the original source.
Good to hear that the 2 survivors are doing well.
The term 'trimming', much as the term 'strong banking', is probably the result of poor translation by the original source.
Good to hear that the 2 survivors are doing well.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Trumpville; On the edge
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to be clear:
Whether MSN23 was fitted with such a system (software/hardware) is immaterial - a first-flight schedule would not be checking/testing any such capability, that would either be in subsequent flights, or - more likely - subject to specific functionality testing onboard one of the 3 development aircraft prior to being cleared for series production embodiment.
Whether MSN23 was fitted with such a system (software/hardware) is immaterial - a first-flight schedule would not be checking/testing any such capability, that would either be in subsequent flights, or - more likely - subject to specific functionality testing onboard one of the 3 development aircraft prior to being cleared for series production embodiment.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, that is my understanding of the system. It is, in effect, an autonomous 'wing relieving' system specifically for the tactical role.
If you look at any of the A400M display videos out there, the penultimate manoeuvre before the 120 degree wing-over at the conclusion of the display is a 3G pull-up.
If you look at any of the A400M display videos out there, the penultimate manoeuvre before the 120 degree wing-over at the conclusion of the display is a 3G pull-up.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Age: 59
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrong Tree, Barking
In common with most large aircraft, by design the A400M fuel system keeps as much fuel as far outboard as possible all the time for wing bending moment relief. As fuel is used from the feed tanks, they are topped up from the centre and transfer tanks in that order. (There is a slight modification to this in a tactical fuel loading mode which I won't describe here - but that's not important right now.)
The aircraft fuel system does not take orders from the engine ECUs. If there is a parameter labelled "trim" or "fuel trim" in the ECU data, it relates to engine fuel control, not the aircraft fuel system.
The aircraft fuel system does not take orders from the engine ECUs. If there is a parameter labelled "trim" or "fuel trim" in the ECU data, it relates to engine fuel control, not the aircraft fuel system.
Ah, yes, KenV. Let's see, now. You're in Texas and you clearly think the Boeing product has the better answer over the European thing. Hmmm. Help me out here. 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whether MSN23 was fitted with such a system (software/hardware) is immaterial - a first-flight schedule would not be checking/testing any such capability, that would either be in subsequent flights, or - more likely - subject to specific functionality testing onboard one of the 3 development aircraft prior to being cleared for series production embodiment.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, yes, KenV. Let's see, now. You're in Texas and you clearly think the Boeing product has the better answer over the European thing.
Douglas is well known for their conservative design philosophy. Some say that philosophy is "better". Clearly in the market place it is NOT "better", because except for the C-17 the entire Douglas production line no longer exists. And the C-17 line will cease to exist in a few weeks. Is that "better"? Probably not. Certainly not for the folks in Long Beach, California.
Last edited by KenV; 22nd May 2015 at 18:22.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In common with most large aircraft, by design the A400M fuel system keeps as much fuel as far outboard as possible all the time for wing bending moment relief. As fuel is used from the feed tanks, they are topped up from the centre and transfer tanks in that order. (There is a slight modification to this in a tactical fuel loading mode which I won't describe here - but that's not important right now.)
Last edited by KenV; 22nd May 2015 at 18:28.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, missed the tongue-in-cheek. My bad.
But in my defense, this is not the first time where I asked a question about an Airbus product and others assumed I was knocking Airbus. Douglas had a long and proud history and having lost to Boeing, I'm very familiar with the notion that "different" is not necessarily "better". (or for that matter, worse.) But having experienced the Boeing vs Douglas difference first hand, I like to understand the Boeing vs Airbus difference.
But in my defense, this is not the first time where I asked a question about an Airbus product and others assumed I was knocking Airbus. Douglas had a long and proud history and having lost to Boeing, I'm very familiar with the notion that "different" is not necessarily "better". (or for that matter, worse.) But having experienced the Boeing vs Douglas difference first hand, I like to understand the Boeing vs Airbus difference.
Any reports if data was retrieved from the flight recorders? Seems there were early reports of technical issues extracting the data and the boxes went from Spain, to France and then perhaps to the US manufacturer.
Airbus CEO Says A400M Black Box Data Recovered
From the Wall Street Journal:
Airbus CEO Says A400M Black Box Data Recovered
By Robert Wall
May 27, 2015 12:26 p.m. ET
Airbus Group Chief Executive Tom Enders said data from the black boxes on the A400M military transport plane that crashed this month in Spain has been extracted, though Spanish authorities have not yet shared the crucial information.
“So far we have not had access to the data” though it has been available for more than a week, Mr. Enders told shareholders in Amsterdam.
Extracting the information wasn’t simple and in one case involved sending the box to its manufacturer, L-3 Communications, in the U.S., Mr. Enders said.
The May 9 crash, the first of an A400M, killed four of six Airbus employees on the plane. The other two were critically injured, though Mr. Enders said on Wednesday their condition was improving.
Airbus last week alerted operators that the plane requires one-time checks of the so-called electronic control units on each of the four engines before the next flight. The electronic box helps translate pilot commands into instructions on how the engine should operate.
Airbus also instructed operators to perform additional checks in case of later engine problems. Airbus said it found the issue, seen as a flaw in the system’s software, during its own analysis of what may have caused the crash.
Mr. Enders said Airbus wants access to the black box data, which stores conversations in the cockpit and, more critically, a large number of system parameters, to validate whether its hypothesis about the crash is accurate.
The U.K., Germany, Turkey and Malaysia grounded their transport planes after the crash, although France continued using the aircraft. Spanish authorities also told Airbus to stop flying newly built planes for the time being.
Mr. Enders said the data from the black boxes is crucial to determining exactly what caused the accident, take corrective action and gain clearance for the planes to start flying again more widely.
Mr. Enders said the crash would have an impact on the program, which was already behind schedule. He said he’s optimistic the accident “will not have a very detrimental impact on the aircraft deliveries and the cost situation in 2015.
The A400M program is several billion dollars over cost after repeated delays during its development. The program is unprofitable over the 174 aircraft already ordered, with pressure on Airbus to win additional deals to make money with the aircraft.
Airbus in January made management changes to the program and since then ”the situation is markedly improved,” Mr. Enders said.
By Robert Wall
May 27, 2015 12:26 p.m. ET
Airbus Group Chief Executive Tom Enders said data from the black boxes on the A400M military transport plane that crashed this month in Spain has been extracted, though Spanish authorities have not yet shared the crucial information.
“So far we have not had access to the data” though it has been available for more than a week, Mr. Enders told shareholders in Amsterdam.
Extracting the information wasn’t simple and in one case involved sending the box to its manufacturer, L-3 Communications, in the U.S., Mr. Enders said.
The May 9 crash, the first of an A400M, killed four of six Airbus employees on the plane. The other two were critically injured, though Mr. Enders said on Wednesday their condition was improving.
Airbus last week alerted operators that the plane requires one-time checks of the so-called electronic control units on each of the four engines before the next flight. The electronic box helps translate pilot commands into instructions on how the engine should operate.
Airbus also instructed operators to perform additional checks in case of later engine problems. Airbus said it found the issue, seen as a flaw in the system’s software, during its own analysis of what may have caused the crash.
Mr. Enders said Airbus wants access to the black box data, which stores conversations in the cockpit and, more critically, a large number of system parameters, to validate whether its hypothesis about the crash is accurate.
The U.K., Germany, Turkey and Malaysia grounded their transport planes after the crash, although France continued using the aircraft. Spanish authorities also told Airbus to stop flying newly built planes for the time being.
Mr. Enders said the data from the black boxes is crucial to determining exactly what caused the accident, take corrective action and gain clearance for the planes to start flying again more widely.
Mr. Enders said the crash would have an impact on the program, which was already behind schedule. He said he’s optimistic the accident “will not have a very detrimental impact on the aircraft deliveries and the cost situation in 2015.
The A400M program is several billion dollars over cost after repeated delays during its development. The program is unprofitable over the 174 aircraft already ordered, with pressure on Airbus to win additional deals to make money with the aircraft.
Airbus in January made management changes to the program and since then ”the situation is markedly improved,” Mr. Enders said.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: FR
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Marwan Lahoud (Airbus strategy director) is quoted in tomorrow's edition of the german newspaper Handelsblatt.
Crash de l?A400M*: Airbus reconnaît des problèmes de qualité dans l?assemblage
and
Crash A400M: "Un sérieux problème de qualité dans l'assemblage final" - RTBF Economie
Black boxes confirm this. There is no structural (design) defect, but we have a serious quality problem at the final assembly stage.
We have had access to the results of the recorders analysis for the first time yesterday (Wednesday), they confirm our internal analysis.
Crash de l?A400M*: Airbus reconnaît des problèmes de qualité dans l?assemblage
and
Crash A400M: "Un sérieux problème de qualité dans l'assemblage final" - RTBF Economie
Les boîtes noires le confirment. Il n'y pas de défaut structurel, mais nous avons un sérieux problème de qualité dans l'assemblage final.
Nous avons pris connaissance pour la première fois hier (mercredi) des résultats, ils confirment nos analyses internes
Anyone have an idea what was the issue with the data recorders ? Given the crash circumstances it would seems that they should have been recovered in a fairly decent shape and these must be state of the art. I'm a little puzzled by this.
As for the crash being down to quality control in assembly... wow ! That would quite unbelievable given the context. I just can't imagine Airbus having such a huge issue in QA - muss be more to the story.
As for the crash being down to quality control in assembly... wow ! That would quite unbelievable given the context. I just can't imagine Airbus having such a huge issue in QA - muss be more to the story.
I know some of you here knew the crew, I am not trying to attribute blame, just mentioning what is in the public domain.
LES ECHOS, saying the crash could have been human error. Rough translation here:
LES ECHOS, saying the crash could have been human error. Rough translation here:
The control software of the engines has been poorly installed just prior to the flight of the aircraft.
A400M, airplane cursed ? The track of a human error at Airbus is confirmed in the fatal accident of May 9 last year in Seville, said of corroborating sources. Specifically, it would seem that the control software of the power of the four motors - turboprop - has been downloaded incorrectly during the phase of so-called "pre-flight ", i.e. the phase which separates the output of the device of the assembly line for its first flight. " IS sure to 99 % ", says a source close to the folder.
On 9 May last, the A400M MSN23 - that is to say, the 23e series - crashed some time after taking off for its first flight. Three of the four engines have suddenly lost power. The accident has cost the lives of four of the six persons on board. The appliance was the third to be delivered to Turkey. The black boxes have been found but the specialized unit of the Spanish Ministry of Defense in charge of the investigation has made no comment since.
5 Billion of additional costs
if the track to a procedural error is confirmed, the design of engines, very complex, is therefore not in issue. " They are the consequence, not the cause of the crash ", is it estimated to source close. Manufactured by EPI, a consortium consisting of the British Rolls-Royce , the French Snecma (Safran group), the Spanish ITP and the German MTU, the engines are at the origin of the previous setbacks of the program who have already cost 5 billion of extra cost to Airbus.
Marwan Lahoud, the responsible for the strategy and marketing of Airbus Group, goes in this direction. " Black boxes the confirm. There is no structural defect.
But we have a serious problem of quality in the final assembly ", he says in an interview to " Handelsblatt " to be issued on Friday. Last May 19, Airbus had recommended to its clients to regularly inspect the ECU, the engine electronic control unit, before the flight and perform additional checks after a possible replacement of engine or the ECU. But without establishing a link with the crash.
At this point, Germany, Great Britain, Turkey and Malaysia have suspended the flights of their A400M. France, she, the continues but only for the operational emergencies. In total, 174 A400M have been ordered by eight countries. Twelve only are in service. Independently of the crash, the program suffers from new delays. The dropping of paratroopers had major problems, and in-flight refueling of helicopters will not see the day, according to the DGA. All these problems have forced Airbus a go a load of EUR 551 million in its accounts 2014 ( " Echoes " of 2 March).
A400M, airplane cursed ? The track of a human error at Airbus is confirmed in the fatal accident of May 9 last year in Seville, said of corroborating sources. Specifically, it would seem that the control software of the power of the four motors - turboprop - has been downloaded incorrectly during the phase of so-called "pre-flight ", i.e. the phase which separates the output of the device of the assembly line for its first flight. " IS sure to 99 % ", says a source close to the folder.
On 9 May last, the A400M MSN23 - that is to say, the 23e series - crashed some time after taking off for its first flight. Three of the four engines have suddenly lost power. The accident has cost the lives of four of the six persons on board. The appliance was the third to be delivered to Turkey. The black boxes have been found but the specialized unit of the Spanish Ministry of Defense in charge of the investigation has made no comment since.
5 Billion of additional costs
if the track to a procedural error is confirmed, the design of engines, very complex, is therefore not in issue. " They are the consequence, not the cause of the crash ", is it estimated to source close. Manufactured by EPI, a consortium consisting of the British Rolls-Royce , the French Snecma (Safran group), the Spanish ITP and the German MTU, the engines are at the origin of the previous setbacks of the program who have already cost 5 billion of extra cost to Airbus.
Marwan Lahoud, the responsible for the strategy and marketing of Airbus Group, goes in this direction. " Black boxes the confirm. There is no structural defect.
But we have a serious problem of quality in the final assembly ", he says in an interview to " Handelsblatt " to be issued on Friday. Last May 19, Airbus had recommended to its clients to regularly inspect the ECU, the engine electronic control unit, before the flight and perform additional checks after a possible replacement of engine or the ECU. But without establishing a link with the crash.
At this point, Germany, Great Britain, Turkey and Malaysia have suspended the flights of their A400M. France, she, the continues but only for the operational emergencies. In total, 174 A400M have been ordered by eight countries. Twelve only are in service. Independently of the crash, the program suffers from new delays. The dropping of paratroopers had major problems, and in-flight refueling of helicopters will not see the day, according to the DGA. All these problems have forced Airbus a go a load of EUR 551 million in its accounts 2014 ( " Echoes " of 2 March).
Last edited by rolling20; 29th May 2015 at 07:38.