Germany to pull out of the A400 program

[tdracer]

Forgive my ignorance, but I don't understand the reference to Haddon-Cave.
All I came up with from Google was reference to a Nimrod crash...

[Chugalug2]

The Nimrod Report by Mr Haddon-Cave QC revealed that systemic faults permeated UK Military Airworthiness and called for a Military Aviation Authority to be established in order to restore it. That was the good part.

Unfortunately he ignored evidence that the damage had been caused by RAF VSOs in the late 80s/early 90s, describing those years instead as a "Golden Period"! That cover up ensured that the MAA was compromised from the start, as the independence that would have enabled reform was denied it. It has thus been instead the bureaucracy complained of by Tourist ever since, and unairworthiness continues to infect UK military airfleets, such as the ACO one, as a result.

[Lordflasheart]

Tdracer – It’s just as Chug says …. And please excuse me for adding a little. (Chug - PM sent)

You might wish to look at the background links below, and as an aerospace professional you would certainly understand the technical details. Our new MAA has already been absorbed into the newer Defence Safety Authority – viz -
https://www.gov.uk/government/organi...fety-authority
I think we have an ongoing disagreement about the meaning of the word “Independent.”

Mr Haddon-Cave’s report is below - The label may say “Golden Period” (H-C p 385) but inside the can is only the proverbial worms.
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...29037/1025.pdf

ACO stands for Air Cadet Organisation - In this respect, referring to the RAF-run Volunteer Gliding Squadrons (VGSs - providing powered and unpowered gliding facilities for air minded young people) These two dozen plus units across the UK have now been grounded for over two years due to institutional airworthiness problems - for which see the long-running thread in this section below - http://www.pprune.org/military-aviat...-grounded.html
and the Wiki article on the VGS here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volunt...iding_Squadron

For further detailed insight into the wider longstanding problem of UK military airworthiness and specific fatal crashes, this guy certainly knows his stuff, from the inside out. https://sites.google.com/site/militaryairworthiness/

Hope this helps, LFH. .................................... Now - about those A400 engines .....




....................

[riff_raff]

The A400's turboprop engine is a clean sheet design and much higher power than existing western engines. It would not seem unusual for such an engine to experience some development problems. But gearboxes are a well known technology, so I would not expect to see this type of problem from an experienced company like Avio, MTU, or Rolls-Royce.

[melmothtw]

Something I don't understand is why Germany, which only has a couple of aircraft and would very rarely if at all use them operationally, is so down on the A400M, while the UK which is receiving them at an increasing rate and is flying them all over the world seems to be very happy with it (certainly the crews I have spoken to are). Both nations have the same aircraft, so what is going on here?

[t43562]

Something I don't understand is why Germany, which only has a couple of aircraft and would very rarely if at all use them operationally, is so down on the A400M, while the UK which is receiving them at an increasing rate and is flying them all over the world seems to be very happy with it (certainly the crews I have spoken to are). Both nations have the same aircraft, so what is going on here?

I don't have any information but could it just be their attitude to not getting everything they paid for? Could it be the need to motivate Airbus?

[Lordflasheart]

Both nations have the same aircraft, so what is going on here?

(NB - plus France have a few)
In short, I think it's something to do with having to inspect the gearboxes (on one pair of engines) for some kind of cracking, every 20 hours. Plus still waiting for service clearance for a couple of minor operational roles. It's all on prune and wiki. HTH LFH


...........................

[melmothtw]

Thanks, but my question was why are the Germans so unhappy with the same aircraft that the UK seems to be more than happy with. Am aware that others have received the aircraft also, was just using Germany and the UK as they are at opposite ends of the spectrum of deliveries and customer satisfaction.

Engine gearboxes, etc, are common to all A400M nations.

[kbrockman]

Originally Posted by melmothtw

Thanks, but my question was why are the Germans so unhappy with the same aircraft that the UK seems to be more than happy with. Am aware that others have received the aircraft also, was just using Germany and the UK as they are at opposite ends of the spectrum of deliveries and customer satisfaction.

Don't want to sound like a cynic but they might be setting up for another order cut, from 53 to now 40 (13 to be sold to third party) and maybe that is even too many for them, might be preparing for another cut, 25 or something I would guess, this mould certainly give them a somewhat valid reason.

[KenV]

Thanks, but my question was why are the Germans so unhappy with the same aircraft that the UK seems to be more than happy with.

I believe the answer lies in who is complaining: the operators, the maintainers, the contract officers, or the politicians? The flight crews can absolutely love an airplane, but if it requires burdensome inspections or other painful maintenance requirements, the maintainers could hate it. Or it may fly great, and be easy to maintain, but if it cannot meet contracted requirements like airdrop or aerial refueling, the contract officers will hate it. And politicians may hate it simply because it is not built in Germany and/or does not have enough German content. Or the politicians may have spent billions to develop and produce a new armored vehicle (Puma FV, Boxer APC, 8x8 Grizzly?), but there was no coordination between the aircraft designers and vehicle designers and it turns out the vehicle is not compatible with the aircraft. So the answer may depend on who in each nation is shouting praises and who is shouting curses.

[kbrockman]

AAR for helicopters seems to be something for this year.
MILITARY TECHNOLOGY: A400M Helicopter Refuelling Kit Ready by End of 2016

A400M Helicopter Refuelling Kit Ready by End of 2016

An air-to-air Refuelling (AAR) refuelling kit for the C-295 was extensively tested by Airbus Defence & Space (DS) with dry contact scheduled in July and helictopter AAR with an H-225M by November 2016.

[ORAC]

Airbus Looks To the US in Search of A400M Buyers

"......Airbus expects two planes to have flown 100 hours by June 24 to test an interim Avio propeller gearbox replacing the present system. “Cracking is not a safety issue,” Alonso said. “Safety is guaranteed by inspection intervals.” Once the interim fix is installed, the gearbox will be inspected every 600 flight hours compared to the current 20 hours. A long-term solution of a new gearbox from General Electric and Italian subisidary Avio is expected to be delivered next year......

French aerospace lab Onera has conducted research and development to find an aerial refueling system for helicopters, a key French requirement, said Miguel Angel Morell, head of engineering at Airbus DS. The plan is to flight-test a small-diameter fuel hose up to 120 feet in length by the end of the year, extending it from the standard 80-90 feet. A longer hose is needed to allow helicopter pilots to see the tailplane during the fuel transfer and cut the turbulence of flying behind the four powerful TP-400 turboprop engines from Europrop International. Airbus DS is working with Airbus Helicopter for the test flight..........

There is a modification of installing a small step to allow 116 paratroopers to jump from both sides of the fuselage, with 58 from each side door. A full test jump of 116 troops is due by the end of the year. These would be alternate jumps, with work ongoing to enable a simultaneous jump from both doors.

Airbus seems unlikely to bid in a US tender for a second batch of air tankers. There is little interest for the Air Force to fly two types of aircraft, said Jean-Pierre Talamoni, head of sales and marketing........"

[KenV]

The plan is to flight-test a small-diameter fuel hose up to 120 feet in length by the end of the year, extending it from the standard 80-90 feet. A longer hose is needed to allow helicopter pilots to see the tailplane during the fuel transfer and cut the turbulence of flying behind the four powerful TP-400 turboprop engines from Europrop International.

There are two problems with the small diameter hose. #1 is fuel flow. Can they get the necessary/desired fuel flow thru the hose, or will customers have to accept slower and therefore longer aerial refueling. #2 is rigidity. The smaller diameter hose will be significantly more flexible. Will the basket be stable farther back AND flying at the end of a much more flexible hose. The smaller diameter hose is required to fit the hose onto the existing hose reel and into the existing refuel pod. Staying with the current diameter hose but extending its length will require significant redesign to both, adding time and cost.

There is a modification of installing a small step to allow 116 paratroopers to jump from both sides of the fuselage, with 58 from each side door. A full test jump of 116 troops is due by the end of the year. These would be alternate jumps, with work ongoing to enable a simultaneous jump from both doors.

C-17 explored a similar option. The US Army and USAF were adamantly opposed to any system that imposed/ensured alternating jumps from the left and right troop doors. They were firm in their requirement that a solution be found to enable simultaneous jumps from both doors. I'm pretty sure that the C-17 solution would work for A400M.

[kbrockman]

Originally Posted by KenV

There are two problems with the small diameter hose. #1 is fuel flow. Can they get the necessary/desired fuel flow thru the hose, or will customers have to accept slower and therefore longer aerial refueling.

You're right about the fuel flow rate, there will be a trade-off, slightly lower flowrate resulting in longer contact time (quoting from the article).

[Easy Street]

Why are the Germans so down on A400M?

Don't want to sound like a cynic but they might be setting up for another order cut, from 53 to now 40 (13 to be sold to third party) and maybe that is even too many for them, might be preparing for another cut, 25 or something I would guess, this mould certainly give them a somewhat valid reason.

I agree with kbrockman's analysis. I think they are also realising that the aircraft is too large for some of the tasks they want to do with it. I don't want to sound like a cynic either but it would hardly be the first time that a partner nation in a large programme wildly overestimated its requirements in order to secure workshare, before scaling back the order safe in the knowledge that the production facilities were in place...

[AW009]

2 of 3 German A400M grounded

Engine damage: A400M of Bundeswehr grounded

By Matthias Gebauer Thursday, 06/30/2016 - 16:12
AFP

Original link:Bundeswehr: Airbus-A400M-Flieger müssen am Boden bleiben - SPIEGEL ONLINE

Google translation: https://translate.google.de/translat...tml&edit-text=

[KenV]

Airbus Said to Cut German A400M Deliveries for 2016 in Half
Planemaker grappling with gearbox, engine, fuselage faults

Airbus Group SE will deliver just over half the A400M military transport planes Germany was set to receive this year, exacerbating delays in the troubled model and raising the prospect of further writedowns for the manufacturer.

A preliminary delivery plan Airbus presented to the country’s Defense Ministry indicates the company will deliver five A400Ms in 2016, instead of the nine agreed on earlier, according to people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified because the information is confidential. The air force received its first plane from this year’s batch last Wednesday.

A ministry spokeswoman said Airbus has presented “a first delivery and retrofit plan” and is being asked to provide further details. She declined to comment on the number of aircraft Germany expects to receive. Kieran Daly, an Airbus spokesman, said in an e-mail that delivery schedules with customers for this year are still being finalized.

Germany is among seven North Atlantic Treaty Organization countries that commissioned the four-engine A400M turboprop transporter in 2003 to replace decades-old models. Faulty gearboxes and a crash during a test flight caused by an engine failure have led to multiple delivery holdups. Airbus may need to take “an incremental charge in our next quarter” because of slower-than-expected progress with fixing the model, Chief Executive Officer Tom Enders told analysts a week ago.

The company booked 290 million euros ($321 million) in provisions related to the A400M in 2015, on top of 551 million euros in costs posted in 2014. Airbus’s next quarterly earnings reports are scheduled for July 27 and in October. “The magnitude of probable charges is extremely difficult to predict, but 500 million euros should be realistic, with the possible maximum at about 1 billion euros,” said Stefan Maichl, an analyst at LBBW in Stuttgart. The lower figure is “already anticipated by the financial markets.” Airbus fell as much as 0.9 percent and was trading down 0.8 percent at 51.80 euros as of 12 p.m. in Paris. The stock has dropped 16 percent this year, valuing the planemaker at 40 billion euros.

German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen said last month that the government will seek compensation from Airbus and might look at competing suppliers. The country’s A400M fleet consists of three planes delivered in 2014 and 2015, as well as the one handed over last week. Two of the aircraft received earlier have been grounded because of the gearbox flaw. Germany has ordered more than 50 of the aircraft.

[T28B]

Germany to pull out of the A400 program
As my fiancé said right before the wedding was cancelled ... substantial penalty for early withdrawal.

[sandiego89]

Airbus targeting the US with future A400 sales. "Airbus staff are drafting a marketing program".... Gotta love the optimism, but good luck with that.....


Airbus Looks To the US in Search of A400M Buyers

[ORAC]

Germany may keep more of its A400 military transporters -report | Reuters

Germany is in talks with several countries, including the Czech Republic and Switzerland, about jointly operating a large number of the 13 Airbus A400M military transport planes it had planned to sell, a German newspaper reported.

The Sueddeutsche Zeitung reported in Tuesday editions that the plan would allow the German air force to maintain access to a large number of the transport planes. A ministry spokeswoman declined comment. Airbus also declined comment, but a spokesman said the report did not indicate a change in the total number of planes that Germany expected to buy.

Germany initially planned to buy 60 of the aircraft, but later lowered the number to 53. In 2011, the German parliament then approved a plan under which 13 of those aircraft would be sold to other countries to save money. But sources familiar with the program said a military review had indicated greater requirements for transport planes........

Sueddeutsche Zeitung said the arrangements under discussion called for the A400M transports to be based in Germany, with other countries being able to use them as needed, but Germany being responsible for training, maintenance and operations. Such pooling and sharing agreements have been strongly encouraged by NATO and the European Union, which is seeking to strengthen its security and cooperation among member countries.

The newspaper said it was unclear what the change in the ministry's plans would cost, since it would depend on how many aircraft were ultimately sold to other countries, and how many were put into joint operating agreements.