Indonesia Order 5 A400M
I remember Boeing looked at doing a FAR Part 25 cert of the C-17 to allow commercial sales, but it would have cost a fortune and anticipated sales didn't come close to justifying the expense (something similar happened with the V-22).
Join Date: May 2007
Location: upstairs
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know the A400M went through a civil certification process but only for the 'civil' aspects designed to CS25 criteria. A part of the overall design was left to the various National military certification processes (based mostly on a single Airbus body of evidence). My reading of this is that there isn't a fully valid type certification available to civil operators (even if there may be a document called a Type Certificate).
Maybe a bit pedantic on my part given that it probably wouldn't take a lot of effort to take an A400C through the full process but some aspects, e.g. passenger accommodations, ramp access and operation, might be interesting.
I once sat through a presentation by the A400M PT where they claimed that the civil certification with 85% of the work took as long as (or longer?) the military certification of the remaining 15%. Just for interest, I know that the OCCAR body which created the A400M Cert & Qual processes was chaired for a long time by a member of the UK MAA. He said that the processes were openly available on the interweb but I've never been able to find them.
EAP
Maybe a bit pedantic on my part given that it probably wouldn't take a lot of effort to take an A400C through the full process but some aspects, e.g. passenger accommodations, ramp access and operation, might be interesting.
I once sat through a presentation by the A400M PT where they claimed that the civil certification with 85% of the work took as long as (or longer?) the military certification of the remaining 15%. Just for interest, I know that the OCCAR body which created the A400M Cert & Qual processes was chaired for a long time by a member of the UK MAA. He said that the processes were openly available on the interweb but I've never been able to find them.
EAP
Join Date: May 2007
Location: upstairs
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please excuse the reminiscing but I've just remembered a conversation I had with a senior UK Airbus certification bloke I knew just after they had got the job. He told me that Airbus were intent on sticking to the civil certification process for everything. I believe my reply was something along the lines of, "good luck with that..."
EAP
EAP
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Makes sense - Airbus are set up as CIVIL manufacturer so all their systems will be built on civilian certification
Lockheed are purely military these days and so probably are set up for Military certification
Mr B does both but (see KC-46) can fall between two stools.............
Lockheed are purely military these days and so probably are set up for Military certification
Mr B does both but (see KC-46) can fall between two stools.............
HH, a major source of the KC-46 delays have been related to getting FAA Part 25 cert of the 767-2C (as well as aspects of the KC-46, which is an STC from the 767-2C).
I remain puzzled by the continued expectation that military transport aircraft get civil certification. It's hugely complicated and expensive and adds almost nothing of value to the finished product (in some cases actually being counterproductive).
I remain puzzled by the continued expectation that military transport aircraft get civil certification. It's hugely complicated and expensive and adds almost nothing of value to the finished product (in some cases actually being counterproductive).
