Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Yet another RAF whitewash- A400 is simply unfit for purpose.

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Yet another RAF whitewash- A400 is simply unfit for purpose.

Old 16th Sep 2022, 18:06
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,176
Received 18 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by Big Pistons Forever View Post
Personally I think any airplane that is not full mission capable 17 years after first flight and still has over 100 seriously deficiencies is the very definition of failure
I see it differently. The F-35 brings a leap in capability over the predecessors at only moderately higher costs. This leap in capability will always com at a price. This price being minor deficiencies and annoyances in peace time. If push came to shove you could still use the fleet and enjoy an enormous advantage over the adversary aircraft or Air Defence Systems. The deterrence effect of 700 F-35 will way exceed that of 1000 F-15/F-16/F-18. But we are digressing from the A400M. Which I btw. also don't see anywhere as negatively as some here do. It also has its teething problems but it brings strategic Air Lift capability with excellent Offroad capabilities. Probably not as much advantage over legacy stuff as the F-35 does but still a good capability
henra is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2022, 18:25
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: buckinghamshire
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by henra View Post
I see it differently. The F-35 brings a leap in capability over the predecessors at only moderately higher costs. This leap in capability will always com at a price. This price being minor deficiencies and annoyances in peace time. If push came to shove you could still use the fleet and enjoy an enormous advantage over the adversary aircraft or Air Defence Systems. The deterrence effect of 700 F-35 will way exceed that of 1000 F-15/F-16/F-18. But we are digressing from the A400M. Which I btw. also don't see anywhere as negatively as some here do. It also has its teething problems but it brings strategic Air Lift capability with excellent Offroad capabilities. Probably not as much advantage over legacy stuff as the F-35 does but still a good capability
I agree with you regarding the A400s strategic capability however, it is being pressed into service as tactical AT which it is patently unable to carry out anywhere near as well as the Herc. Tellingly, the German, Italian and French air forces which all operate A400s also have Hercs to carry out the tactical role.
bspatz is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2022, 19:38
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 1,895
Received 17 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by Big Pistons Forever View Post
I predict a lot of buyers remorse when the realty of owning an airplane that is so expense to operate even the USAF and USN is cutting back F 35 orders in favor of F 15's and F 18's ; sets in......

In any case the USAF made a huge mistake by not doing a follow on order for more C 17's to keep the production line going.
Neither the USAF nor the USN is cutting back their F-35 programmes of record. The USAFis, however, reconsidering its F-15EX numbers downwards, while the USN is wanting the cancel Super Hornet Block 3 to fund NGAD.

Still, all for a other thread.
melmothtw is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2022, 08:54
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,176
Received 18 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by bspatz View Post
Tellingly, the German, Italian and French air forces which all operate A400s also have Hercs to carry out the tactical role.
While I do agree that it probably is a tad on the 'big' side for a tactical aircraft in case of the German Air craft it was probably more about putting a bit of pressure on Airbus plus the somewhat late arrival of some kit that drove this decision. At the time of arrival of the C-130 these deficiences were mostly solved and some questions arose for what the C-130 would still be needed. But now they are there why not use them?!
henra is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.