No news = bad news ?
 

In all this hoo-ha about the A400M programme, I'm surprised and worried that no news is even seeping out about "progress" with the engine control software. Nobody talks about how the engine programme is/was managed, and EADS is blamed for every delay, while airframes sit in Spain waiting for the engine side to come up with what they are contracted to provide.
I assume that EADS "accepts" this situation, as programme overall manager, but the silence about remedial action (if needed ?) in the engine programme is like waiting for the second shoe to drop. EADS may be trying to get that side sorted behind the scenes, without public spats about the clear failure to provide an airworthy power plant which would "upset" sensitive (but apparently not very competent) partners.
The story of the engine's development might provide good material for real investigative journalists or even conspiracy-seekers in the film industry, but surely it's well past time for some "authority" on the engine side to come out from EADS' shadow and provide something more than Soviet-style platitudes about "the programme is proceeding well according to schedule".
Once the engines are working properly will be the time to blog about the airframe's performance - and if they don't get the software sorted, the programme's failure would be clearly seen to have been caused by incompetence outside the direct control of EADS/Airbus Military ...

FYI JP they are taking on at Seville :ok::ok::ok::ok::ok:

A400 hiring ...
 

@ glad rag ...
Nice to know they're "taking on" at Seville, which is a ("small" ?) sign of progress - nicer still would be "taking off", with an engine whose hard- and soft-ware work as required by the certification authority ... (Why on earth "they" decided that an aircraft destined for military use should be certificated under civil rules is a question to which, again, no satisfactory (ie, non-Sir Humphrey) answer has been given and which has been also accused of being responsible for weight above original spec).
Europrop seems to be an unusually uncommunicative outfit, and EADS seems to accept that, possibly because of military restrictions within partner governments.
Although the "respite" recently granted to the programme is far from expiring, it would seem appropriate for news of progress in the engine department to be announced (if any).

PS. For the suspicious minds, I am N O T a journalist, but I shall still be disappointed if there's a reply on the lines of "if you need to know, you know already". In any case, the state of play will be known in the end, whatever rushing for shelter from the draught from the proverbial fan may be under way ... :E

Great rumours doing the rounds that the MOD have finally accepted the A400M delay and the associated airlift gap:

Option 1: Extend the C130K until 2017 for £325M

Option 2: Purchase 6 x ex-RSAF C130Es

Option 3: Purchase more C130J and C17

No doubt we will go for the cheapest option and that is not the preferred buy of C130J and C17

Ex-RSAF C130Es:mad:

'S' for Saudi?

Believe so!:ok:

Well, that means that they've probably mean maintained on a cost-no-object basis by Lock-Mart contractors, and aren't likely to have been flogged to death (things do get flogged in Saudi, but I can't see the Herc fleet being one of them).

But another mini-fleet? Option C for common sense...... please..... (6 to 12 more C-17s and another dozen Js would be a good start!)

S41

C-130's
 

I also heard a rummer last week that 5 c-130 J's had been purchased straight from the production line to replace the K's. However the Herk bloke i heard it from said it might take upto 2 years for the Gucci, easy to use floor, to be cleared for use!!!!:ok:

Why dont they just sign it off using the US clearances a la C-17? Surely most of the kit we throw out the back is American spec anyway?

Why not just us US clearances?
 

If only that were the case for Tac AT. The Type V was a good case in point.

Will these 5 C130Js with the US spec freight bay be able to drop all the boats that the C130K/C130J can at present?

Does the C-130K life extension involve the Delaware wings, seems mighty expensive if so?

You mean before or after they bastardised the floor with the dash 4, ripped out the underfloor winch an flip floor and then decided to use quinetiq to complete the trials clearance as opposed to taking on face value the trials the US had, fully signed up?

Want to hazard a guess as to how many American spec chutes the UK could have bought with the savings found by not pushing the J through Qinetiq trials and took the aircraft with US clearances?

Not sure, but believed to include new avionics upgrade as well as wing replacement for all 9 remaining C130K Mk1/3Aa.:ok:

Probably still cheaper than replacing all 16 Bde's vehicles with American vehicles that are designed to take the landing shock that an American platorm will deliver.

But agree that we ruined a good cargo compartment for no sensible reason.

Actually vin if you did indeed know your stuff you would be aware that the 4a was a retro fit as the air force ordered the j with just a flat floor and wanted to adapt the old skydel which turned out to be far too difficult and time consuming. You can knock qinetiq all you like but they werent even around when the floor got cleared for most things and if you want to take lockgreeds word for anything you are a fool :ugh:

Which just demonstrates the utter ludditery that plagues the AT fleet.

And if that were true, it too would also demonstrate how far the RAF AT world had managed to get it's head up it's own arse :rolleyes:

If they really were worried about a gap in AT capability (this is INTRA-theatre AT we're talking about here, not big, Brize stuff) then they couldn't go far wrong binning the bulk of the K fleet that's left and tipping the resources and manpower freed up in generating more Js onto the flightline every day. The amount of time, effort and resources that are poured into keeping the K fleet going is wholly disproportionate to the airlift effect that is returned.

That said, this is Lyneham we're talking about and nothing makes much sense here anyway :ok:

Haven't some K's recieved some sort of recent cockpit upgrade anyway, fully glassified?

Well, most of the crew have Iphones if that counts....

Unless you define "glassify" as the clinking of Kio brandy bottles on the way back from AKI.... :E


Sorry, not knocking anyone . I just think it ludicrous that we think we can do better time and time again, instead of just going fully COTS trials clearances and all. Why was a full flight test regime necessary to re-clear an aircraft that already had US clearances? Not knocking of ANY of those involved in the tests, I just think in a world that is focussed on delivering a product that functions in a cost-efficient manner. I don't see how a full flight test regime is compatible with cost-effectiveness.

Must be the i-HUD app then...:}