|
A400M refuelled in flight for first time
As reported on Flight Global:-
An Airbus Military A400M has received fuel in-flight for the first time, with one of the programme's three development aircraft having achieved the milestone behind a French air force Dassault-Breguet C160 Transall. "There were no problems for the aircraft," says A400M project pilot Tony Flynn, who describes the first wet contacts as having gone "perfectly" during a trials activity performed from Seville, Spain in late November. The work successfully validated a new set of air-to-air refuelling (AAR) flight control laws referred to as "D6R-P", he adds. "This is the first time we have had a satisfactory control law for the whole [receiver] task," Flynn says. This follows an extensive rewriting process, which was initiated following early trials performed behind a Vickers VC10 tanker in 2010. "To begin with, things didn't go well," he says. Cockpit video footage of the second dry contact made behind the now-retired Royal Air Force type shows the A400M pitching up and down, before climbing violently towards the tanker's T-tail as the crew abandoned the connection. "To begin with, things didn't go well," - :eek: Click on the link for the rest of the report. PS - I see that the humongous size of that photo has not been corrected, hence the continuing ruination of formatting! :ugh: |
do the flight control laws still have the direct lateral and vertical control laws for aar? ie pitch up = translate up with no pitch and roll translates left and right with no roll?
|
Some more decent pics of all things A400m, with a few 'tasteful' shots thrown in! :E
Photos of the A400M Atlas in high-res : theBRIGADE |
Do all the loadmasters on A400M look like the ones on slide 12?
next time can I sit in the comfy chair shown in slide 46? |
Looks like a lot of legroom between the para seats. Three point harnesses as well . Hope the side seats are more crash resistant than the C130 and the sound/insulation material is more fire and fume resistant to that on the C130.
|
Never mind the length feel the width
AA62, The extra width came about by a requirement to have two Landrovers side by side. back in 1995 the Air Portability section at JATE were working on the spec. at the same time the new landrover showed up with the spare wheel mounted on the side rather than on the bonnet.
I bet the team at Solihull did not appreciate what influence they had over the design of this aircraft 20 years on. I think the chairs with the side curtains and much improved harnesses are good for 9g. I know a lot of effort went into this aspect. I am pleased those arguing for grandfather rights did not get their way. I think this aircraft will be brilliant when it gets in service. I titled the post appropriately I hope - some folks will expect the cargo bay to be much longer than a long 130. the flat floor is only about 18" longer so without pallets on the ramp as in airdrop it can only do the same. (apart from the increased weight of course). You will be interested in the Dufelyte bicycle helmets on the BBC news today. What's that got to do with straps? Well I think consideration was given to straps from an Israeli or US company called Simula which incorporated airbags to meet the crashworthy requirement on the A400M. I think they may be in use on some choppers. |
I had a fairly close look at an A400M yesterday afternoon. It flew low level along the Ouvèze valley, did a quick fly-by of Orange Caritat, before proceeding on its way.
Not quite as low as the person who regularly does a "Bonjour Maman" in the Transall ... yet! :) |
|
Dragartist
AA62, The extra width came about by a requirement to have two Landrovers side by side. back in 1995 the Air Portability section at JATE were working on the spec. at the same time the new landrover showed up with the spare wheel mounted on the side rather than on the bonnet. I bet the team at Solihull did not appreciate what influence they had over the design of this aircraft 20 years on. It was essentially a Series IIa 88", with shortened axles and some of the weight removed. They are still lumpy old things though. :) Roger. |
And there was me thinking the Argosy's lack of carrying capacity was the reason behind the Airportable Land Rover.
|
Originally Posted by Georgeablelovehowindia
(Post 8265580)
I had a fairly close look at an A400M yesterday afternoon. It flew low level along the Ouvèze valley, did a quick fly-by of Orange Caritat, before proceeding on its way.
|
Ah Landroger, I was not being contentious. just stating fact. These loading schemes were rolled up into what became Exhibit A. I am not sure if this became contractual document but worked to establish a baseline for trade offs. A stick to beat up Airbus with. One of the concerns was safety during emergency egress and load lozenging into those who may have been sat in the sideways facing seats. Some of VX275s mates from the day were arguing over reduced levels of cargo restraint during military ops. As we know this aircraft is being certified to the more rigorous civilian regulations.
It was nice to hear several years later that the seats and restraint would be more crashworthy than the C130 benchmark. By the way VX is quite an expert on transport aircraft history going back to the Dakota. He would know about these things for sure. When ESF was eating up all our cash on the Hercules Project Team my Dad kept giving me an earful of how the Argosy had been equipped with a superior system back in it's day. I do hope the A400M is so equipped. Al R, Thanks for posting the link to the RAF promo video. I only ever saw the computer mock ups of the Loadmasters workstation etc. I retired before the real thing came into being. I hope I get a chance to see one soon. |
Originally Posted by Landroger
It was essentially a Series IIa 88", with shortened axles and some of the weight removed. They are still lumpy old things though.
http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n...Dscf0017ed.jpg Beverley and Argosy: I'd always been given to understand that it was to fit inside the Andover C1. |
Nice lightweight FFR. Presumably the front tilt is rolled back to allow the driver to get in, as the door top appears to be attached to the tilt frame with "black and nasty" tape.:O
|
The lightweight landy is a very British thing IMHO. Land rover took an existing design, and modified it, and the result was was known as lightweight.
Odd that, when you consider how much it weighed compared to the original :) |
I thought the "lightweight" part of the lightweight Landrover was the fact that the door tops and rear panel sides could be removed easily thus saving weight for transportation under the helicopters at the time.
|
So what happened to he Mil Rugged Robin development programme :E
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/...98_634x402.jpg Image Credit : SWNS.com |
good one Coff.
Probably finished up with all the Springers at Defence Disposals at Grantham. Most had the moulding flash still on the tyres! Like the Seagul OBM on the transom! This thread was about A400M. I don't believe either of these things were in Exhibit A! |
It's GREEN like the A400M Drag old chap ...
Hat, coat and headed for the door :ok: |
Originally Posted by dragartist
(Post 8458203)
good one Coff.
Probably finished up with all the Springers at Defence Disposals at Grantham. Most had the moulding flash still on the tyres! On special at £10.5K this month!! EPS, Springer ATV, #43613 - MOD Sales, Military Vehicles & Used Ex MOD Land Rovers for Sale |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 23:08. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.