A400M vs Belfast
Just read this comparison between A400M and the Belfast - had not realised before the similar capacities of the two airframes. Clearly other capabilities vastly different.
Clash of the titans! Airbus A400M Versus Shorts Belfast | Hush-Kit Would be interested in the comments of the AT experts |
Wanderer00 here's a copy of an earlier post I made that you may have missed on another thread which compares the A 400 with the Belfast, C-133 and C130H.......
At the time it was based on the predicted performance of the A400 versus those venerable workhorses of the air which in design terms date from 50 (yes 50!) years ago. The max payload of the A400 is 82,000 lbs, C 133 110,000 lbs, Belfast 80,000 lbs and the Herc (C130 H) 45,000 lbs. Max cruise speeds are very similar, 350 mph, 359 mph, 358 mph and 336 mph respectively. The range of the A400 with a 20 tonne payload (btw this would be a full load for a Herc) is projected at 3,753 nm for the A400 and with 23.5 tonnes the C133 could go 3,560 nm, the Belfast could do about 3,600 miles and the Herc only 2,050 nms. The A400 has 4 x 11,000 shp, the C 133 4 x 7,500 shp, the Belfast 4 x 5,730 shp and the C 130 4 x 4,300 shp. The real question is what would each aeroplane cost to build in today's prices and whether the A400 really is giving us value for money for what might seem a modest improvement in performance. General characteristics - A400M
General characteristics - C133 Cargomaster
|
That's all very well, but has the A400 got crew rest facilities that compare with the Belfast?
|
Originally Posted by Madbob
(Post 8112014)
The real question is what would each aeroplane cost to build in today's prices and whether the A400 really is giving us value for money for what might seem a modest improvement in performance
Do you have any costings and adjusting for today's prices? |
I was working in Shorts back in 93 / 94 when we had a delegation from the Future Large Aircraft Group, later to become Airbus Military, who picked over every bit of data that Shorts had retained on the Belfast. A400M is to a very large degree the Son of Belfast.
Back in the early days of the Belfast, Shorts had a concept for a high-performance version of the aircraft involving grafting a C-141 wing-set and engines onto the Belfast fuselage. Those who can remember that far back will recall that the original FLA concept was a jet...... |
Looking at the differences in thrust I suspect the A400M's runway performance is significantly better than any of the old-timers.
|
One "what if" scenario that has always interested me is what could the Belfast have done as regards the build up to the Argie invasion of the Falklands in 1982 in reinforcing the islands before the Argies came ashore on 02 Apr had the aircraft not been removed from RAF service in 1976 and the US allowed operations from Wideawake.
Was the AAR system in the aircraft usable? Could the aircraft do para drop or do LAPES to get some form of heavy weight weapons down there? I assume that the runway at Stanley would have been too short to do a landing and take off. Of course the Belfast was invovled in moving stuff to Wideawake from the UK in the colours of Heavylift. |
MAINJAFAD
Could you explain this a bit further for those not in the UK forces ? "and the US allowed operations from Wideawake." |
I remember some years ago when the A400 was known as the FLA and was having the usual development problems a working group was formed by the consortium to sort things out. It was called Best FLA which interestingly enough is an anagram of Belfast!
|
General characteristics - A400M
Crew: Six, 2 x pilots, Navigator, Flight Engineer, Signaller, Air Loadmaster. Capacity 53 000 lb. 124 to 148 passengers (192 in high density), 100 paratroops, 2 x HSP. Length 120 ft span 166 ft height over fin 31 ft 6in Basic operationally equiped weight 85 500 lb Design all-up-weight 167 500 lb Maximum payload 53 000 lb Maximum fuel 69 980 lb Powerplant 4 Rolls Royce Tyne stage 2 4 x 16 ft dia 4 blade de Haviland propellors Range at max payload 1600 miles max rage with full fuel 4200 miles Balance field length (167 500 lb AUW) 4540 yds Landing distance from 50 ft (145 000lb) 1000 yds Cruise performance at ISA - 150 000 lb mean weight Max speed 325 kt at 22 000 ft Ceiling 34 500 ft Notice the description (Beverley developent stage 3), what the B107 would have been was a Beverley wing and tailplane mated to a new pressurised fuselage and four turoprop engines. Of course the Belfast was similar originally a similar concept, being a new fuselage using the Britannia's and four Tynes, which is why in its early days it was called the Britannic. |
Could you explain this a bit further for those not in the UK forces ? "and the US allowed operations from Wideawake." The question is would the Argies have backed down if a couple of hundred Paras and some weapons bigger than a 84mm Carl Gustav suddenly appeared on the Falklands the day before they intended to invade because a Belfast or two with Victor tanker support had been able to get them down there (with of course the British government advertising the fact). |
Thanks
Interesting question. Well if you look at how much damage 18 or so Royal Marines did on South Georgia, a couple of hundred Paras would probably have put a serious dent in the invasion plans. Whether it would have held up any reinforcements, who knows. The problem would also have been one of re supply to the Paras once they were there as is always the case behind enemy lines. |
The Belfast was not cleared for any airdrop, neither paras or stores.
|
AA62, your comments about Belfast not being cleared for AD got me thinking. Neither is our [UK] C17. They were just arriving when I attended an ABFOG meeting in town. Col Parkinson (recently deceased God bless him) remarked during the discussion of the possibility of dropping from them: "Look guys its not going to happen. We are only getting a few and can't afford to have one at Boscombe for as long as they have had the J. Just paint them white and park them up at Brize Norton" Little did we know at the time how busy they would be shifting stuff to the sand pit.
I am really looking forward to seeing the A400M do what it says on the tin. |
AA65
Thanks for the clarification on the question about the Belfast's lack of airdrop capability. |
Thanks Interesting question. Well if you look at how much damage 18 or so Royal Marines did on South Georgia, a couple of hundred Paras would probably have put a serious dent in the invasion plans. Whether it would have held up any reinforcements, who knows. The problem would also have been one of re supply to the Paras once they were there as is always the case behind enemy lines. |
The Belfast was not cleared for any airdrop, neither paras or stores. |
Main
Yes, if the Argie knew it could be done and was going to be done, you never know. If they had been any good at planning, then they should have factored that in. |
If they had been any good at planning, then they should have factored that in. Cleared and capable are two distinct, different, states. Particularly during conflict. |
I think you're getting your IASs and TASs mixed up here, aren't you? The idea that the Belfast and A400 have roughly the same performance is surely wide of the mark. Certainly the A400 max cruise is quoted as CAS, and the C130 is TAS, so you are comparing apples and oranges I think.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:47. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.