A400m

[John Fedup]

If the A400M engines worked as planned, this aircraft could have attracted more users thus lowering unit cost which in turn may have resulted in even more orders that normally would have gone to C-130Js. It is a good design but the engine problems are killing its long term future. Hind sight is 20/20 but I can't help thinking Boeing could have grabbed few more new C-17 orders and certainly a few existing users that need more (Canada IMHO).

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

I am still a big fan of the A400m due to its unique features. But I note that the A400M is being produced at the reduced rate of eight per annum (down from a high of 19 achieved in 2017), it should take a further 12 years for it to complete the remaining aircraft, extending work into the early 2030s.

Thanks for the A400M update. Not sure if this is related to the European Aviation Safety Agency certification for a "Pack 2" series of modifications to the TP400-D6 engine's Avio Aero-supplied permanent propeller gearbox.


I continue to scratch my head over the inability of Europrop International GmbH (a JV of four main European aircraft engine manufacturers), to get its act together. In UK Parliament in July, Mark Francois, a former Defence Minister, said: “We have paid £2.6 billion for an aircraft with appalling reliability, bad engines, a virtually broken gearbox, problem propellers, massive vibration problems...”

This hurts the export potential for the A400M in the early 2020s. If the engine and propeller gearbox problems continue, Airbus will not get new A400M users like the Koreans. Korean acceptance of the proposed Spain deal with breathe life for its export.

All these engine problems can also be one of the reasons why the Indonesian Airforce isn't that enthousiast about the A400M.

I was thinking, France wants to replace all the C-160s and the 14 C-130H(-30) with the A400M, those C-130Hs can be perfect replacements for Indonesia's C-130Bs...

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

The first A400M-180 for Luxembourg (and Belgium) entered the paint shop at its assembly facility in Seville on 11 December 2019. Airbus Defence showed the first major components of this aircraft on 13 February 2019. Luxembourg ordered one Atlas (# 104), which will be operated with the fleet of seven ordered by the neighbouring country of Belgium. The A400M for Luxemburg will be delivered next year and the other seven A400Ms will be delivered between 2020 and 2023.

Sadly i wasn't able to post any photos here.

 

[OPSSG]

A UK A400M aircraft was deployed from the Falkland Islands to search for a missing Chilean Air Force C-130 that went missing on 10 Dec 2019 en route to Antarctica with 17 crew and 21 passengers on board, the aircraft lost contact 450 miles into its journey to a military base on King George Island. Extreme weather conditions, including low clouds, strong winds and massive, rolling ocean swells initially complicated search efforts, but within days an international team had recovered some debris, personal effects and human remains 30km south of where the plane last made contact.

 

[OPSSG]

An Airbus A400M airlifter has performed an air-bridge between Toulouse and Madrid in order to deliver critically-needed mask supplies to the Spanish health system.

The aircraft, known as MSN56 and operated by an Airbus crew, took off on 23rd March 2020 from Airbus’ headquarters in Toulouse at 18.07 local time (CET) landing at the Getafe Air Base (Madrid) at 19.05 to off-load and deliver the masks to the Spanish Ministry of Defence.

The cargo is part of the approximately 2 million masks transported over the weekend by a test Airbus A330-800 aircraft from Tianjin, China, to Europe.

This air-bridge will enable the delivery of a significant supply of masks to the Spanish public health network in support of current COVID-19 crisis efforts.

 

[OPSSG]

1. A total of 14 A400Ms were delivered to customers in 2019, which Airbus says resulted in the in-service Atlas fleet standing at 88 examples. This is just over half-way through its contracted programme total of 174 for Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Spain, Turkey and the UK.

2. Detailing the development in a full-year results announcement on 13 Feb 2020, Airbus says: “While the rebaselining of the A400M programme was completed and significant progress has been made on technical capabilities, the outlook is increasingly challenging on exports during the launch contract phase, also in light of the repeatedly extended German export ban to Saudi Arabia.”

3. Airbus chief executive Guillaume Faury describes the German government’s action as creating “significant headwinds on export”, and says the company is “awaiting clarification” regarding its potential further impact. On 13 Feb 2020, it was reported that Airbus incurred a fresh €1.2 billion (US$1.3 billion) charge against its A400M tactical transport programme in the fourth quarter of 2019, having “reassessed its assumptions on future export deliveries”.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

First flight Luxembourg Armed Forces Airbus A400M.

On 13 April 2020, the Airbus A400M ordered by the Luxembourg Armed Forces has made its maiden flight. The transporter (MSN104) took off from Seville/San Pablo (Spain), where the final assembly line is located, at 16:08 hrs local time and landed back on the same airport five hours later.

The Luxembourg aircraft will be operated by the armed forces of Belgium and Luxembourg within a binational unit based at Melsbroek, Brussels International Airport (Belgium). MSN104 is scheduled to be delivered in the second quarter of 2020.

Photo credits: Airbus Defence

 

[OPSSG]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265245193797763072

Airbus A400M achieves Automatic Low Level Flight certification

May 27th, 2020 — There will be a second phase including Instrumental Meteorological Conditions, without visibility, to be certified in Q2 2021.

The Automatic Low Level Flights improves the A400M’s terrain masking and survivability and involved operations down to 500ft, including transitions from low level flight to other operations like aerial delivery.

Hopefully, we can see a sale of the A400M to an Asian customer by Q2 2021.

 

[ngatimozart]

Airbus A400M achieves Automatic Low Level Flight certification

May 27th, 2020 — There will be a second phase including Instrumental Meteorological Conditions, without visibility, to be certified in Q2 2021.

The Automatic Low Level Flights improves the A400M’s terrain masking and survivability and involved operations down to 500ft, including transitions from low level flight to other operations like aerial delivery.

Hopefully, we can see a sale of the A400M to an Asian customer by Q2 2021.

It already has an Asian customer. The Malaysians operate 4 of them.

 

[swerve]

Complete with a couple of AAR kits, so for the last couple of years Malaysia has had tankers for its fighters.

 

[ngatimozart]

Complete with a couple of AAR kits, so for the last couple of years Malaysia has had tankers for its fighters.

I reckon if Airbus hung a couple of largish commercial turbofans from the wings, instead of bespoke turboprops, they would of had a winner that could've given them far less grief.

 

[Redlands18]

I reckon if Airbus hung a couple of largish commercial turbofans from the wings, instead of bespoke turboprops, they would of had a winner that could've given them far less grief.

A400M (Future Large Aircraft) Military Transport Aircraft - Airforce Technology

The A400M (formerly known as the future large aircraft) is a military transporter designed to meet the requirements of the…

www.airforce-technology.com

Airbus HQ probably thinks the same thing, as by the time the project was handed to them by OCCAR in 2003 it was probably to late to make such a drastic design change. The major problem here is the whole basic design was developed by the original nations then handed to Airbus Corporate.

 

[OldTex]

A400M (Future Large Aircraft) Military Transport Aircraft - Airforce Technology

The A400M (formerly known as the future large aircraft) is a military transporter designed to meet the requirements of the…

www.airforce-technology.com

Airbus HQ probably thinks the same thing, as by the time the project was handed to them by OCCAR in 2003 it was probably to late to make such a drastic design change. The major problem here is the whole basic design was developed by the original nations then handed to Airbus Corporate.

Just another example of the adage "that an elephant is a mouse designed by a committee". I doubt that a turbo fan powered version of the A400M would have been any more successful as it would have been competing against the C-17. Trying to fit an aircraft into the niche between the C-130J (and especially the -30 variant) and the C-17 was always going to be difficult as it would most likely be seen as being 'too big' for a tactical airlifter and 'too small or slow' for a strategic airlifter. For example the C-130J-30 carries 8 463L pallets, the A400M carries 9 (with 54 pax) and the C-17 carries 18 (no pax configuration) or 11 with pax. Speedwise the C-130J cruises at mach0.58, the A400M at mach 0.72 and the C-17 at mach 0.77.

 

[ngatimozart]

Just another example of the adage "that an elephant is a mouse designed by a committee". I doubt that a turbo fan powered version of the A400M would have been any more successful as it would have been competing against the C-17. Trying to fit an aircraft into the niche between the C-130J (and especially the -30 variant) and the C-17 was always going to be difficult as it would most likely be seen as being 'too big' for a tactical airlifter and 'too small or slow' for a strategic airlifter. For example the C-130J-30 carries 8 463L pallets, the A400M carries 9 (with 54 pax) and the C-17 carries 18 (no pax configuration) or 11 with pax. Speedwise the C-130J cruises at mach0.58, the A400M at mach 0.72 and the C-17 at mach 0.77.

Maybe so but not every air force wants or can afford the C-17A (if it was still being manufactured), but requires a strategic air lifter in between the C130J-30 and the C-17A. For example NZ does but the A400M is to risky for us. The KHI C-2 would be ideal, but at present it's an orphan., which is more the pity because it's quite a good aircraft by all accounts.

 

[OldTex]

Maybe so but not every air force wants or can afford the C-17A (if it was still being manufactured), but requires a strategic air lifter in between the C130J-30 and the C-17A. For example NZ does but the A400M is to risky for us. The KHI C-2 would be ideal, but at present it's an orphan., which is more the pity because it's quite a good aircraft by all accounts.

Would an A400M procurement by NZ be risky based on potential fleet availability? I would be assuming that the number of airframes would in the low single digit order (based on the assumption that the C-130H replacement is not included) which could lead to a 'feast or famine' situation for tasking.
I do agree that the KHI C-2 appears to be an ideal choice, so long as it was the C-130H replacement with additional (2-3) airframes to provide a strategic airlift capacity. The C-2 can lift 32T (according to Kawasaki) or 8 463L pallets (same as C-130J-30) but with a cruise of mach 0.8 (which is better than the C-17). While it is still early in the production life of the C-2, an overseas order would improve its profile with other potential users.

 

[KiwiRob]

Maybe so but not every air force wants or can afford the C-17A (if it was still being manufactured), but requires a strategic air lifter in between the C130J-30 and the C-17A. For example NZ does but the A400M is to risky for us. The KHI C-2 would be ideal, but at present it's an orphan., which is more the pity because it's quite a good aircraft by all accounts.

By the time we ever get around to buying a strategic lifter (if ever) the A400 will have been in service for nearly a decade with multiple operators, what makes it risky at that point in time?

 

[ngatimozart]

Would an A400M procurement by NZ be risky based on potential fleet availability? I would be assuming that the number of airframes would in the low single digit order (based on the assumption that the C-130H replacement is not included) which could lead to a 'feast or famine' situation for tasking.
I do agree that the KHI C-2 appears to be an ideal choice, so long as it was the C-130H replacement with additional (2-3) airframes to provide a strategic airlift capacity. The C-2 can lift 32T (according to Kawasaki) or 8 463L pallets (same as C-130J-30) but with a cruise of mach 0.8 (which is better than the C-17). While it is still early in the production life of the C-2, an overseas order would improve its profile with other potential users.

No in the NZ context, the risks are the fact that it's still having problems with the engines, Airbus has slowed the production rate down, it hasn't yet delivered on all the capabilities promised, the German government is seriously concerned about the program and it's at the end of its tether about having to continually bailout out the program. So the program's future is no longer guaranteed.

In NZDF CONOPS the C130J-30 would be used in a strictly tactical role and if acquired the C-2 in a purely strategic air lift role. We don't have airlifters such as the C-27J or the C295 because they don't meet our requirements. We have a tad large moat of about 800 nm that surrounds us so any airlifter must be able to have the range and capability to lift a good sized payload at least 1,000 nm. There's plenty of discussion about this back through the thread. Secondly there is a requirement that the strategic airlifter must be able to fly from NZ to Phoenix Field, McMurdo, Antarctica, orbit for 45 minutes if required and return to NZ with the appropriate safety margin in fuel. It's about 2,100 nm from Christchurch to Phoenix Field. The current B757-200 Combi cannot do that.

 

[ngatimozart]

By the time we ever get around to buying a strategic lifter (if ever) the A400 will have been in service for nearly a decade with multiple operators, what makes it risky at that point in time?

There's no guarantee that the A400M will be in production when we get serious about replacing the strategic airlift capability, which is around 2025 - 2027.

Then there's this in today's news Coronavirus: The Air NZ 777-200ER planes which may never fly again. An opportunity? Or not an opportunity?

 

[OldTex]

There's no guarantee that the A400M will be in production when we get serious about replacing the strategic airlift capability, which is around 2025 - 2027.

Then there's this in today's news Coronavirus: The Air NZ 777-200ER planes which may never fly again. An opportunity? Or not an opportunity?

As you pointed out earlier in the thread the life of the A400M production is by no means certain (sadly a case of a great idea poorly executed aided by German duplicity, just like with the Tornado).
I don't believe that the idea of taking over AirNZ 777-200ER as the replacement for the 757-200 Combi will be viable. Does NZDF require a 312 seat strategic lift capability? An indication would be how often the 757-200s are tasked (fulfilled and unfulfilled requests). The other question is whether the LD containers (LD3/4/6/7/11/26) and PLA pallets on the lower deck will meet the NZDF strategic cargo requirements? If the strategic lift requirement needed the upper deck converted to a cargo configuration then that would suggest the aircraft are being converted to a dedicated freighter configuration (with the large upper deck cargo door and no windows).
Perhaps the KHI C-2 production line will still be running in 2025-2027 in which case that may be the only option.

 

[John Fedup]

The younger 777-300 might be worth considering especially as Air NZ owns 4, the other 3 are leased. The 777-200s are older. Buying a C2 from an Asian ally and trading partner seems a better choice than a Euro A400 with a troubled history.