A400M News Update, page 3

reply to post by Jezza

---

From my understanding it seems to be due to powerplant issues as well as many other small things.

Well more rumbling from the US goverment. Lockheed has purposed a 120 plane option for purchase of the C-130J to the goverment to replace the 20% of the old E/H fleet that is on the ground right now and the USAF wants the old planes gone.

Where it gets interesting though is that there is rumour that the A400 may be a better option for the USAF All of this is rumour but it has made a big enough of one to make it into this site. But also this purposal would get the planes to the USAF that it need before really the A400 is even viable as a new option. All of this not to mention the fact that you would have some major PO'ed brass and manufactures I thinks.

www.defenseindustrydaily.com...

Meanwhile, the C-130Js are performing well in Iraq and Afghanistan, where its performance suffers much less from heat and high altitude than C-130E/H versions. US Special Forces are also looking to renew their aging C-130 specialty aircraft and gunship fleet, but they worry that platforms like the C-130 won't be survivable 15 years from now.

Both groups have made noises lately about a competition that could involve Airbus' recently-delayed A400M, which breaks through the 20-ton cargo barrier that has stymied several US armored vehicle programs. Those rumblings, and the delay, may have handed Lockheed both motive and opportunity to make its proposal….

With Airbus A400M production unlikely to begin before 2011, and 190 orders already on the books, Lockheed's 2011-2015 deal offers the US military immediate relief for its aging force, before the competition can realistically deliver an alternative.

Well I guess from here in we should take a closer look at the pros and cons to either of these planes and costing and the like. Here is the current figures for the C-130 options.

Costs per C-130J-30 would reportedly drop from $60-70 million in current dollars to $50.4 million in FY08 dollars; the KC-130J tanker variant would be $51.8 million, and a shortened version (which was disqualified from the Joint Cargo Aircraft competition) would be $47.8 million. In real dollars, this would be $59-64 million per plane on average between 2011-2015.

[edit on 22/08/06 by Canada_EH]

reply to post by FredT

---

Hasn't the USAF completed its C-17 purchases? I thought that was the reason for Boeing chasing export orders from Australia, Canada and the UK (wooo! we bought 1 more )

reply to post by waynos

---

And we just got our 2nd of 4 two weeks ago. The C-17 production line is more or less wrapped up but Boeing is still trying to keep it open by getting more planes bought and shrinking the production materials gettign shipped to them and personel. My guess though is that the line could probably stay open for about another year or 2 at least.

Well again more news about the A400 though it is simple nes at that. The Plane is sitting on its own landing gear! lol thrilling I know but still one more step forward.

Flightglobal.com has obtained an image of the first Airbus Military A400M flight-test aircraft resting on its own landing gear at the final assembly line near Seville, Spain. The transport is awaiting installation of its composite wing and empennage, together with its four Europrop International TP400 turboprop engines.

They also go on to say that this will be aircraft 1 of 6 that will be used for flight testing and this airframe MSN001 is "expected" to start flight testing in mid 2008.

www.flightglobal.com...

reply to post by Lonestar24

---

I'm not saying its a small step but making a small joke? Anyways its true that some balancing and further testing of components within the airframe. But the empanage and wings still need to be attached to really get balancing done etc.

Well we have another update to the programe as the first TP400 powerplant has been recived by Airbus and is set to be installed in the modified C-130 sometime in the next week or 2. From what I can recall this delivery is was about 8 months late by now. Teh flight testing of the engine is set for early next year. Oh and surprise surprise Airbus failed to update the A400 site with the information but the reliable flight global has posted a pic as well as an update check out the link.

www.flightglobal.com...

EADS in late October announced a delay of up to one year to the start of A400M deliveries to launch user the French air force, with the late availability of the TP400 turboprop cited as a key cause of the problem.

The EPI consortium - which comprises European companies ITP, MTU Aero Engines, Rolls-Royce and Snecma - recently announced the appointment of Snecma chief executive Phillippe Petitcolin as non-executive chairman, as part of a management reshuffle intended to get the troubled engine programme back on track.

reply to post by bigx01

---

That Plane technology became the 777, it used a lot of titanium and advanced avionics which are the base of the current T7 (sans the engines of course). Also the Japanese were inherited to the 777 and subsequently the 787 programmes.

www.ddci.com...
en.wikipedia.org...





[edit on 23-11-2007 by carcharodon]

reply to post by Canada_EH

---

It's got it wings attached now, still the empennage to go though.

reply to post by deckard83

---

Awesome thanks for the update.
Finally an update to the A400 site.
www.airbusmilitary.com...

Assembling the A400M includes a specially-designed vacuum lifting system that raises the entire wing to suspend it above the fuselage prior to lowering it into position, where it is fixed to the twelve attachment points by means of lugs and pins. The whole process takes approximately five days to complete....
With MSN 001 now structurally complete, work continues on the aircraft’s systems with "power on", the availability of full systems functionality by early 2008

Well after much delay the TP400 development engine has been attached to the C-130 test bed! The aircraft will do a number of ground tests before it take too the air in 08.

I've got to say though the size of the updates and info on the offical site is lacking. Meh better to eb vague I guess.
www.airbusmilitary.com...

Based on their considerable experience of specialist aircraft conversion, Marshall was awarded the contract for installing and operating the A400M engine Flying Test Bed in December 2004. In addition to systems installation, considerable structural modification was needed to strengthen the C-130 airframe in order to absorb the massive torque of the 11,000 shaft horsepower engine and its 5.5 metre diameter propeller

And of course the image for the lazy who refuse to click links lol.

More news on the A400 powerplant TP400 development engine. If the A400 flys this summer it will likely be with out a certified engine.

Flight testing of the TP400 engine has slipped a few weeks to rebuild parts. But that shouldn't significantly slip the first flight of the A400M airlifter in July or shortly after, although it does mean engine certification will not be in hand, says Airbus Executive Vice President for programs, Tom Williams.

The engines testing isnot going well with only 500 out of 1500 hours of testing that was to be done on the egine at this point and software is falling behind with the next digital flight control software update/drop to happen in march only a weeks before the current time line for flight testing of the TP400 powerplant on the C-130 airframe.

EADS last year had to slip A400M service entry six months into 2010, with another six months considered a risk period

www.aviationweek.com...

[edit on 16-1-2008 by Canada_EH]

Found a neat video on the assembly of the Ratier Figeac FH386 propeller that will be used on the upcoming Airbus A400M cargo aircraft. The propeller has eight composite blades and has a total diameter of 5.3 meters. Just neat time lapse video

reply to post by Canada_EH

---

In the ever continuing trend of the aviation manufacturing industry the A400M is under rumor surrounding the fact that the planes first flight maybe delayed again till Oct and not the current released date of July. This slip happened in the speech by DGA chief executive Francois Lureau, presenting the agency's 2007 activities in Paris .

He insisted the DGA has received no indication from Airbus Military of further delays to the programme, which he said is "still within the parameters" most recently set out by the company. Lureau said his "natural pragmatism" leads him to expect a first flight in "late summer", as opposed to the estimate of "summer" given by Airbus Military.
He still expects the French air force to take delivery of its first aircraft between April and October 2010. The air force was originally due to receive its aircraft from October 2009, but in October EADS confirmed the programme was six months late, with the risk of further slippage of up to half a year

www.flightglobal.com...

Flight is reporting that the A400M is having problems with the engines and engine control systems. The final engine configuration won't be available until MSN004 is ready to fly. They're redesigning/modifying the high-pressure compressor section of the engines.

The first A400M is due to be delivered to the French Air Force in October of 2010, but Airbus is saying that it could be slipped another 6 months at this rate.

Actually the airframe is coming along nicely. MSN001 is fully assembled and in full power on mode in Station 35, and MSN002 is about to move to Station 40 and have the wings and tail put on. Rollout is scheduled for June 26. They're scheduled to have all four engines installed by then, but they're still undergoing work, and won't be in the final delivery configuration for awhile.

They need a minimum of 50 hours of flight testing on the C-130K that has the engine installed, but so far it hasn't flown once. It was supposed to start flying last year, but they won't start until late May, or early June now.

I thought this was a rather interesting comment from the Flight article.

With the benefit of hindsight, he admits that industry may have bitten off more than it could chew with the A400M development contract, given the technical and financial risks involved.

"For a programme of this scale and magnitude this is something we will never do again," he says. "It was probably not wise to launch such a large-scale aircraft programme in parallel with a completely new engine development programme."

Flight Article

In Case Of Videos Of Flying People
  Posted 12 days ago with 9 member flags

First flight for \'flapless\' plane - the Evolution of Aviation
  Posted 15 days ago with 4 member flags

F22 mishap or more that meeets the eye?
  Posted 4 days ago with 4 member flags

Boeing X-37 and X-40 - the ultimate history
  Posted 8 days ago with 3 member flags

Dassault Rafale wins India\'s biggest fighter deal for $10.4 billion
  Posted 13 days ago with 2 member flags

Its a bird, its a plane, no its a ....
  Posted 17 days ago with 0 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: