Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus A400M Export Campaigns  
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 9235 times:

Australia

C-130H's and Caribous to be replaced.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ches-a400m-c-295-to-australia.html

Would fit in nicely inbetween C130J and C-17 and provide tanker capacity for helicopters.

31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1083 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 9187 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):

Why would they want to add two new types of aircraft... to replace what? 10 A/C or less?

"Would fit in nicely inbetween C130J and C-17 and provide tanker capacity for helicopters."

They are already flying 12 of the C-130J models and will be replaing only 2-4 C-130H models I believe?? If they needed additional tanker capacity for helicopters (does RAAF/Army currently even have air refuelable helicopters?) Wouldn't make more sense to replace the H's with KC-130J's??

And the C-27J seems a more logical choice to replace the Caribou's then the C-295... since they share the same engines and many systems with the C-130J. Clearly from training and maintenance point of view anyway...   



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 9149 times:

Quoting mffoda (Reply 1):
They are already flying 12 of the C-130J models and will be replaing only 2-4 C-130H models I believe?? If they needed additional tanker capacity for helicopters (does RAAF/Army currently even have air refuelable helicopters?) Wouldn't make more sense to replace the H's with KC-130J's??

Well it would add capacity the C130 and C-17 strategic transports. It can move around two Tigers, a NH90 or Blackhawk in side, in flight refuel Hornets, F35, Wedgetails, C130s. Fly serious loads high, fast & smooth over serious distances and still land / take-off from dirt strips.

There is a reason Lockheed is studying a fat Herc and Boeing a shrink C-17.



User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4887 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8965 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 2):
There is a reason Lockheed is studying a fat Herc and Boeing a shrink C-17.

But the reason may not align with the RAAF's goals.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ted-in-more-c-130j-transports.html

Quote:
"Australia and Lockheed Martin have begun preliminary talks over the purchase of additional C-130J tactical transports early in the next decade.

It is not clear how many aircraft could be bought to supplement the Royal Australian Air Force's current 12 C-130Js (one pictured below), bought in 1999, but industry sources say about six more may be required.

[.....]

Canberra has been happy with the performance of its existing C-130s, which provide it with medium- to long-range transport with a short, dirt runway capability. This allows the aircraft to perform tactical and strategic transport duties, search and survivor assistance roles, disaster relief and medical evacuations.

Lockheed plugged the C-130J and its capabilities at the Avalon 2009 international air show in Geelong, Victoria, where George Standridge, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics' vice-president of business development, said 257 of the type have been ordered to date, and 171 delivered. These perform missions including air combat, air-to-air refuelling, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, weather reconnaissance, electronic combat and firefighting."



http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...lans-a45m-upgrade-for-c-130js.html

Quote:
"Australia has approved an A$45 million ($40 million) upgrade to its air force's fleet of 12 Lockheed Martin C-130J military transports.

'The Block 7.0 Upgrade will enable Australia's fleet of C-130J to meet new global air traffic management requirements and continue to operate in global airspace,' says defence minister John Faulkner.

'These will address system obsolescence, maintain coalition compatibility and enable these aircraft to comply with global air traffic standards.'"



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5718 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8951 times:

Quoting mffoda (Reply 1):
They are already flying 12 of the C-130J models and will be replaing only 2-4 C-130H models I believe??

There are 12 H to be replaced. They (DOD) are currently talking about 6 replacements, RAAF is NOT happy.

Quoting mffoda (Reply 1):
And the C-27J seems a more logical choice to replace the Caribou's then the C-295... since they share the same engines and many systems with the C-130J. Clearly from training and maintenance point of view anyway...

The C-27J was rejected in the past, the C-295 I don't know. The next attempt to replace the Caribou will the third, the first two failed because no aircraft could do the job the 'Boo did. IF Viking can get their act together fast enough and they might on the time scale in the FI article, then a modenised DHC-5 must have a show.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12160 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 8865 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 2):
Well it would add capacity the C130 and C-17 strategic transports. It can move around two Tigers, a NH90 or Blackhawk in side, in flight refuel Hornets, F35, Wedgetails, C130s.

The A-400 may be able to refuel the F/A-18s, but that is what they are buying the KC-30s to do. The RAAF version of the F-35, the "A" model will be boom refuelable, not probe and drogue. Last I heard the A-400 will not carry a boom, and will not refuel receivers than need booms, like the F-35, Wedgetail, or F-111s.

As far as "adding capacity", any airplane ordered will do that. The RAAF is already considering more C-130Js, and they still could order another 2-3 C-17s to "add capacity" instead of introducing another new type.

Isn't Germany still having trouble with their Tigers?


User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 8796 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
Isn't Germany still having trouble with their Tigers?

Start up problems happen to many new aircraft,

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6712/is_17_213/ai_n28894933/
http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...&sjid=7vADAAAAIBAJ&pg=3847,9602712
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...-by-serious-design-problems-04311/


User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5716 posts, RR: 44
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 8770 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting keesje (Reply 6):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
Isn't Germany still having trouble with their Tigers?

Start up problems happen to many new aircraft,

Call me a cynic if you like but that is a worrying statement about an A/C that first flew almost 20 years ago!



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 8175 times:

Airbus holds talks with 36 countries interested in buying A400m military transport plane

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...400m-military-transport-plane.html

Priority seem to have Brazilië, Chili, Saoedi-Arabia, UAE, India and Australia. And he upcoming JFTL competition.


User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5716 posts, RR: 44
Reply 9, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 8167 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting keesje (Reply 8):
and Australia.

Where do you get that from?

I see Australias's priority in replacing the Caribou rather than filling an (imaginary) gap at the heavy end!

As for the A400 replacing the Hercs, that would make Oz Airlift far to slanted towards the heavylifters.



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 8148 times:

Quoting stealthz (Reply 9):
Where do you get that from?

Last week, http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ches-a400m-c-295-to-australia.html


User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4887 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 8136 times:

Quoting gemuser (Reply 4):

The C-27J was rejected in the past

What was the basis for the rejection - price?

Quoting gemuser (Reply 4):
the C-295 I don't know. The next attempt to replace the Caribou will the third, the first two failed because no aircraft could do the job the 'Boo did.

Was it big for the requirement? Maybe the CN-235 would be a better fit as it is roughly in the same capacity and performance range.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Howie - Vortex Aviation Photography
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Leonardo L. de Mello Menezes

Quoting stealthz (Reply 9):
I see Australias's priority in replacing the Caribou rather than filling an (imaginary) gap at the heavy end!

I still believe the Spartan would be ideal for that role.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bruce Leibowitz



[Edited 2010-07-04 16:55:31]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5716 posts, RR: 44
Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 7997 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting keesje (Reply 10):
Last week, http://www.flightglobal.com/articles....html

Thanks for that, missed that article.

Still pretty convinced there is no real opportunity here for the A400, likely it was included to raise the visibility of the C295 proposal as a 'bou replacement.



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12160 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 7959 times:

Talks with 36 countries about sales of the A-400? I just cannot imagine anyone seriously considering the A-400 at now an increased price per unit and reduced capabilities from the original contract with the EU countries.

User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 7936 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 13):
Talks with 36 countries about sales of the A-400? I just cannot imagine anyone seriously considering the A-400 at now an increased price per unit and reduced capabilities from the original contract with the EU countries.

A strong selling point for this modern 37t outsize tactical transport seems: no competition.

There is also a chance that it just meet/ exceeds its promised performance specs from the start, just like the A380 and A330F.

.
A400M #1 at ILA, with 17 tonnes "payload"


User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 7934 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 8):
Airbus holds talks with 36 countries interested in buying A400m military transport plane

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...400m-military-transport-plane.html

Priority seem to have Brazilië, Chili, Saoedi-Arabia, UAE, India and Australia. And he upcoming JFTL competition.

I think the "Telegraph" article should have been tittled:

'Airbus holds talks with 36 countries Airbus would like to try and talk into buying A400M's'.

Is that Belize or Brazil and who is Saoedi-Arabia?

An A-400M would be a big step up for the Balize Self Defence Force's Islander, as in one (1) Islander?


User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 16, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 7896 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 14):

There is also a chance that it just meet/ exceeds its promised performance specs from the start, just like the A380 and A330F.

...? Like dispatch reliability?



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4887 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 7648 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 8):
Priority seem to have Brazilië

I doubt Brazil would torpedo its own airlifter program especially after the FAB committed to it - despite the disparity in payload capacity.....

http://www.aereo.jor.br/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/concep%C3%A7%C3%A3o-KC-390-imagem-Embraer.jpg

As you pointed out in the other thread, LM had that to watch out for. And it's not like Brazil would embark on a heavy expeditionary deployment anytime soon.

Quoting keesje (Reply 14):
A400M #1 at ILA, with 17 tonnes "payload"

So, the A400M is resorting to the same flying antics as the C-27J does at airshows.  bigthumbsup 

[Edited 2010-07-06 10:43:48]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12160 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 7512 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 14):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 13):
Talks with 36 countries about sales of the A-400? I just cannot imagine anyone seriously considering the A-400 at now an increased price per unit and reduced capabilities from the original contract with the EU countries.

A strong selling point for this modern 37t outsize tactical transport seems: no competition.

There is also a chance that it just meet/ exceeds its promised performance specs from the start, just like the A380 and A330F.
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 16):
...? Like dispatch reliability?

Or the A-400 low level capability, the 37 tonne capability (which is questionable), or years later tasnker capability?

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 17):
Quoting keesje (Reply 14):
A400M #1 at ILA, with 17 tonnes "payload"

So, the A400M is resorting to the same flying antics as the C-27J does at airshows.

Doing that with 17 tonnes is a long way from doing it with 30, or 37 tonnes. Just what capability is that manuver suppose to show? I can think of no reason to go more than 90 degrees of bank in a big airplane, it gives you no tactical advantage, plus you expose your belly at more than 90 degrees.


User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 7482 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 18):
Just what capability is that manuver suppose to show?


From the position of the left hand aileron, whatever he was doing he is trying to undo real quick.


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3418 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7386 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 19):
From the position of the left hand aileron, whatever he was doing he is trying to undo real quick.

Or the photographer turned the camera. Without a horizon reference who knows what the actual manuver is.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12160 posts, RR: 51
Reply 21, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 7291 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 19):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 18):
Just what capability is that manuver suppose to show?


From the position of the left hand aileron, whatever he was doing he is trying to undo real quick.
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 20):
Or the photographer turned the camera. Without a horizon reference who knows what the actual manuver is.

Both correct assumptions.

But this entire thread is BS as it is no more valid that EADS saying there was a market for 400 A-400s in North America.


User currently offlinesantafejay From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 9 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 7049 times:

I'm surprised they would consider the C-295 ahead of the C-27J unless it's part of an attractive deal. That being said it's hard to imagine that the A400M can come in at a reasonable price unless Airbus/EADS plans on taking a loss. The A400M's problems are well known and the engineers have thier work cut out for them if the plane is ever going to live up to expectations.

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12160 posts, RR: 51
Reply 23, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6885 times:

Quoting santafejay (Reply 22):
That being said it's hard to imagine that the A400M can come in at a reasonable price unless Airbus/EADS plans on taking a loss. The A400M's problems are well known and the engineers have thier work cut out for them if the plane is ever going to live up to expectations.

It is a big hill for EADS to climb. I think many countries took notice when EADS refused to honor the original contreact wit its EU customers.


User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6822 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 21):
Quoting 474218 (Reply 19):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 18):
Just what capability is that manuver suppose to show?


From the position of the left hand aileron, whatever he was doing he is trying to undo real quick.
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 20):
Or the photographer turned the camera. Without a horizon reference who knows what the actual manuver is.

Both correct assumptions.

It's a FBW aircraft. The aircraft measures all relevant parameters continuously and makes sure the aircraft stays within its flight enveloppe. In this case The pilot knows and just pulls the stick as far as he can because he knows the aircraft will stop at (pre programmed) 120 degrees and make sure the aircraft stays under control.

Quoting santafejay (Reply 22):
I'm surprised they would consider the C-295 ahead of the C-27J unless it's part of an attractive deal.

I think they are two different aircraft, the C-295 being the smaller/lighter/cheaper one. What fits best depends on the requirements.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 23):
It is a big hill for EADS to climb

No serious competition & a lot of demand helps.

The contracted price for the launch customers was extremely low. Even price rises of additional billions will make it good value for money compared to bigger aircraft lacking its tactical performance.

About the "technical issue" haubting the program, I sense a lot of hope and little substance here. So lets bring up reliable sources. Not the usual cheap shots by folks with an agenda or politicians hating having to pay more.


25 Post contains links and images DEVILFISH : View Large View MediumPhoto © Oleg V. Belyakov There might be if the twinjet version of the above ever takes off from CATIA..... . http://i15.photobu
26 KC135TopBoom : Rolling into 120 degrees of bank is not a normal manuver that pilots do in large aircraft. There are only two ways to recover from that, continue to
27 santafejay : If the Japanese intend to offer the Kawasaki C-2 for export the A400M will have a tough time competing. The A400M so far is 12 tons overweight and tra
28 Post contains links oldeuropean : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgALWWBg3qs and here filmed on another day (07:10): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kZCa9Asu8Y& Axel[Edited 2010-07
29 Post contains links and images keesje : are you sure? The last I heard is the french mod was concerned the first A400M would miss their specified max payload, by a few hundred kg's.. http:/
30 santafejay : That's what I've read on Wikipedia as well as couple of other sources. Agreed, but that would be case the for any aircraft.
31 Post contains links DEVILFISH : It may not have to if the fighter for tanker/airlifter arrangement between Brazil and France pushed through..... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Airbus A400M Export Campaigns
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Airbus A400M - No Room For Mistakes. posted Mon Jun 11 2007 20:50:25 by WINGS
Airbus A400M posted Fri Dec 16 2005 14:22:08 by AirbusA346
Airbus Militairy MRTT, A400M Next A320 AEW? posted Mon Nov 30 2009 14:54:28 by Keesje
Airbus Just Finished Largest Composite Wing Ever (A400M) posted Sat Dec 2 2006 09:09:31 by Slz396
A400M Riat Flying Display posted Thu Jun 3 2010 03:08:22 by flipdewaf
Any Updates On The A400M posted Tue Jun 1 2010 19:30:37 by GRIVely
French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure posted Sun Apr 4 2010 07:50:59 by Lumberton
A400M Contract Amendment Negotiations posted Tue Mar 16 2010 11:40:28 by Revelation
SA Still Waits For A400M Refund posted Sat Mar 13 2010 06:29:38 by Revelation
EADS, EPI Seek Damages Over A400M Engine posted Sat Mar 13 2010 06:14:25 by Revelation

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format