Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus A400M - No Room For Mistakes.  
User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3989 times:

No room for mistakes with the Airbus A400M



http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...istakes-with-the-airbus-a400m.html

Airbus Military is upbeat after a difficult six months in the life of its A400M, but will Europe's giant airlifter keep its flight schedule?

While Airbus's flagship A380 will dominate the skies at Le Bourget this year, the company's first dedicated military transport aircraft - the A400M - will be maintaining a much lower profile, as the project battles to avoid the development woes that have previously afflicted its commercial stablemate.

Launched in May 2003 with the signature of a 180-aircraft development and production contract by Europe's OCCAR procurement agency acting on behalf of seven partner nations, the A400M is publicly declared as being on track to achieve its first flight in the first quarter of 2008, albeit later than a previous goal of next January. But with the project's aggressive timescale leaving little room for error, Airbus Military is assessing the possible implications of two setbacks that have affected its development activities over the last six months.


Definately worth the read.  Smile

Regards,
Wings


Aviation Is A Passion.
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11446 posts, RR: 76
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3980 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This airplane is on track to be another Transall if they aren't careful. It's got real potential to be a very good tactical airlifter with some strategic implications (except that it's a bit big and costly to drop in the mud very often, and many operators will treat this as a strategic asset instead of a tactical one).

I'd like to see it in the air sooner rather than later as if it fails then the nations needing the lift will have very little room to turn other than asking Boeing to reopen the C-17 line or taking a huge chance on the AN-70X....



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3859 times:

The H-130J´s probably won´t replace the large numbers of old Herc´s around, C-17 production will be ended soon & the A400s & C-27J´s will be circling around the Pentagon for future transport requirements to pop up.

Odd there will not be a US tactical transport build in US for the foreseable future but Lockheed selling improved versions of the 50 year old Hercules.


User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3751 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 2):
the A400s & C-27J´s will be circling around the Pentagon for future transport requirements to pop up.

Don't hold your breath.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3577 times:

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 3):
Don't hold your breath.

No one should ever hold their breath on any military projct these days..


User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 851 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3574 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 4):
No one should ever hold their breath on any military projct these days

 checkmark 

Micke//



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineKrisYYZ From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3563 times:

Is Airbus still pissed over the Canadian decision favouring the C-130J? I think DND has already made some sort of deal with Lockheed thereby excluding the A400M. Canada should have looked at a split order of C-130js and some A400M as the A400M could have been a great SAR/smaller tactical airlift aircraft for the forces.

KrisYYZ


User currently offlinePADSpot From Germany, joined Jan 2005, 1676 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3558 times:

Quoting KrisYYZ (Reply 6):
Canada should have looked at a split order of C-130js and some A400M as the A400M could have been a great SAR/smaller tactical airlift aircraft for the forces.

Three types (C-17,C-130J and A400M) with maybe 30 frames in the fleet? I don't think you can communicate that very well ... would be a nice gesture though.


User currently offlineKrisYYZ From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3549 times:

Quoting PADSpot (Reply 7):
Three types (C-17,C-130J and A400M) with maybe 30 frames in the fleet? I don't think you can communicate that very well ... would be a nice gesture though.

The A400M would have been a great asset to the CAF, but Canada needs new tactical airlift aircraft ASAP and Airbus couldn't meet the delivery schedule set by DND. Canada still may look at the A400M in the future as the current C130J proposal will only replace 15 or so out of the 32 C-130s Canada operates.

KrisYYZ


User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3541 times:

Quoting KrisYYZ (Reply 8):
he A400M would have been a great asset to the CAF, but Canada needs new tactical airlift aircraft ASAP and Airbus couldn't meet the delivery schedule set by DND. Canada still may look at the A400M in the future as the current C130J proposal will only replace 15 or so out of the 32 C-130s Canada operates.

Not if anyone at Pratt & Whitney Canada has anything to say about it.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Airbus A400M - No Room For Mistakes.
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 Plant In The U.S. For KC-135 Repacement. posted Sat Sep 24 2005 02:24:14 by 747400sp
Airbus Does Hard Sell For Tanker Under BA's Nose.. posted Wed Sep 15 2004 17:52:50 by KEESJE
Jato For Fighters? Why No Vtol Decision Making? posted Sat Apr 14 2007 21:18:45 by CF188A
Due To A400M, UK Mulls Follow-on Order For 3 C-17s posted Thu Dec 28 2006 19:59:32 by N328KF
Why No "Indian" Name For Huey Cobra? posted Tue Dec 19 2006 06:43:08 by BHMBAGLOCK
Airbus Just Finished Largest Composite Wing Ever (A400M) posted Sat Dec 2 2006 09:09:31 by Slz396
A400M For Nato? posted Mon Nov 27 2006 22:12:16 by RIXrat
Why No Military Name For The JT8-D? posted Wed Aug 2 2006 01:37:35 by 747400sp
Why No More Sukhois For IAF? posted Fri May 20 2005 02:35:03 by Aseem
Why Not Airbus For US Tanker Requirement: Answered posted Thu Jan 20 2005 22:24:16 by DL021

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format