First A400M Rolled Out

moo · Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:06 pm

Today EADS rolled out the first structurally complete A400M from the Final Assembly Line in Seville, Spain:

Big version: Width: 913 Height: 532 File size: 113kb

I must admit, it looks a lot better in real life than it did in the mock ups!

http://eads.com/1024/en/pressdb/pres.../20080626_eads_a400m_roll-out.html

keesje · Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:20 pm

Cut out. A $20 billion program..

F27Friendship · Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:33 pm

it looks pretty!

can't wait for the first flight

keesje · Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:40 pm

For folks that wants some more perspective / detail..

http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace...airbus-military-a400m-roll-out.jpg

Francoflier · Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:45 pm

This picture gives a good idea of the scale of that thing.

Check out the size of the prop...

NoUFO · Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:48 pm

And another one:

autothrust · Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:03 pm

Looks fantastic, so much better then the Herc. Hope it will fly soon and get more orders. Well done Airbus.

N328KF · Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:03 pm

Anyone know of scaled drawings that show it in comparison to other airlifters?

autothrust · Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:06 pm

Quoting N328KF (Reply 7):
Anyone know of scaled drawings that show it in comparison to other airlifters?

Hope this helps:

DeltaGuy · Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:13 pm

The nose looks like a C-141

The tail looks like a C-17

The rest looks like a C-130

DeltaGuy

keesje · Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:22 pm

Hat throwing event

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 9):
The rest looks like a C-130

Yeah absolutely laughing

columba · Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:32 pm

Congratulations to the folks at Airbus another milestone achieved. Finally and long awaited.
Hope it gets in the air soon it is desperately needed with the European Air Forces much more important as new fighters and attack helicopters.

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 6):
Looks fantastic, so much better then the Herc.

Nah, no military transporter will ever look better as the Herc just as no fighter will ever look better as the F 104 and F 105 Smile

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 9):
The nose looks like a C-141

Now as you say it !!

GST · Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:53 pm

Do those props on the same wing spin in opposite directions? What would be the benefit of that?

whatever, it looks cool though.

BlueSky1976 · Thu Jun 26, 2008 4:05 pm

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 9):
The nose looks like a C-141

Correct.

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 9):
The tail looks like a C-17

Correct.

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 9):
The rest looks like a C-130

Incorrect. The rest looks like An-70. Herc doesn't have swept-back wings.

MCIGuy · Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:17 pm

Congrats Airbus, a nice looking airplane! Now get it in the air. Silly

Nicoeddf · Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:26 pm

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 9):
The nose looks like a C-141

The tail looks like a C-17

The rest looks like a C-130

Its because Airbus didn't know how to build a military airlifter. So they just copied superior US airlifter design.

2H4 · Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:47 pm

Quoting GST (Reply 12):
Do those props on the same wing spin in opposite directions? What would be the benefit of that?

You'll find your answer here. Smile

2H4

SlamClick · Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:02 pm

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 9):
The nose looks like a C-141

The tail looks like a C-17

The rest looks like a C-130

Yep.
I was just thinking it looked like they had hired that great Russian designer T. M. Reguspatov
(TM Reg. US Pat. Off.)

I'm sure it is, from keel to truck an entirely original design taking advantage of every advance in airplane design since the C130 was lofted but the superficial resemblance will prevail. Some opine that the only reason DHC went to a t-tail for the Dash-8 was so no one would mistake it for an F-27.

GST · Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:13 pm

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 16):
You'll find your answer here. Smile

Yeah I found that about 30 mins after posting here, silly me Smile

Thanks though

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 17):
Some opine that the only reason DHC went to a t-tail for the Dash-8 was so no one would mistake it for an F-27.

Complete hogwash . Wink

SAS A340 · Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:26 pm

Lovely airplane,hopefully Sweden replace some of the Herc's to a couple of these beauties bigthumbsup

bustin · Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:36 pm

Hi:

I was there. ¡¡¡¡44 º c. Horrible!!!!

Regards

Bustin

Big version: Width: 1460 Height: 985 File size: 534kb

Big version: Width: 1405 Height: 949 File size: 422kb

keesje · Thu Jun 26, 2008 9:01 pm

Quoting Bustin (Reply 20):
Hi:

I was there. ¡¡¡¡44 º c. Horrible!!!!

Congratulations & thnx for the pictures!

I was there when the engines were still misssing, I think they form the heart of its unique capabilities.

Mortyman · Thu Jun 26, 2008 9:35 pm

BBC video of the event here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7475687.stm

r2rho · Thu Jun 26, 2008 9:56 pm

I'll never get tired of saying it: I LOVE those props!

keesje · Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:49 pm

You can see the props tips point forward in reverse position, a result of the scimitar blade shape.

Asturias · Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:12 pm

Wow it is beautiful. ..

Fff 44 degrees eh? I prefer the north of Spain thank you! Smile

asturias

2H4 · Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:18 pm

I can only imagine the rate of descent that could be achieved with those props in flat pitch...

2H4

kc135topboom · Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:10 am

Does it have anything inside it, or is it a shell, like the first A-380 was? Is it still overweight?

Asturias · Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:27 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
Does it have anything inside it, or is it a shell, like the first A-380 was? Is it still overweight?

Yes, no, no, no.

asturias

andhen · Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:49 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
Does it have anything inside it, or is it a shell, like the first A-380 was? Is it still overweight?

I think you should start by saying CONGRATULATIONS to the plane and the workers who build it before you start to inquisit (I don't know how that word is written, sorry..) it!!

I, for shure have been no fan of the 787 or the boeing company, but I know that I will congratulate you, boeing and all others here on the forum after the first flight..!!

I'm sorry for coming so hard down on you, but I guess you understand my point here..?

Congrats to the a400, beautiful, and very important plane!!

andhen

dl021 · Fri Jun 27, 2008 1:41 am

well, congratulations to the folks in Seville who have rolled that airplane out. It's a terrific looking airplane and I'm certain they can be very proud of their work.

Now...is it still overweight? I know Boeing's having the same problems with weight after rollout (and why wouldnt you be a fan of Boeing or the 787?...we're airplane geeks here...we like airplanes and ones that offer significant advancements are always good) and they're still working on it even now with power on.

I wonder how important the plane is going to be in terms of actual orders? It will certainly be rather expensive, but I'd like to see the US order some. They'd fill a certain niche not currently being handled.

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 26):
I can only imagine the rate of descent that could be achieved with those props in flat pitch...

I'd bet that it's got the potential, like all other airplanes, of a fantastic rate of descent!

Quoting Asturias (Reply 28):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
Does it have anything inside it, or is it a shell, like the first A-380 was? Is it still overweight?

Yes, no, no, no.

asturias

When is it likely to fly? We certainly won't see it at Farnborough, right?

texl1649 · Fri Jun 27, 2008 1:44 am

Looks terrific. Now, "Show me."

fridgmus · Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:46 am

Absolutely Beautiful Aircraft! And those monster propellers! Shweeet! Well done Airbus, well done. bigthumbsup

Wouldn't mind seeing one in USAF livery! I think she'd fit in quite nicely in between the C-130 and the C-17!

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but judging by the photographs, isn't that beauty just begging to be stretched???

F

NoUFO · Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:01 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
is it a shell, like the first A-380 was?

Not sure what you mean. The first A380 had watertanks and a couple of tons of technical equipment for the test flights in it. It wasn't an empty shell.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
Is it still overweight?

Was it ever overweight?
Airbus had problems with the engines, hence the 6-months delay, but I can not recall weight problems.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 30):
I wonder how important the plane is going to be in terms of actual orders?

With only little less than 200 firm orders on the books, the A400M is important. That's why Airbus' stock rates dropped significantly after they announced the 6-months delay.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 30):
When is it likely to fly?

Delivery is supposed to start in 2010, and the first test flight is tentatively scheduled for October.

Alien · Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:18 am

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 33):
With only little less than 200 firm orders on the books, the A400M is important.

As a government financed jobs program it clearly is important. One should note that only a handful of those 200 planes are destined for countries outside of Europe.

NoUFO · Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:32 am

Quoting Alien (Reply 34):

I figured that DL021 asked if the project is important for Airbus, and at least investors obviously think it is. Military projects are almost always government financed.

Edit: Foreign governments often wait for tranche 2 aircraft when they fly-away-costs drop and the design is a little more proven. Against this backdrop, it is astonishing that Airbus already has orders from outside Europe.

[Edited 2008-06-26 21:37:23]

smeg · Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:08 am

Quoting Alien (Reply 34):
As a government financed jobs program it clearly is important. One should note that only a handful of those 200 planes are destined for countries outside of Europe.

So what? You dont like it, dont order it.

It is the same as the tanker fiasco. The rest of the world seems to be quite happy with it. But if the USAF do not want it, fine, I am sure that Boeing will come up with something for the US.

Well done Airbus. Congrats to all on the workforce, and heres hoping that they all fly many safe and sucessful missions.

astuteman · Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:53 am

Quoting Alien (Reply 34):
As a government financed jobs program it clearly is important. One should note that only a handful of those 200 planes are destined for countries outside of Europe.

Like the KC767, you mean? scratchchin

Meanwhile, back at the ranch....

Congrats to Airbus, and the engine builders. Looks a fabulous plane. Hope they can progress from here with few problems.

Rgds

Nicoeddf · Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:57 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 37):
Like the KC767, you mean?

:D

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 37):
Meanwhile, back at the ranch....

Yep...so nothing more to say but that it is a beautiful plane and those props...gotta love them!
Those props on the A400 are like breasts on a nice lady...just fitting and incredibly huge without being artificial Big grin

hypersonic · Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:58 am

Got to ask,
Antonov have or (had) potentially an equally capable aircraft if not even greater, being the AN-70.
Why did the Antonov fail to capture the market? - Seems the west 'are' gradually falling in love with Soviet freighters like the AN-124 anyway. So what was/is so wrong with the AN-70? - It was potentially available years before the A400M

When you compare the specs of the AN-70 to the A400M
The AN-70 could carry more, fly further, fly faster & fly higher, whilst being comparible in size..

Given that it beats the A400M in every department, what is so wrong with the AN-70 that practically no-one bought it?

I also think the AN-70 is a lovely aircraft!

slz396 · Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:59 am

Quoting Alien (Reply 34):
One should note that only a handful of those 200 planes are destined for countries outside of Europe.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 37):
Like the KC767, you mean?

Or the Boeing C-17....

Wonder how many of those job programs Boeing is currently running for the US government.

Quoting Smeg (Reply 36):
It is the same as the tanker fiasco. The rest of the world seems to be quite happy with it. But if the USAF do not want it, fine, I am sure that Boeing will come up with something for the US.

Oh, but the USAF would die to get some asap! Its the politicians which don't want it!

Indeed, the rest of the world has no problems with selecting a superior platform even though it is not US made, but it seems US politicians have huge problems in admitting Europeans can technically outdo them in military planes too...

If US military hardware has to be US designed and built, then just say so and please stop pretending by running RFPs all the time...

[Edited 2008-06-27 02:28:04]

slz396 · Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:25 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
Does it have anything inside it, or is it a shell, like the first A-380 was?

A shell? Well, it is a military aircraft, so surely you don't expect any seats and IFE systems to be installed in it, do you? It has all flight systems fitted though, so no, what you see here is not a plastic mock up bolted together with cheap but un-airworthy bolts from the local DIY store like a certain manufacturer embarrassingly seems to have used for its most recent roll-out event...

[Edited 2008-06-27 02:29:08]

autothrust · Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:55 am

Quoting Fridgmus (Reply 32):
isn't that beauty just begging to be stretched???

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
Does it have anything inside it, or is it a shell, like the first A-380 was?

The A380 wasn't a empty shell it had a minimal interior with technical stuff and a complete cockpit. I can show you the vid from the Power On.

However the 787 was a real empty shell with temploral fasteners from the local store.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 40):
Or the Boeing C-17....

Or big parts of the 787.. a great plane and a great job building program.

F27Friendship · Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:58 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
like the first A-380 was

you mean 787, with cardboard nacelles...

scouseflyer · Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:54 am

Quoting Fridgmus (Reply 32):
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but judging by the photographs, isn't that beauty just begging to be stretched???

To me it's looks like it's gagging for a session in Willy Wonka's chewing gum stretching machine Big grin

It actually looks quite dinky until you see a photo with people in to give you an idea of the perspective.

glideslope · Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:08 am

Quoting Fridgmus (Reply 32):
Wouldn't mind seeing one in USAF livery! I think she'd fit in quite nicely in between the C-130 and the C-17!

Nice point. I agree. Perhaps we bag the KC-30 and purchase a load of A400's?

Nice compromise from a political point doable after the US election.

TSV · Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:26 am

Be interesting to see it beside a Belfast!

Scooter01 · Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:34 am

Second thing that struck me was the looks of the front fuselage-area, looks almost like a C-141 from the sides..

-First thing were the props:

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 26):
I can only imagine the rate of descent that could be achieved with those props in flat pitch...

Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 38):
Yep...so nothing more to say but that it is a beautiful plane and those props...gotta love them!
Those props on the A400 are like breasts on a nice lady...just fitting and incredibly huge without being artificial

-and such a nice fat target for small-arms fire or heaven forbid, a birdstrike..

But overall, it looks like it is ready for a mission.

Scooter01

[Edited 2008-06-27 04:41:16]

Nicoeddf · Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:02 pm

Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 47):
and such a nice fat target for small-arms fire or heaven forbid, a birdstrike..

I guess, if any small-arms fire gets close and hits the prop...they won't care as they are armored, no?

And I guess the bird would have more of a problem than the prop...the ingestion chance on a prop is a LOT smaller than for a jet engine.

dragon6172 · Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:47 pm

Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 48):
I guess, if any small-arms fire gets close and hits the prop...they won't care as they are armored, no?

Armored props? Really? Am I missing the sarcasm?

From the Airbus website:

Quote:
The propeller blades are of composite construction, having a carbon spar and a composite shell. A polyurethane coating is applied on the shell to protect against erosion. Electrical de-icing is used along the leading edge. The outer part of the blade leading edge has a nickel guard to protect against erosion.

Pretty strong I am sure, but armored I doubt.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net