All this is great news for the A400M program.
The thing I find lacking in the links is some independent analysis.
This is confidential negotiations combined with a press mostly incompetent in defence issues. Any independent analysis would require a leak. Much of the European press is interested only in bad news about the military anyway. You'll find some reports from industry-friendly french newspapers, like A400M, the revenge of "the cursed plane"
After years of technical setbacks and 11 billion euros of additional cost, Airbus military transport aircraft finally sees the end of the tunnel.
The last big piece will be the refueling of helicopters, a capacity that should be certified in 2021.
But the general lack of information paves the way for smear campaigns, distortions of facts etc.
Yet it seems Airbus was liable for huge penalties and have negotiated their way out of them.
Hopefully this the last time they will be asking for give backs, but I doubt it.
Meanwhile, Boeing eats $2B in KC-46 overruns without complaint.
Airbus avoided additional penalties that would have resulted from the previous contract combined with the current plan for delayed deliveries, but that doesn't mean they avoided any penalty or asked for give backs. According to FlightGlobal
OCCAR describes the nations’ new contractual arrangement with Airbus as being “cost-neutral”.
I guess Airbus would have eagerly traded the A400M for any project that has only $2B in cost overruns. They reached that amount many years ago, and it has multiplied since then.
If you gave the USN, and the nations they provide humanitarian support, the option of flying a 22 ton excavator into an airfield or parking a Wasp class amphib off the coast which one do you think they would choose?
In an emergency, they'd probably choose the faster option, which is the aircraft, followed by the ship a few days later.
A recent Defence Select Committee was told that engineering staff at RAF Brize Norton called the aircraft “a dog” and that on occasion only two out of the fleet of 20 aircraft were serviceable.
In Parliament this week 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 and an inability to deliver paratroops.”
The former Minister of Defence asked what could be done about the “emerging procurement disaster”.
Mr Andrew replied: “The performance has been totally unacceptable. We are now expecting EuroProp International, the engine manufacturer, to be more empowered to negotiate the support solutions that we need.
That kind of news in such a public forum can't be good for export campaigns.
No, but it's good for smear campaigns.
I thought Airbus had already declared victory with regard to gearbox problems?
Basically, it isn't news, but a summary of well-known issues of the past. The only piece of information I take from this article is that Germany isn't the only A400M user that has suffered from temporarily poor availability rates. Meanwhile in June 2019, 19 different A400Ms of the Luftwaffe have actually flown within one month.
“Airbus Defence and Space has also been held to account, but, following the problems with the engines and gear boxes, those parts will be replaced on each of the aircraft by the middle of next year.
The MoD confirmed that there will be no additional cost to the taxpayer and that all reliability improvements will be funded by industry.
Replacing all engines and gear boxes on the UK fleet by the middle of next year?
That can't be cheap, and of course the other operators will now expect the same.
Good thing Airbus got the customers to sign the concessionary renegotiated contract before all this hit the fan.
Nonsense. The article simply describes what will happen within the new contract. It isn't cheap for Airbus, but that's no news.
Incompetent press meets American readers willing to read only the worst about a European project.
Germany has bought 53 aircraft, with 30 delivered so far. The Telegraph understands the Luftwaffe sought to pull out of the programme and not take the remaining 23, but was convinced by Britain to stay in.
I'll attribute this to the incompetence of the press as well. It sounds like a distorted rendering of the well-known fact that Germany had been trying to sell 13
out of 53 aircraft, a plan that, as we know, has been abandoned.