keesje wrote:

aumaverick wrote:

Grizzly410 wrote:

Year 2022 saw 10 deliveries of A400M to customers :
1 last for Turkey, 1 for Belgium (1 left); 2 for Spain, 2 for France, 3 for Germany and 1 for UK (1 left).

For the long time readers of 400M threads there’s two noticeable news in those deliveries :
- the UK one is MSN56 that Airbus Defence&Space used for around 4 years as Flight Test aircraft
- one of the French is not exactly brand new either, though without more flight hours than the build process requires, it’s MSN75. A specimen ADS took out of the production line after structural assembly and stowed long term since mid-2018 (IRC for the date)

Note that for housekeeping purpose I’m notifying mods on this post as it’s named for 2022, asking if it makes sense to close it and start a 2023 thread given the low activity.
Personally I’d rather rename this one like it was before “A400M update” and let it follow its slow course.

What is the backlog now, 2?

68 from 7 countries, https://youtu.be/yVttp1kBQn8

Maybe you are counting Kazakhstan/Indonesian options as order but it's rather 63 firm left.

End 2022 there's 115 delivered for 178 ordered (174 initials + 2 Kazakhstan + 2 Indonesia).
https://www.abcdlist.nl/a400mf/a400mf.html is up to date

Grizzly410 wrote:

keesje wrote:

aumaverick wrote:

What is the backlog now, 2?

68 from 7 countries, https://youtu.be/yVttp1kBQn8

Maybe you are counting Kazakhstan/Indonesian options as order but it's rather 63 firm left.

End 2022 there's 115 delivered for 178 ordered (174 initials + 2 Kazakhstan + 2 Indonesia).
https://www.abcdlist.nl/a400mf/a400mf.html is up to date

Thanks, Grizzly410. With the remaining 63 left, how long does the production line have?

aumaverick wrote:

Grizzly410 wrote:

keesje wrote:

68 from 7 countries, https://youtu.be/yVttp1kBQn8

Maybe you are counting Kazakhstan/Indonesian options as order but it's rather 63 firm left.

End 2022 there's 115 delivered for 178 ordered (174 initials + 2 Kazakhstan + 2 Indonesia).
https://www.abcdlist.nl/a400mf/a400mf.html is up to date

Thanks, Grizzly410. With the remaining 63 left, how long does the production line have?

I think ADS stated they didn't want to go below the current rate of 8/year (last year was 10 thanks to the 2 "specials" mentionned).
Now there was also questions about the current orders, Spain wanted to reduce its order, Germany too IRC. We didn't hear much about this anymore.
While in the meantime we read UK could do a top up (makes sense), recently that France could also want to top up (less sense given they don't even have half of their order fullfilled).

So technically there's 7 years safe to collect new orders.

It looks like the A400M performs more than ok & has limited competition this decade, while global air forces are rushing to increase capacity, replace aircraft.

Buyers hate to have little alternatives. Creative and eyebrows raising public comments, downplaying requirements & urgency indicate ongoing negotiations.

Grizzly410 wrote:

keesje wrote:

aumaverick wrote:

What is the backlog now, 2?

68 from 7 countries, https://youtu.be/yVttp1kBQn8

Maybe you are counting Kazakhstan/Indonesian options as order but it's rather 63 firm left.

End 2022 there's 115 delivered for 178 ordered (174 initials + 2 Kazakhstan + 2 Indonesia).
https://www.abcdlist.nl/a400mf/a400mf.html is up to date

Are you sure that the Indonesian order is an option only? Back in November Airbus reported this deal as "having been firmed":

https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/indonesia-finalises-order-for-a400m-airlifters/151329.article

And I understand that the Kazakhstan order was a firm order right from the beginning when it was announced in 2021 (anything else wouldn´t match a 2024 delivery anyway).

Flying-Tiger wrote:

Grizzly410 wrote:

keesje wrote:

68 from 7 countries, https://youtu.be/yVttp1kBQn8

Maybe you are counting Kazakhstan/Indonesian options as order but it's rather 63 firm left.

End 2022 there's 115 delivered for 178 ordered (174 initials + 2 Kazakhstan + 2 Indonesia).
https://www.abcdlist.nl/a400mf/a400mf.html is up to date

Are you sure that the Indonesian order is an option only? Back in November Airbus reported this deal as "having been firmed":

https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/indonesia-finalises-order-for-a400m-airlifters/151329.article

And I understand that the Kazakhstan order was a firm order right from the beginning when it was announced in 2021 (anything else wouldn´t match a 2024 delivery anyway).

No no, I don't say the 2 Kazak are options, on the contrary I'm puting them in 63 firm.

I was wondering if Keesje was counting the options to reach his 68 backlog figure (63 firm + 4 kazak options + 1 from where?)

Grizzly410 wrote:

So technically there's 7 years safe to collect new orders.

When will the early A400M be up for replacement? Could A400M production stay open until the first A400M are due for replacement?

The RAF C-130J arrived between 1999 and 2004 and will be fullly retired this year. That is around 20 years average age. RAAF C-130J fleet will also be retired with an average age around 20 years with replacement C-130J ordered last year.

The first A400M will reach 20 years old around 2033. If the current backlog is 7 years that means the A400M that means a few years gap until the replacement cycle starts. This assumes the A400M fleet is being worked hard like a tactical airlifter. They could have an easy life doing strategic work and won't need replacement until after 2040.

It would be great if the A400M could remain in production indefinitely like the C-130. I could see the C-130 sized tactical airlift market getting captured by the a big tilt rotor next decade. The much larger A400M could then become the best long range transport. For example the A400M carries armoured vehicles into theatre and the big tilt rotor carries them in theatre.

Keeping the A400M industrial base should be a priority. In 2030 even if the older A400M still have 30% life left it makes sense to bring brand new A400M into the fleets. It would be very short sighted to end production in 2030 and then when the older A400M need replacement in 2035 there is no replacement available.

It might even makes sense to evolve the A400M design. Will be the A400M move further into the strategic role? That robust design could easily take a MTOW increase with G limits. Add wingless like the C-27J. Improve engine SFC by 5%. The strategic range with 20t of payload could easily go from 3,450 nm to 4,450 nm. Or Europe might not need extra range but might need more cargo volume to fit a third lightweight armoured vehicle? So a stretch like the C-130J-30

RJMAZ wrote:

Grizzly410 wrote:

So technically there's 7 years safe to collect new orders.

When will the early A400M be up for replacement? Could A400M production stay open until the first A400M are due for replacement?

The RAF C-130J arrived between 1999 and 2004 and will be fullly retired this year. That is around 20 years average age. RAAF C-130J fleet will also be retired with an average age around 20 years with replacement C-130J ordered last year.

The first A400M will reach 20 years old around 2033. If the current backlog is 7 years that means the A400M that means a few years gap until the replacement cycle starts. This assumes the A400M fleet is being worked hard like a tactical airlifter. They could have an easy life doing strategic work and won't need replacement until after 2040.

It would be great if the A400M could remain in production indefinitely like the C-130. I could see the C-130 sized tactical airlift market getting captured by the a big tilt rotor next decade. The much larger A400M could then become the best long range transport. For example the A400M carries armoured vehicles into theatre and the big tilt rotor carries them in theatre.

Keeping the A400M industrial base should be a priority. In 2030 even if the older A400M still have 30% life left it makes sense to bring brand new A400M into the fleets. It would be very short sighted to end production in 2030 and then when the older A400M need replacement in 2035 there is no replacement available.

It might even makes sense to evolve the A400M design. Will be the A400M move further into the strategic role? That robust design could easily take a MTOW increase with G limits. Add wingless like the C-27J. Improve engine SFC by 5%. The strategic range with 20t of payload could easily go from 3,450 nm to 4,450 nm. Or Europe might not need extra range but might need more cargo volume to fit a third lightweight armoured vehicle? So a stretch like the C-130J-30

Right now ADS strategic priority is to increase the number of customer and the presence on the market withour injecting more money, therefore with the platform as it is.
No doubts customers will want some small custom modifications for additional capacities, and ADS will be happy to sell this, but nothing about weights, dimensions, engine or aerodynamics will be done before a long period of time and without having a much bigger footprint on the marketplace.

I think the coming years are crucials. All or nearly all the initials capabilities are available and certified, every customer with a decent fleet order are served with a good number of frames and manufacturing line is proven so every potential customer now knows what's really on offer. Hopefully ADS can now work a bit on the price given the development are paid anyway, it would need some diplomacy skills with the OCCAR nations given they will pay full price for the third of their order remaining on the book, but it seems doable.

The obvious chalenge is the indefinitely presence of C-130. It is "crushed" performance wise, a bit "outdated", but smaller, cheaper, reliable and more importantly already in use nearly everywhere. You have to be very convincing to a potential customer to make him take a new platform with all the associated costs instead of going cheap with Hercules...

Grizzly410 wrote:

The obvious chalenge is the indefinitely presence of C-130. It is "crushed" performance wise, a bit "outdated", but smaller, cheaper, reliable and more importantly already in use nearly everywhere. You have to be very convincing to a potential customer to make him take a new platform with all the associated costs instead of going cheap with Hercules...

I can see that having a big effect on KC-390 sales, given load capacity is not so different to KC-130J but A400M load capacity is almost double C-130J load.

Any new order prospects on the horizon?

RJMAZ wrote:

It would be great if the A400M could remain in production indefinitely like the C-130. I could see the C-130 sized tactical airlift market getting captured by the a big tilt rotor next decade. The much larger A400M could then become the best long range transport. For example the A400M carries armoured vehicles into theatre and the big tilt rotor carries them in theatre.


It might even makes sense to evolve the A400M design. Will be the A400M move further into the strategic role? That robust design could easily take a MTOW increase with G limits. Add wingless like the C-27J. Improve engine SFC by 5%. The strategic range with 20t of payload could easily go from 3,450 nm to 4,450 nm. Or Europe might not need extra range but might need more cargo volume to fit a third lightweight armoured vehicle? So a stretch like the C-130J-30

Agreed. Lots of potential in the airframe and engines.

Some A400 export opportunities are apparently delayed due to bureaucracy in Berlin regarding licenses:

""Several countries are interested in the (military transport plane) A400M. Unfortunately we are having difficulties to get the German export licences on time," Michael Schoellhorn told Reuters in an interview at the Munich Security Conference."

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 023-02-19/

The A400M could appropriately be called the “Delayed” vs. the grizzly. When is production slated to end at this time?

texl1649 wrote:

The A400M could appropriately be called the “Delayed” vs. the grizzly. When is production slated to end at this time?

If you are stuck in early 2010's sure, otherwise....
IRC, since 2016 each year have seen the number of deliveries matching expectations in quantity and in standard.

Note also that Grizzly was the development aircraft nicknames, MSN1 to 6 only. Production specimens are A400M ATLAS.
[making me curious to know if MSN56 received the nickname during it's 2 years in the ADS flight test fleet]

Not far above we discussed the fact the current order book at current pace leaves 7 years of production booked.

JayinKitsap wrote:

Any new order prospects on the horizon?

India, possibly. India has invited tenders for 40/60/80 MTA with load-carrying capacity of 18-30 tons. ADS did not submit a tender but did request more information on the requirement before tendering and the tender closing date is reported to have been extended. Assuming that the minimum number of 40 was ordered, this would be a massive order for A400M. C-390, C-130J and IL-276, a Russian airlifter still in development, are competing for the contract. I wonder what chance there is of ADS even tendering, given that the A400M overtops the capacity required.

https://idrw.org/iaf-gets-3-bids-as-it- ... a-program/

India could be politically interesting. Since india is also using the C-17, I would not rule that out, also with some technology transfer probably and Germanys recent charming offensive in India.

Generally, looking on ADSB Global we see lots of A400M in daily use, be it arms delivery to Rzezow, medical aid to Turkey, low level VFR tactical flights, dropping of parachute jumpers, and refueling missions. The A400 had a troubled start, but it seemingly has become a very useful asset.

The French Air Force is modifying A400M transport aircraft with a mount for an MX-20 EO/IR turret for the special forces support role.

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/spec ... -missions/



https://www.l3harris.com/all-capabilities/wescam-mx-20-air-surveillance-and-reconnaissance

Grizzly410 wrote:

aumaverick wrote:

Grizzly410 wrote:

Maybe you are counting Kazakhstan/Indonesian options as order but it's rather 63 firm left.

End 2022 there's 115 delivered for 178 ordered (174 initials + 2 Kazakhstan + 2 Indonesia).
https://www.abcdlist.nl/a400mf/a400mf.html is up to date

Thanks, Grizzly410. With the remaining 63 left, how long does the production line have?

I think ADS stated they didn't want to go below the current rate of 8/year (last year was 10 thanks to the 2 "specials" mentionned).
Now there was also questions about the current orders, Spain wanted to reduce its order, Germany too IRC. We didn't hear much about this anymore.
While in the meantime we read UK could do a top up (makes sense), recently that France could also want to top up (less sense given they don't even have half of their order fullfilled).

So technically there's 7 years safe to collect new orders.

Some news from Spain:

after several months of uncertainty, European defence sources said Madrid was leaning towards cancelling the remaining 13 or so aircraft in Spain's quota that have not been delivered, after its air force indicated it did not need the extra planes.

This would cut a year and a half of production.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/spain-may-cancel-remaining-airbus-a400m-orders-sources-2023-03-13/

The A400 seems to be gaining credibility in Germany at last:

"The model was not only used in its main role as a transport aircraft, but also as a tanker, flying hospital and for dropping paratroopers."

https://www.aero.de/news-44768/Airbus-f ... orter.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh3by1BL-6I

Pretty interesting video showing the return of 3 A400m in Wunstorf after the Sudan evacuation. Lots of A400m in action in this video, worth a see even for non-german speakers.

I know the wing pods have a limited number of flight hours available yet they decided to equip all aircrafts with it for the mission ! The only obvious reason is they did refuelling missions, or at least may have had to do some.
Is this mentioned in the discourse at some point ?

I did not find any discussions about that (which in itself does not necessarily mean anything) - however the GAF A400M regularly refuel Counter Daesh planes from Jordan anyway (like French Rafales) so I assume they are fully equipped with missile defense systems and are those which are fully mission capable. Probably not all A400M have the standard to fly into combat zones yet.

But this is pure speculation. On the other hand, aerial refueling helps in case you need air support from French, English or German planes (not that I know anything about that being planned, but Rafales and UK/German Eurofighters are able to be refueled by the probe drogue system).

TheSonntag wrote:

I did not find any discussions about that (which in itself does not necessarily mean anything) - however the GAF A400M regularly refuel Counter Daesh planes from Jordan anyway (like French Rafales) so I assume they are fully equipped with missile defense systems and are those which are fully mission capable. Probably not all A400M have the standard to fly into combat zones yet.

But this is pure speculation. On the other hand, aerial refueling helps in case you need air support from French, English or German planes (not that I know anything about that being planned, but Rafales and UK/German Eurofighters are able to be refueled by the probe drogue system).

Thing is install/removal of wing pods is a couple of shifts job max.
And I've seen cases where A400M did flights before delivery with pods installed but they were subsequently remove for the delivery ferry flight, I've been told it was because pods have limited time on wing life before maintenance, and airforces didn't want to waste precious hours. That's why I thought GAF would surely have selected aircrafts with full defense system, but would have left pods on wings only with plans to use them during the evac mission.
Thanks for the research !

TheSonntag wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh3by1BL-6I

Pretty interesting video showing the return of 3 A400m in Wunstorf after the Sudan evacuation. Lots of A400m in action in this video, worth a see even for non-german speakers.

Very nice video and very positive feedback in the comments section.

Funny to see Baerbock entering a military aircraft with such shoes…

Grizzly410 wrote:

I know the wing pods have a limited number of flight hours available yet they decided to equip all aircrafts with it for the mission ! The only obvious reason is they did refuelling missions, or at least may have had to do some.
Is this mentioned in the discourse at some point ?

A photo posted on another forum shows an A400M returning to Germany from Jordan today (04 May). The refueling pods are clearly visible, even though they should've had enough time to either swap the aircraft or remove them. The aircraft is not headed for a combat zone, it's just doing regular transport runs.

Most likely, there's a set of A400M dedicated to operations to and from Jordan, where typically at least one aircraft should be available for fighter refueling duties in the counter-daesh operation. I guess they don't want to assign just one specific aircraft, so if you're headed to Al-Azraq, you're carrying the pods with you.

There are also some images on the Bundeswehr CD/CBI page showing A400M with pods, clearly loading/unloading troops and cargo in Jordan, so they wouldn't have needed the pods on those particular flights either. https://www.bundeswehr.de/de/einsaetze- ... nd-im-irak

Also interesting to see the first German a400m in the video equipped with a 5 tonne crane. To date I have never seen that thing being used, ever.

mxaxai wrote:

Grizzly410 wrote:

I know the wing pods have a limited number of flight hours available yet they decided to equip all aircrafts with it for the mission ! The only obvious reason is they did refuelling missions, or at least may have had to do some.
Is this mentioned in the discourse at some point ?

A photo posted on another forum shows an A400M returning to Germany from Jordan today (04 May). The refueling pods are clearly visible, even though they should've had enough time to either swap the aircraft or remove them. The aircraft is not headed for a combat zone, it's just doing regular transport runs.

Most likely, there's a set of A400M dedicated to operations to and from Jordan, where typically at least one aircraft should be available for fighter refueling duties in the counter-daesh operation. I guess they don't want to assign just one specific aircraft, so if you're headed to Al-Azraq, you're carrying the pods with you.

There are also some images on the Bundeswehr CD/CBI page showing A400M with pods, clearly loading/unloading troops and cargo in Jordan, so they wouldn't have needed the pods on those particular flights either. https://www.bundeswehr.de/de/einsaetze- ... nd-im-irak

Thanks ! I must have got something wrong then with a limitation of pods FH.

In addition those in Jordan, there are other refueling missions, including training. The threat from Russia remains; German A400Ms have been active in the tanker role over Poland and Romania in this context.

My take is that, with some pods permanently installed, the fleet is flexible to react to escalations on any front. In particular, the German evacuation in Sudan was scaled to respond quickly to escalations. According to Pistorius' speech, more than 1000 soldiers and 600 metric tons of equipment were deployed to Jordan just by Germany. Not all by the four A400Ms that arrived in this video; there were far more A400Ms participating, a SALIS AN-124 was involved as well, and an A321 was shuttling between Germany and Jordan.

There are photos that show Wiesel tankettes departing from the back of German A400Ms in Sudan. All of this signals a high degree of readiness of the German forces. I wouldn't be surprised if there had been preparations to deploy fighter jets to Southern Europe or Jordan as well. The A400Ms with pods in Jordan could then have enabled the fighters to operate over Sudan.

It highlights the A400M's operational flexibility. Conversely, this was already evident in January 2020, when the German A400M, which was permanently deployed to Jordan as a tanker aircraft as part of Operation Counter Daesh, carried out a short-term evacuation mission in Iraq.

Another aspect is the large number of A400Ms from all operators that have been active in recent weeks. According to Airbus, there are now 118 A400Ms in service. I counted about 75 individual A400Ms active on RadarBox or ADS-B Exchange between April 20 and May 5. Readiness must have improved significantly. On April 20, 13 German A400Ms got airborn, according to spotters. (That must also be a challenge for the ground crew, so maybe that's another reason to leave the pods on: With such a large workload, there are more important things to do than install and remove the pods. But I'm more inclined to think that lining up 4 A400Ms with refueling pods in the presence of the defense minister was a deliberate show of force.)

I'm wondering if the limitations on the pods are actually in flight hours or operating hours of the pods themselves?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4NVWW1Abi4

Yet another interesting video, showing a refueling mission from GAF A400m to Rafales over Iraq. You can see real fuel flow numbers (seems to be no secret then), quite interesting.

Catfry wrote:

Also interesting to see the first German a400m in the video equipped with a 5 tonne crane. To date I have never seen that thing being used, ever.

Where do you see that crane? At 6:30 minutes into the video posted by Sonntag?

N14AZ wrote:

Catfry wrote:

Also interesting to see the first German a400m in the video equipped with a 5 tonne crane. To date I have never seen that thing being used, ever.

Where do you see that crane? At 6:30 minutes into the video posted by Sonntag?

A few seconds earlier you can also see the rail on the outside of the upper cargo door.

Here's a Spanish report with pictures of the crane.

Hello Everyone
Adsbexchange shows lots of EC-400 flights from Toulouse in the recent months, often low level in the Pyrenees or Massif Central.

Yes, at timestamp 6:07 you see the outside rail, and at 6:21-6:30 you can make out the crane assembly above the ramp. the only other nation I have seen get a crane was Luxembourg. However the article linked by Noray mentions more than a hundred assemblies, so who knows?
I imagine for the vast majority of cargo missions this crane will be superfluous, but I suppose a lot of the features of the a400m are like that. When suddenly you stand in an unexpected situation, such as making heavy cargo lifts out of completely austere places without ANY loading options, it is good to have a tool that is capable of dealing with it.

The plane is designed for many missions, so it certainly is a compromise and often it is carrying much capability which is not needed for the mission. This is why you saw/see none, or at least almost none civilian A400m, C160 and C130 operators.

However, a toolbox also includes stuff you dont always need. But if the plane lands in the desert or on a grass strip, it might be useful to have it.

Seen this article the other day and I'd like to know thoughts on it.

The A400M has just undergone its longest flight so far with a flight of 20 hours and 36 minutes according to the below link.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... st-flight/

pugman211 wrote:

Seen this article the other day and I'd like to know thoughts on it.

The A400M has just undergone its longest flight so far with a flight of 20 hours and 36 minutes according to the below link.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... st-flight/

How much oil does the TP400-D6 burn? That'll probably decide how long the A400M can theoretically remain airborne without having to land and the engines requiring an oil top-up.

That, and whether the waste water tank is full...

pugman211 wrote:

Seen this article the other day and I'd like to know thoughts on it.

The A400M has just undergone its longest flight so far with a flight of 20 hours and 36 minutes according to the below link.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... st-flight/

I didn't see the mileage listed in the article, but an estimate would be about 7,500 mi. 7,500 mi/20.6 hours = 364 mph. Seems about right.

SteelChair wrote:

pugman211 wrote:

Seen this article the other day and I'd like to know thoughts on it.

The A400M has just undergone its longest flight so far with a flight of 20 hours and 36 minutes according to the below link.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... st-flight/

I didn't see the mileage listed in the article, but an estimate would be about 7,500 mi. 7,500 mi/20.6 hours = 364 mph. Seems about right.

Could it be calculated by using the nm figures for waypoints on the map in the article? I wouldn't know if they were accurate or not though?

SteelChair wrote:

pugman211 wrote:

Seen this article the other day and I'd like to know thoughts on it.

The A400M has just undergone its longest flight so far with a flight of 20 hours and 36 minutes according to the below link.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... st-flight/

I didn't see the mileage listed in the article, but an estimate would be about 7,500 mi. 7,500 mi/20.6 hours = 364 mph. Seems about right.

That would be the straight-line distance on a route via Sweden, Russia, China and Japan, according to Great Circle Mapper. The route via Greenland and Alaska is closer to 9000 miles / 14,500 km / 7800 nm, according to Google Earth. So the average speed was about 437 mph / 704 km/h / 379 kts.

Noray wrote:

SteelChair wrote:

pugman211 wrote:

Seen this article the other day and I'd like to know thoughts on it.

The A400M has just undergone its longest flight so far with a flight of 20 hours and 36 minutes according to the below link.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... st-flight/

I didn't see the mileage listed in the article, but an estimate would be about 7,500 mi. 7,500 mi/20.6 hours = 364 mph. Seems about right.

That would be the straight-line distance on a route via Sweden, Russia, China and Japan, according to Great Circle Mapper. The route via Greenland and Alaska is closer to 9000 miles / 14,500 km / 7800 nm, according to Google Earth. So the average speed was about 437 mph / 704 km/h / 379 kts.

I got the distance from great circle mapper. It was the great circle route. I agree the real wouldn't follow that curve exactly, but would have some deviations. 437 mph is very impressive imho.

SteelChair wrote:

437 mph is very impressive imho.

It's fully in line with the speeds you see every day on flight trackers. And on this flight, there were no repeated takeoff and landing phases that would lower the average speed.

The UAE seem to be interested in an order for 6 A400M. At the very least, the German government announced that they'd provide export permits.
https://esut.de/en/2023/07/meldungen/43 ... ren-osten/

889091 wrote:

How much oil does the TP400-D6 burn? That'll probably decide how long the A400M can theoretically remain airborne without having to land and the engines requiring an oil top-up.

That, and whether the waste water tank is full...

Can the rear ramp be lowered in flight?

Revelation wrote:

889091 wrote:

How much oil does the TP400-D6 burn? That'll probably decide how long the A400M can theoretically remain airborne without having to land and the engines requiring an oil top-up.

That, and whether the waste water tank is full...

Can the rear ramp be lowered in flight?

Well they can throw drones out the back so who knows what else they can throw overboard

https://youtube.com/shorts/AsE30yxNM48?feature=share3

Rut-roh:

A Royal Canadian Air Force CC-150 aircraft accidentally collided with a French A400M on the ground at the American military base in Guam.

A Canadian military transport plane crashed into a French A400M transporter at the American military base in Guam in the Pacific at the end of last week, without causing any casualties, the French Ministry of the Armed Forces announced on Tuesday.

Ref: https://airlive.net/military/2023/07/26 ... e-in-guam/

Article suggests damage to the elevators of both aircraft.

The prototype firefighter kit is back with improvments !

Press release
https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2023-12-airbus-upgrades-a400m-firefighter-prototype-kit?s=03
There's link to photo and video at the bottom.

The improvements are on the dopping efficiency, a 30% reduction of discharge time while remaining a Roll-on/Roll-off kit compatible with any existing A400M without modification, and possibility to use retardant.
Last year someone questionned the time needed for filling the tank on ground, seems that with the right equipment it can be done in 10 minutes.
Though, 10min must be the pure time of filling in water, even if David Ferro, A400M Chief Engineer confirms in his video (in spanish) the refill can be performed with engine powered up, the complete "pit stop" should take noticeably longer.

Comparating the previous version video and this one :
- the tank and its position looks similar
- the release mecanism seems different
- maybe the door itself different too but we couldn't see the previous one
- the "tube" driving water from tank to ramp section noticeably different (going from 2 rectangular section, to a single "half moon" section)

Of course not a game changer as we said before, but definitvely a nice-to-have every custmer could decide to try.

Too late to edit and add this tweet from Jean-Brice Dumont, Airbus Defense&Space Head of Military Aircraft with a nice comparative photo of a drop with the first kit, and the improved one.
https://t.co/8msmLHvC67

At the risk of showing my ignorance about the U.S. military procurement process, I'm wondering if the U.S. would ever consider adding A400M as a partial replacement for aging C-17s since that production line was shut down years ago. With ever strained R&D budgets being eaten up by inflation, I don't see the U.S. implementing another new airlifter program for the foreseeable future and many of those C-17s saw hard use over the last 20+ years with U.S. military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere. The A400M is the only currently in production Western made airlifter that can somewhat approach the C-17 in capacity and capability so I'm wondering if there may be the possibility of a U.S, buy if Airbus Military can keep the line open long enough. I'm aware that's at least a long shot, given I'm not aware of any current plans to retire any of or augment the current USAF C-17 fleet. However, some number of those frames must be approaching retirement, given the hard usage. While the U.S. traditionally hasn't bought military airplanes from other nations, I'd think it might be prudent to consider adding some number of A400Ms as time goes on to replace the high usage C-17s since the C-130J seems too small for that purpose. Does anyone know if this was ever considered? I've not found any evidence of such in articles I've read about the A400M of late. Thanks.

Considering the need to (eventually) replace both C-5 and C-17, and also the use of both for a lot of long-range TATL/TPAC missions (which the A400M isn't that good at), I'd expect the US to launch a dedicated new large airlifter program in 10 or 20 years. For the lower end, they can always buy more C-130J.
There is no evidence that the US ever seriously considered buying A400M (or anything else in its category). Politically I also suspect it would be quite suicidal unless there's absolutely no other option.