A400m to be canned?

[thatone1967]

The project is now 5bn euros ($7.25bn; £4.5bn) over its initial budget as a result of weight and engine problems.


Airbus will sit down with representatives from countries that have placed orders for the A400M later this week to discuss additional financing.

I cannot see UK plc coughing up any more money...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8453931.stm

Edited by thatone1967 on Tuesday 12th January 19:17

Edited by thatone1967 on Tuesday 12th January 19:17

[Eric Mc]

Only Euro 5 bn - not a problem.

Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 12th January 19:23

[bobthemonkey]

I say sod it and order more C130Js (1:1 replacement for the old K's) and meet the top end of the A400M role with more C17s.

[Mojocvh]

bobthemonkey said:

I say sod it and order more C130Js (1:1 replacement for the old K's) and meet the top end of the A400M role with more C17s.

Bul****Bob strikes again.
There are operational factors, well beyond your comprehension, that will rule your argument out.

[Nick_F]

Has the FLA ever been a good idea?

[n1ckt001]

They got it in the air for the first time last month though, no?

[anonymous-user]

What's the cause of the performance issues with the A400M. Is it an Engine or an increased weight problem?

[anonymous-user]

n1ckt001 said:

They got it in the air for the first time last month though, no?

I think it can fly but can't carry enough of the army stuff.

[remedy]

I think the problems are related to the interfaces with the engine. The engines themselves are very good but there's problems communicating with them.

[Nick_F]

Wiki says it's 12 tons overweight.

[anonymous-user]

Nick_F said:

Wiki says it's 12 tons overweight.

wiki said:

The German newspaper Financial Times Deutschland has closely followed the A400M program and reported on 12 January 2009 that the aircraft is overweight by 12 tons and may not be able to achieve a critical performance requirement, the ability to airlift 32 tons. Sources told FTD that, currently, the aircraft can only lift 29 tons, which is insufficient to carry a modern armored infantry fighting vehicle. The FTD report prompted the chief of the German Air Force to say, "That is a disastrous development," and could delay deliveries to the Luftwaffe until 2014

ouch!

What's going to happen in 2014 that will make it then suitable for the Luftwaffe? They can't shave off 12 tons? Perhaps it's the engine improvements?

Anyway good luck anyone here who's involved in it!

[IforB]

12 tons overweight......Fark me. That is a fat Albert.

Edited by IforB on Tuesday 12th January 21:11

[Mojocvh]

el stovey said:

Nick_F said:

Wiki says it's 12 tons overweight.

wiki said:

The German newspaper Financial Times Deutschland has closely followed the A400M program and reported on 12 January 2009 that the aircraft is overweight by 12 tons and may not be able to achieve a critical performance requirement, the ability to airlift 32 tons. Sources told FTD that, currently, the aircraft can only lift 29 tons, which is insufficient to carry a modern armored infantry fighting vehicle. The FTD report prompted the chief of the German Air Force to say, "That is a disastrous development," and could delay deliveries to the Luftwaffe until 2014

ouch!

What's going to happen in 2014 that will make it then suitable for the Luftwaffe? They can't shave off 12 tons? Perhaps it's the engine improvements?

Anyway good luck anyone here who's involved in it!

EFA

"insufficient to carry a modern GERMAN armored infantry fighting vehicle" which actually is fair enough really.

It was a total lack of oversight by the original management team that has caused this "knock on" effect today.

[n1ckt001]

Mojocvh said:

el stovey said:

Nick_F said:

Wiki says it's 12 tons overweight.

wiki said:

The German newspaper Financial Times Deutschland has closely followed the A400M program and reported on 12 January 2009 that the aircraft is overweight by 12 tons and may not be able to achieve a critical performance requirement, the ability to airlift 32 tons. Sources told FTD that, currently, the aircraft can only lift 29 tons, which is insufficient to carry a modern armored infantry fighting vehicle. The FTD report prompted the chief of the German Air Force to say, "That is a disastrous development," and could delay deliveries to the Luftwaffe until 2014

ouch!

What's going to happen in 2014 that will make it then suitable for the Luftwaffe? They can't shave off 12 tons? Perhaps it's the engine improvements?

Anyway good luck anyone here who's involved in it!

EFA

"insufficient to carry a modern GERMAN armored infantry fighting vehicle" which actually is fair enough really.

It was a total lack of oversight by the original management team that has caused this "knock on" effect today.

Enders indicated in the video (well, he said, and I inferred) that a huge part was down to politics, and trying to please all the NatCo's, and their respective governments influenced the subcontractor selection policy for the design and manufacture heavily....

[aeropilot]

The only real problem with the A400M is that Airbus, grossly underestimated the whole project, having no real previous mil a/c building experience, and also agreed a fixed price contract, with it's clients.
Airbus are therfore now saying....excuse me, but we fecked up the price, we need some more dosh to finish it.

The trouble is having already forked out what they have, canning it and then having to buy something else on top, is it really going to be the cheaper option for all said Gubbermints involved...?

Glad I'm not making the decision.

[hidetheelephants]

Nick_F said:

Wiki says it's 12 tons overweight.

The definitive source of aviation facts & wisdom...

The various AFs have signed up to buy it because of an evaluated need, not because of the pork barrel(although it never hurts...) or because 'it looks nice'. The C130 is a 60 year old design that's reached the end of the line, and is too small internally for many of the loads that the military wish moved from A to B. A lot of the excess structure weight is 'puppy fat' which will be lost before production starts, and the powerplant has plenty of development available to take care of what's left over. The original requirement, to be able to haul FRES(oh where art thou?) and other heavy armoured things, was always a bit pie in the sky anyway so no surprise if it struggles to meet it. Even at this early development stage, it offers a quantum leap in lift capability over the hercs and a massive saving in overhaul/maintenance overhead.

[ben_h100]

If you google last weeks meeting in parliament by a Wiltshire MP, who is trying to put forward a case for keeping RAF Lyneham open, there is some information on the alleged flaws of the A400M. One of which is the fact that the main British army armoured vehicle won't actually fit in the thing.

Linky:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/...

[Nick_F]

hidetheelephants said:

Nick_F said:

Wiki says it's 12 tons overweight.

The definitive source of aviation facts & wisdom...

The various AFs have signed up to buy it because of an evaluated need, not because of the pork barrel(although it never hurts...) or because 'it looks nice'. The C130 is a 60 year old design that's reached the end of the line, and is too small internally for many of the loads that the military wish moved from A to B. A lot of the excess structure weight is 'puppy fat' which will be lost before production starts, and the powerplant has plenty of development available to take care of what's left over. The original requirement, to be able to haul FRES(oh where art thou?) and other heavy armoured things, was always a bit pie in the sky anyway so no surprise if it struggles to meet it. Even at this early development stage, it offers a quantum leap in lift capability over the hercs and a massive saving in overhaul/maintenance overhead.

Financial Times Deutschland said:

A400M is 12 tons overweight.

Better?

If the original requirement was 'pie in the sky' then what's the point of the thing? Will it really, at the current likely cost, be a cheaper solution than a C130/C17 mix?

[Mojocvh]

Nick_F said:

hidetheelephants said:

Nick_F said:

Wiki says it's 12 tons overweight.

The definitive source of aviation facts & wisdom...

The various AFs have signed up to buy it because of an evaluated need, not because of the pork barrel(although it never hurts...) or because 'it looks nice'. The C130 is a 60 year old design that's reached the end of the line, and is too small internally for many of the loads that the military wish moved from A to B. A lot of the excess structure weight is 'puppy fat' which will be lost before production starts, and the powerplant has plenty of development available to take care of what's left over. The original requirement, to be able to haul FRES(oh where art thou?) and other heavy armoured things, was always a bit pie in the sky anyway so no surprise if it struggles to meet it. Even at this early development stage, it offers a quantum leap in lift capability over the hercs and a massive saving in overhaul/maintenance overhead.

Financial Times Deutschland said:

A400M is 12 tons overweight.

Better?

If the original requirement was 'pie in the sky' then what's the point of the thing? Will it really, at the current likely cost, be a cheaper solution than a C130/C17 mix?

Well, it may come down to whether we REALLY want to give up design and manufacturing.
In any case the hemorrhage of skills in the UK aviation industry accelerates even further.

[hidetheelephants]

Nick_F said:

hidetheelephants said:

stuff

Financial Times Deutschland said:

A400M is 12 tons overweight.

Better?

If the original requirement was 'pie in the sky' then what's the point of the thing? Will it really, at the current likely cost, be a cheaper solution than a C130/C17 mix?

I've not read anything convincing that stated it would be cheaper, on capital cost anyway; if that was the only criteria we would have some Globemasters and C130Js on order. They had a bit of a fright when they realised how expensive C17s are to run. The state of play at the moment seems to be, 'We're broke and we don't know what the fk we're doing, but let's have some of each anyway'. By the time the A400M arrives at Lyneham/Brize, the current C17s and the remaining C130J fleet will be so wornout as to be fit for the knackers' yard. The C130Ks should already be retired with A400M in replacement, it's a wonder those things keep flying. Basically it's a huge stty mess, otherwise laughingly referred to as Defence Procurement Planning.

The FRES/AFV airmobility thing was always going to be a bit of a joke; we simply can't afford such frippery.

FRES is a nice idea which we can't afford and we don't yet have the technology for; an C3I integrated armoured combat system for the 21st century. The chaps who thought it up have been watching too much SciFi; it screams 'Starship Troopers' and 'Aliens'. Magic active armour, all-electric drive with fuel cell technology, broad spectrum sensors throughout the vehicle joined to others via secure datalinks eliminating the fog of war, all of which allows 25-30tonne AFVs to replace 70 tonne MBTs and 40tonne APCs alike. If they had specified that it fling ste at the moon it would not surprise me. What we ended up with is a large waste of money and no prospect of any new hardware courtesy of Geoff 'the ' Hoon.

Someone should have pointed out that we don't do airmobility; we don't have enough aircraft. We could fly forward a few AFVs, but they wouldn't have any fuel so they become expensive impractical paperweights. Farce? No, it's not funny enough. Even the Americans only airlift heavy armoured things in emergencies, the rest of the time they get hauled around on ships and on Halliburton's overpriced lowloaders.

So to summarise; we're buying A400M because it will lift stuff tactically and be cheaper to run than hercs. One of it's missions is lugging FRES which doesn't exist yet and will probably be overweight, and doesn't really need lugging as it's a waste of airlift capacity. We don't do Airmobility because we're too poor.