A400m to be canned?

[WestYorkie]

Only scanned the thread, Has this been added?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8453931.stm

Sorry if a repost.


Does sound like a game of Poker. Or buying futures by the MOD/NATO?

[thatone1967]

[quote=WestYorkie]Only scanned the thread, Has this been added?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8453931.stm

Sorry if a repost.


Does sound like a game of Poker. Or buying futures by the MOD/NATO?
[/quote]

that was the "original" post to this thread....

[Nick_F]

Mojocvh said:

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.

Hang on, it's an EADS/Airbus project - the UK lost the design and manufacturing ability for this type of aicraft fifty years ago - if, indeed, we ever had it to begin with.

[Nick_F]

hidetheelephants said:

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.

It's the F in FRES that counts.

[hidetheelephants]

Nick_F said:

hidetheelephants said:

snip

It's the F in FRES that counts.

Yes, but which future exactly? In the mean time the PBI have to make do with 432s held together with baling wire and spit, armoured landrovers and their sub-optimal replacements. Future is a willfully vague term; I could say that we have a future of nuclear fusion to look forward to. It's still 20 years from fruition, and has been for 50 odd years! FRES should never have been anything other than a research project; starting such a hugely ambitious programme to replace 1500+ armoured vehicles, most of which are overdue for replacement now, was folly. If significant amounts of hardware enter service before 2020 I'll be pleasantly surprised. I make a comparison with the FIST project; it was originally trumpeted (by ignorant politicians) as cyberwarriors kit for the 21st century or some such bullst and was to have been in initial service early this decade; unsurprisingly it never happened like that(the BOWMAN radio was a large part of it), it morphed into a longterm research and development programme with slightly nebulous goals and no discernable timetable.

[Nick_F]

Oh, I agree. The F will be a permanent feature of the project. We're already below the minimum sustainable fleet size for CR2 and Warrior and all the panic buying of assorted armoured trucks and re-worked 432s, never mind the mods required to make Warrior and CR2 fit(ish) for FIBUA mean that there's little or no chance of a home-grown, ground-up replacement for either.

[hidetheelephants]

Nick_F said:

Mojocvh said:

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.

Hang on, it's an EADS/Airbus project - the UK lost the design and manufacturing ability for this type of aicraft fifty years ago - if, indeed, we ever had it to begin with.

We did, although we did get carried away some times

[Nick_F]

On the basis of that Wiki page I'd have to disagree - the track record of the Belfast suggests we didn't have a clue...

[hidetheelephants]

Nick_F said:

On the basis of that Wiki page I'd have to disagree - the track record of the Belfast suggests we didn't have a clue...

A little unfair; the Lockheed C5 was a bloated budgethog, it was late and beset with technical problems. Historically, most aircraft programmes are; precious few have come in on time or budget.Three criteria: cheap, technically advanced, on time; pick any 2, because you can't have all 3.