A400m

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Germany and the UK have reduced their orders, do you think that that also influenced the production rate?
The German reduction (by 7 aircraft) was transferred into an option in 2010/2011, i.e. Germany could in theory still buy that from the line (if the option is still active). Not sure if that was also the case for the UK.

For Germany the 2018 delivery problems which led to reduced production were actually fortunate - even if you won't hear that said out loud. By that point Germany had received 36 aircraft out of 40 for the air transport wing at Wunstorf (the remaining 4 were delivered 2018-2020).

The other 13 of the remaining 17 aircraft to be delivered at that point were considered surplus by the German Air Force and Germany had tried to sell them internationally without finding customers since ca 2015. The interim solution to that problem was that the Air Force was supposed to operate them until they could be pooled into an international squadron for which partners had yet to be found. Of course as long as Airbus doesn't actually deliver Germany also doesn't have the operating costs for them, that's why from the German perspective it was always "no problem" if Airbus wanted to stretch that final delivery to 2026.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
|"Michael Schoellhorn, the CEO of the Airbus Defence and Space division, said that poor availability remains an issue for the A400M, but that the issue is being addressed as the company looks to build on the first two export contracts for 15 years that it secured during recent months."|

This is indeed something which has to be taken care of, if not, then these two contracts will be the last ones the coming 15 years.

 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Some A400M news.
The UK wants to add more A400Ms on top the 22 now on order.

And this test was quite successful.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
Some A400M news.
The UK wants to add more A400Ms on top the 22 now on order.

And this test was quite successful.
I wonder if they will bump the numbers up to the original 25 or go beyond. I think they'll go above 25, they have 14 C-130's leaving the fleet next year.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #205
Air Forces with tired Hercs will now give the A400 close consideration. A400s could also be useful in taking on some C-17 missions thus extending C-17 lifetimes, an asset that can’t be replaced at present and any future design is likely 20 years at least.
 

OldTex

Active Member
Air Forces with tired Hercs will now give the A400 close consideration. A400s could also be useful in taking on some C-17 missions thus extending C-17 lifetimes, an asset that can’t be replaced at present and any future design is likely 20 years at least.
I don't see a reason why current users of C-130 aircraft would now consider the A-400 as a replacement for 'tired' C-130s as the production line has not closed. If the users have a requirement or ambition to acquire a strategic airlifter then perhaps the A-400 may come into contention. Users who have both C-130 and C-17 in their fleet are unlikely to go to the A-400 as an intermediate/crossover airlifter. I acknowledge that the RAF have exactly that fleet mix, but most things the UK do don't make a lot of sense (even though they intend to retire the C-130J aircraft they have).
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #207
I don't see a reason why current users of C-130 aircraft would now consider the A-400 as a replacement for 'tired' C-130s as the production line has not closed. If the users have a requirement or ambition to acquire a strategic airlifter then perhaps the A-400 may come into contention. Users who have both C-130 and C-17 in their fleet are unlikely to go to the A-400 as an intermediate/crossover airlifter. I acknowledge that the RAF have exactly that fleet mix, but most things the UK do don't make a lot of sense (even though they intend to retire the C-130J aircraft they have).
I have to disagree. The A400 is more tactical than strategic IMO so for customers that have ever increasing kit weight, the A400 has an advantage over the Herc. Canada screwed up on only acquiring 5 C-17s which are in constant use. Any capability that assists in minimizing there use in order to extend service life is a good investment. The A400 can do this better than the C-130. Guessing the RAF thinks this is true as well. Let’s face it, with generous funding, all three would be nice.
 

koxinga

Active Member
Whether Singapore will be next. The B/Hs are long in the tooth. Given the amount of humanitarian missions they fly on top of the operational missions, I would be surprised if they can continue to operate them for the next 10 years.

The humanitarian missions would have given RSAF considerable insights into what they need and the additional capacity would certainly be handy.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
South Korea’s Defense Project Promotion Committee has approved a 710 billion won (about US$580 million) project to purchase foreign-made transport planes by 2026. For this project, Airbus' A400M, Embraer's C390 and Lockheed Martin's C130J are expected to compete.
Will be interesting to see which way the ROKAF go. I would think that the C390 is the outsider because even though it looks good on paper and probably is, it doesn't have a strong user base. This is a shame because I quite like the platform and it showed a lot of promise until Boeing done the dirty on Embraer and pulled out of their deal.
 

kiwipatriot69

Active Member
I'd like to see these proposed again to replace our RNZAF Boeing 757,they a bit long in the tooth already and three of them would avoid the issues of unavailabilty we've had with them
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #212
I'd like to see these proposed again to replace our RNZAF Boeing 757,they a bit long in the tooth already and three of them would avoid the issues of unavailabilty we've had with them
Different application, a 757 replacement could be a A321XLR. If something larger is needed then perhaps add in a refuelling requirement and get MRTTs (based on A330).
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Different application, a 757 replacement could be a A321XLR. If something larger is needed then perhaps add in a refuelling requirement and get MRTTs (based on A330).
The B757 is the current NZDF strategic airlift capability so the likes of the A400M & KHI C-2 are very much in the mix.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #214
The B757 is the current NZDF strategic airlift capability so the likes of the A400M & KHI C-2 are very much in the mix.
Does the B757 also have a VIP role? If so, perhaps pollies will have to order noise isolation headphones for their A400M or C-2 trips.
 

kiwipatriot69

Active Member
Does the B757 also have a VIP role? If so, perhaps pollies will have to order noise isolation headphones for their A400M or C-2 trips.

Lol. Seriously though , surely the A400 M could be fitted out temporarily when required for the role, the 757 does have a dual passenger and cargo role after all.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #216
Lol. Seriously though , surely the A400 M could be fitted out temporarily when required for the role, the 757 does have a dual passenger and cargo role after all.
Perhaps a couple of long range Bombardier or Gulfstream business jets make more sense than back and forth VIP fitting out of military strategic air lifters.
 

kiwipatriot69

Active Member
Perhaps a couple of long range Bombardier or Gulfstream business jets make more sense than back and forth VIP fitting out of military strategic air lifters.

Agreed . But I can imagine the meal press and opposition mps would make of a PM approving a luxury passenger jet for his/ her benefit.
 
Top