PDA

View Full Version : The A400M flies



CBris
December 11th, 2009, 06:50
Airbus has managed it at last... the A400M flies - years after we had one flying in the simulator:

http://www.n24.de/news/newsitem_5648904.html?id=726599&autoplay=true

OK, so the commentary is in German... ignore it.

Z-claudius24
December 11th, 2009, 06:55
Hi,

More .. in english :)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=akUhTaflF17Q

And in french .. the native language of Airbus :)

http://www.rfi.fr/contenu/20091211-premier-vol-dessai-reussi-la400m-lavion-transport-militaire-europeen

CBris
December 11th, 2009, 07:01
And on you tube without commentary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oX-kIUYRyDk

CBris
December 11th, 2009, 07:03
Oh, by the way, French is NOT the native language of Airbus - even if my French colleagues would like to think so. There is a formal Airbus instruction that says it's English ;)

Z-claudius24
December 11th, 2009, 07:14
Hi,

More precisely a French - German - English speaking plane :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus

This is the flying prototype livery

http://i49.tinypic.com/103ivif.jpg

Ferry_vO
December 11th, 2009, 07:23
If I understand it correctly the delays were not Airbus' fault, but rather a result of problems during the development of the engines.

:)

Bjoern
December 11th, 2009, 09:03
Finally!

The A400M was close to becoming Europe's 787. :kilroy:

Ferry_vO
December 11th, 2009, 09:48
Finally!

The A400M was close to becoming Europe's 787. :kilroy:

Sorta like the A380 you mean..?

(P.s. Don't let this turn into a Boeing vs. Airbus thread!)

Bjoern
December 11th, 2009, 10:14
Sorta like the A380 you mean..?

...and countless other designs before them...



(P.s. Don't let this turn into a Boeing vs. Airbus thread!)

No intention to do so. I like 'em both.

6297J
December 11th, 2009, 10:25
I guess the real question is how long will it be before Captain Sim or PMDG make one!

And which developer would you prefer (bearing in mind you won't want to wait as long as the British Forces have for the real one)?

Who would do it justice??

NoNewMessages
December 11th, 2009, 10:51
Flight1 has made mention of this being in development, but the last "official" statement was last year. Release in mid to late 2010??

http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=25323

Bjoern
December 11th, 2009, 11:31
I guess the real question is how long will it be before Captain Sim or PMDG make one!

And which developer would you prefer (bearing in mind you won't want to wait as long as the British Forces have for the real one)?

Who would do it justice??

Wilco already did one ages ago.

Z-claudius24
December 11th, 2009, 11:58
Hi,

My screen is the Wilco A400M

6297J
December 11th, 2009, 12:13
Wilco already did one ages ago.

I must have been washing my hair.

Wing_Z
December 11th, 2009, 12:55
Thanks for the HU, Chris.
A deeply troubled military project...sound familiar?
27 years in the making, and a ransom of 5 billion Euros to continue with it, and save the jobs spread across Europe.
Would it be too far off the mark to suggest a buy of C-17's, and then pay the Airbus workforce to dig holes and fill them in, for the rest of their lives? :kilroy:

CBris
December 11th, 2009, 13:09
Thanks for the HU, Chris.
A deeply troubled military project...sound familiar?
27 years in the making, and a ransom of 5 billion Euros to continue with it, and save the jobs spread across Europe.
Would it be too far off the mark to suggest a buy of C-17's, and then pay the Airbus workforce to dig holes and fill them in, for the rest of their lives? :kilroy:

Probably, but don't forget, we aircraft builders are a proud bunch - holes don't fly, so we were happy with the ransom.

Same as the NH 90, the Eurofighter, even the EH101...

Mind you, she does look damn good in flight - for a BUFF. I even caught myself smiling - even though I hold zero for a military machine made of plastics. That black stuff isn't sodjer-proof and not easy to repair in the field.

Toastmaker
December 11th, 2009, 13:28
Admittedly, I don't know much about this airplane - but, it looks a hell of a lot like a prop-driven C-17.

Why would someone want one of those?

CBris
December 11th, 2009, 13:42
The A400M is considerably (well, OK, noticeably) smaller and fits a different market. To tell the truth, I don't like the idea of "plastic" planes for military uses, but a prop jobbie is easier on the purse strings for maintenance and can land on "dirtier" terrain than a C17. Anyway, I guess the plastic (i.e. carbon fibre) may prove its worth, despite a soldier's misgivings.

It's just "horses for courses" - the buying airforces don't need the capacity of a C17 and a Herc is not on their radar for various reasons.

Toastmaker
December 11th, 2009, 14:02
Ok - that helps ease my lack of understanding. Thanks -

viking3
December 11th, 2009, 14:29
Anyway, I guess the plastic (i.e. carbon fibre) may prove its worth, despite a soldier's misgivings.

After 20 years of playing around A-320's I can say that your concerns about carbon fibre are right. It easy to damage, hard to repair PROPERLY, and very hard to determime if defective some times(tap test?):wiggle:. The repairs can be very intricate requiring vacuum bags or autoclaves, and just about every material used is carcenigenic:running:.

Regards, Rob:ernae:

Wing_Z
December 12th, 2009, 11:45
...It's just "horses for courses" - the buying airforces don't need the capacity of a C17 and a Herc is not on their radar for various reasons.
So they say...interesting to note the C-17 is seen as a "strategic" airlifter, but is often used tactically.
The RAF rented a few, and liked them so much they ended up with a buy!
I'm pretty sure the C-17 could do everything the A400M is imagined to do, at a fraction of the lifetime cost.

Of course I am biased, because I just love my Alphasim C-17 even without avionics :kilroy:

CBris
December 12th, 2009, 13:14
The C17 can probably lift more and cheaper. There is probably a slight European bias when you look at the list of buyers...

Buying aeroplanes is more a political thing than what the soldiers themselves would like to see... I remember being giving my first Gazelle and thinking "What the heck is up with my bosses? Why can't we have a BO105 - or even (horrors) an Eceureil? That is a far more soldierproof chopper."

After you've done BDR on a Westland Scout, a Gazelle, a Lynx or even an Auster or a Beaver, you'll know why the techs and pilots prefer "traditional" construction.

BDR - Battle Damage Repair - get the plane flying asap...

I know the techs were happy with the hercy bird. But we helicopter techs hated having to have to take the main rotor heads (and even gearboxes) off our choppers for a simple airlift.

OK, I have had my moans... You've got to admit though, the A400M looks sexy...

Wing_Z
December 12th, 2009, 15:29
... You've got to admit though, the A400M looks sexy...
Crikey...you've been working around aircraft too long... ;)
Looking at those fans - half of which appear to be on backward! I assume this beast runs quietly?

cheezyflier
December 12th, 2009, 18:56
i love those props. :applause:

i would suspect "quiet" is a relative term when applied to this plane

CBris
December 12th, 2009, 19:04
That's "DBE" for the props... (Down Between Engines). It means separate gearboxes for two of the four engines, but you can imagine what a balancing effect this will have on things like harmonic vibration, noise, wear...

Panther_99FS
December 12th, 2009, 20:48
Outstanding! :guinness::ernae:

mike_cyul
December 13th, 2009, 04:44
That's a whole lot of whirling black bananas out there. :)


Mike