Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

EADS: USAF can buy 118 A400Ms with savings from C-130, C-5 retirements
Flightglobal ^ | 02/19/2010 | Stephen Trimble

Posted on 02/20/2010 8:27:23 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld

EADS North America has offered a plan for the US Air Force to purchase 118 Airbus A400Ms using savings from retiring most Lockheed Martin C-130Hs and all C-5As.

The EADS proposal was submitted last year to the Air Mobility Command (AMC) upon their request, says Neil F. Smith, director of A400M programme for EADS NA.

The concept proposes to stand-up about eight squadrons of A400Ms within the US mobility force structure, Smith says. "We get a very good reception" at AMC, Smith says.

EADS has been seeking to introduce the A400M in the US market for several years, arguing that the increasing size of ground vehicles has out-grown the box size of Lockheed's C-130. The A400M features a 3.96m (13ft) cabin diameter, versus the C-130 family's 2.74m-wide cargo bay.

The size difference would allow the army to load an armoured Stryker vehicle on the A400M, Smith says.

In response, a Lockheed executive challenged EADS' assumptions about the cost of the A400M, especially with the programme currently in negotiations with European governments over a reportedly $7 billion cost overrun.

"I think that's the ultimate in fuzzy math," says Jim Grant, Lockheed vice president of business development for air mobility and special operations programmes.

Despite the ongoing uncertainty about the programme's financing, EADS plans to continue making a big push in the US market. One of the programme's test aircraft could even travel to the US in early 2011 for a marketing tour, the company says.

(Excerpt) Read more at flightglobal.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: a400m; aerospace; airbus; airmobilitycommand; amc; boeing; c130; cc5; eads; gates; plasticplanes; usaf
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-163 next last
To: antiRepublicrat

I have already been corrected in a previous post


41 posted on 02/20/2010 10:03:56 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

I have already been corrected in a previous post


42 posted on 02/20/2010 10:04:06 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

I have already been corrected in a previous post


43 posted on 02/20/2010 10:04:26 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

There was a report a month ago on the subject but i don’t remember from whom.


44 posted on 02/20/2010 10:16:35 PM PST by rbosque (11 year Freeper! Combat Economist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Doc91678
As it appears, the A400M will need improved runways

If the A400M can't take off and land pretty much anywhere then we shouldn't even consider it. Hell, can an A400M do this?


45 posted on 02/20/2010 10:39:31 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

No sh*t! That program is under crisis with engine failures and risking chance to be unable to enter military service. If USAF needed 40t class transport, we just need to bring back Hanoi Taxi! We already got our own C-130J and don’t need those.


46 posted on 02/20/2010 11:08:01 PM PST by Wiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
A400M is not a counterpart of C-130J, but rather a counterpart of C-141 Starlifter in payload, at least in spec of the A400M, which is currently overestimated with lack of power of the engine. I believe we should build updated C-141 Starlifters and sell them to Europe to provide an alternative to the dead A400M.
47 posted on 02/20/2010 11:14:44 PM PST by Wiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
Fat chance, EADS. The C-17 Globemaster III line is still open and it's far more likely that we could see additional follow-on orders for the C-17 to replace the oldest C-5's instead of buying the A400M.
48 posted on 02/20/2010 11:23:51 PM PST by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wiz

Instead of the old 141, do what the Russians are doing, buy more IL-76. Cheaper option even.

I have worked with this A/C very imressive and can use unimporved field, does not need specialty ground equipment and so on.

OTOH, nothing so sweet as the roar of 4 turoprops in full reverse and knowing your ride back home as arrived...


49 posted on 02/20/2010 11:35:41 PM PST by ASOC (In case of attack, tune to 640 kilocycles or 1240 kilocycles on your AM dial.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

lol


50 posted on 02/20/2010 11:51:13 PM PST by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Js are being built.


51 posted on 02/20/2010 11:52:46 PM PST by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Red6

Yes. I have already been informed. Thanks


52 posted on 02/20/2010 11:53:19 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88

The C17 can carry a tank.

A400 can’t.

Done.


53 posted on 02/20/2010 11:58:20 PM PST by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88

C-5s are being upgraded with new engines and cockpits.


54 posted on 02/21/2010 12:09:40 AM PST by Always Independent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
The A400, another great EADS product like the 16 year late EF, A380, Herkules (Their versions on FBCB2)...... will be OK as tactical airlift within a theater of operation. This airframe will not be worth much for strategic lift. Lack of range, payload, unable to load a MBT, Self propelled howitzer........ No way can it fill the shoes of either C-5 or C-17.
55 posted on 02/21/2010 12:12:02 AM PST by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red6

And the fact the production line jigs are ready to crank out an additional 80-120 planes (at reasonable cost per plane) to replace the oldest C-130’s and C-5’s means buying more C-17’s are the cheapest option.


56 posted on 02/21/2010 4:04:18 AM PST by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Always Independent

Alas, we’ll miss the famous loud whine of the TF39 engines on the C-5A’s and C-5B’s. The C-5M—using the same CF6-80C2 engine found on many modern airliners—sounds like a 747-400 on takeoff.


57 posted on 02/21/2010 4:22:51 AM PST by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Red6

The A400M can carry the Army’s fancy new Stryker and MRAP vehicles, the C-130J cannot.

An improved C-130 “widebody” has been discussed by Lockheed Martin, but they are too cash strapped dealing with the F-35 cost overruns to fund the design themselves.

Currently, the Air Force is using C-17s to move these vehicles aroun in theater, which is a waste of the C-17s purpose as a strategic airlifter, not a tactical one.

In order to accomodate these new land vehicles, either the US would have to sink a few billion into development of a C-130XL, have a contest for a new design, or buy the A400M off the shelf at very attractive prices.

The cheapest and quickest solution is to purchase some A400Ms to retire our oldest C-130s.

There is also an avionics update and re-engineing program for the C-5. It was determined by the bean counters that the oldest C-5As were too old to last long enough for the re-engineing to pay for itself, so only the C-5Bs are being upgraded to C-5Ms. As the older C-5As are retires, something needs to fill that gap.


58 posted on 02/21/2010 6:43:22 AM PST by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: OCC

Bet you could make a heck of a smoothie with those props.


59 posted on 02/21/2010 6:46:37 AM PST by Tijeras_Slim (Live jubtabulously!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88
The C-17 Globemaster III line is still open

I swear I saw somewhere that zero's budget kills the C-17. Am I wrong?

60 posted on 02/21/2010 6:56:19 AM PST by 6ppc (It's torch and pitchfork time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-163 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson