Jump to content

A-400M Thread


amalahama

Recommended Posts

At the beginning of November, first A-400M (MSN-001) has been delivered to FTC (Flight Test Center) in Seville to begin engine tests, taxi and ground runs and finally, first flight (in the middle of December I guess). Today (23rd November) the MSN-001 has completed the first ground run test.

 

Some pictures:

 

A-400M DELIVER TO FTC

 

4101048150_b004ff07cb_o.jpg

 

FIRST ENGINE START UP

 

Primerrodaje001.jpg

 

Primerrodaje003.jpg

 

Primerrodaje008.jpg

 

 

FIRST COMPLETE START UP

 

4118830751_c7ebe0e018_o.jpg

 

Regards!!

  • Like 3



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder why they chose to make it with turboprops and not conventional jet engines...

 

I can't get the "jetmania" some people seem to have.

 

Some examples of non-jet aircraft that are still very efficient?

 

C-130J Super Hercules (or even the 'old' C-130) - no jet engines, yet one of the best (and more flexible) transport aircraft.

 

EMB-314 (A-29, for friends :D) - no jet engine, but a very modern and comptetent attack aircraft (by the way, apparently USAF is interested in buying some of these bad boys. Any news on that?)

 

You need a jet engine for a supersonic air superiority fighter, for example, but for a transport, good n' ol' turboprop can do the job - and for a smaller price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turboprops tend to give a better fuels efficiency AFAIK...

 

I can't get the "jetmania" some people seem to have.

 

Some examples of non-jet aircraft that are still very efficient?

 

C-130J Super Hercules (or even the 'old' C-130) - no jet engines, yet one of the best (and more flexible) transport aircraft.

 

EMB-314 (A-29, for friends :D) - no jet engine, but a very modern and comptetent attack aircraft (by the way, apparently USAF is interested in buying some of these bad boys. Any news on that?)

 

You need a jet engine for a supersonic air superiority fighter, for example, but for a transport, good n' ol' turboprop can do the job - and for a smaller price.

 

I fully agree with you guys, but the ugly truth is that in West Europe, experience with big turboprops is practically nonexistent. A pair of Trent 700 could fit very well in the design, it would be an affordable and safe solution and performance penalty would be assumable with a less expensive and traumatic design phase.

 

In fact, A-400M is the perfect example what you must NOT do in a military aeronautical program. Fixed prices and deadlines is not the way to go for this kind of programs. However, all have to be said and technically is a nice airplane and I'm sure that, when first operational squadrons became operational, people will feel very happy with this.

 

Regards!!



Link to comment
Share on other sites

the only little default it has it can't carry heavy tanks , but it has not been designed for that . you don't bring heavy to fortune runways but to safe place only . i think the choice of the US to develop a plane able to both land on fortune runways and carry heavy payloads is mainly political , like a kind of saying to the countries if you "mess with us" we can bring heavy tanks everywhere . the A400 is a good thing for Europe because we develop our own high end military technology , the A400 is still the most powerful turboprop in the world , a nice first step .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats 1 unbelievable pit.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cockpit looks like other Airbus cockpits. It looks good however ...

Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't get the "jetmania" some people seem to have.

 

Some examples of non-jet aircraft that are still very efficient?

 

C-130J Super Hercules (or even the 'old' C-130) - no jet engines, yet one of the best (and more flexible) transport aircraft.

 

EMB-314 (A-29, for friends :D) - no jet engine, but a very modern and comptetent attack aircraft (by the way, apparently USAF is interested in buying some of these bad boys. Any news on that?)

 

You need a jet engine for a supersonic air superiority fighter, for example, but for a transport, good n' ol' turboprop can do the job - and for a smaller price.

 

I thought the EMB-314 / ALX or A29 was a Turbo prop ?

 

Looking at the most reliable source on the web, wikipedia :lol:, it says that its a turboprop and by definition a turboprop is a prop aircraft powered by a jet engine, same with the 130, all 4 engines are by definition jet engines.

 

So jetmania is all around.

 

Although I do prefer the huge radial's of ww2 aircraft, the engine on the p47 was some piece of work.


Edited by bumfire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the EMB-314 / ALX or A29 was a Turbo prop ?

 

Looking at the most reliable source on the web, wikipedia :lol:, it says that its a turboprop and by definition a turboprop is a prop aircraft powered by a jet engine, same with the 130, all 4 engines are by definition jet engines...

 

don't know where you live but in french and english definitions they say nothing similar icon_confused.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the EMB-314 / ALX or A29 was a Turbo prop ?

 

Looking at the most reliable source on the web, wikipedia :lol:, it says that its a turboprop and by definition a turboprop is a prop aircraft powered by a jet engine, same with the 130, all 4 engines are by definition jet engines.

 

So jetmania is all around.

 

Techincally... :D

 

So it kills the argument of the first guy who decided to comment on it, anyway :music_whistling:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Techincally... :D

 

So it kills the argument of the first guy who decided to comment on it, anyway :music_whistling:.

 

Yea, i miss read your post, when re-reading for the second time, i noticed you mentioned it was a turboprop, the first time i read it, i never noticed you say that and i thought you was meaning that the embraer was just a normal prop aircraft i.e similar engines to ww2 stock ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...