Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Airbus A400M

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • LH-B744
    replied
    Originally posted by seahawk View Post
    With drive into, I literally mean drive into and more importantly out without any ground equipment. The 747 does need ground equipment to lift the cargo to the level of the hold.
    Do we know 1 landing of an A400M on our beloved home airport? Afaik, No. And which aircraft do we love the most. If you ask me, only two occasions are acceptable:
    1. A/C which regularly or at least once a year visit our home airport. The Boeing 747? Iron Maiden has performed quite a famous landing here, a few months ago. But the newest news are made by my favorite airline:
    The only bad colored LH B747 on my home airport, February 2018
    427 views and zero likes. I know liveries which have gathered more views and more likes...

    2. A/C which are famous due to one or two avatars. But until today, I have not seen 1 jetphotos forum member which has chosen an A400M as his avatar. The F-4 Phantom. Is it true that we always choose a/c which are older than we are? If you ask me, that's not the case. B744 inauguration flight 1989. Back then I was 11 years old.

    If I had to choose a military avatar, that is the F-16 Falcon, inauguration in August 1978. I like a/c which are younger than me.

    [Off topic content deleted by the author.]

    Leave a comment:


  • seahawk
    replied
    Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
    Hm. Are you sure? I mean, I understand what you write.
    [The topic was a LH-B744 instead of an A400M, because afaik, a B747 never failed to fly a defense secretary (or higher)
    from a point where B747s are able to take off to let's say an US Air Force Base.]

    I agree, a Panamera probably is not a frequent guest in a LH-B744. But the problem wasn't either to transport a Panamera or a BMW M5. The task was to transport...
    humans, or 1 special human.

    And for this task, a B747 is not so very bad. You can ask Washington.
    With drive into, I literally mean drive into and more importantly out without any ground equipment. The 747 does need ground equipment to lift the cargo to the level of the hold.

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    you can not drive a Boxer or Puma into it
    Hm. Are you sure? I mean, I understand what you write.
    [The topic was a LH-B744 instead of an A400M, because afaik, a B747 never failed to fly a defense secretary (or higher)
    from a point where B747s are able to take off to let's say an US Air Force Base.]

    I agree, a Panamera probably is not a frequent guest in a LH-B744. But the problem wasn't either to transport a Panamera or a BMW M5. The task was to transport...
    humans, or 1 special human.

    And for this task, a B747 is not so very bad. You can ask Washington.

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    Originally posted by seahawk View Post
    Hello,

    as much as we like your enthusiasm about aviation, let me put a few things right.

    1. no A400M of the Luftwaffe has been written off
    2. a 747 would surely make a fantastic looking transport aircraft for the Luftwaffe (even more so in the colours of the "Silberne Gans") but unfortunately you can not drive a Boxer or Puma into it and land at an semi-prepared airstrip afterwards.
    3. And that is the big point. Please show respect towards other users and our crew members. Your English is sometimes hard to understand, so misunderstandings do happen and your posts are often not understandable for persons who do not speak German and English.

    Thank your for your understanding.
    This is an old topic. And If we now have a look at my #9 here, I still wonder how somebody else than me, and if you ask me today, only me, is able to appear in MY edit post message!
    I understand, that jetphotos crew members don't necessarily use their last names, so it is Brian and Stefan, instead of ... (not so very important).

    And imho, this topic here is also older than my last online encounter with Seahawk! In my eyes there is only 1 judge here at jetphotos. And this is
    Seahawk.
    Not only because he's longer here than Brian.

    Respect does not depend on age, if you ask me. It depends on social competence. This is the reason why Seahawk is an administrator. And no one else in this topic!

    PS: Administrators probably have the right to appear in my very personal edit post message. But only because I like him. Was it such an evil edit post message, so that
    1 Super Moderator
    plus
    1 administrator
    felt challenged to overwrite themselves?! Most of the time, I think that I'm rather unimportant. (!)

    After all, we should have a nice weekend now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter Kesternich
    replied
    Originally posted by seahawk View Post
    (...) Please show respect towards other users and our crew members. Your English is sometimes hard to understand, so misunderstandings do happen and your posts are often not understandable for persons who do not speak German and English.

    Thank your for your understanding.
    Amen to that!

    Leave a comment:


  • brianw999
    replied
    Thank you Stefan.

    Leave a comment:


  • seahawk
    replied
    Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
    You know that I decided to (not mention your nickname) during a question which a real jetphotos junior (during his very first forum entry here?!) tried to ask.. Is IAH really stronger than ORD. My first thought was, that's your question!

    Back on topic. Well. I have to live in the country where at least 2 domestic A400M pilots had to stay overnight (or more than 1 night) in the desert, because the A400M which was scheduled to take these two active pilots home (plus a rather unimportant person from the German Defense Ministry),
    provided a failure so that this A400M had to be declared a write-off.
    [I.e. Nobody on the planet was able to repair that bird in the desert!]

    And then, what happened. I know, that I wrote,

    I haven't heard something like that concerning my nickname. Why don't we use a LH-B744 to rescue these people?


    Please do not attack other members of the forum of of the jepthotos crew. Thank you for your understanding. -seahawk
    Hello,

    as much as we like your enthusiasm about aviation, let me put a few things right.

    1. no A400M of the Luftwaffe has been written off
    2. a 747 would surely make a fantastic looking transport aircraft for the Luftwaffe (even more so in the colours of the "Silberne Gans") but unfortunately you can not drive a Boxer or Puma into it and land at an semi-prepared airstrip afterwards.
    3. And that is the big point. Please show respect towards other users and our crew members. Your English is sometimes hard to understand, so misunderstandings do happen and your posts are often not understandable for persons who do not speak German and English.

    Thank your for your understanding.

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    Originally posted by Highkeas View Post
    The C-300J and the A400M are both turbo props which I consider to be jets.

    One of the cost drivers with the A400M is that it needs engines/props of different configuration - two where the prop rotates clockwise and two where the prop rotates anti-clockwise; this arrangement counteracts propeller torque. This engine configuration was controversial from the beginning of the program.
    You know that I decided to (not mention your nickname) during a question which a real jetphotos junior (during his very first forum entry here?!) tried to ask.. Is IAH really stronger than ORD. My first thought was, that's your question!

    Back on topic. Well. I have to live in the country where at least 2 domestic A400M pilots had to stay overnight (or more than 1 night) in the desert, because the A400M which was scheduled to take these two active pilots home (plus a rather unimportant person from the German Defense Ministry),
    provided a failure so that this A400M had to be declared a write-off.
    [I.e. Nobody on the planet was able to repair that bird in the desert!]

    And then, what happened. I know, that I wrote,

    I haven't heard something like that concerning my nickname. Why don't we use a LH-B744 to rescue these people?


    Please do not attack other members of the forum of of the jepthotos crew. Thank you for your understanding. -seahawk
    Last edited by seahawk; 2018-04-01, 16:38.

    Leave a comment:


  • Highkeas
    replied
    Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
    ............ Today I have learned, that an A400M is not a jet, but it isn't either a slow propeller. .................
    The C-300J and the A400M are both turbo props which I consider to be jets.

    One of the cost drivers with the A400M is that it needs engines/props of different configuration - two where the prop rotates clockwise and two where the prop rotates anti-clockwise; this arrangement counteracts propeller torque. This engine configuration was controversial from the beginning of the program.

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    Originally posted by HalcyonDays View Post
    Why has the A400 not been a success ? Poor management by Airbus. They were unable to determine whether it should be more a C130 or a C-17. Is it tactical or is it strategic ? I don't think anyone knows. It was also probably a mistake to build a turboprop over a pure jet platform. The turboprop imposed substantially higher development costs than a tried and tested turbofan, and penalised its capabilities.
    Man, this is the reason why some of us are still here, after a complete decade. There's probably always (at least) 1 dude who's as long here as you..

    Btw, congrats. You're Here since more than 10 years? You must be really tough!

    You mention the Lockheed C-130. That's exactly what I mean. You can't really try to sell an a400M as something like a copy of a C-130, with a cockpit which seems to have been designed by a guy on crack who's no longer wanted in the iphone design section.
    And the C-130 still is in production? Since the inauguration, December 1956?!
    A European version of the C-130 with a jet cockpit does not really count, not with more than 2500 C-130 Hercules which have been produced since then.

    Well. I know where the Original is. And probably even when I became a jetphotos member, I knew that Airbus Industrie, Toulouse (est. 1970) is a little bit too young for me to be that big prototype.
    Thus, the a400M cockpit is a jet cockpit, it should rather be a European version of a very small Globemaster III.

    But it is not. It it even slower than a Globemaster, and, afaik, even 1 or two Globemaster pilots sometimes wonder why 1 or two Civilian Boeing pilots are faster...
    Last edited by brianw999; 2018-03-09, 12:04.

    Leave a comment:


  • HalcyonDays
    replied
    Why has the A400 not been a success ? Poor management by Airbus. They were unable to determine whether it should be more a C130 or a C-17. Is it tactical or is it strategic ? I don't think anyone knows. It was also probably a mistake to build a turboprop over a pure jet platform. The turboprop imposed substantially higher development costs than a tried and tested turbofan, and penalised its capabilities.

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    Another good question is,

    why has the 400M not become a success? Deep budget cuts imho never led somebody to success.

    And I am really proud to say that a man like Boeing Chief Engineer Joe Sutter
    [and we soon celebrate his 97th birthday, don't we.]

    was able to contradict his boss, when Sutter said, 'the 747 needs a certain amount of engineers. I am not able to work with less man-power.'

    These are Sutter's words as delivered on German television, which he spoke in presence of his boss, Bill Allen. A legend. Today, I would probably not be here without these words.

    Or at least, with a completely different nickname.

    PS (for insiders): Kesternich, is the 400M really more than an übertriebener Treppenwitz? I don't write that without a reason. Let's try to look at the C-17 Globemaster III (payload: 78 metric tons).



    What Sutter would've said? >> - Probably only a short "LOL!"

    Edit: Post in English only please. Brian W.
    Last edited by brianw999; 2018-05-05, 10:10. Reason: Joseph F. Sutter (1921-2016)

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
    I think the more appropriate question here would be: "Why does the Bundesluftwaffe schedule an aircraft that is still plagued by teething troubles for a flight carrying the German Defense Minister?" One of their Bombardier Globals would have been enough to do the job. On the other hand, I think the transport arm of the Bundesluftwaffe basically operates like an airline and airlines do on occasion have equipment breakdowns. So honestly, if it hadn't been an A400M there would have been no story here. If we want to bash the A400M, there are better reasons for that than an aircraft going tech that was supposed to pick up the German Defense Minister.
    It seems as if this rather complex propeller aircraft (!) is a little bit too complex. For who, the question is open. But only a few minutes ago, I read some substantial news, as if Airbus likes to reduce the A400M man-power. And I am not happy with this decision. Airbus is a good company, not only in Chicago, Mumbai and Sydney.

    But decide for yourself, is this an easy propeller aircraft cockpit (cp 747-400)?
    ..and of course, it's a jetphoto again:

    The Cockpit of an A400M (propeller aircraft).

    I always thought that for good (military) a/c, not necessarily the inventor as an engineer has to be on board for all flights, in case that 1 or 2 difficulties happen inflight. That's why since today I own this avatar.

    Really old people say, you better don't drive a car which not everybody on the Route 66 is able to repair.

    Now let's look again at that computer glass HUD propeller cockpit, and imagine, you've just landed the A400M at Wendover Airfield... Who then would be able to help you?

    PS: This is a jetphoto, but I saw it for the first time today. Imho, this is not a propeller cockpit. It rather fits into a B744 or even a 747-800 ! And I disagree with you.
    If the 400M were an aircraft which after 1 second is so brilliant that the Transall C-160 is no longer worth a word, then here I'd probably show beautiful jetphotos of 400M inflight. But that's not the case, keyword Verteidigungsministerium.

    Do you know somebody who is able to repair an A400M in the desert? With THAT cockpit?

    As I said, only since today I know how a propeller aircraft (troop carrier) cockpit should not look like.

    And you can be sure that a professional C-160 pilot does not always need the help of an engineer if there is a red light in the cockpit.
    In contrast to the A400M.

    Or why did this story end in a C-160?
    Last edited by LH-B744; 2018-03-07, 23:19. Reason: UA, QF, BA, everybody flies Airbus. But the 400M is a flop!

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
    I think the more appropriate question here would be: "Why does the Bundesluftwaffe schedule an aircraft that is still plagued by teething troubles [...]
    We don't want to denunciate Airbus, at least that is true for me!

    And even if we are not happy with the situation, how could we, with Germany as our location.
    "airlines do on occasion have equipment breakdowns. " Hm. For everybody worldwide it is obvious the month when I became a Jetphotos member. Do I have to call it pure luck that, as far as I can think back, no German Minister of Defense ever relied on a LH-B744, and that no LH-B744 was unable to take off within ...let's say 12 hours?

    I know the a/c type that frequently is used for these purposes, if the route is much longer than 670 nautical miles. And you are even closer to the answer than me.

    What we both don't know, was the German Minister of Defense 'booked' on the A400M for the complete distance? Today I have learned, that an A400M is not a jet, but it isn't either a slow propeller. But that's a fact which doesn't help. I've just tried to imagine what I'd do if I planned to sit in a 747-400, with a seat number only for me, and as the B744 were not ready for t/o,
    "the airline"
    comes up with ... that comparison almost does not exist! The Transall is 10 meters shorter, and not much faster than half the speed of an A400M. In the last ten minutes I wasn't able to find an a/c that is more than 10 meters shorter and only half as fast as a B744.

    Especially the two A400M pilots must've been... very happy. So, what did they do after the Transall took off? Probably they asked the airport for... two liters of coffee for each pilot?

    I don't yet know the end of the story. Is the A400M still there? And the two A400M pilots?

    Btw, nice to see you 'on board' again.
    Last edited by LH-B744; 2017-03-08, 18:21. Reason: LH-B744 very rarely has such problems, afaik.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter Kesternich
    replied
    Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
    (...) Why does Airbus sell a military aircraft which is not able to transport the German Minister of Defense?! (...)
    I think the more appropriate question here would be: "Why does the Bundesluftwaffe schedule an aircraft that is still plagued by teething troubles for a flight carrying the German Defense Minister?" One of their Bombardier Globals would have been enough to do the job. On the other hand, I think the transport arm of the Bundesluftwaffe basically operates like an airline and airlines do on occasion have equipment breakdowns. So honestly, if it hadn't been an A400M there would have been no story here. If we want to bash the A400M, there are better reasons for that than an aircraft going tech that was supposed to pick up the German Defense Minister.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X