Ole Bill wrote this for Aviation Week this morning...
US interest in the A400M is likely to emerge mid-decade, according to EADS North America CEO Sean O'Keefe. At the company's pre-Paris media seminar, O'Keefe noted that the USAF is likely to retire its oldest C-5A heavy transports before 2020.Damn this guy is wishing on a star.
"That leaves a hole in the big airbase, heavy-payload role," O'Keefe points out, and Boeing C-17s will be pulled into that mission - opening up the need for new tactical airlifters. "At that point, we'll have a hot production line", O'Keefe says, "and there isn't going to be any new US program."
However, Airbus Military is not going to do any intensive marketing until the A400M completes testing and gains its commercial type certificate, due next year.
Boeing is slow walking C-17 production with an eye toward the same future that EADS sees with the A400M.
And the A400M will face the same issues it faces today.
Smaller payload than the C-17.
Shorter ranged than the C-17.
Slower than the C-17.
Worldwide acceptance and service.
Costs just a few mill less than the C-17.
And thats looking at it today. Looking into the future I can see the C-17 getting stretched....Uprated engines...improved avionics...increased fuel efficiency measures...better aircraft defense countermeasures...a dedicated Special Operations version...
The list is endless and this clown from EADS thinks he's going to bust into the US market with an inbetween airplane that isn't as good as the industry leader and costs about the same?
Whatever he's smoking, I recommend he stop. And I hope this type thinking is drug induced...if he's sober then they need a new CEO.
NOTE:
The weirdest thing about the whole A400 saga is the fact that when they first designed it and brought it to market, it was suppose to be a C-130 killer.
Lockheed Martin got nervous----started designing XL C-130's....the USAF was even starting to make noise about it because it was suppose to be the perfect plane to go along with the Stryker Brigades....
And then two things happened.
1. The Stryker gained weight. Alot of weight. C-17 airlift type weight.
2. The cost point of the A400 expanded to enormous proportions.
Now I can imagine Boeing executives are sitting back watching EADS spin like tea leaves and laughing there asses off. The standard EADS model of building 'in betweener' aircraft bit EADS. They deserve it.
the amazing thing about this is they get FAR more direct subsidies than boeing yet boeing still can deliver capable aircraft, with extraordinary abilities (as shown in their new P8 contract) while the A400M is WAY overdue, was suppose to enter service soon if not earlier than now and its barely getting off the ground (literally!).
ReplyDeletealso according to wikipedia they are already upgrading the C5A's, so so much for them going out of service, hoping to extend service life to 2040, not 2020, maybe he got his numbers wrong, Airbus seems to have that problem :)
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_C-5_Galaxy#C-5M_Super_Galaxy
yeah and i said i wasn't going to bring it up anymore but thats another example of what US companies face in this globalized market place.
ReplyDeleteour understanding of subsidizing a company is different from their idea...and thats between 1st world democracries.
what chance do we stand when our companies try and compete with communist nations that half of the US has forgotten are communist, communist that are taking advantage of our capitalistic market place?
globalization is a sad joke on the american people...only the elite like it and only the elite want it to continue.
and he's not wrong about the C-5.
ReplyDeletei'm not sure how many are due to be ugraded but its not many.
well according to Wikipedia 52 C5s will be modernized. I agree there are drawbacks to it, and the WTO has slammed Europe for its subsidies of Airbus, and i agree we should buy defense equipment American if possible, but i am also concerned with the military industrial complex period. remember Eisenhower warned against letting those companies getting too powerful, and the military not directly doing that stuff anymore like in WWII. i like the idea of what DARPA has been doing in some areas like creating competitions where people design things and get a cash prize and DARPA gets the designs.
ReplyDeleteDARPA is lost. its not doing DARPA tough anymore...its just a club house for the trendy to get together and play. i'd rather the guys at MIT or CalState do real research than those ya=hoos at DARPA.
ReplyDeleteWhat real military problem have they solved lately thats been adopted by the military that was sole sourced straight from DARPA?
i'm asking cause i don't know.
the military industrial complex is a misnomer. he wasn't talking about the defense industry per say but the more insidious things like NATO. like the UN. like the power of a President to commit US troops without congressional approval.
the defense industry has an automatic check and balance. Congress, the American people and US budgets.
NATO, UN, elitist thinking has no counter weight. they are filled with idealogues that shoot down opposing opinion as antique or those that disagree as not properly understanding the issues.
thats the real threat
C-17 production will end in a few years. A400 production will not.
ReplyDeletethe C-17 may get (and i guess will get) some strong foreign orders), so they can keep the production line warm, and in anyway it will take time for the a400 production line to get fully going, the C-17 is already going strong and a proven system, not a difficult decision on where to go to.
ReplyDeleteTo some extent we're back to the success of the program vs. success of the plane argument. The program is a mess and this is the latest in a series of stupid marketing statements (a maritime patrol version? Ha!) about its potential.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, it's probably a good airplane that delivers a very useful capability for European nations committed to things like the Boxer/VBCI that won't fit in a C130 but, at least politically, don't justify a C17 fleet.
If it is finally meeting specs and has decent fly away and operating costs, it will make sense for 2nd tier militaries that have important equipment too big for C130s but not much sense for anyone else.
but we're back to talking about price. if i recall correctly the C-17 is only about 10 million dollars more an airplane.
ReplyDeletethats alot of money to an individual but for a nation???? besides you not only get potential discounts through US foreign military sales but you also get the backing of the US.
i find it hard to believe that at its current price point the A400 is a good buy...especially when you compare it to the C-17.
The trouble with buying American aircraft is that you never get the same product as the US, its always downgraded in some way. Indian C-17 and C-130 are missing vital nav and comms equipment because the US wont release it
ReplyDeletePlus, your telling me that Boeing isnt being subsidised to put a shiny now cockpit in the 767 via the Kc-46 contract??? Give me a break! Both Europe and the US have their own interests to protect and fund as such
Hello,
ReplyDeleteI am no lover of the A400M or Airbus for that matter but in the interests of fairness here is my assesment:
Boeing were slammed by the World Trade Organisation over subsidies.
Airbus were slammed by the World Trade Organisation over subsidies.
The C17 was way over budget.
The A400M was way over budget.
The C17 suffered long delays.
The A400M suffered long delays.
The C17 was never able to do the more tactical roles it was intended for.
The A400M....well we don't know yet.
The C17 is rather like a strategic airlifter with some emphasis on tactical operations while the A400M is a tactical airlifter with some emphasis on strategic air lifting.
They don't really compete with eachother but their roles do overlap.
GrandLogistics.
Hello,
ReplyDeleteI forgot to add that if I was American I would want to see my government buying the C17 to protect my nation's economy and security of supply and if I was European I would want to see my government buying the A400M for the same reason.
Grandlogistics.
mikey b....you claim that we sell inferior equipment to allies and then on another post you brag about how superior your Apaches are to ours? which one is it?
ReplyDeleteyou don't get it do you cowboy?
the UK is has assembled an adhoc force and is being brought to its knees by a 9th rate power.
you should feel ashamed. the UK has delusions of granduer at this moment and is not able to meet its desires because it has gutted its defense budget.
its not too late but time is running out.
Grand Logistics.
what everyone forgets is the one thing that counts more than anything. PRICE!
the A400 is an expensive beast.
thats why it will never beat out the C-17. it just costs too much and delivers too little.