Less than a month after the first Airbus Military A400M aircraft made its maiden flight on December 11, the European company admitted on Tuesday that it might scrap the military transport aircraft project.
Airbus spokesperson Stefan Schaffrath said that cancelling the programme was “a scenario” being considered, if the A400M “continues to contribute to a loss”. He called on the countries involved in the airlifter programme to come to an agreement on whether or not to continue funding the aircraft by the end of this month.
http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/airbus-to-cancel-airlifter-2010-01-05
I find it weird that FlightGolbal has no word on it yet.
Is this site a mouthpiece of Airbus?
Well death may be a strong word. But I have a hard time thinking the 7-member states that have ordered the bird would caugh up an ADDITIONAL 5.3 billion Euros, after all the program's cost overruns.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=aPgD.z4YYNKg
It's just incredible to me that a project that has gone through so much (in terms of time,resource and especially money) can just come to the end after its first flight, its like writing a novel for 3 years and then deciding to stop on the last chapter.
AirSpace - more than just hot air
It's had delay after delay it's way over budget, Air Forces can buy a C-17 plus full support for around £200m, A 400M will cost around £100m despite being cheaper the C-17s much bigger and carries twice more...so why spend money on what's been a flop?
The South African (SA) ministry of defence decided to terminate a contract with Airbus for A400 back in November 2009
In 2005, South Africa signed a contract with Airbus to acquire eight A400s and South Africa also became a partner in the A400 programme.
The decision to cancel is a result of the extensive increase in cost of the programme and Airbus's failure to deliver the aircraft on schedule, according to a South African Government statement.
Also, $379m (R2.9bn) will be refunded to the country's national treasury as per the contract provisions.
The A400M will not, repeat not, be cancelled by either Airbus or the purchasing governments.
The reasons for this are
a) The lose of pride and face in the European aircraft industry would be devastating to this industry that has been built up to a very strong position that challengers the Boeing monopoly in large transport. It would also mean that Europe would be forever beholden to the whims of the US government, Boeing and any of the new aircraft manufacturers from Brazil, Canada, China and Russia which already has the aircraft that would fill the space vacated by the demise of the A400M
b) Up to 40000 people would be become unemployed and governments cannot afford to have an increase of this magnitude in the size of the dole queues
c) There has been too much money already invested in this project for it to be cancelled. The scrap value of the aircraft parts built to date fuselage and all the ancillary equipment that has been designed specially for this aircraft plus all the jigs, carbon fiber layup machines and auto-glaves etc would not even come close to covering the cost of e.g. the paint used on this equipment.
The A400M is a very good aircraft that will become a mainstay of the the Air Forces of the countries that have already ordered it and those countries that will order it in the future and one of those could be the USA. Remember, the Boeing Aircraft Company is going to in all probability be given the uncontested KC -X tanker contract although by law there should be a competition. The possibility therefore exists that to even up the playing field the A400M manufactured by Northrop should have the inside running for the replacement of the now too small C-130 in the large equipment forward support role with C-27 providing the small load forward support capability. It must be remembered that although the C-17 is rough field capable it is in reality too big and too expensive to operate in this role and the C-5 also is too big for anything but operations from the all concrete rear support bases.
A4K
But this only will happen if the European governments and Airbus get their act together which I'm sure they will do eventually. There is to much at stake to meekly give up and surrender when the project is on the home straight.
How can you call the A400M a "very good" aircraft? It's not even in service, is way over budget and extremely behind schedule. Less than 200 of this, so called, "very good" aircraft have been ordered, and one country has even cancelled their order, with Chile cancelling their MoU. The project is too big to be cancelled? Now you're starting to sound like Obama, regarding the US auto industry; keep throwing money into the bottomless pit.
With only 184 frames on order, the A400M is going to be expensive to operate and expensive for Airbus to support. Over 2,300, and counting, C-130s have been produced, making it affordable, and maintainable. The A400M is going to be a nightmare for Airbus whether they cancel the project or not.
With all the wasted time and money, the countries that have ordered the A400M could have the C-17 and new models of the C-130 in service NOW. Instead, they continue to fund a bloated, overdue, wasteful project at the expense of the European taxpayer, with little to show for it.
Finally, I propose a name change for the A400M. I suggest the name "Euro400M", as it will soon cost 400 million euros per airframe.
Yes, it IS the mouthpiece of Airbus.
" The most important thing in life is to look into the future and not dwell in the past"
The A400M is designed to fill a perceived gap in the range of western military aerial transport aircraft. The gap is between the C-130 range of aircraft and the C-17 for which the A400M is designed to fill.
I accept that the cost overruns together with the delays to the production of the aircraft are totally unacceptable but it must be remembered the C-17 and the C-130J also suffered from similar cost overruns and production delays.
The problem is that whilst the C-17 can carry and deliver the very large items of equipment now used by the modern military machine to and from forward semi prepared airstrips the operators are reluctant to do so due very high operational cost of this aircraft. Which, leaves the C-130 which is too small to carry the modern large military equipment.
This role is the one the A400M is designed for and apart from the AN-70 there is no other competitor which means that if it is proven to be a "good aircraft" it should be successful.
The main competitor if it is built will be the C-130XL and if it is proven to be a "good aircraft" will in all liklehood build on the success of the standard C-130.
The A400M has the advantage at present and should build on that advantage because it will be quickly overtaken by the C-130XL if it is built and I'm sure that in all liklehood it will be built sooner than later.
To date Airbus have only produced a commercially successful range of commercial airliners and small military transport aircraft. They and the European nations have not ever produced a commercially successful large military transport aircraft. The only countries whose aircraft manufacturing industries have done so are those of the USA and Russia and without a doubt they will not give up their advantage without a fight. Even the Chinese and the Brazilians will find it hard like the Japanese are doing so with their Kawasaki C-X air-lifter.
"To make money you have to firstly invest money"
Without a sizeable donation from its military partners the A400M programme will end according to Enders in a BBC interview, understandably Tom gets some quite awkward questions but he says the mistake lies with the European governments as well as EADS. BBC interview here:
More from Flightglobal
I have to admit to being quite ignorant of how these things work but surely they'd never actually cancel the programme? No government in their right mind would ever award them a military contract again.
My wings are like a shield of steel.
Germany Hosts Key Talks On Future Of A400M
Officials from seven countries and aerospace firm EADS on Thursday held talks over the future of the Airbus A400M military transporter plane.
The aircraft has been derailed by technical problems and rising costs, sparking testy exchanges between Germany, its biggest projected buyer, and Airbus parent EADS.
German Defence Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg told a newspaper on Thursday his government's patience would only stretch so far on the multi-billion euro project.
"Our readiness to compromise in relation to cost developments and the necessary performance parameters are limited," Guttenberg was quoted in the Bayernkurier as saying.
He added that industry alone bore responsibility for risks related to the plane's development and production.
EADS said it had no comment to make on the discussions held in Guttenberg's ministry, which began on Thursday afternoon as swirling snow engulfed the German capital.
Germany has so far rejected calls from EADS for buyers of the heavily delayed troop and cargo plane to absorb some EUR5 billion euros of anticipated extra production costs.
It was not immediately clear whether Guttenberg's reference to limited margins for compromise signalled any softening of Berlin's opposition to a price increase for the plane, but Germany has so far refused publicly to back any changes.
EADS chief executive Louis Gallois and Airbus chief executive Tom Enders were expected to plead the company's case for extra government support to build 180 troop carriers for seven European NATO countries -- Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Belgium, Luxembourg and Turkey.
Britain and France have said the aircraft are urgently needed in Afghanistan, but the first expected deliveries have been pushed back to 2013 from 2009.
Germany is the biggest client with 60 planes on order.
Airbus came under pressure on the eve of the talks when a leaked audit report commissioned by buyers said EADS did not have adequate systems to monitor A400M costs.
According to a report commissioned for the buyer nations, EADS could be forced to raise fresh capital if the seven fail to agree a price increase for the plane and costs continue to increase.
If one believed there is some truth in the stories arising from the financial mess surrounding the A400M the all parties have to accept some blame for this mess.
At least the parties are still talking which is a start to the development of the compromise that is going to be required to sort this mess out and allow this aircraft, which is required apparently by the seven nations that have ordered it, to be fully tested and put into service sooner rather than later.