Airbus A400M Atlas
The Airbus A400M Atlas is a European four-engine turboprop military transport aircraft. It was designed by Airbus Military, now Airbus Defence and Space, as a tactical airlifter with strategic capabilities to replace older transport aircraft such as the Transall C-160 and the Lockheed C-130 Hercules.
The A400M is sized between the C-130 and the Boeing C-17 Globemaster III. It can carry heavier loads than the C-130 and can use rough landing strips. In addition to its transport capabilities, the A400M can perform aerial refueling and medical evacuation when fitted with appropriate equipment.
The A400M's maiden flight took place on 11 December 2009 from Seville Airport, Spain. Between 2009 and 2010, the A400M faced cancellation as a result of development programme delays and cost overruns; however, the customer nations chose to maintain their support for the project. A total of 174 A400M aircraft had been ordered by eight nations by July 2011. In March 2013, the A400M received European Aviation Safety Agency certification and the first aircraft was delivered to the French Air Force in August 2013.
Development
Origins
The project has its origins in the Future International Military Airlifter group, established in 1982 as a joint venture between Aérospatiale, British Aerospace, Lockheed, and Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm with the goal of developing a replacement for both the C-130 Hercules and Transall C-160. Varying requirements and the complications of international politics meant that progress on the initiative was slow. In 1989, Lockheed decided to withdraw from the grouping. Lockheed independently developed an upgraded Hercules, the C-130J Super Hercules. With the addition of Alenia of Italy and CASA of Spain, the FIMA group became Euroflag.Project management evaluated twin and quad turbofan engine configurations, a quad propfan configuration, and a quad turboprop configuration, eventually settling on the turboprop option. Since no existing turboprop engine in the western world was powerful enough to reach the projected cruise speed of Mach 0.72, a new engine design was required. Originally, the SNECMA M138 turboprop, based on the M88 turbofan core, was selected, but this powerplant was found to be incapable of satisfying the requirements. In April 2002, Airbus Military issued a new request for proposal, which Pratt & Whitney Canada with the PW180 and Europrop International answered. In May 2003, Airbus Military selected the Europrop TP400-D6. United Technologies alleged that the selection was a result of political interference.
A Europrop partner executive said in April 2003 that Airbus was close to selecting the P&WC offer, claiming it was more than €400 million cheaper than Europrop's bid. As the original deadline for the engine decision passed, Airbus CEO Noel Forgeard said P&WC's bid was nearly 20 percent less expensive and declared that "As of today Pratt and Whitney is the winner without doubt; a much lower offer could make us change our minds.", inviting Europrop to revise its offering, which it reportedly reduced in price by 10 or 20 percent. A later report described the revised bid as exceeding P&WC's bid by €120 million.
File:Size comparison C-17 A400M C-130J-30 C-130J.jpg|thumb|The A400M and aircraft it is intended to replace or complement: C-130, C-130J-30 and C-17.
The original partner nations were France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom, Turkey, Belgium, and Luxembourg. These nations decided to charge the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation with the management of the acquisition of the A400M. Following the withdrawal of Italy and revision of procurement totals, the revised requirement amounted to 180 aircraft. The first flight was forecast to occur in 2008 and first delivery in 2009. In April 2005, South Africa joined the programme, with the Denel Saab Aerostructures receiving a contract for fuselage components. Malaysia was the second country outside Europe to be involved. Malaysia through CTRM is responsible for manufacturing composite aero components for the aircraft.
The A400M is positioned as an intermediate size and range between the Lockheed C-130 and the Boeing C-17, carrying cargo too large or too heavy for the C-130, while able to use rough landing strips.
Delays and problems
In January 2009, EADS announced that the first delivery was postponed from 2009 until at least 2012, and indicated that it wanted to renegotiate. EADS maintained the first deliveries would begin three years after the first flight. In January 2009, Financial Times Deutschland reported that the A400M was overweight by 12 tons and may not have been able to meet a key performance requirement, the ability to airlift 32 tons. Sources told FTD that it could only lift 29 tons, insufficient to carry an infantry fighting vehicle like the Puma. In response to the report, the chief of the German Air Force stated: "That is a disastrous development," and that it could delay deliveries to the German Air Force until 2014. The Initial Operational Capability for the Luftwaffe was later delayed and alternatives, such as a higher integration of European airlift capabilities, were studied.On 29 March 2009, Airbus CEO Tom Enders told Der Spiegel that the programme could possibly be abandoned without changes. OCCAR reminded participating countries that they could terminate the contract before 31 March 2009. In April 2009, the South African Air Force announced that it was considering alternatives to the A400M due to delays and increased cost. On 5 November 2009, South Africa announced the cancellation of its order. On 12 June, The New York Times reported that Germany and France had delayed a decision whether to cancel their orders for six months while the UK planned to decide in late June. The NYT also quoted a report to the French Senate from February 2009, noting: "the A400M is €5 billion over budget, 3 to 4 years behind schedule, aerospace experts estimate it is also costing Airbus between €1 billion and €1.5 billion a year."
In 2009, Airbus acknowledged that the programme was expected to lose at least €2.4 billion and could not break even without export sales. A PricewaterhouseCoopers audit projected that it would run €11.2 billion over budget, and that corrective measures would result in an overrun of €7.6 billion. On 24 July 2009, the seven European nations announced that the programme would proceed and formed a joint procurement agency to renegotiate the contract. On 9 December 2009, the Financial Times reported that Airbus requested an additional €5 billion subsidy. In January 2010, Airbus repeated that the A400M could possibly be scrapped, costing it €5.7 billion unless €5.3 billion was added by partner governments. Delays had already increased its budget by 25%. Airbus executives reportedly regarded the A400M as competing for resources with the A380 and A350 XWB programmes.
In June 2009, Lockheed Martin said that both the UK and France had requested details on the C-130J as an alternative to the A400M.
In November 2010, Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Spain and Turkey finalised the contract and agreed to lend Airbus Military €1.5 billion. The programme was then at least three years behind schedule. The UK reduced its order from 25 to 22 aircraft and Germany from 60 to 53, decreasing the total order from 180 to 170.
In 2013, France's budget for 50 aircraft was €8.9bn at a unit cost of €152.4M, or €178M including development costs. The 2013 French White Paper on Defence and National Security cut the tactical transport aircraft requirement from 70 to 50. As the A400M was unable to perform helicopter in-flight refuelling, France announced in 2016 that it would purchase four C-130Js. In July 2016, French aerospace laboratory ONERA confirmed successful wind tunnel trials of a hose and drogue configuration to permit helicopter refuelling by the A400M. Prior tests found instability in the intended hose due to vortices generated by the spoilers, deployed to achieve 108-130 kt air speed.
In April 2016, production faults affecting 14 propeller gearboxes produced by Italian supplier Avio Aero were discovered. The issue, involving a heat treatment process that weakened the ring gear, affected no other PGBs; the units involved needed changing. Airbus noted: "pending full replacement of the batch, any aircraft can continue to fly with no more than one affected propeller gearbox installed and is subject to continuing inspections." Another PGB issue involved input pinion plug cracking, which could release small metallic particles into the oil system, which is safeguarded by a magnetic sensor. Only engines 1 and 3, which have propellers that rotate to the right, were affected. The European Aviation Safety Agency issued an Airworthiness Directive mandating immediate on-wing inspection, followed by replacement if evidence of damage was found. On 27 April 2016, Airbus warned there may be a substantial PGB repair cost. An interim PGB fix was certified in July 2016, greatly extending inspection intervals.
In May 2016, Airbus confirmed that a cracking behaviour identified during quality control checks in 2011 was found in a French A400M's fuselage part. Not impacting safety, it could be repaired during regular maintenance/upgrade schedules. The aluminium-zinc alloy, known as 7000 series, was used in several central frames. Its chemistry, along with environmental conditions, led to crack propagation. The alloy was excluded from future aircraft. A retrofit to remove it from early A400Ms, which could take up to seven months, was considered.
On 29 May 2016, Enders conceded in an interview published in Bild am Sonntag that some of the "massive problems" of the A400M were of Airbus' own making: "We underestimated the engine problems...Airbus had let itself be persuaded by some well-known European leaders into using an engine made by an inexperienced consortium." Furthermore, it had assumed full responsibility for the engine. On 27 July 2016, Airbus confirmed that it took a $1 billion charge over delivery issues and export prospects. Enders also stated that "Industrial efficiency and the step-wise introduction of the A400M's military functionalities are still lagging behind schedule and remain challenging."