Added: 2 years ago
From: SecureUsb
Views: 323,322
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (520)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Ew. Its a scarebus. Boeing please!

  • Very impressive but no one, not even boeing itself can ever match the power, the sexiness, and the maneuverability of the C-17 in a million years

  • Airbus is bigger and bether than boing

  • @Ma22Ma21 i dont think so that is a proppeller globemaster

  • @Ma22Ma21 Faggot

  • the name of the song please

    

  • the name of the song please

  • It is very impresive and I am an American.

  • Made in Spain :D

  • In a few years time, the Royal Air Force will retire its fleet of C-130 hercules. They will be replaced with this beast!

  • Its like a c-130 on steroids

  • Whats the name of the song in the backgroud? Very relaxing music

  • why was his gear down the whole time?

  • @TheHashBot It's part of flight testing.

  • i wanna hear the engines! (>_<)

  • C-130 clone

  • @TheDrewdavis06 C130 clone? I'ts more like CASA C-295's bigger version.

  • ...schade, kein Motoren-Sound zu hören...

  • Carriage UP ?? Yet not finished??

  • I like it a lot , cant wait to see one at an airshow soon..

  • THAT'S A HUUGE BITCH !!

  • Did they forget to retract the landing gears?

  • @wtrdogg20

    They leave the gear down on first flights, just in case of a gear malfunction. One less thing to worry about.

  • @54cj3 Good to know...thanks!

  • الله يشلكم

  • Built in Spain :D

  • @ascendead1 You are totally correct. The C-17 seen up close is nothing more than a gay joke. They even remove their yokes so it looks like they have 2 dicks that they fly with. This country is run by insane faggots who always lie and produce nothing positive except for faggots in the Marines.

  • lookslike a C-17 with propeller engines

  • looks like the industry is moving backwards ,propellers?

  • Ok today we have darling little a400m and his mother C-130 on the show to find out who the father is. Both C-5 and the C-17 say they will step up and be a father if in fact the child is theirs. We'll be right back with the results. Stay tuned!

  • @ChallengerGuy22 put them on the maury show! is the c5 or c17 the father

  • @VKat517 lol exactly

  • @ChallengerGuy22 in the Case of 2 Year old a400m!

    C-17...... YOU ARE THE FATHER

  • @ChallengerGuy22 C5, looks more manly :) Brute!

  • Encore une perle signer Airbus... ! vivement de le voir distribué !

  • Are you idiots crazy? what do i expect from a bunch of bloody yankees!

    @davetileguy. the C17 was one of the biggest failures in aviation history. it is slow, it guzzles gas and it is unreliable. why do you think c-130 hercules can be found on every continent, but not C-17 or C-5s? they are used by the USAF because they have to buy american. M-400 a copy? rtead the specs you morons.

  • @jigmanx this guy davelittleguy is a faggot :D

  • Are you idiots crazy? what do i expect from a bunch of bloody yankees!

    @Simon-hairass. the C17 was one of the biggest failures in aviation history. it is slow, it guzzles gas and it is unreliable. why do you think c-130 hercules can be found on every continent, but not C-17 or C-5s? they are used by the USAF because they have to buy american. M-400 a copy? rtead the specs you morons.

  • Are you idiots crazy? what do i expect from a bunch of bloody yankees!

    @Simon-hairass. the C17 was one of the biggest failures in aviation history. it is slow, it guzzles gas and it is unreliable. why do you think c-130 hercules can be found on every continent, but not C-17 or C-5s? they are used by the USAF because they have to buy american.

  • i notice the flags of the nation who are ordering this outstanding military transport plane,yet i dont see the us in there,after all this plane would be a good replacement for the aging C1-30 hercules witch is now obsolete ,witch should be retired out of service,i mean the C-17 globemaster is great in all ,but its a heavy transport for pet'esake ,what we need medium transport just like the venerable and legendary C1-30 hercules,sooo i want every ones opinion on this.

  • Comment removed

  • @tragkfshnt The Hercules was just released in a new updated configuration with state of the art systems, known as the C-130J. It's easier to to do that than it would be to update all of our heavy lift bases with the necessary equipment to service an aircraft we have never had to service before, the A400M.

    Look up C-130J Super Hercules on you'll see what I mean.  It's good stuff.

  • How many countries and money did it take to make a plane that might be canceled?LOL Boeing did it 50 yrs ago by themselves!! the collective sucks!!

  • @davetileguy davelittleguy is a faggot :D

  • @chutiamoshiur Ha! what are u 10? LMFAO!f

  • How many billions that are now missing somewhere else were spent for that moment?

  • wow airbus way to make an original design. They were like "Hey we can just take the C-17 and take the engines off and replace them with props! Its brilliant!" bunch of idiots. Boeing is where its at

  • bet ya that plane could chop some birds. ya kin?

  • >>>>>>>What a magical plane. When I saw it my eyes were socked at how monoverable it is <<<<<<<

  • Why landing gear is open?

  • can anyone tell me why they use what seems to me old fashioned prop engines, and not powerful jet engines? I mean we never see big commercial planes with propeller engines today, like they didn't put that on A380.

    Curious, do please answer if you know why.

  • @callehopp

    Turboprop-powered aircraft require are able to take off and land on shorter runways than jet-powered equivalents, which is an attribute that you'd want in a military transport plane. Also, turboprops allow for better handling and flying characteristics at lower speeds than jet aircraft, and are more maneuverable at lower speeds.

  • @alancats cheers :)

  • @callehopp If I had to guess its probably because of fuel, Airbus might want to bring a C130 like modern aircraft into the market. This Plane seems to be a C-17 with Prop engines to me I know its not though. Also maint. on a turbo-fan vs turbo-prop is drastic in cost as well as maneuverability. Militaries around the world always look at ability, durability, capacity, possibilities and of course cost, I think this is a magnificent plane and would like to see it compared to the C-17 or the C-130.

  • @LuvAirTraffic

    Those things are built along the specifications of the countries which order them, not because Airbus thinks that there is a market for. Germany / France / GB wanted a tactical transport plane with turboprop engines and a certain payload. The most important advantages of turboprops are their excellent short takeoff and landing capabilities and durability while operating on unprepared airstrips.

  • @LuvAirTraffic Thank you .

  • @callehopp Prop engine? prop on a turbo jet or piston engine? you have no idea what your even asking,educate yourself first. wiki is your friend.

  • @davetileguy thank you for your kind answer.

  • @callehopp Kind shmind your question embarrasses you as a human . SO because you see a prop that tells you the engine? If a car has wheels does that means it has a Gas engine,Electric ,Hydrogen or Diesel? get it? the wheels or in this case the "propeller" has nothing to do with what it's attached to.

  • @davetileguy and again i say thank you ;-)

  • @callehopp  :-)

  • IF the 400 hits the market ,it's a fat cow that's 12 TONS over weight ,that's a serious design miscalculation which means it has other bugs, it's over budget and the Germans don't want it because it won't carry their lightweight tank ,Italy and Canada dropped their orders, and finally SCAREBUS had to ASK Lockheed Martin for technical specs and help!!!!!!!! wow that's sad !!! USA IS KING Boeing or Lockeed can do what 6 countries together cannot!!!

    davetileguy 1 second ago

  • @davetileguy

    Could you please back up ONE of your claims? Yes, it has it's problems, but maybe you should ask Lockheed how the F35 is going...

  • @blablubb12345 Try Google or Wiki,my point is that's an OLD design imagine if scarebus had to make the Space Shuttle or B-1 or B-2 or SR-71,DEATH BY CONSENSUS !!!

  • @davetileguy

    What makes it an "old design" in your opinion? The carbon fiber wing or fuselage, the FBW system, it's flight performance? How would you design a tactical airlifter?

  • @blablubb12345 I would just get a C-130 or c-117 as to keep money coming to America , or Europe should have asked Boeing to design it FOR them!! LOL

  • @davetileguy Absolute BS, i've never heard such rubbish, do you think that everyone who works at Boeing or Lockheed is American because if you do then you are retarded

  • @TheSimonHarris Pretty much all American certainly a higher ratio than scarebus,America is the melting pot not England France or Germany. The 400 is just a C-17 copy.

  • @davetileguy This is partly true, although like so many other Americans your patriotism seems to inhibit your ability to make a balanced argument. There are no doubt 10's of 1000's of people in the 3rd world who, given the opportunities, could design and build a aircraft superior to the C-17. Just because someone is lucky enough to be born into a society that allows them to fulfil their potential doesn't mean they are better people. Yours and so many other Americans arrogance is unbelievable!

  • @TheSimonHarris What can I say the US rules in so many ways and I don't mean militarily ,'the people in the 3rd world can hardly govern themselves or even mass produce a car! much less a high tech plane. Quite frankly our accomplishments in only 250 years is unprecedented and worth a little arrogance.Socialism is what kills ideas ,drive and innovation and that is one battle we may not win

  • @davetileguy Wait when Sarah Palin becomes president...we will be all proud of being American...

  • @ellebal1111 what makes you think Saraha Palin will be president?and if she was America would thrive! Michele Bachman for pres!!!

  • @davetileguy American politics is becoming a big farce around the world...You got me going but reminded myself that this an airplane forum!

  • @ellebal1111 True enough,but tell me what do you believe you really know about Sarah P. ?? Canadian Socialism I'm sure is truly honest by the state media ,do you fear strong women? women who shoot guns? outspoken women ? or any woman smarter or in a higher position than yourself? (I'm not trying to egg you on)

    So without using adjectives like "dumb " and "stupid" (A childs vocab) clearly outline you disagreements. (P.S. I like her but not for president)

  • @davetileguy Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for women, and hope we get more of them in politics and CEO's...having said that, Sarah Palin does not have my respect, she manipulate simple minded Americans by telling them what they want to hear, (mostly right wing religious bible belt) her claim she had foreign experience while vice president contender by saying she could see Russia from where she was in Alaska and that Putin was flying over her state was over the top!

  • @ellebal1111 For all practical purposes and more so than any state you can see Russia from Alaska, The Distant Early Warning Line, is located there as part of our National Defense.Who is the Commander in Chief of the 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard? Sarhra Palin....What U.S. governor is routinely briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counter terrorism?

  • @ellebal1111 What U.S. governor has a higher classified security rating than the Presidential candidate of the Democrat Party? She did not say Putin was flying over her state she was speaking figuratively of how close Al. is to Russia. Now the fact that you and most of the world can't look that up for yourself is pathetic and a larger symptom of a virus called ignorance that is running rampant around the world.Once again I am not a S.P. fan but an honest person.

  • @TheSimonHarris I do agree with you that a lot of Americans are arrogant. Yes we are not very well rounded. However, not just anybody from any country can design an aircraft superior to c17 if opertunity was givien. when it comes to the air and the ocean the US has dominated the last 100yrs and will continue to dominate for another generation. If we weren't excellent when in comes to planes then how come we don't have foreign planes in our militry inventory. englad, france, australia, turkey

  • @TheSimonHarris Continue....

    are all developed nations, how come they are using american aircrafts. Now u have japan, saudia and other countries saying that they changed their mind about eurofighter. They want to purchase the f22 instead. A lot of ppl like to speak negative about America's aicraft industry, yet, the majority of the aircrafts they have in their country are american aircrafts. If i'm wrong about anything i said then u are more then welcomed to prove me wrong sir.

  • the pilot is like, shit guys, wheres the landing gear button? aww fuck it :)

  • Thx for ruining the sound with the crappy music

  • they should replace the ac 130 with this so they could cary more ammo

  • @kirbyroxy Thats why the USAF uses the C-17. The C-130 is still in use and will still be in use for some time to come because the C-130 is a model that has many variants and more than exceeds any AF standards. That..... and its able to land on aircraft carriers.

  • @Eversman1 >"That..... and its able to land on aircraft carriers."

    LOL! That only happened ONCE and you make it out to be some sort of "routine" capability. Hell, it wasn't even the USAF that pulled-off that stunt, and you make it out to be some sort of reason the USAF "still has it in use". Gawd I love how the interwebz lets out the idiots on display. 

  • @RingSight91 I never said they use it as a routine and I didn't try to make it seem like routine. Besides, it was the Air Force that brought up the challenge for that "stunt", then the Navy took the challenge. Now like I said "its ABLE to land on aircraft carriers" Now next time before you try to make yourself sound smarter by putting "the idiots on display" on the "interwebz" get a better understanding from the point of view of the person your trying to make feel lesser.

  • @Eversman1 Oh yes you did. The phrase, "it's [or IT IS] able to" implies it is STILL able to do so to this day. Not a stunt. But something that happens with some regularity. And the "Navy" didn't "take on the challenge". That was a freaking CIA / Air America crew on a special op.

    The Herc is UNABLE to land on a carrier. Not by any sane measure. Good Luck finding one modern carrier skipper who will let even the best-trained C-130J Air Force pilot today do that again, you nit.

  • @RingSight91 One Experiment ,they landed took off like 50 times fully loaded with no JATO or Catapault.

  • @davetileguy Who is this "they" of whom you speak? No Air Force project has ever been tasked to prove the viability of C-130 use with NAVY carriers.

  • @RingSight91 Why don't you Google before you open your mouth ,how embarrassing for you,there's several videos on youtube of the 120 fully loaded unassisted takeoff and landings of a c-130 on a U.S carrier.

  • @davetileguy One Hundred and Twenty launches and recoveries of a Herc on a carrier? Like the Forrestal? Now I know you're insane. There were 29 T&Gs and 21 unarrested landings. Counting 21 launches, how does all that have a sum of 120?

    And I say it again. THAT WAS NOT THE AIR FORCE! If Lockheed-Martin wants to have a few stunts with their plane then let them be. L-M DOES NOT SPEAK FOR THE US AIR FORCE and go ask mommy to send you back to school 'cause your math sucks.

  • @RingSight91 From your post you seemed to doubt the landings ever happened, Wheather it was the Navy or USAF makes no diff to me,of COURSE the USAF wouldn't land on a carrier. and I ment to say c-130 not 120 landings.

  • @davetileguy Those shipborne stunts were not, as you put it, exceeding "AF standards", are not the reason they're worth keeping in the AF, and would never have been done in the second place were it not for one ballsy Air America/CIA pilot deciding to do it for some emergency in the first place.

  • eurofighter is another story. That i understand

  • no huge volume no future. standardisation is military key. and commercially necesary

  • and buy it, than it can be sold for a reasonable price to the civil market for specialized (humanitarian) cargo transports.

  • and buys it.

  • or the usa and / or former eastern block / asia miulitary complex jointventures it.

  • its just more efficient modern wonderfull plane. but i would have gone for updated 130,s or antonovs. Cheaper, makes more sence than inventing the wheel again like with the tornade back then. Its has to be bulky, easy to maintain everywere, and safe. Its not a fighter or a bomber.

    thats more or less it with a mainly military cargoplane. If i was airbus i would kill it! Makes no sence.

  • Never mind the music, lets hear those engines, one flew over here from Brize Norton, the sound is WONDERFUL.

  • Unicorn plane?!?

  • The replacement to the C-130

  • Why not use Jet Engines? doesnt make sense

  • @DeRico91 That has not to be sexy but efficient and useful to carry troops or vehicles. its not a multi-role fighter aircraft. lol

  • Too bad the US Airforce don't have these replacing the c-130 the A400 is badass!

  • @130hc US airforce has the C-17, its quite nice.. propellors do have there benifits as well i guess and these propellors are damn sexy.. but the c-130 is already perfect, just as is the b-52.. they keep on keeping on :)

  • They should carry cessnas inside that release during flight then in turn the cessnas release RC planes

  • beautiful, but horrendously expensive. i doubt it'll be much of an export hit apart from the countries who already contributed to its development.

  • Are they kidding?  The C-17 flies rings around this slow poke...Amazing testicular courage on the part of the Euros, though...

  • It almost looks like a Tu-95 Bear and a Hercules had a short, stubby, overweight child...

  • @DeRico91 you need to get out more, there are plenty uglier than this, and i am in no way saying this is a sexy plane, but its just not ugly!

  • I'll be impressed when it can carry a tank. Until then, it's a propeller driven C-17. The C-17 can do everything this plane can do and then some.

  • looks like a c17 fucked a c1SHUT THE FUCK UP and got a nice airplane... :/ i hate these comments -.-

  • oooops Shattered thunder is my kid. Forgot to log in under me.

  • Thanks! Great to see someone who understands the sweet science behind propulsive mechanics!

  • @LottoWinner999 You represent all Brits?

  • Well this is slightly more advanced than the C130 but not by much the C130 requires a bit more takeoff distance than the 800ft that the A400M does , but at the moment only 4 A400M's have been built , the first delievery is now 2012 but the uk have reduced order to 22 and the RAF will call the A400m the Atlas and south africa have cancelled orders for 8 with Germany eventually dropping to 40.

  • @Timsalt3100 T/O distance does not translate into "more advanced." The A400M is a huge step-up, technologically, compared to the C-130 and it acts as more or less as a replacement for it.

  • I like this plane and I like EADS CASA flying cargo planes

  • melooncillo Hey I am Patriotic Brit and Airbus is a joke in fact we Brits call its Airfags because out planes suck and we don't care how many Airbuses crash as long we get our Welfare Check from American workers jobs. By they way what do you think of our Whore Queen who got raise in pay? Screw every one and keep sending your checks to Airfags. So what if the boom falls of U Americans can afford to buy a new one. Well good by mates. Also say a prayer when you fly on an Aifbus you'll need it.

  • itts nice and all but does airbus have to copy every single damn aircraft we have?

  • @turbineproductions How else would an airplane look?

  • @scaremengaviation well maybe if hey came out with their own structure of a aircraft and not copy one and just put propellers on it then i wouldn't complain but they copy so much from boeing

  • @turbineproductions

    What exactly did they copy?

  • @blablubb12345 The whole plane and nothign but the plane. New American Law will will deport non-patriotic foreign loving Airfaggers AKA Airbus to France, Germany + Spain and Birts said they will not take you!

  • @turbineproductions One, work on your grammar. Two, looks aren't everything. Three, the A400M is not a copy. Four, just because the A400M looks like a C-130 doesn't mean it's the same. Five, realize that airplanes are made to look like birds. They all look similar. Six, work on your grammar.

  • @scaremengaviation U R A Asswipe + Eurotard and without doubt Europeons cannot design plane with out copying American. So the copyright expired and thats just proves how lame the Frogs, Krauts + Limeys are such tards. Its like the A350 which is a copy of the Boeing 787 however there is big difference is how Airfags copies seem to crash all the time. By the way U Eurotards really fucked up and lost the USAF 40 Billion Dollar Contract + that copied the KC-135 Airframe. Airfags=Losers!

  • @LottoWinner999

    Do you really think that choosing a 30 year old airframe for the new tanker had any technical reasons? It was a political decision to "buy american" and prevent Boeing from scrapping their old 767 production line because nobody ordered them any more after the A330 came to market.

  • @LottoWinner999 A Eurotard? Now, how can that be when I am sending you comments all the way from the United States? The last time I checked the United States is not considered to be a part of Europe, right? What copyright? A copyright on the shape on an aircraft? Okay.. I dislike Airbus myself, but people like you are just dumb. To dislike them based off of "looks" is stupid.

  • @LottoWinner999 The KC-46A is not a copy of the KC-135. What the hell? KC-135=707. KC-46A=767. I suppose that you consider yourself a "copy" of your mom and dad? LOL.

  • @LottoWinner999 Oh, the last time I checked ass wipes are in little holders to clean up your poo poo. The last time I checked, those are inanimate objects. Now, if you're going to be throwing around objectified and ridiculous metaphorical ad hominem attacks it just proves to show that you know who's right and wrong. Why get all emotional?

  • Comment removed

  • @scaremengaviation one.my keyboard has sticky keys. 2 im just saying it looks like a c-130. threee we all have are own opinions four. my keyboard has sticky keys

  • @turbineproductions Where did you say it "looks like a C-130"? You said "why do they have to copy." Dumbass.

  • @scaremengaviation dude i never speciificly said it looks like a c- but thats what i was getting at...dumbass

  • @turbineproductions How am I supposed to know what you're trying to get at? Dumbass. I can't exactly read minds. Let alone interpret what the hell the jumble of text you left meant.

  • @scaremengaviation use your brain and figure it out

  • @turbineproductions Use your brain and figure out that I can't get "C-130" out of your sentence.

  • @turbineproductions These Airfaggers really suck cuz the copy American airplanes and designs and they could care less but when they take the credit thats when the suck the most!

  • @LottoWinner999 i know it makes me so mad!!

  • @turbineproductions It makes you mad? How do you think people who post vulgar stupidity like "copying" make the brilliant scientists who designed this aircraft feel?

  • @LottoWinner999 Okay. What the hell? Seriously. If you think it looks like a LOCKHEED (yet, you say "Boeing") C-130, you should compare them closer. There are extremely obvious differences. And besides, to the observer every airplane "looks" the same. It's only upon close inspection that people realize the differences. What would not be "copying" if the A400M was shaped like a fighter jet? LOL. This general shape works best, it's not copyrighted and cannot be.

  • @LottoWinner999 You're a nutcase. You think Airbus is owned by Nazi's? LOL. Nazis are extreme haters, and since you call Airbus people "Airfaggers" I suppose you are a Nazi. Freaking dumbass.

  • @scaremengaviation The new Undercover Nazis + Airbus's effort to break into the USA Military Aircraft Production could give access to USAF information. Airbus tried to steal 35,000 American Jobs. U called USA protectionist + every dirty word in the book but WTO proved your subsidies were unfair. There will be a new law on the books that will not allow foreign manufacturers to build USAF military aircraft. Sorry but Airbus building USAF Aircraft is not option, so try the Russians or Chinese.

  • @scaremengaviation It would not surprise me that children of Nazis are in a stage were they are trying to rearm Germany by using other European nations as fronts. Its the kind of game that you Europeans play do to the fact that miss having power and the ability to make war.

  • sorry c-130 but this looks a/c looks awsome..

  • man i could swear that Airbus copied Boeing's C-17 design

  • @pCf96 Why? Because they look similar?

  • @scaremengaviation yeah they have the same wing dehedral and same T tail

  • @pCf96 As far as I know you cannot copyright the wing sweep angle of an aircraft. The Saab 29 had a 29-degree wing sweep-- did the C-17 "copy" the Saab 29? No.

    Also, they don't have the same T-tail. If you look carefully you will see that the C-17 has no bump on the front-- the A400M does. The C-17 also has a longer trailing edge. Does the 717's tail look copied to you?

    And anyways, just because something looks similar doesn't mean it's a copy.

  • Wonderful to see that propeller driven ACs will never disappear. Fuel eff. and ground performance not to be approached by jets of comparable size.

  • @ABlodg0290 Turbofans are more efficient within a certain margin as are jet engines. Jet engines are more fuel efficient than turbofans at high altitudes over extremely long ranges, look at the GE90, and can produce much more power. Turbofans are efficient at lower altitudes and over shorter ranges, look at the Q400 vs. CRJ700 in the case of Horizon Air. It's about utilisation.

  • do the inner pair of props turn counter to the outer pair to negate torque effect?

  • amazing~~~~~~~~~

  • zkzjjhnzjhbnhtuijmn.4400uz3451­6320uzhnhjbzjiujuuuiuij8630001­024560..ukumn00juntggbhukjmnku­kuik.kumnhjnmzuij01200114..031­8773/45+uu,njumjnuuijukk0136

    zjhznuz

    uzkum

    zojhkzk

    zilzjhojz

    kzkjjhz

    zmkm

    

  • The C-17 retracted it's gear on the maiden flight.

  • stop bashing on c-130, c-17, an70. its bigger than c130 and narrow than c-17 by an inch, it use modified version of a380 cockpit. if u compare short belfast,

  • Why flaps and gears were down??

  • a400m will have same cargo height as c-17 but c-17 are bit wider, hope this help

  • Say whatever you want about the "copy" of c17 c130 thing. Facts are facts : She is totally new, she is currently the best military aircraft in her category (with props and designed for military transport) and her perfs are excellent.

  • its bigger than c130, with T-tail while c130 use fuselage mounted tail

  • I think the pilot forgot about the aircraft's retractable landing gear capability!

  • @AdamAlim95 most test pilots leave the gear down on the first flight in case of a problem.

  • @AdamAlim95 lolz

  • @AdamAlim95 its all procedural, its a first flight they are not gonna retract the landing gear.

  • @AdamAlim95 nope, on the maiden flight, they are to fly with gears down the hole time

  • @AdamAlim95 No, on maiden flights it is common practice for them to stay in the down position. One less thing to go wrong. Also keep in mind that it takes series of flights gradually stepping up the performance and functions of a brand new plane. They never roll one out of the factory and say "let's see what this baby can do". Only after all systems have been checked an re-checked does a plane get to go %100.