Germans will always beat us in engineering. That's because all the mexicans come and make it hard for us to find people who can go for 24 hours without drinking alcohol and are skilled in anything but injecting heroin. good thing the nazi's were there own race, otherwise there would be a german flag over france. who cares, let the fag's take care of them selves.
AircraftCompare DOTcom provides exact details of around every aircraft in the world from the past present to the FUTURE FLYING CARS, with photos specs price and everything else. Compare side by side the Boeing 747 and the Airbus A380 or the MIG with the F16 etc, get access to category wise airplane and helicopter rankings, meet the prominent figures from the aerospace industry through the community..
Everybody are trying to use some successful ideas of other manufactures :)
Truly speaking I don't believe that such similarity is just kind of coincidence. I can tell you that 10 years ago (or more) there was a group of AIRBUS agents in Antonov. The general idea of AIRBUS at that time was to use AN-70 with their avionics due to luck of money for own A-400 project. So, they had almost full access to aircraft.
@MrKhayrula Yes they look identical! the A-400 M has counter rotating props just like... ah, no it doesent. Well, the A-400M has a "T" tail just like the AN-70... oh, the An70 doesent. Anyway, they both have Air-to-air refuelling... oh, the AN-70 doesent.
@05u16hep lol. I recently heard someone say the su-47 was just like the x-29. Yup, just like it, twice its size, with a lifting body, two engines, twin rudders, and horizontal tail stubs. Well they both have wings right? :-) *yawn*
Why do you people compare a plane that was basically finished in 1954 with one that is basically finished this year? The C130 has proven its worth and has been refit and reviewed over the years with growing experience from billions of miles flewn with it. Lets relax until the first hundreds of these are being in use for a few years. Guess which countries were able to afford a C130 in the 1950's .... ...
This baby is smaller than a C5, smaller than a C17, but its bigger as an C130.
It is the biggest plane able to do "tactical flying" like super-low-level flying and deploying of cargo, it is able to refuel eurofighters an Planes because it is able to fly really fast (over 700 km/h) and really slow (less than 200 km/h). It has the latest self-defense and it has the ability to use semi-prepared runways to start and land .. no other is having all those features combined. The A400M is a great plane!
whitewing.. totally agree I now work on the A380 systems integration programme and it is yet to make a profit. When an aircraft is delivered late to agreement the manufacturer pays the airline a huge compensation which delayed profitability of the380 for possibly another couple of years and will be the same for the 787.. eventually both will be cash cows
verdebuster.. what are you talking about?. from someone that has worked on the A400M project in filton I can tell you that all aircraft are built by a loads of companies. billions over budget?.. laughable, would of been crapped years ago if that was true. Airbus does not have the sole task of building the A400M, it comes from all different suppliers all over the world.. the reason for the delay?.. the same reason for the delay of the boeing 787 dreamliner.. bad quality from numerous suppliers!
wrong, again, different companies may supply the parts but utilmately the company in this case Airbus is managing the construction , two
no it would have ,reason why the A400M survived so long despite being over budget is that fact that European countries are trying to break Boeing's and lockheed's monoply on military transport
as they currently the makers in NATO as well outside too
the 787 , unlike the predessors , was constructed in a new way, hench the delays
to clarifty the new the construction method that Boeing used
rather than buying parts, they brought the parts in a more assembled form in a effort to speed up construction at a lesser cost but the subcontractors had a hard time dealing with the extra strain
And yes F35 is a GROUND combat aircraft. And large aircraft are just as difficult to build. When you are given a certain limit for specs. Basically if you are going to build a new aircraft it should be better than its predecesor. Also more fuel efficient. Lighter. Good maintenance ability. Better design.
Just basically better. And of course when making a brand new aircraft there is bound to be a few kinks in the road along the way. But i believe they have done it. This plane fits the year 2015!
Your talking about aircraft being beihind their production time scale, Look at the Eurofighter Typhoon that was over 10 years behind schedule and ended up with the Frnch pulling out and going alone and producing the Rafale. Now everyone loves the Typhoon and its one of the top Front-Line Fighters. So what if the A400 is behind Schedule, as long as it does its job and does it well and it ends up a great aircraft in my eyes Airbus deserve credit
do not, i mean NOT call this aircraft a disastrous development. May i remind you of the F35 Pigeon. This aircraft may be 12 tons or somthing overweight but it is still an amazing achievment by Airbus.
Just like the F35 with its supercruise + VTOL ability.
The A400M will only be disastrous if no one buys one damn aircraft. But after proving it flys, that a few countrys are looking at that aircraft are just drooling!
Do you even know how much the A400M costs. Its well, in wikipedia says: Unit cost 100 million euros. possibly more. How much does the C-130J cost. The design is old. The aircraft is basically all extension and no aerodynamic improvment. The electronics are nowhere near as good as the A400M and its only around 2 metres wider, 2 metres higher and 10 metres longer.
What do you mean bad move. I know it costs more than the C-130J. But you get more from this aircraft. And as I said the C-130 is an old design. And you get a hell of a lot more from the A400M. Thats why it costs more. Its BETTER!!!!!
Technologically it is more modern and more multi-purpose the airbus A400M. Of all the tasks that can make, it is to refuel fuel while it flies, so its flight capacity to arrive to any place of the world without landing to refuel, is limitless
I wasn't using the EF as an example i was just saying it is not the first time aircraft have been late. The 787 rolled out late, so did the A380. Both of those 2 planes were late and over budget its something you just have to accept in the aviation world. As i have saiid if the aircraft prooves itself and ends up making a profit then so what if it was late, at least it wasn't cancelled!!!
Cockpit and nose manufacturing is in St Nazaire (France), not Toulouse. And there is no many carbon parts on this aircraft. First all engine run was done today, first flight as soon as possible (1 month)
i wish modern warfare 2 had both the A400M and the AC130... and this is the first time i figured out that the plane at 00:21 is actually real, i thought it was always photoshopped... (but o/c im no aviation enthusiast)
oh dear south africa have pulled out of contract (06/11/09) citing delays and rising costs for the plane airbus now have to refund them, guess the antonov an70 is the darling of the party
Actually the A400M is not completely built from carbon fibre. the fuselage is aluminium. The wing is mainly CF but has several aluminium bits. While its wing span and length may not be much larger than the C130 stretched version (C130K Mk 3 and C130J Mk 4) its cargo hold is much bigger as the fuselage is a lot fatter and it can carry almost twice the payload.
This would be impressive if the C-17 didn't already do what it does, but better.C-17 carries more than twice the cargo for a further range. The only advantage I can see is a shorter take off and displacement of the A400M. Aside from the technical aspect, the C-17 was on time and in production. The RAF have had to buy 6 C-17s, with potentially another 2. They were only planning on leasing 4 to cover the hole in lift capability. It's a bit of a white whale really.
Turboprops have better short takeoff, slow, short distance performance and are more fuel efficient. Turbofans are better in the high speed cruse and are quieter.
the fuck is this music??
Guitargod4ever45 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The C130 is improved but still carrys its old 50s design. It has a brand new design that cannot be matched just by making a longer aircraft.
G777GUN 11 months ago
Terrible music
c53204 11 months ago
Crappy German music!
acridotherestristis 1 year ago
Maldita musica flooger.
LivinkG3 1 year ago
ey musik ?
arturboj 1 year ago
Germans will always beat us in engineering. That's because all the mexicans come and make it hard for us to find people who can go for 24 hours without drinking alcohol and are skilled in anything but injecting heroin. good thing the nazi's were there own race, otherwise there would be a german flag over france. who cares, let the fag's take care of them selves.
PSNgregiskool 1 year ago
Worst music choise ever
Pvjinflight 2 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
AircraftCompare DOTcom provides exact details of around every aircraft in the world from the past present to the FUTURE FLYING CARS, with photos specs price and everything else. Compare side by side the Boeing 747 and the Airbus A380 or the MIG with the F16 etc, get access to category wise airplane and helicopter rankings, meet the prominent figures from the aerospace industry through the community..
aircraftcompare 2 years ago
terrible noise(music)
Bluesbrothe 2 years ago 9
This has been flagged as spam show
Dear All,
I have some questions about psychology:
(1) Why do we love flying?
(2) Why do we always want to build new aeroplanes?
(3) Why do we think that building new aeroplanes is a representation of our success?
(4) Why do we think that "working together" is so important for designing and building new aeroplanes?
THANK YOU IN ADVANCE for your creative ideas and brainstorm!!! :)
applesweeter 2 years ago
Comment removed
motormonkeyNL 2 years ago
kind of copy from Antonov 70.. very similar as for me.. First flight of Antonov was in 16 December 1994..
MrKhayrula 2 years ago 2
haha, hm, i dont think that any european (europe stops where poland begins) manufacturer does copy anything from russia ;)
doktorlindblood 2 years ago
Everybody are trying to use some successful ideas of other manufactures :)
Truly speaking I don't believe that such similarity is just kind of coincidence. I can tell you that 10 years ago (or more) there was a group of AIRBUS agents in Antonov. The general idea of AIRBUS at that time was to use AN-70 with their avionics due to luck of money for own A-400 project. So, they had almost full access to aircraft.
P.S. Antonov is Ukrainian manufacturer :)
MrKhayrula 2 years ago
@MrKhayrula Yes they look identical! the A-400 M has counter rotating props just like... ah, no it doesent. Well, the A-400M has a "T" tail just like the AN-70... oh, the An70 doesent. Anyway, they both have Air-to-air refuelling... oh, the AN-70 doesent.
05u16hep 1 year ago
@05u16hep lol. I recently heard someone say the su-47 was just like the x-29. Yup, just like it, twice its size, with a lifting body, two engines, twin rudders, and horizontal tail stubs. Well they both have wings right? :-) *yawn*
NikitasGuitars 1 year ago
Why do you people compare a plane that was basically finished in 1954 with one that is basically finished this year? The C130 has proven its worth and has been refit and reviewed over the years with growing experience from billions of miles flewn with it. Lets relax until the first hundreds of these are being in use for a few years. Guess which countries were able to afford a C130 in the 1950's .... ...
chfreund 2 years ago 14
@chfreund guess what country could barely afford a C130 today...sadly america is soon collapsing, again...Bad for the rest of the world....
Firelife3 1 year ago
@chfreund Because the A400m will be replacing the C130 in many airforces i think its very important that the two be compared.
Aliasify 1 year ago
This baby is smaller than a C5, smaller than a C17, but its bigger as an C130.
It is the biggest plane able to do "tactical flying" like super-low-level flying and deploying of cargo, it is able to refuel eurofighters an Planes because it is able to fly really fast (over 700 km/h) and really slow (less than 200 km/h). It has the latest self-defense and it has the ability to use semi-prepared runways to start and land .. no other is having all those features combined. The A400M is a great plane!
Fragxecutioner 2 years ago 8
tihs aircraft looks a bit like a C-5
josephmileswitts 2 years ago 2
name of the song??
conchetumadreperro 2 years ago 2
great music :D
ixylon07 2 years ago 3
music ^^ ?
AThundeR76 2 years ago 3
mental music
mixxmexx 2 years ago
crappy music
Colamix90 2 years ago
whitewing.. totally agree I now work on the A380 systems integration programme and it is yet to make a profit. When an aircraft is delivered late to agreement the manufacturer pays the airline a huge compensation which delayed profitability of the380 for possibly another couple of years and will be the same for the 787.. eventually both will be cash cows
cavvy88 2 years ago
verdebuster.. what are you talking about?. from someone that has worked on the A400M project in filton I can tell you that all aircraft are built by a loads of companies. billions over budget?.. laughable, would of been crapped years ago if that was true. Airbus does not have the sole task of building the A400M, it comes from all different suppliers all over the world.. the reason for the delay?.. the same reason for the delay of the boeing 787 dreamliner.. bad quality from numerous suppliers!
cavvy88 2 years ago
Comment removed
Aureus302 2 years ago
wrong, again, different companies may supply the parts but utilmately the company in this case Airbus is managing the construction , two
no it would have ,reason why the A400M survived so long despite being over budget is that fact that European countries are trying to break Boeing's and lockheed's monoply on military transport
as they currently the makers in NATO as well outside too
the 787 , unlike the predessors , was constructed in a new way, hench the delays
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
to clarifty the new the construction method that Boeing used
rather than buying parts, they brought the parts in a more assembled form in a effort to speed up construction at a lesser cost but the subcontractors had a hard time dealing with the extra strain
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
And yes F35 is a GROUND combat aircraft. And large aircraft are just as difficult to build. When you are given a certain limit for specs. Basically if you are going to build a new aircraft it should be better than its predecesor. Also more fuel efficient. Lighter. Good maintenance ability. Better design.
Just basically better. And of course when making a brand new aircraft there is bound to be a few kinks in the road along the way. But i believe they have done it. This plane fits the year 2015!
G777GUN 2 years ago
transports are not that hard to built
up till now,
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
CONFIRMED FIRST FLIGHT: 11-DEC-2009
siliconaconcarne 2 years ago 2
La musique est pourrie comme d'hab.
TheDany649 2 years ago
its bigger than the legacy C-130 by alot
but only a few feet bigger than the newer C-130J, so far ,the A400M has posted projected specs that are really dont exceed the C-130Js by much
then the fact that its so behind schedule, makes it worse
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
but its faster and has modern computer systems
aphasia1972 2 years ago
Your talking about aircraft being beihind their production time scale, Look at the Eurofighter Typhoon that was over 10 years behind schedule and ended up with the Frnch pulling out and going alone and producing the Rafale. Now everyone loves the Typhoon and its one of the top Front-Line Fighters. So what if the A400 is behind Schedule, as long as it does its job and does it well and it ends up a great aircraft in my eyes Airbus deserve credit
whitewingsrich 2 years ago
no I am talkin about plane that 3 to 4 behind schedule, and billions over budget
and its production time scale is completely out the window, the EF is not an example because Airbus has the sole task of building the A400M
the EF is built by four seperate companies so delays with the EF was to be expected, the A400M has no excuse for its disaterous development
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
Hey, verdebusterAP the A400M is a flyin.
WHAT
THE
FUCK
do not, i mean NOT call this aircraft a disastrous development. May i remind you of the F35 Pigeon. This aircraft may be 12 tons or somthing overweight but it is still an amazing achievment by Airbus.
Just like the F35 with its supercruise + VTOL ability.
The A400M will only be disastrous if no one buys one damn aircraft. But after proving it flys, that a few countrys are looking at that aircraft are just drooling!
G777GUN 2 years ago
Hey G777GUN, get to fuck over it
againt bad example
F-35 is combat aircraft, the A400M is a simple transport,,designing transports is childs play compared to do designing combat aircraft
12 tons overweight means its ability to carry its projected max weight will be hampered,
right now, Airbus has 184 orders and that really it wheres the C-130J deliveries have exceeded that figure
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
Do you even know how much the A400M costs. Its well, in wikipedia says: Unit cost 100 million euros. possibly more. How much does the C-130J cost. The design is old. The aircraft is basically all extension and no aerodynamic improvment. The electronics are nowhere near as good as the A400M and its only around 2 metres wider, 2 metres higher and 10 metres longer.
Thats Brilliant!!!
G777GUN 2 years ago
lol
bad move G777GUN
the A400M is 150 USD to 65 USD for C-130J
the newer J is more attractive as its price and operational cost are far less the A400M
the explain I used earlier is post a couple days ago, it explain an order placed by the QuAF
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
What do you mean bad move. I know it costs more than the C-130J. But you get more from this aircraft. And as I said the C-130 is an old design. And you get a hell of a lot more from the A400M. Thats why it costs more. Its BETTER!!!!!
G777GUN 2 years ago 2
exactly why it can't compete with the J
few countries can afford a plane with this price , tag, a country can have 4 J at 248 mil and throw in 152 spare parts and training
,whereas 4 A400M is 600 for starters, then parts and training for the countries who have not been with project since start
another 200-300, its simple math and economics
you get less but save more
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
Technologically it is more modern and more multi-purpose the airbus A400M. Of all the tasks that can make, it is to refuel fuel while it flies, so its flight capacity to arrive to any place of the world without landing to refuel, is limitless
LordBuntaro 2 years ago 4
I wasn't using the EF as an example i was just saying it is not the first time aircraft have been late. The 787 rolled out late, so did the A380. Both of those 2 planes were late and over budget its something you just have to accept in the aviation world. As i have saiid if the aircraft prooves itself and ends up making a profit then so what if it was late, at least it wasn't cancelled!!!
whitewingsrich 2 years ago
Cockpit and nose manufacturing is in St Nazaire (France), not Toulouse. And there is no many carbon parts on this aircraft. First all engine run was done today, first flight as soon as possible (1 month)
arleboqueen 2 years ago
i wish modern warfare 2 had both the A400M and the AC130... and this is the first time i figured out that the plane at 00:21 is actually real, i thought it was always photoshopped... (but o/c im no aviation enthusiast)
FPVsean 2 years ago
oh dear south africa have pulled out of contract (06/11/09) citing delays and rising costs for the plane airbus now have to refund them, guess the antonov an70 is the darling of the party
dragon825 2 years ago
not likely , its another Sale for the C-130J for simple fact that its on time in and production and has an excellent track record so far
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
Actually the A400M is not completely built from carbon fibre. the fuselage is aluminium. The wing is mainly CF but has several aluminium bits. While its wing span and length may not be much larger than the C130 stretched version (C130K Mk 3 and C130J Mk 4) its cargo hold is much bigger as the fuselage is a lot fatter and it can carry almost twice the payload.
OsborneDave 2 years ago
that's the interesting part, the A400m claims to exceed the C-130J but by much
C-130J operates at an average load of 33,000kg
the A400M is suppose to be 37,000,
so off the bat, your only getting 4,000 kg in weight and 80km faster plane
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
honestly what is killing this progam is the shear lack of progess
verdebusterAP 2 years ago
This would be impressive if the C-17 didn't already do what it does, but better.C-17 carries more than twice the cargo for a further range. The only advantage I can see is a shorter take off and displacement of the A400M. Aside from the technical aspect, the C-17 was on time and in production. The RAF have had to buy 6 C-17s, with potentially another 2. They were only planning on leasing 4 to cover the hole in lift capability. It's a bit of a white whale really.
BertrumPantyshield 2 years ago
38 tonnes maximun load i suppose
95predator 2 years ago
turbofans are turbines
Ravenwing3000 2 years ago
looks a lot like a combination between the c-5 and c-130
27Cardoza 2 years ago
that New A400M looks like the C130. is this a new Millitary Transport or is this a new Comercial regional aircraft?
sideslide23 2 years ago
Military/Civilian Cargo.
HeavyLikesSandwich 2 years ago
because turbofans, in desert regions are more vulnerable than turboprop, turbo fans were sandblasted in sandy regions.
I know this, because i work at Airbus Germany, Hamburg
Ravenwing3000 2 years ago
what is the differents between turboprop and turbofans?
benten0000 2 years ago
A turboprop is a propeller powered by a jet turbine.
A turbofan is a fan enclosed in a duct powered by a jet turbine.
You can have low, medium and high bypass turbofans.
LooseRivet2103 2 years ago
why did they choose to use gigantic turboprops instead of turbofans?
cnknguyen 2 years ago
Turboprops have better short takeoff, slow, short distance performance and are more fuel efficient. Turbofans are better in the high speed cruse and are quieter.
LooseRivet2103 2 years ago
Good video man!!!!
jlopezraygon4 2 years ago
When is thing due to enter service?
Yet again, another overdue project which includes the UK. Just stick to the C17's. Be far less hastle
We8City 2 years ago
First delivery in 2012 I think...
solbergsindre 2 years ago
the delays hasnt been due to the UK production however.
its main problem is being overweight and not carrying the required amount for an armoured vehicle, which it was supposed to do.
Toxicseagull 2 years ago
very good vid !
filipe026 2 years ago
what an awesome plane!! the tech on that thing is incredible...
spongebo13 2 years ago