A400M transport tests will continue

The test program of the military transporter A400M will continue, despite the recent car crash in Spain, reports MIC with reference to an Airbus representative.

“We are not suspending our own flight test program,” the company said. Earlier flights of these machines were banned in Britain, Germany, Malaysia and Turkey.

The fall of A400M occurred on May 9 in Spain. According to media reports, "around 13: 00 local time (14: 00 Moscow time), the plane crashed into the Coca-Cola plant shortly after takeoff, six people were on board, four of them died, two were hospitalized in a critical condition."

It was the first test flight after assembly. A minute of silence passed in all European offices yesterday in memory of those killed in the crash.

Comments

[Metallurgist]

Yes, it was Boeing who encouraged them ...
And then, somehow, Boeing is doing quite well: their planes are falling, but there is no Airbus. Technical, panim, diversion ...

[jjj]

Recently, they have approximate equality, God forgive me

[vodolaz]

Poorly licked Antonov’s documentation?

[Dmitry Volodin]

Yeah, the file is not processed

[viktorrymar]

AN 70 also did not immediately fly, but this 400 is very similar to it.

[insafufa]

Quote: viktorrymar

AN 70 also did not immediately fly, but this 400 is very similar to it.

Antonov also proceeded to Airbas joint development even signed an agreement and handed over the documentation to the Italians, and the collaboration ended the same as with Yak-130 he worked out the cable to Yakovlev, handed over the documentation and the Italians rivet their version and do not bother

So development in Europe is many times more expensive

[avt]

Quote: insafufa

Antonov also continued to airbus

They were planning to build An-7X with the Germans, having localized part of the production in Germany.

Quote: insafufa

and passed the documentation to the Italians on this and the collaboration ended

Again by. They didn’t transmit anything, well then, of course, but they made it familiar. What actually is clearly seen when comparing the propeller group. The airplane after ETGO sold its No. 400 and vowed that An would not fly in series. As a result, they brought their liquid shit to a solid state. No. 400 is worse than An-70, and besides, they could not stand their own, declared characteristics.

[Aviaded]

And what is actually seen when comparing the propeller group? In An-70 and A400M, they are completely different. An-70 has coaxial propellers, which the A400M does not have. Therefore, their gearboxes are completely different. The blades, by the way, too. Because the working conditions of coaxial and conventional propellers are different, which leads to a different design of the blades. Structurally, these aircraft are also very different. For example, look at the vertical tail. Nothing like that. The external difference leads to completely different solutions in the power elements of the airframe. This is at first sight. And if you look closely, and also dig deeper, then there will be a lot of differences. In general, all the talk that Airbus copied the An-70 is from the category of bazaars, that they say Kalashnikov "licked" the design of the StG-43.

[kil 31]

Perhaps it is the old Spanish communists "but a passaran". On May 9, the plane of the French, who had previously supported Franco, crashed, along with the bourgeois Coca-Cola plant.

[Dangerous]

In fact, new technology is being tested, and rarely do they pass without disasters. And your comment on this is stupid and inappropriate. Recently, there are more such "Petrosyans" here than really smart people, unfortunately ...

[ancient]

Quote: Dangerous

... Recently, there are more such "Petrosyans" here than really smart people, unfortunately ...

As I agree with you! +!

The quote from the article - "" at about 13:00 local time (14:00 Moscow time), shortly after takeoff, the plane crashed into the Coca-Cola plant ... "

"Where" there is "the territory of the plant ...." ... is it 2 km from the runway end? Somewhere in the area of ​​BPRM and ARP there is a filling workshop

[aviator1913]

In general, the BPRM at a distance of 1 km is approximately, and the ARP generally almost goes in the center, from the CTA meters 250

[Alexey Boukin]

Quote: Dangerous

Recently, there are more such "Petrosyans" here than really smart people, unfortunately ...

I totally agree.

[aviator1913]

Well, the 400 actually turned out to be good, I say from the point of view of aircraft builders, the workshops are very new for it, everything is clean and technological, and the fact that the accident happened, well, tests are done for that, it rarely happens without catastrophes.
Mastering the market for military cargo, commendable. The greater the competition, the greater the quality and lower the price, so the 400 will still make some noise here.

[ma_shlomha]

I join completely. For a rank of 40 tons it feels like engineers and marketers made a successful car.

[dvvv]

there is an opinion that the propeller-driven version of the engines itself is prone to accidents when even one engine fails on take-off. It seems to me that the current-generation aircraft stuffed with electronics and program-controlled aircraft behave unpredictably in case of failures, although this rarely happens.

[ancient]

Quote: dvvv

there is an opinion that the propeller-driven version of the engines itself is prone to accidents when even one engine fails on take-off.

And what is the difference between the failure to take off an ordinary theater?
After all, the AFV system, which is on "simple screws", which is on the "fans" is the same in the principle of action .. the conditions for takeoff must be observed ... ie. normal Gvzl. and a normal temperature .. then, in principle, if you do not "gape the mitten", then on a 4 "motor" apparatus you can continue to take off ... automatic and timely actuation of the AFV system, then there will be such a "negative thrust" effect (this is when the propeller blades in their plane tend to go to small angles of attack, becoming across the incoming flow and create drop dead great resistance), then ... God will not save ... where they refused ... there and ... you will "find yourself" (the aerodynamics of the "free falling brick" has not yet been canceled, unfortunately

[passenger]

Sorry for the people. Let the earth rest in peace.

[Redfox3k]

The tail is from IL-76, the cockpit is from s-130, the propellers are from the an-70, here is a modern cool airplane.

[akudr48]

Somewhere in the second half of the 90s, there was a lot of fuss around the AN-70 for their possible licensed production in the west, for Europe and for the whole world. And its surroundings. Again, our Ukrainian "partners" tried to push Russia away from the skin of a bear that had not yet been killed.

To my knowledge, they gave the documentation, of course, not for free, such as a VCR.

[dvvv]

Quote: ancient

And what is the difference between the failure to take off an ordinary theater? request
After all, the AFV system, both on "simple screws" and on "fans", is similar in principle of action.

--- exactly .... only the consequences are different. The propeller fan has a large frontal resistance and if it doesn’t feel wet, then there is a sharp drop in speed and airflow on the take-off ... They say this landed the An-70 once ... In short, a failure of this type of engine even if 1pc out of 4px will lead to disaster. .. if on takeoff. Although, being an amateur, I am still glad for the ingloriously lost An-70. Beautiful tar and flies beautifully ... it is a pity that politicians killed him.

[aviator1913]

Yes, politicians know how to turn the work of engineers and workers into dust, if only the word "prettier" sounded for the "electorate" .. That ours, that Ukrainian, that European ...