Comments by "Orbital_Inclination" (@Orbital_Inclination) on "RAF celebrates 10 years of 'dream to fly' A400M Atlas" video.

 @jado3069 it's more expensive to operate two separate types, even if one is cheaper per flying hour
12
Flying characteristics and ease to operate are different things to capability. Being an airbus aircraft with a lot of automation, the thing is pretty care-free to operate.
9
Those kinds of issues get dealt with through modification programmes, as a fairly standard part of most airframes development through service life. C-17 had a complete wing spar redesign and replacement, and Typhoon had speedbrake adjustments as a result of unforeseen turbulence fatigue on the tail. These things happen. Simulation in the design stage and early flying trials can't catch everything, which is one of the reasons we have continuing airworthiness management in the armed forces.
6
 @marcg1686 C-17 was also almost cancelled, and the entire fleet needed new wing spars early on in production due to design defects. Nowadays it's an absolute workhorse.
5
It has more control redundancy than any mechanically controlled aircraft, as the wires don't have to follow the same routings to control surfaces. Digital cockpits are also more reliable than analogue instruments, and if one screen fails, the information can be replicated on the others. They also have reversionary backup modes.
5
@JeanBatiste5158 so you'd rather we developed an inferior aircraft with a far more limited budget and manufacturing capability, than produced a decent aircraft as a joint effort? Another case of pointless nationalism coming before common sense or military effectiveness.
4
Captain and co-pilot sit on the left and right respectively, but share the flying between them as Pilot Flying and Pilot Monitoring, so the stick location is just something they have to learn to deal with.
4
Kabul happened because of Trump. He set the entire Afghan withdrawal timeline by negotiating with the Taliban rather than the Afghan govt. He literally chose to negotiate with terrorists, before going to suck up to Putin and Kim Jong Un, because he loves an authoritarian regime.
3
Typhoon wasn't popular with Germany because of WWII, when Typhoons used to strafe their troops. A400M was originally going to be called Grizzly, but the RAF seniors hated that name, so opted for Atlas instead.
2
 @Jimmythefish577 no, the air force can still deliver the output asked of it, its just being asked too much of for the size of it
2
That tends to happen with newer platforms. They get better with age. The A400M is also more capable.
1
The Hawk production line last produced aircraft a couple of years ago, but collaborative efforts like this make perfect sense as we can pool budgets and resources, for economies of scale we otherwise couldn't achieve
1
Not really, just all the teething problems expected of a new type. C-17 was the same, we just bought into that programme after the US had done all the hard work, rather than being involved from day 1
1
Not really, just understaffed for what is asked of them. We still manage to deliver on taskings routinely, but it takes a toll on the workforce as there aren't enough people to spread the burden.
1
22
1
A C-17s cost per flying hour is £42k. Its hard to imagine that the A400M is any more costly per hour, so that £600k figure is highly suspect. Its more likely the request was denied as it's a broadly pointless use of military air transport capability when civil alternatives were available.
1
Old aircraft? In terms of fleet ages, we have one of the youngest fleets in the developed world.
1
@mark4371 how is the F-35 outdated? What an awfully misinformed take. F-35s had racked up over 500,000 hours worldwide in 2022. China flies one basic demo profile at an airshow and all the idiots come crawling out of the woodwork proclaiming them as the next messiah of the aviation world.
1
 @mac2626 they weren't all in maintenance. They had none available for the flypast tasking, but there were some fulfilling operational taskings which take priority.
1