Ryan130 Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 Many of you have probably already seen this, but for you that haven\'t check out this link. http://www.air-attack.com/news/news_article/3239/First-A400M-Military-Transporter-Rolled-Out.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Kind of looks like a mini C141 with props we will see what it can do when it starts flying and what others think of it. Bill Miller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herkeng Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Bill The aerial shot in the article made me look twice. I thought is was a \"Star Lizard\" for a second. Just needs the \"B\" model plug and it would pass for one. I agree with ya, give it some time, it may be a good bird, then again it may not. Herkeng Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Yea, if the it performs has stated in there handout it will put a hurt on Lockheed J model. Since it can carry a bigger payload and do short field work and hav the range we shall see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unfast1 Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Put on some winglets and get rid of the props and it looks like a mini C-17 to me. Even has the strakes on the cargo door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEFEGeorge Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Just noticed while looking at the pics again, that the 2 engines on each wing rotate opposite each other. Or so it seems from looking at the props. I\'m sure that there\'s a reason for it, but not sure what it could be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskeyglenn Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Go to airbusmilitary.com I think they do turn in oposition directions. I\'m no pilot, but didn\'t the pilot in a c-130 have to kick in full right rudder rudder on takeoff roll to compensate for engine torque. Straight line thrust Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GerryShaw Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Hi the reason the props rotate in opposite directions is quite simple; basically if all four props rotate the same way this makes the plane want to turn off in the opposite direction, a stability problem particularly if you have huge great engines like the A400M. Note that the only bigger turboprop engine ever is the Kuznetsov unit fitted to the Tu-95 Bear and some other less well known aircraft. These are fitted with a pair of contra-rotating props for the same reason. So Airbus opted for \"down between the engines\", with the inboard on each wing rotating clockwise and the outboard in the other direction. Someone was castigating the French for doing this under the assumption that there would have to be two types of engines, a clockwise and an counterclockwise variant, which would bring logistic and manufacturing problems. However the Frenchies (and Brits and Germans and Spanish and Italians in Airbus) thought of that, there is only one type of engine which rotates the prop in different directions depending on how it is geared. Yrs GerryShaw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncleglenn Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 It has been over 32 years since I was on 130\'s, but I think the T.O. 1-1 (C130)has a blurb that the vertical Stab is offset (L.E. to the right) a number of degrees to compensate for the torque pull. It\'s pretty \"hazy\", but it may be in the maintenance T.O.\'s. Can any one confirm this? Glenn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoCrow Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Vmca / P-factor - counter rotating props have a benefit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetcal1 Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 JoCrow wrote: Vmca / P-factor - counter rotating props have a benefit. C/R props enable the prop to rotate inboard on the downward side of the rotation. Props develop more lift while rotating down then when up. This keeps the majority of the thrust working towards the inboard side of the aircraft and closer to the rudders. At least this what all the books I have read on aerodynamics have stated. The French appear to have found another reason to rotate the blades towards each other. Testing and time will tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyclark Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 South Africa is paying 830 Million Euro for 8 aircraft. That\'s 100 million a piece, which converts to about $180 million for us. Hmmm, that\'s a J-model and a couple C27 Spartans thrown in. Anyone know what guns they are putting on the C27 Gunship, BTW? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEFEGeorge Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 When I went through Red Flag in \'83 were had a forum discussion on something. During the conversation we discussed the scenario of a flight of Hercs flying to Europe during a conflict in Europe, and the feasibility of protecting the formation. One suggestion was arming a few Hercs with missiles, Sidewinders, etc., and have them flying as part of the formation. The theory was that by them hiding with the formation that they could lock on and launch their missiles against any attacking aircraft. Guess it never caught on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.