欧洲人想把A400M卖给美国

来源:百度文库 编辑:超级军网 时间:2024/05/02 09:51:15
http://www.flightglobal.com/arti ... rket-spotlight.html
A400M poised for US market spotlight
By Stephen Trimble



Neil Smith has a tough assignment. For the next several years, the EADS North America director's task is to sell a European-built airlifter to a US military that now acknowledges no shortage of large transport aircraft.

Working under EADS NA vice-president for air force programmes Charles Coolidge, Smith's dogged sales job has been overshadowed in the past few years by the company's more high-profile pursuit of the prized US Air Force KC-X tanker contract.


  1.jpg


EADS believes there is scope for the A400M's capabilities in the US military. Picture: Airbus Military  



But the US sales push for the Airbus Military A400M "Grizzly" is poised to become the company's primary opportunity for new business in the US market after the KC-X contract is awarded in November.

EADS believes the USAF has a hole in its airlift force structure wide enough to comfortably park an A400M. "There's a near-term gap," Smith says. "There's only one non-developmental solution that's going to be ready in time to fill that gap and it's the A400M."

EADS's corporate leaders have started laying the public foundations for an A400M sales campaign in the US market, with its chief executive Louis Gallois and North American chief executive Sean O'Keefe making the case for a future USAF purchase during the Farnborough air show in July. "The number of US defence officials who have requested to see the A400M at Farnborough is at record levels," O'Keefe said on the eve of the show.

  


2.jpg
The A400M can carry about twice the weight of the C-130. Picture: Airbus Military



AGGRESSIVE STRATEGY
The remarks are a preview of an aggressive strategy that will gain in momentum over the next 12 months. By early 2012, EADS plans to fly the A400M on a public tour of USAF and US Army bases, providing demonstration flights to pilots and logistics planners and featuring the Grizzly's advertised ability to land on short and rough fields.

Orchestrating the increasingly active EADS NA sales push is Smith, a former USAF logistics planner who managed the service's airlift mission during the Serbian air war in 1999. It was Smith's job to deliver supplies to the airport of Albania's capital Tirana, which became bogged down in an intractable layer of mud.

"The army was taking its vehicles and driving all over the ramps," Smith recalls. "That was a mud hole. Puddles mean nothing and mud means nothing [to military airlifters]. The aircraft go through mud on taxiways. The problem is mud dries, and mud becomes clumps."

Standing between Smith and a signed contract in the US market are several major barriers, not least of which is the USAF's stated determination to reduce its airlift fleet rather than expand with an all-new type.

"We are in an overcapacity situation, so retiring some [aircraft] because we don't need it is okay, but buying more so that we retire more is certainly not the way the department needs to be balancing its business in this airlift system," Alan Estevez, assistant deputy undersecretary of defence for supply chain integration, testified during a hearing on airlift by the Senate on 14 July.

In stark contrast to many global air forces, USAF officials are adamant that the service has too many airlifters. With 111 Lockheed Martin C-5s in inventory, 222 Boeing C-17s on order and up to 430 C-130s in the fleet, persuading the USAF to buy scores more airlifters seems one of Smith's most daunting challenges.

Another factor Smith must overcome is the perception of the A400M as a European-built platform. The outcome of the KC-X competition may expand or contract the limits of the US military's tolerance for equipment designed in another country. But proposing a new aircraft in a market with entrenched competition from US companies has proven problematic.

Finally, Smith faces the perception of the A400M as a poster child of a troubled aerospace development project. After the latest round of schedule delays and cost overruns, Smith's counterparts across the Atlantic Ocean are even now seeking to finalise a new contract with European governments buying A400Ms.

But Smith's sales campaign for the A400M has certain trends in its favour. The US government acknowledges the USAF's immense airlift fleet faces a critical capability gap. Last October, the Government Accountability Office issued a report on the airlift fleet that concludes the USAF is deficient in one area.

"There is a potential future gap in tactical airlift capabilities for transporting medium- weight army equipment that cannot fit on C-130 aircraft," GAO auditors wrote in a November 2009 report on the airlift fleet.

The USAF may have no shortage of airlifers, but does it have the right kind of aircraft?


3.jpg


Lockheed has revealed a glimpse of the C-130XL, which widens the Hercules' cargo box. Picture: Lockheed Martin




EADS NA is not the only defence contractor that sees a need for something different in the USAF inventory. Both major aircraft suppliers to Air Mobility Command have unveiled new versions of airframes currently in production. Last year, Lockheed revealed a glimpse of the C-130XL, which widens the Hercules' cargo box that is now limited to just over 3m (9.9ft) across on the cargo ramp.

Boeing, meanwhile, proposed a C-17B advanced tactical airlifter several years ago, which adds a centreline landing gear and other changes to improve the aircraft's ability to land on the ground rather than a runway. In July, Boeing unveiled a variant of the C-17B proposal. The new concept narrows the C-17 airframe by about 1.3m, making it slightly wider, but still longer than the A400M.


4.jpg


The USAF has 222 Boeing C-17s on order: could it find room for the A400M as well? Picture: Boeing



TACTICAL AIRLIFT MISSION
The idea of a new aircraft for the tactical airlift mission has been around for decades. In the early 1970s, the end of the Vietnam War coincided with the USAF's failure to immediately launch production of a jet-powered, short-take-off-and-landing airlifter to replace the C-130E.

The prototypes of the Boeing YC-15 and McDonnell Douglas YC-14 were abandoned, although the latter's technology was later applied to the much larger C-17.

In the late 1980s, the USAF also pursued the advanced medium STOL transport (AMST), which was also cancelled. The USAF instead encouraged Lockheed to launch the C-130J, an improved version of the C-130 but retaining the same cargo box size introduced in 1954.

In the past decade, however, the US Army's ground mobility equipment has grown larger and wider. While the C-130 could squeeze in an up-armoured Humvee, the Hercules is unable to carry the new class of Stryker and mine-resistant ambush protection vehicles.

"So for a future airlifter you need something with payload and cargo-carrying dimensions to not only transport the thing, but to be able to deliver it directly to combat," Smith says. "You don't want to wait for [the vehicle's] slat armour to come on the next airplane."

The cross-section of the A400M cargo compartment is slightly more than 1m wider than the C-130. The A400M can also carry about twice the weight of the C-130. Its dimensions allow it to carry any military ground vehicle in the US Army inventory up to the size of a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, Smith says.

Smith thinks the nature of the tactical airlift mission is undergoing a fundamental change. It may no longer be enough to support ground forces using a network of bases centred on runways or even semi-prepared airfields, he says.

"It could be a road. It could be a field. So that's what they're looking for," Smith says. "And that makes you unpredictable. If I have lots of straight road, then I can change where I'm going. If I have a field and it's big I just keep landing on that, and once I eat that up [through repeated landings] I just move over 500ft and eat up that section."

That concept is actually the basis for a future airlifter concept on the drawing boards at Air Mobility Command. Called the Joint Future Theatre Lift (JFTL), the idea has been the subject of an internal debate. Some army officials say they need a vertical take-off capability, but the USAF has favoured an aircraft that can take off from an unimproved surface in 460m.

The USAF is preparing to launch an analysis of alternatives to lay the groundwork for launching a programme of record to develop and build a JFTL. But the timeline for producing an operational product is 15 years away, and will require billions of dollars of new investment even as military budgets are expected to contract. Smith believes that creates the perfect opening for the A400M, which is due to be ready for delivery to the USAF after 2015.

"It's a low-risk, non-developmental option for the United States. People are developing all kinds of stuff [to fill the same gap]. But they're all Powerpoint slides. We're no longer on Powerpoint slides, and we can't lie to you about its capabilities."

The key to Smith's sales pitch is one particular design feature. The A400M should be able to repeatedly land on a surface as soft and rough as a ploughed field, although that has not yet been validated in flight tests. The objective is to land on such a surface carrying a Stryker-sized vehicle. "It's flying what won't fit into a C-130 into places where a C-17 can't land," Smith says. "That's the gap."

Compared with the JFTL concept, the A400M needs nearly twice the distance to take off with a similar cargo load, but Smith thinks that can be set aside. "It may turn out that the [solution for the] near-term gap is good enough for the long term," he says. "If I'm runway independent, does it make any difference if I land in 2,800ft as opposed to 1,500ft? They haven't done the analysis to know that yet."

In February, Smith disclosed that EADS had submitted an unsolicited proposal to the USAF for 118 A400Ms, saying the entire acquisition cost could be financed with yearly operating savings generated from retiring the C-5A fleet and the oldest C-130Hs. A Lockheed executive criticised that strategy as "the ultimate in fuzzy math", noting that at the time EADS was not even publicly commenting on the final cost of the A400M programme.

In theory, the EADS proposal would address the USAF's concerns about growing an airlift fleet the service considers too large.

"AMC is going to have C-5s, C-17s and C-130Js for a long time," Smith says. "We're not telling them to throw that away. But you have a gap, and you have things operating in realms they don't do well in. So you're an inefficient fleet. If you add the A400M to the mix you not only fill the gap, you become more efficient."

Smith declines to comment on specifics about cost, saying the price would depend on quantity and the pace of deliveries. Some US contractors have recently offered fixed-priced deals on other contracts as the Department of Defense has grown more risk averse.

Could EADS offer a fixed-priced A400M deal? "I won't get into that," says Smith. "The original contract we had was a fixed-price contract. Let that be said. But we don't know."

EADS elaborates: "The requirement hasn't been formally developed. It's premature to come up with pricing for the US market."http://www.flightglobal.com/arti ... rket-spotlight.html
A400M poised for US market spotlight
By Stephen Trimble



Neil Smith has a tough assignment. For the next several years, the EADS North America director's task is to sell a European-built airlifter to a US military that now acknowledges no shortage of large transport aircraft.

Working under EADS NA vice-president for air force programmes Charles Coolidge, Smith's dogged sales job has been overshadowed in the past few years by the company's more high-profile pursuit of the prized US Air Force KC-X tanker contract.


  1.jpg


EADS believes there is scope for the A400M's capabilities in the US military. Picture: Airbus Military  



But the US sales push for the Airbus Military A400M "Grizzly" is poised to become the company's primary opportunity for new business in the US market after the KC-X contract is awarded in November.

EADS believes the USAF has a hole in its airlift force structure wide enough to comfortably park an A400M. "There's a near-term gap," Smith says. "There's only one non-developmental solution that's going to be ready in time to fill that gap and it's the A400M."

EADS's corporate leaders have started laying the public foundations for an A400M sales campaign in the US market, with its chief executive Louis Gallois and North American chief executive Sean O'Keefe making the case for a future USAF purchase during the Farnborough air show in July. "The number of US defence officials who have requested to see the A400M at Farnborough is at record levels," O'Keefe said on the eve of the show.

  


2.jpg
The A400M can carry about twice the weight of the C-130. Picture: Airbus Military



AGGRESSIVE STRATEGY
The remarks are a preview of an aggressive strategy that will gain in momentum over the next 12 months. By early 2012, EADS plans to fly the A400M on a public tour of USAF and US Army bases, providing demonstration flights to pilots and logistics planners and featuring the Grizzly's advertised ability to land on short and rough fields.

Orchestrating the increasingly active EADS NA sales push is Smith, a former USAF logistics planner who managed the service's airlift mission during the Serbian air war in 1999. It was Smith's job to deliver supplies to the airport of Albania's capital Tirana, which became bogged down in an intractable layer of mud.

"The army was taking its vehicles and driving all over the ramps," Smith recalls. "That was a mud hole. Puddles mean nothing and mud means nothing [to military airlifters]. The aircraft go through mud on taxiways. The problem is mud dries, and mud becomes clumps."

Standing between Smith and a signed contract in the US market are several major barriers, not least of which is the USAF's stated determination to reduce its airlift fleet rather than expand with an all-new type.

"We are in an overcapacity situation, so retiring some [aircraft] because we don't need it is okay, but buying more so that we retire more is certainly not the way the department needs to be balancing its business in this airlift system," Alan Estevez, assistant deputy undersecretary of defence for supply chain integration, testified during a hearing on airlift by the Senate on 14 July.

In stark contrast to many global air forces, USAF officials are adamant that the service has too many airlifters. With 111 Lockheed Martin C-5s in inventory, 222 Boeing C-17s on order and up to 430 C-130s in the fleet, persuading the USAF to buy scores more airlifters seems one of Smith's most daunting challenges.

Another factor Smith must overcome is the perception of the A400M as a European-built platform. The outcome of the KC-X competition may expand or contract the limits of the US military's tolerance for equipment designed in another country. But proposing a new aircraft in a market with entrenched competition from US companies has proven problematic.

Finally, Smith faces the perception of the A400M as a poster child of a troubled aerospace development project. After the latest round of schedule delays and cost overruns, Smith's counterparts across the Atlantic Ocean are even now seeking to finalise a new contract with European governments buying A400Ms.

But Smith's sales campaign for the A400M has certain trends in its favour. The US government acknowledges the USAF's immense airlift fleet faces a critical capability gap. Last October, the Government Accountability Office issued a report on the airlift fleet that concludes the USAF is deficient in one area.

"There is a potential future gap in tactical airlift capabilities for transporting medium- weight army equipment that cannot fit on C-130 aircraft," GAO auditors wrote in a November 2009 report on the airlift fleet.

The USAF may have no shortage of airlifers, but does it have the right kind of aircraft?


3.jpg


Lockheed has revealed a glimpse of the C-130XL, which widens the Hercules' cargo box. Picture: Lockheed Martin




EADS NA is not the only defence contractor that sees a need for something different in the USAF inventory. Both major aircraft suppliers to Air Mobility Command have unveiled new versions of airframes currently in production. Last year, Lockheed revealed a glimpse of the C-130XL, which widens the Hercules' cargo box that is now limited to just over 3m (9.9ft) across on the cargo ramp.

Boeing, meanwhile, proposed a C-17B advanced tactical airlifter several years ago, which adds a centreline landing gear and other changes to improve the aircraft's ability to land on the ground rather than a runway. In July, Boeing unveiled a variant of the C-17B proposal. The new concept narrows the C-17 airframe by about 1.3m, making it slightly wider, but still longer than the A400M.


4.jpg


The USAF has 222 Boeing C-17s on order: could it find room for the A400M as well? Picture: Boeing



TACTICAL AIRLIFT MISSION
The idea of a new aircraft for the tactical airlift mission has been around for decades. In the early 1970s, the end of the Vietnam War coincided with the USAF's failure to immediately launch production of a jet-powered, short-take-off-and-landing airlifter to replace the C-130E.

The prototypes of the Boeing YC-15 and McDonnell Douglas YC-14 were abandoned, although the latter's technology was later applied to the much larger C-17.

In the late 1980s, the USAF also pursued the advanced medium STOL transport (AMST), which was also cancelled. The USAF instead encouraged Lockheed to launch the C-130J, an improved version of the C-130 but retaining the same cargo box size introduced in 1954.

In the past decade, however, the US Army's ground mobility equipment has grown larger and wider. While the C-130 could squeeze in an up-armoured Humvee, the Hercules is unable to carry the new class of Stryker and mine-resistant ambush protection vehicles.

"So for a future airlifter you need something with payload and cargo-carrying dimensions to not only transport the thing, but to be able to deliver it directly to combat," Smith says. "You don't want to wait for [the vehicle's] slat armour to come on the next airplane."

The cross-section of the A400M cargo compartment is slightly more than 1m wider than the C-130. The A400M can also carry about twice the weight of the C-130. Its dimensions allow it to carry any military ground vehicle in the US Army inventory up to the size of a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, Smith says.

Smith thinks the nature of the tactical airlift mission is undergoing a fundamental change. It may no longer be enough to support ground forces using a network of bases centred on runways or even semi-prepared airfields, he says.

"It could be a road. It could be a field. So that's what they're looking for," Smith says. "And that makes you unpredictable. If I have lots of straight road, then I can change where I'm going. If I have a field and it's big I just keep landing on that, and once I eat that up [through repeated landings] I just move over 500ft and eat up that section."

That concept is actually the basis for a future airlifter concept on the drawing boards at Air Mobility Command. Called the Joint Future Theatre Lift (JFTL), the idea has been the subject of an internal debate. Some army officials say they need a vertical take-off capability, but the USAF has favoured an aircraft that can take off from an unimproved surface in 460m.

The USAF is preparing to launch an analysis of alternatives to lay the groundwork for launching a programme of record to develop and build a JFTL. But the timeline for producing an operational product is 15 years away, and will require billions of dollars of new investment even as military budgets are expected to contract. Smith believes that creates the perfect opening for the A400M, which is due to be ready for delivery to the USAF after 2015.

"It's a low-risk, non-developmental option for the United States. People are developing all kinds of stuff [to fill the same gap]. But they're all Powerpoint slides. We're no longer on Powerpoint slides, and we can't lie to you about its capabilities."

The key to Smith's sales pitch is one particular design feature. The A400M should be able to repeatedly land on a surface as soft and rough as a ploughed field, although that has not yet been validated in flight tests. The objective is to land on such a surface carrying a Stryker-sized vehicle. "It's flying what won't fit into a C-130 into places where a C-17 can't land," Smith says. "That's the gap."

Compared with the JFTL concept, the A400M needs nearly twice the distance to take off with a similar cargo load, but Smith thinks that can be set aside. "It may turn out that the [solution for the] near-term gap is good enough for the long term," he says. "If I'm runway independent, does it make any difference if I land in 2,800ft as opposed to 1,500ft? They haven't done the analysis to know that yet."

In February, Smith disclosed that EADS had submitted an unsolicited proposal to the USAF for 118 A400Ms, saying the entire acquisition cost could be financed with yearly operating savings generated from retiring the C-5A fleet and the oldest C-130Hs. A Lockheed executive criticised that strategy as "the ultimate in fuzzy math", noting that at the time EADS was not even publicly commenting on the final cost of the A400M programme.

In theory, the EADS proposal would address the USAF's concerns about growing an airlift fleet the service considers too large.

"AMC is going to have C-5s, C-17s and C-130Js for a long time," Smith says. "We're not telling them to throw that away. But you have a gap, and you have things operating in realms they don't do well in. So you're an inefficient fleet. If you add the A400M to the mix you not only fill the gap, you become more efficient."

Smith declines to comment on specifics about cost, saying the price would depend on quantity and the pace of deliveries. Some US contractors have recently offered fixed-priced deals on other contracts as the Department of Defense has grown more risk averse.

Could EADS offer a fixed-priced A400M deal? "I won't get into that," says Smith. "The original contract we had was a fixed-price contract. Let that be said. But we don't know."

EADS elaborates: "The requirement hasn't been formally developed. It's premature to come up with pricing for the US market."
做梦吧!

加油机都搞到现在呢
想 去替换C-130  ?~~~~~~~
欧洲人只是想通过恶心美国人来宣传自己而已。
A400M完全是针对欧洲设计的吧,如机身宽度什么的?
这玩意,真正用得起的,都想自己搞啊。
把MD当三哥?我看就是老欧洲在吹NB呗,搞宣传。
欧洲小国只有被老美玩耍的份
挺好的机子,生在如今的欧洲真是可惜了
A400M+C-17+An-124才是王道啊。
回复 9# 血花刀剪


    C 17+C130改才是王道
可能性为零,MD的军火商都瞪着眼睛看着这块肥肉那,还能被欧洲夺取?{:2_66:}
回复 10# damo56030
然后继续用那个体积不行防护不行的斯特赖克?
就算骡马计划中那个载重27吨货舱宽度高度都超3米的C-130XL,装25吨以上的轮式车辆也很勉强
倒是一直希望C-17能够换发,载重上90吨~
血花刀剪 发表于 2010-9-21 11:19

所以我说C 130大改呀,再说,这年头,便宜才是王道。。。。。:D
血花刀剪 发表于 2010-9-21 11:19


也不能全用大家伙,短程战术运输还是用小个子好。
欧洲人是想钱想疯了!
MD不会买的
欧洲佬赶紧过来求TG啊,背地里泄写机密过来,咱们就一次买它100架330 50架350. 反正总归都是要买的。
我想把运8卖给美国
耗子药煮面 发表于 2010-9-21 12:00
    想一块儿去了呵呵
还不如想法子卖给三哥[:a11:]
回复 13# damo56030
如果A400M不是生在欧洲也不会这么贵……一直把它脑补成天朝的运-14:victory:
回复 21# 血花刀剪


    欧洲人的东西,只买技术,不买整机
美国现在经济那么差,才不会舍弃自己的产品而外购。欧洲人洗洗睡吧。
Heineken 发表于 2010-9-21 13:48


欧洲经济相比也是百斤八两,所以急着出货赚钱。

A400也是生不逢时。
替换大力神的不错选择啊


回复 22# damo56030
乃太现实了,直接脑补EADS是天朝企业、奸十是台风直九是NH90,岂不爽快:D

回复 22# damo56030
乃太现实了,直接脑补EADS是天朝企业、奸十是台风直九是NH90,岂不爽快:D
rolltide 发表于 2010-9-21 13:51

对大运有需求的就那么些客户。MD是没可能了,哪怕是在北美制造。油霸有钱,但是就要那么几架。土鳖一是禁运,二是土鳖还要扶持自己大运。如果是早些年,搞个一揽子合作还可能会吸引土鳖。现在也没可能了。
Heineken 发表于 2010-9-21 13:57
本来欧洲人自己200多架订货也不少了,无奈一帮懒汉越混越穷掏不出银子啊
血花刀剪 发表于 2010-9-21 14:01


现在欧洲这个鸟样,怎么可能还有200架的订货。经济在三五年内还是这样,整个黄了也是可能的。
@BlueNight 发表于 2010-9-21 13:52

就价格一点就完全没可能。
就现在欧元对美元那个汇率,买一架A400M就相当于C-17的价格了,撞墙了才会买。

还有个大个子波音在那里,空客想进美国的大型军用飞机市场门都没有,最多有美国国会议员拿这个来压波音飞机的价格。
我觉得A400比MD最新的C-130要优秀啊。但是A400会不会太贵了??
卖的话 还不如说 给MD山寨呢。。
a400和c130都不是一个级别的东西,中巴和面包车的关系吧~~??能比吗~??

md是面包车和大客车同时装备,欧洲是单一型号中巴全包`{:yan:}
想钱想疯了,A400M的价格都快赶上C17了,有的买10架A400M美国买8架C17不更划算?
squallgzy 发表于 2010-9-21 21:45


    有这样比的吗~??都算钱的话,毛子的河马可以独霸直升机市场了....
谁要啊
卖给土鳖吧!{:2_68:}
不可能,MD军工业可不是吃素的