SHAH ALAM: IN my previous post on RMAF A400Ms, I stated that the additional capabilities for the three already delivered air-lifters could be done locally. It appears that I wrote erroneously as the work needed are only available overseas.
Fernando Alonso, Head of Military Aircraft, Airbus Defence and Space says that the upgrading work need to be done at the A400M final assembly line in Seville, Spain. He said the work on the third aircraft delivered to RMAF – M54-03 – will be shorter than 01 and 02 as it has been delivered with more features compared to the first two.
However, the upgrading will likely be needed after 2018 as only by that time, the final configuration of the A400M will be certified.
Alonso says that the fourth A400M for RMAF will be fitted with the latest tactical configuration. However, due to the much publicized technical issues which affected the delivery schedule of the airlifter, it will probably be ready for delivery only in next January or February.
Alonso was speaking to the media yesterday on the second day of his visit to Malaysia. This was his first visit Malaysia after taking over at Airbus Defence and Space two years ago. He said he could not come sooner as he was consumed by efforts to revive the troubled A400M programme.
The fourth aircraft will be delivered with defensive aid sub-system (DASS), air-to-air refueling (receiving and providing fuel) and the ability to deliver up to 25 tonnes of cargo as reported previously.
Alonso confirmed that RMAF was also affected by the engine problems though only one engine from the 16 installed on the three A400Ms already delivered need to be replaced. However, like the other A400Ms, RMAF had to curtail the flight hours of its aircraft as engineers had to check the engines manually. Initially the checks were conducted for every 40 hours of flight before it was raised to 100 hours recently.
Alonso said as temporary fix had been certified, the interval for the engine checks have been increased to 600 hours. A permanent solution to the problem is still being worked out though Alonso was confident that it will be resolved soon.
Maanwhile, Alonso said Airbus is eyeing the region as potential market for its military transport aircraft. He says that this strategic region is a natural market for Airbus’ military aircraft across the board from light to medium aircraft such as the C295 and the technologically advanced airlifter A400M.
Alonso said: “Our military aircraft are able to fill a real gap in the market responding to today’s regional challenges. Governments in the region are aware of the need to replace ageing equipment based on old designs and technologies. New assets will bring long-term cost savings while meeting the region’s unique requirements.”
“We are extremely proud that Malaysia is the first export customer for the airlifter. It is very important for us to ensure that RMAF’s A400M experience meets expectations as the Malaysian Air Force serves as our ambassador for the region,” said Alonso.
— Malaysian Defence
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
View Comments (19)
C295 as the MPA????........Well played, there killing 2 birds with one stone?
can someone confirm this ??
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/industry/2016/08/03/armor-turkey-germany-malaysia/88030086/
Nobody wants to buy armour from us. We simply don't bring any technology, experience or savings to the equation- not even a track record. We know it, the Germans and Turks know it, customers know it. If anything, our company is there to satisfy the Malaysian requirement for a local partner.
If we do get a handful of Altays, I'm not excited about Malaysia being one of the launch customers again.
Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result.
I can't say much for BMC either. The most they have done for the military is build civilian trucks and MRAPs.
Theoretically, the A400M can transport the Gempita right? Meaning the 25T transportable cargo will gradually increase to around 30T I suppose?
Reply
Yes it supposed to be able to transport though it had not been tested yet. They tested with a truck recently but only ground test . The 25 tonnes are for parachute drop
The Altay is a promising design and has a lot going for it. It has greater growth potential over the T-72/PT-91, has better baseline protection levels, has better ergonomics, has a better hunter killer capability, unlike the PT-91 it has a commander's HMG that can be fired remotely and doesn't have a carousel auto loader that makes the tank vulnerable in the event of a hit in the fighting compartment. By the time it's ready for export, any teething issues would have been sorted out; after all, the Turks have ordered a lot. Before anyone mentions the Armata : it hasn't even completed development and we have zero indication as to whether it will live up to its hype and when the Russian will be able to export it.
The a400 is called as a strategic airlifter..if i may ask, what does it mean actually?
Reply
That it can carry stuff, men and equipment, over long distances.
While the Altay has more potential than our PT-91 will ever have, that's not a very high bar. The PT-91 is a growth of a 1960s design that has long reached its limits.
As no one has seen Turks build and field their own MBT before, because this is the first time they will, we don't know whether "by the time it’s ready for export, any teething issues would have been sorted out."
It is possible that the tank will be fielded before it is ready. What if fixes or capabilities that every tank should have are labelled "improvements" and pushed into later production blocks?
Why can't we just go for an established, off the shelf design that is just as capable as the Altay. I've not seen any claims, even from the manufacturer, that the Altay sets out to be better than other tanks on the market.
AM - ''While the Altay has more potential than our PT-91 will ever have, that’s not a very high bar.''
Ok. Let's try another angle : compared to a Leo 2A6; does the Altay come off badly? If viewed objectively, the Altay compares quite favourably against even current gen Western designs. The PT-91 has little growth potential due to the age of the design but it's still a pretty decent tank - the problem is we didn't do all the stuff to it that we should have because of funding.
AM - ''Why can’t we just go for an established, off the shelf design that is just as capable as the Altay.''
What design do you have in mind? Assuming we buy a new tank within the next 5-6 years; what alternatives are there to Altay? This premise is based on us not wanting to buy Chinese, Russian, Ukranian or surplus Leos [which are getting lesser anyway]. The only near term possibility I can see - apart from Altay - is buying South Korean but we would still be a launch customer.
AM - ''It is possible that the tank will be fielded before it is ready. What if fixes or capabilities that every tank should have are labelled “improvements” and pushed into later production blocks?''
Off course it's possible; in the form of trials vehicles which are intended to solve any teething issues. Any improvements made to the design or any modifications can easily be added to export variants as we're not talking about major improvements or modifications that would require something major as the redesigning of the hull or realigning the engine. It won't be the first time that improvements or modifications have been performed on export vehicles or aircraft before they were performed on ones operated by the home nation.
AM - ''I’ve not seen any claims, even from the manufacturer, that the Altay sets out to be better than other tanks on the market.''
So? That's no indication of anything.
AM - ''As no one has seen Turks build and field their own MBT before''
They're not on their own. There is significant South Korean involvement and the South Koreans have quite a bit of experience toying around with their own designs. A lot of the stuff on Altay is actually from the K-2 by virtue of Hyundai's participation.
Ada budget..altay can..small budget go for additional pt91.....takde budget maintain je la pt91
AM,
maybe it because it the reduced bell and whistle version of the K9 Black Panther with own Turkey designed turret. I would rather we go for a more complete product like the K9. Though not yet fully field in ROK army but it a more or less completed product instead of a prototype.
Plus, K9 used the same autoloader mechanism as the lecrac although the korean refuse to admit it instead of the T-series corousel autoloader