A rotary-wing A400M, anyone?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Circus_Pony, May 20, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/8512958

    Came across the above via the "Alert 5" website and my first thoughts were here comes the vertical-takeoff A400M... Then I saw the Americans are being approached for a tie-up... You never know...

    Interesting about the Mil-17 and Puma information at the foot of the article.
  2. Whats the matter with the MiL-26 HALO, that bugger can already carry as much as a C-130 Herc and it's been around for decades?
  3. I read an articall saying that the French where in disussing building the MI-26T under license for the Europian heavy liht helecopter and had one on trials at Istres in 2007
  4. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    MI- 26 lifts about 20t which is a bit less than what they are taking about here. My only question is what are we supposed to use them for?

    Is there any doctrine that suggests that we need this lift capability? I don't know of any.

    Is this just another crap buy to suit someone else's needs?
  5. Well they are testing two MI-8s at Boscomb Down
  6. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    So what?
  7. Flight

    Flight LE Book Reviewer

    Don't fukcing well build it then. If you can't even get an AT (A400) project right then I don't fancy their chances.
  8. Yes but using this old ariframe as a starting point, you just have to either stretch or widen it and put some nice new shinny powerful engines in and I'm sure they will be be able to match the load requirements pretty easily. The Russians have far more experience with REAL heavy lift helo's than the West does, Chinooks and Stallions are simply not in the same ball park as the Halo.
  9. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    Stop thinking about shiny things and spending lots of money and go back to base requirement.

    I ask again - to what purpose would we be spending money on this capability? What doctrine or highlighted capability gap does this requirement spring from?
  10. Flight

    Flight LE Book Reviewer

    Can't see what the frogs or krauts would want with it for either....

    When something that lifts a few tonnes costs more than £10 million quid (NH90, EH101 for instance) I dread to think what this beastie would come in at.
  11. Point taken, in the real world it would be nice to have something VTOL that could lift as much as a Fat Albert. However size vs cost/necessity will porbably make it a moot point anyway. Also owt bigger than a HALO would certainly be a heavy MG or MANPAD magnet out in the sandy place when dropping to land - it would be harder to miss it!
  12. The UN lost a Halo in Afghanistan a couple of years ago
  13. Flight

    Flight LE Book Reviewer

    The Ruskies lost one in Chechnya, I think the death toll was something like 170 blokes.

    Just in case you wanted any other reasons not to want the bloody things....
  14. 127 killed but 20 survived, August 19, 2002.

    Hell of a lot of casualties, but it was well overloaded when hit by an Igla SAM

  15. That kind of logic would mean never flying in an Airbus or Boeing again either, since they sometimes crash too.... :?