Royal Air Force Airbus A400M Atlas • Flight & Cockpit Video 

The airplane is designed to be able to use not developed runways or basically to land and start everywhere on a flat ground.

Matsimus Gaming true

Most tactical military transport planes have props. It gives more lift at slow speeds, allows the use of shorter runways and is more efficient in low level flight (hiding from radar). Yet the A400M can fly almost as fast and high as jet transports.

Matsimus From what I heard the C-17 is very uneconomical fuelwise. So that along with the lowspeed benefits is why they went with the turboprop. That said the turboprop engines was one of the major issues that caused the cost overuns and productions delays for the A400M

Turboprops have multiple advantages. They aren't such fuel hogs, they got powerfull reverse thrust that allows for powerback (C-17 seems to be the only jet capable of powerback anyway), turboprops are less likely to get damage from runway contamination, they provide nice thrust at low speeds, especially usefull for short runway takeoffs.

which one took it up the tailpipe?

Wdym??

A400 is generally perceived as a monumental failure isn't it?

@Plane guy 787 If this big grey flying shitbox is a success then why did the German government refuse further deliveries after the Luftwaffe called it a "disaster" and has been trying to sell off the last of its fleet with zero success after they started to fall apart and fail to meet critical performance targets, with Airbus announcing the programme would lose 2.4 billion Euros?

Airbus greatness

@@squarehead9595 What?

​@@thegrandmuftiofwakandalike Vietnam was for you?

Titan520 the a400 is a tactical dream

@@SpewtGG with strategic implications

Nostra Mashego haha

MaximDS mhm I don’t see what’s funny

its a turbine prop not prop

same

Mahesh M V U it’s because the aircraft is so clean at landing

Because its the same one as on Civilian Airbus's just like the C-17 uses bitching betty from the MD airliners.

@enrico Skhan 🤣🤣

It didn't say "RETARD, RETARD!"

Not so polite if you leave autopower engaged below the 5 feet callout, "RE-TARD, RE-TARD, RE-TARD"

A lot of guys who were on the C130 have moved over and were the ones who brought this into service. It has a lot of the same tact capabilities of the Herc, with more loading capabilities....it's tagline is "Taking loads a C130 can not, to places a C17 can not go to"

Jeanny Segret cool mec!!

50 ordered by France :)

Same

Same

Me too I spent 2 years of playing that

Yis yis

If only they had the range to get there...

DEEREMEYER1 • Ever heard of refueling stops? It’s normal for aircraft delivery flight to every carrier in every country of the world from the manufacturer’s base. Guess how ATR 72s were delivered to Malindo Air of Malaysia from France given that the max range is only a quarter out of this A400M’s max range. 😅

c17 range 8000km service ceiling 45,000 a400 range 8,700km service ceiling 40,000 c130j range 7,800km service ceiling 28,000 a400 is more capable tan either

greata7x it's an airbus jet

This isn't a Jet I think.

He means it is Airbus.

Like the c-17

Also on the A330 MRTT which are assembled in Cadiz, Spain exclusively for military variants.

In-Flight Refuelling probe

Nigel Clinning finally someone commented

B. Jucu pro inferno

I'm not and RAF pilot currently but I'm in the middle of my application process to become one. After doing very extensive research and questioning numerous pilots as well as watching many documentaries and videos on the matter. Mulit engine pilots will be trained on their preferred aircraft unless there is no availability on that aircraft. Once training starts, they will typically stay with that aircraft throughout their training and then an additional 2-5 years flying that aircraft operationally. They can change after this period of time if they so please, but there's a minimum period of time they have to stay on the same aircraft because of the amount it costs to train each pilot. As for time off, Multi-Engine pilots typically get deployed more overseas than Fast Jet and Rotary, because they're more involved in humanitarian aid, logistics and the movement of troops, as well as providing air drops and being the vital asset for paratroopers. But, being deployed more often (usually on numerous short term deployments), means more time off. Multi Engine pilots will often have weekdays off and depending on the operations they've done will finish half way into a week day and have 2-4 days off after. Whereas Fast Jet pilots (unless on deployment) only get weekends off and work 9-5 unless they are on QRA. But as with any role in the RAF the pay is amazing and the benefits you receive and opportunities u receive cannot be matched in almost any other career. Any other questions?

Kieran thanks for your reply mate, it definitely does sound more appetising than going into fast jet roles. Good luck with your training mate!

Hi I'm currently an RAF pilot operating the A400M. In terms of what aircraft we fly, we submit an initial preference on elementary flying training. The stream each student is allocated depends on preference, availability of slots for each stream (ME, FJ or rotary) and also flying ability. From there the students progress to the next stage of training in their allocated stream, the ME students go on to fly the Phenom 100. At this stage they again submit a preference of which specific aircraft they want to fly and similar considerations are applied to allocate them to an aircraft. You will generally fly this aircraft for at least a few years before moving on to a different one (if ever you do), you can submit a request to fly another type but why would you when you fly the A400?! Day to day is often fluid, depending on any tasks you have been assigned you could be flying away on operations for an extended period of time or training here in the UK on shorter trips. We can work any day of the week and fly as long as we are within our crew duty hours. The squadron generally tries to plan months in advance to ensure crews are not flying too little/too much but they often get tasks at short notice so it's not all that easy. Any other questions fire away!

@@genbatten8607 Thanks, always good to get these insights, for anyone considering joining up or just curious.

Touch and go's?

They do a fly by

Perhaps they did a fly-by

just some touch (and in this case not touch lol) and go's.. take them around a few times and demonstrate etc, show them a good time after flying all the way there lol..

Why does the US need it?

It's but natural given USA aircraft production capabilities. Would be an expensive deal, if they want something more than C130, the upgraded one or the C17 they will make one of their own probably.

It looks nothing like him at all , what drugs are you on?

If they don't like it they should stop being one.

No they don't... Callouts are the same! Either autopower was selected off, or the power levers retarded to FI before 5 feet. Neither is necessary.

Me

I don't know if you're joking or not

​@@TristanSilverwoodare you offended? Bless.

Haha me

Replicated ? There's nearly a 50 year gap between the two designs.

No they weren't. Get your facts straight. The A400M came years after the C-17 was purchased. C-17 more capable and larger payload.

@@thomasmoran899 I’m talking about the C-130J upgrade. The C-17 is built by Boeing, not Lockheed

you need googles...

No,c17 is so smaller than this

Perhaps there were other reasons to fly there.

I think it was never the intention to sell these to the US, mainly the European market

This plane wasn't meant to be sold to the US however in the past Airbus and Northrop Grumman wanted to deliver new tankers to the USAF but after years of congressional work, Boeing finally got the contract and I've heard that they have some problems now.

Exactly why everybody should stop buying from them..

Er....the US depends on the middle east ⛽️

That is how you land at the start of the runway.......obvs...

It's a lot smaller, what do you expect !

The aircraft is meant to be the bridge between a C130 and a C17 this carriers more than a C130 can and a bit less than a C17 can but runs cheaper than a C17. The Royal Airforce operates the C130J, A400M and the C17

You mean a tube with wings and 4 engines?

may be because some people think its as simple as a tube with wings and 4 engines thats why they end up just to make it like c17s

@@icehornet1346 Your delusional.

The globemaster is better

Not even Marilyn Monroe? Or is it Marylin? lol. I still miss her

Name one? There isn't another aircraft of this size with cyclic engines on it, so...

why do you Aussies trash us Yanks when your armed forces are constantly training in the States. Do your own training.

Auzzie? You do realise the RAF is from the UK not Australia

They are our Allies?

I’m sure some of us said the same thing during WW2 with the lend lease act. Our president circumvented laws to save your country from annihilation. How soon everyone forgets.

Manny Bayo not all of us brits.....I love the Americans.....please dont tar us all with the same brush, massive respect for our brothers in arms....

Are you talking about your president?

So pretty much any airplane from now on is a copy of another plane until someone invents flying saucers?

you kidding

copied ?? how ? are you dumb or something

brett, learn about what props can do before you think you are an aviation expert.

ridiculous, basicaly, Airbus copied nothing: to make a efficient military tactic transporter it's exists not 1000 solutions...the old C160 Transall had a comparable design except the T tail, who are common on... gliders...