They fire up the port engines first, and then the starboard engines. This aircraft has eight bladed props. I love the sound that the props make over the whine of the engines. That's what I love most about turboprops. In high idle and taxiing, the props make your basic "Box Fan" sound. In takeoff and inflight, they make the "Bumblebee" sound. The 60 cycle flicker of the TV or computer screen, creates optical illusions of the props spinning slower, or backwards. I notice that the props of this aircraft rotate to port. On the turboprops that I've flown on, including the DeHaviland Dash-8, the props rotate to starboard.
Nice video!! It's pleasure to see large planes and hear the start of their engines, and finally see them take off!! But I don't understand why the dislikes, can someone please tell me? Thanks!
Not seen many videos of A400 start ups; and that one is quite outstanding. Hoping to visit Brize Norton next month and will be trying for an A400 flight.
+Robert Kerr I doubt the RAAF would use one, even though this is my favorite Military transport plane and I would love my country to have them. They use the C-17 Globe Master. But maybe some day they might which would be awesome!
Well more likely RNZAF will be first, as we need to replace our entire airlift within 4 yrs. Austraila have had thier C 130 J models only 15 yrs or so. Ours with a few fuselage and avionics refits have operated since 1967.
It would have been funny if the crow had perched itself on the re-fueling probe. Excellent vid, gives the chance for model builders who have not seen the 400 up-close a fantastic look at her. Thanks
It’s tough pushing 11,000hp to a propeller and maintaining efficiency. One way is contra-rotating props, but it’s heavy and complex (ie TU-95) - technology has come a long way and advanced scimitar props are nearly as good without the drawbacks.
what blow my mind each time I see this plane is how the props blades are almost parallel with the forward vector and still manage to push forward the plane... I'd love to to see the physic of it at first, I thought that the blades were reorienting themselves after start-up but this does seem a little over complicated and prone for system failure...
This configuration, dubbed down between engines (DBE), allowing it to produce more lift and lessens the torque and prop wash on each wing. It also reduces yaw in the event of an outboard engine failure
Goodness grasious! How flipping beefy are thoses turboprop engines an prop blades, They must be soo frigging powerful!..How many flipping Prop blades can they eventually fit on to an engine, I should think if they go beyond a standard 8, The powerplants would essentially become UTF Engines/ Unducted Tubofan Engines or TurboProp Fan engines... I also would be surprised if the power plants it has on right now are a kind of simple UTF or TPF Engine solution.. Couse they sure do look like they are!. 😊😆😎⛅✈💨💨➖.
I Would Like to See the AIRBUS A-400M Turned into a GUNSHIP Like the Lockheed A/C-130H Model GUNSHIP With the 105mm Howitzer and 40mm Bofo Cannon and 25mm Gatling Gun 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Could it be that the engines cannot be started seperately, which means that the props have to be cranked together with the engine right from the beginning of the engine start procedure, like on old turboprop engines as was the case with the Rolls-Royce Dart/Tyne?
I’m pretty sure the props are still a free-turbine design like most turboprops. They are VERY large engines though, and it takes a while to spool the large scimitar props on that shaft.
Bypass turbo fan, but the efficiency is much better with a turbo prop, the highest is with double counter rotative props like AN22 and AN70, but they are very noisy because air shearing between both props : hey are never supersonic, like whe read in some comments...,the only supersonic props was on the XF84H Thunderscreech and the supersonic propfan experimental engines: all was EXTREMLY noisy, the joke was about Tunderscreech: this aircraft doest need weapons, all ennemies at ground are killed from the noise in a low pass...
It's to counter the roll momentum the props produce. It's simply based on newtons principal of action->reaction. If the probs would spin all in the same direction, they would generate an opposite force on the airframe. For instance if all props would spin clockwise, the airframe would have an tendency to roll anticlockwise. And the annoying thing is that the tendency varies when the poweroutput is changed. The effect gets stronger when more power is demanded. The solution Airbus has choosen for the A400M is one way to get rid of this effect. An other way is to use a contra rotating propeller like the russians did in the TU-95. But contra rotating props are heavier and more complicated to produce.
@@shi01 contra rotating props are heawier and a bit more complicated, but increase significant the efficiency ...this solution was not choice from Airbus only because they are much more noisy...see the AN70...
Sir, you need to slow down the recording speed of the camera its "freezing" the propeller blades here its too fast ,thats fine for fast moving jets but shots like this you need to show the blades spinning naturally propeller blades on recorded film should just be a blur, the camera speed here is freezing them "still" it doesen look natural. take a look at the instructions for your camera there will be alternate slower recording speed's you can switch to that are slower for shots like this with propeller aircraft. kind regards.
The C17 costs TWICE as much as the A400m, which has more advanced integrated systems and is a bit more efficient. If cost isn’t a factor, you can achieve some pretty incredible performance metrics (even for an older aircraft.)
Und wieder...liebe ich alles! The A400M does not have counter-rotating props-----just eight blades starting feathered, usually, and the video frames/second rate make the blades look counter-rotating. Check other videos of prop-type Flugzeugen and see this fps oddity. Love this, and all Luftwaffe -types!!
I really like to see the heavy cargo planes of the Hercules type on the beach landing and flying up. Why does this scene remind me of a beautiful scene I saw in the past when Hercules Air Force planes brought doctors and nurses on the plane with drugs and food for the displaced from hurricanes, typhoons and earthquakes in other countries. I found politicians with the military and aeronautics making flights with Hercules planes to other countries carrying water, food and medicines and doctors and nurses to help the homeless and people in need of special medical care. We must make more Hercules planes that could land on the beaches because statistics indicate that there will be many hurricanes and typhoons and future earthquakes in the future and also tsunami because of the increasing pollution in the world that is changing the planet's climate.
Escape for Mankind Well, prop engines are more efficient per mile and EXPONENTIALLY more quiet than a jet engine, which is perfect for combat use. Such as air drops and Airborne troop assaults.
+Cameron Little The problem with Airbus is too many cooks in the kitchen. Conceptually though, their birds are awesome. They should just export their ideas to America. We know how to get things done, no fuss. Lol!
825kmh max... pretty good for Aindustries to finish 2nd 50 years after the tu95's (still going strong!) first reached 950kmh (with 1k-hp more per engine). Time for the A400 to go double-counter-rotating and become the civilian turboprop airliner that finally send the gas-guzzling f...g jets packing!
Yeah, but that speed came with its own downsides: A literal fuckton of Noise produced by the Counter-rotating blades. It's said that a Tu-95 passing the Ocean between Greenland, Iceland and the UK was perfectly audible by the Sosus-Array NATO mounted on the seafloor to spot Soviet Submarines heading for the open Atlantic. Being a nuclear Bomber the Bear could also be afforded to be a pretty slender design compared to the "fat" Atlas - which needs the additional meat for Cargo Capacity though.
Too fat to replace C-130, too light compare to An 124 or C5 galaxy.... small cargo space compare to the plane size, many maintenances issues ... yep what a succes 👏
Need to compare tactic transporter with tactic transporter and no with giant strategic transporter unable to use a soft unpaved terrain...C17 is still a strategic transporter, but can use in emergency unpaved (avoid because the turbo jets are too fragile for such uses, and wheel charge is too high)
