Airbus Defence and Space has conducted a new flight-test campaign of the A400M Roll-on/Roll-off firefighting prototype kit, dropping 20,000 litres of retardant and creating high concentration lines over 400 metres long on ground.
Over a period of two weeks, the A400M carried out a ground and flight-test campaign in south-western and central Spain, including six drops, three of which used red-coloured retardant and three using water.
“We have tested a new version of the kit, improving dropping efficiency and reducing discharge time by over 30% compared to last year, while combined with rapid deployment and easy installation on the A400M aircraft,” said Jean-Brice Dumont, Head of Military Air Systems at Airbus Defence and Space.
“We continue to pioneer new solutions and capabilities for our A400M fleet, in this case protecting populations and natural environments from fires.”
This roll-on/roll-off kit does not require any modification to the aircraft and, therefore, is interchangeable to any aircraft in the A400M fleet. The water or retardant is stored in a tank in the cargo hold of the aircraft and, by using a mechanical lever, a door is opened to allow the liquid to flow out of the aircraft by gravity means through a discharge pipe. The current design of the prototype is capable of dropping 20,000 litres in a single discharge.
The tanks can be filled in less than 10 minutes using standard high-pressure pumps on ground.
They are getting the blast effect that was missing on the previous version, which is great. Though, pressing issues like qualification on this type of mission remain. Nobody can afford a fleet of A400 for firefighting. All A400 are used commonly at their maximum capacity. It will not get any better in the near future condidering the lack of transport planes in european armies inventory. It seems that a A200 is required and perhaps a A800, given the end of Antonov air lifting capabilities… Smart cooperations needed…
How about the Embraer C390 Millennium as a Herc replacement?
Why doesn’t someone just equip the Chinooks with the water bombing thingy (don’t know the proper name)slung under it. But it’s what most countries use, dips it into the sea or a lake flys over the fire and drop. It works and is way cheaper than an A400M.
Bambi bucket. There are at least 3 firms in the USA that use them & could provide training to the RAF Chinooks, if we had the will to do it.
World’s largest firefighting helicopters now available in 3 Southern California counties to battle wildfires year-round – ABC7 Los Angeles
The RAF Chinooks did have this capability, though this has lapsed due to other financial priorities. It was regularly used in the Falkland’s to put out peat fires. Basically a giant B&Q bucket attached via strops to the centre hook. Weirdly they never used a triple bucket configuration to make use of the Chinook’s triple hook fit. The aircraft is more than capable of lifting three buckets worth of water.
Although using three buckets the trim alters radically when the front and back buckets are discharged?
With a central bucket that isn’t an issue?
So I guess it is a compromise on safety/fatigue life too rather than max load out?
I think that was definitely a very true with the analogue Chinooks, whose flight stability was governed by mechanical gyros and seat of the pants flying. Since the upgrade to Mk5 and Mk6. Which introduced digital flight control computers, along with non-mechanical gyros. The aircraft can react significantly faster to trim changes. If you are lucky enough to be near Odiham. I would suggest paying it a visit, just to see how effective the flight control upgrade has been. In the old days you would watch a Chinook hovering. It would be wandering, dipping, bowing just to try and stay… Read more »
I know the squadron leader who lead SF Chinook…..a while back….so well plugged into that area. The original ones were, as you say, quite dicey and demanded a huge level of pilot skill. Which is why upgrading to newer all glass versions make sense as there are more roles for them and they can do them all better. Let’s hope the rumours that Mr Green (or is he called Shapps today?) is trimming the order for new ones are wrong. It is daft as the newer ones will be cheaper to run too. The fleet of Chinooks is one of… Read more »
You can ask him about “DASH runaway”, then watch his face to see if he’s experienced one! The original Mk1s we bought in the 1980s, which included ZA718 “Bravo November” have all had a really hard life. There hasn’t been an environment or major and some minor operations where they haven’t taken part. The airframes are not lifed in the same sense as a fixed wing aircraft. But you are quite correct, they are taking longer to repair, which is costing more. Because of the torsional forces on the airframe caused by the two opposing rotors. The frames do suffer… Read more »
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200102/ldselect/ldchin/25/1110707.htm
They really are a wonderful asset, a true force multiplier.
It’s just a shame we have left our medium helicopter capability to just shrink and wither on the vine….
We had the opportunity 20 years ago to replace Puma with Blackhawks. That would have built as kits by Westlands. Sadly that part of the deal got binned. Though we did end up with the Mk3 Hangar Queens!
84 Sqn in Cyprus has used those things.
Bambi buckets. The Royal Netherlands Air Force uses them, as I have seen them doing several times over the years. The version for the Chinook carries 7600 litres of water. There are also bambi buckets in use for the Cougar, which have a significantly smaller capacity, 2500 litres.
Would make sense that all A400M nations buy 10 of those and place them in Germany, UK, France, Turkey and Spain so that they can be used by each nation if needed.
I can see the need for France, Turkey and Spain.
But Germany and the UK don’t really need them.
Germany does have areas in the east and around Lüneburg which have pine forests that tend to burn fiercely. Climate change is making it worse.
So it might make sense – and apart from that it is a political asset to be able to help friendly nations. For UK, Cyprus comes to mind.
However you need to keep the crews qualfied – someone must pay that Bill and it is not a primarily a military Mission to train fire fighting.
But still I think its a useful asset.
Perhaps an EU or NATO buy, kept at a central location ( South of France or Spain) with a few designated crews from each country potentially affected countries trained to go into action on short notice.
That way you could pull a very effective rapid response, multi national ‘Thunderbirds are go’ type force together very quickly.
Completely off topic, but I see the German government has awarded a contract to build four F126 frigates, with an option for an additional two. However, what caught my eye was the proposed tonnage. Each one will come in at 11,000 tonnes and have a core crew of 114. Thirty years ago that would be a heavy cruiser.
11,000 tonnes 🤔 back to 15ins Guns 🕵
Who is the point of contact at Airbus regarding the A400? They are obviously an excellent choice in the forest fire fighting and cargo transport roles. I’d like to get in contact with the appropriate people at Airbus about an A400 version for civilian use.
I am asking who can be contacted at Airbus regarding sales of A400M aircraft? This aircraft has huge potential for assisting in the global warming issue and helping out with forest fighting fighting issues globally. A response would be appreciated.
Hello, I am Shawn Carmody, why have my previous two comments I posted not been approved and put here? An explanation would be appreciated.