10 Things You Might Not Know About Airbus
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 апр 2024
- Airbus has long been one part of the dominant duopoly with Boeing in the commercial aircraft market. As a major manufacturer of narrowbody and widebody commercial aircraft, it has competed directly with Boeing since the 1970s. But what makes Airbus successful where so many others have failed?
Here are 10 interesting things about the planemaker that you may not have known...
With thanks to our video sources: bit.ly/33BVTkN
Simple Flying:
Visit our website where we publish 150-200 news stories per week: simpleflying.com/
Listen to our weekly podcast: simpleflying.com/podcast/
Download our iOS & Android app: simpleflying.com/simple-flyin...
Daily email digest sign up: simpleflying.com/daily-digest/
Check out our main RUclips channel: / @simpleflyingnews
Follow us on social media:
Instagram: / simpleflyingnews
Twitter: / simple_flying
Facebook: / simpleflyingnews
Linkedin: / 33222643
#aviation #flight #avgeek #airlines #flying
#Aviation #Flight #Avgeek #Flying
You should do a rise and fall of airlines series
Yes!!
Yessssssssssss
Simple flying : 10 Things You Might Not Know About Airbus
Also Simple flying: 3:04
😅 true
Lol
lmao 🤣
Clickbait
the most produced aircraft is actually the cessna 172
The fact that all of us may know at least 8 of these show that we are og airbus and boeing fans
I know it all before
I felt proud and then sad.
5:47 You forgot that Concorde was the first fly-by-wire commercial aircraft. The A320 was only the first full authority fly-by-wire commercial aircraft.
And 4:23 the 737 wasn't the first twin engine commercial aircraft. The Sud Aviation Caravelle (ancestor of Airbus and coproducer of Concorde) was launched long before the 737 and first flew in 1955.
Also Caravelle was the first commercial aircraft with a kind of zero visibility automated landing system called "atterrissage tout temps" > "all weather landing".
The Caravelle was literally ripped off by Douglas to create the DC-9. Initially Sud Aviation looked for American partners to sell the Caravelle in the US. Douglas led them to believe they wanted to but cancelled the project after having gained access to technology transfers, building plans and specifications.
And that very bad experience of looting by American companies led Sud Aviation and European governments to unite and create Airbus. This company would have much more leverage and power.
Concorde was the first analogue fly by wire commercial aircraft. The 320 was the first fully digital fly by wire aircraft.
@@filthywings353 yes
i guess he meant the first boeing plane to have 2 jet engines otherwise that would be weird to not mention the caravelle one of the most noticable french aircraft not counting cross country developt planes
Wasn’t the Hawker Sisley Trident the first commercial aircraft with full-on automatic autoland capability in low visibility?
@@magnustan841 i think it was, it was able to land on its own, the L1011 maybe too since it also had the auto land feature
Some other things about their early products:
The very first Airbus was the A300B prototype. This prototype would be shorter than the original production version (A300B2). After Airbus didn't need it anymore it was sold to TEA (Belgium airline) but it started revenue service with Air Algerie on lease. The passenger A300 came in three sizes therefor, seating up to 323 (B1), 345 (B2/B4) and 361 (-600). The A300B4 also came with a digital cockpit in the -200FF version which ulitmately only was purchased by Finnair in low numbers. Also, the A300(B4)-600 is the only A300 to feature wingtip devices with the exception of some earlier A300 of this version. Interestingly, those wingtip devices are unique to the A300 as they feature a similar design but they have a much lower profile compared to the ones used on the A310-300 (and some late -200s). But that's not all: These A310 wingtip fences were then used on the A320-200 (and later on the A380) while the original A320-100 missed those.
The earlier A330s had a taller tail
Airbus is wierd
The commonality among models is a great thing for drivers and carriers. Look how much fun Boeing had with MCAS to keep a modified 50-year-old a/c model in the air.
There's actually very poor commonality amongst Boeing aircraft. They're all different to fly and maintain.
I know most of your viewers are probably old hands and know all of this, but as someone just starting to learn about commercial airplanes, this was a great video!
I would love to fly on a Airbus A380 and 747-8i as well.
The original A300 agreed upon in 1967 was actually something almost the size of the A330, but powered by the proposed Rolls-Royce RB.207 engine rated at 51,000 lb thrust. But when airlines weren't so keenly interested and Rolls-Royce ran into RB.211 development difficulties, Airbus decided to reduce the plane to A300B size and switch to the more available General Electric CF6-50 engine.
That's right, the first Airbus project A300 was a 300 seats jet powered by new Rolls-Royce engines. But the project was rejected by airline companies and the availability of the engines was doubtful. So a crash program was launched at Sud-Aviation (R&D department in Suresnes which had previously developped the SO 4050 "Vautour") to completly rework the project, which ended with the smaller A300B project for 250 passengers using available US engines.
@@78Dipar Airbus was lucky that the GE CF6-50 became available by 1972. That made it possible to build the A300B powered by the GE 48,000 lb. thrust engine.
@@Sacto1654
It wasn't luck, the GE CF6-50 was selected for the A300B because it's availability was quite certain, it was first developped for the DC-10...
I have personally known the one who managed the team in charge of reworking the A300 project and replacing it by the A300B.
@@78Dipar Thank you very much for the very interesting historical informations.
Thank you very much for the very interesting historical informations.
Thank you. Looking very nice.
I knew most, disagreed on fly by wire = Concorde, but all said & done this is a good, informative and enjoyable video. Thanks.
But the fly by wire was used on all airbus aircraft from the a320
airbus and others made the concorde and put flybywire in it. They realised it's actually a good thing so they put it in the a320
Super comparison
Thank you very much for video
A few years ago I read an account of Airbus. Due to the UK governments lack of interest the initial UK partner was ironically the world’s first builder of a jet liner ie De Havilland. The book also said that De Havilland actually designed the first Airbus planes. I was surprised as I had assumed that Sud Aviation were the designers. Do you know who were the initial designers?
This channel is underrated
Even though I knew all of these facts, I enjoyed the video. Thanks for the effort!
I’ll miss the a 380 and 747 both incredible aircraft the oldest a380 I know of is 6 years old
The 747 was the most iconic jet airliner ever made. Lufthansa still has them!
This is basically a video for rookie Avgeeks.
4:22 the boeing 737 wasn’t the first two engined jet in service! What about the Sud Aviation Caravelle? It came into service almost a decade before. Maybe you meant that it was the first Boeing jet with two engines?
Yes, that's exactly what he meant.
Exactly, for the whole context it’s important to start at 4:10
TU-104
I knew almost all the facts which you mentioned in your video but 8:25 You forgot to tell about the Airbus A - 400M in your video. Please tell about it in your next video. And thanks for the video I loved it and I gained even more knowledge about aviation.
Can you do the rise and fall of Boeing ?
Edit:I’m being serious sadly :(
hahahaha right
good one
Rise and fall of boeing... Boeing hasn't fallen. It's a long long long way from that. You can dream all you want that it is, but it is not.
@@aerofiles5044 No I don’t want Boeing to go down but it really seems that way
@@aerofiles5044 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 🤣🤣🤣🤣😆😆😆😆
Airbus has a space sector called airbus defence and space where they make satalites
I think the Cessna 172 is built at even higher numbers than the DC 3 :)
more than 40000, but it's not a 100+ jet passengers airliner
I was gonna say the 172 is the most produced aircraft of all time but didn’t think about the fact it’s not an airliner 😂
wrong not Holland, The Netherlands
If you’re not Dutch, you’re not much
Nope. As of last year Holland is the official name of the country
@@hernanmunozratto5899 that could never happen. Holland contains two provinces, North Holland and South Holland, The Netherlands could never be named Holland as it has twelve provinces (Zeeland, Brabant, Limburg, Gelderland, Overijssel, North Holland, South Holland, Flevoland, Friesland and Groningen) instead of Hollands two. do your research before you post a dumb comment
@@Daisy_lief piripitifláuticamente conchitranico
@@Daisy_lief nerds
Nice
I love the Airbus Narrow body planes.
1:22 Holland =/= Country...
NETHERLANDS is correct name...
10 things I might not have known about Airbus. . . and a bunch of other good tidbits. . .
Nice video. Anyone know why Airbus chose 300 for their designation?
The initial study was for a 300 seat aircraft.
It required engines not available for a number of reasons, so the aircraft was quietly shrunk to a 250 seat capacity or so, while retaining the name.
@@NielsC68 Thanks. That makes sense
@@NielsC68 the maximum capacity of the A300 is still above 300 ;)
*Number Zero :*
The newer, more fuel efficient but ironically; larger jet engine fits easily under the A-320's Wing, which is higher than that on a 737 and therefore avoided....
The a380 outsold the 747-8 including freighters. This shows all quadjets were doomed
Is there a link between Concorde & Airbus?
Aerospatiale and BAC both became a mayor part of Airbus
The blended wing aircraft looks like something out of science fiction.
I thought concorde was the first fly by wire commercial aircraft.
Wasn’t Concorde fly by wire well before the A320?
A320>737
737 is better tho
@@Mike5890Aviation yes
737: Pilot has ultimate control of plane
A320: Computer overrides pilot
@@nitinaravindraj6753 MCAS wants a word with you
@@Mike5890Aviation one that plummets to the ground I think not
I already know all this, BECAUSE I WAS SUBSCRIBED TO SIMPLE FLYING.
do a one on boeing next!
*plus learned some things from the “mini” facts inside the facts like being the largest heli manufacturer and also the fact that the XL has more cargo space than the Dreamlifter. All in all great video!
I am looking forward to become an Airbus engineer and I feel the need to tell you some negative facts about Airbus too:
Airbus had to pay 3 billion Euros of penalty because of corruption, they bribed CEOs of certain airlines and their relatives to make more sales.
The production is far from being environmentally friendly. As a result of splitting up the production across Spain, France, Germany and the UK Airbus has a huge CO2 footprint because of transport by rails, sea and the Belugas
The A320 neo, a330 neo and a350 are revolutionary.
Oh yeah, the zero e aswell
I thought the L10-11 was the first Fly-by-wire aircraft 🤔?
That was a widebody it failed against the dc 10
I thought it was Concorde....
Boeing's only cash cow is the beleaguered MAX. The 787 has yet to recover its development costs. Airbus has done a number of things wrong, but it has three reliable revenue streams, and is in a better position to invest in the future. Boeing has to survive on its defense business, and maybe freighter sales.
Both companies have done the wrong thing at times, like Airbus building the A380, A340, A318 and A319Neo, and Boeing have built the 777-8 and 747-8, and have many problems with the 737MAX and 787.
Actually, I’d argue the 748 was a great move by Boeing
Exactly, the 747-8 paid off, especially the cargo variant. The other aircraft you mentioned are arguable though
@@spongebubatz precisely, the 748 was a good job by Boeing in the fact they would take away A380F orders while gaining a few passenger orders while keeping Airbus in the failing program that is the A380. They already had a very successful airframe of the 744 going, and with 787 technology kept Airbus investing heavily into the A380, and we all know the outcome of that plane for Airbus
I think you forgot to mention the legendary Concorde 😍
Concorde wasn't made by Airbus
It wasn't but it was what Airbus stemmed from.
Airbus itself consists of many more companies than those that were involved in the Concorde project
To be exact Airbus do not consists of any other company than Airbus. Several companies dissolved into forming Airbus.
But that's the Concorde project which brought together companies which led to the birth of Airbus.
And up until the end of Concorde, Airbus was the company supplying support and spare parts.
Once we started with Airbus was created by European countries I went “uh oh, this is gonna be a rough ride”
737 was not the first twin jet, it was third. France's Sud Aviation takes the honor of first twin engine jet with the Caravelle in 1959. The DC-9 was the first US twin engine jet in 1965. Boeing's 737 came third in 1967
i think he meant the first Boeing twin jet
As a spaniard I am proud of Airbus and Louis Vouitton LMAO
Fact: All Airbus fleets have side-sticks except the A300 & A310 which have a yoke much like a Boeing.
The A310 also had a yoke, but after that every Airbus had a sidestick
@@spongebubatz Thank you for the info. Appreciate it! :)
The advantage of Airbus is that they don't have to ground their new planes. Boeing had to do that after two of their new 737s crashed, because they were due to a software bug with the new nav systems.
i knew all of these except the A300 being the first twin wide-body
The 767 is younger
But is getting retired
The a300 is older, BUT STILL HAS COMMERCIAL OPERATORS
SO CAN WE LEGALY SAY THAT ITS THE OLDEST TWIN ENGINED WIDEBODY????????
@@Tobu9105F 767 is less rare than a300
1:20 didnt/doesnt the Netherlands made/make the electronics
i support airbus.....go airbus.
Can you do 10 thing might not now about boieng
I knew 9 of the facts
The Airbus range of planes has a lineage of sidestick control rather than Yoke, but there is 1 Airbus plane that has Yoke like a Boeing: The Airbus A310!
and the a300 and a300st(Beluga)
I thought that the Lockheed L-1011 was the first fly by wire commercial airliner. Am I missing something?
Yes you are, it was the a320
@@flexiexpress6713 thanks.
Nope you're both wrong, the first fly-by-wire commercial aircraft was Concorde, she had complete digitally controlled flight surfaces. A320 was the first full authority fly-by-wire and only the second fly-by-wire commercial aircraft.
Full authority means the computer does more than simply transmitting orders, it interprets them and can limit or block them in case the movement commanded by the pilot is beyond flight domain or limitations.
I'm heavily summarizing but where A320 has several control laws (Normal Law being the default operations one) Concorde somehow had only a kind of direct law.
@@KyrilPG The Concords' gauges were analog. Perhaps the flight controls were fly by wire, but the Concorde still has most hydraulic systems. First fully digital fly-by-wire aircraft was developed by NASA and flown in 1972, so the Airbus A320 may in fact be the first fully digital fly-by-wire commercial airliner. I think the L-1011 had something similar to the Concorde, but it wasn't fully digital either.
@@sainnt Gauges have nothing to do with fly-by-wire. Every aircraft has hydraulic systems, this is off topic. You can have a fully digital fly-by-wire system and still use hydraulics actuators at the end of the line.
The definition of fly-by-wire is the replacement of mechanical cables and pulleys by digital signal wires.
A "fully digital" fly-by-wire only means there's no backup mechanical cables and pulleys.
Concorde's control transmission was fully digital and was the first commercial airliner built like this.
You're confusing display / cockpit, hydraulic (or electric) actuation and control transmission.
The A320 was the first full AUTHORITY fly-by-wire and second fly-by-wire airliner. Fly-by-wire means it's fully digital transmission by definition. Full authority means there's a computer interpreting and controlling the signal sent to actuators.
But on many fully fly-by-wire aircrafts several surfaces are actuated (moved) by hydraulics commanded by digital signal wires.
The proportion of hydraulics has nothing to do fly-by-wire or not. Even the most computerized airliners use hydraulics.
Concorde (takes an e at the end) also had a digital inertial and guidance / navigation system where you entered waypoints data. I think that's what you're thinking of about commonality with the TriStar.
I don't know which NASA aircraft you're talking about, but "fully digital fly-by-wire" meaning only the complete replacement of mechanical cables and pulleys, any aircraft flown in 1972 could not be the first. Do you mean the first aircraft that replaced mechanical cables transmission AND hydraulics actuators by electrical actuators?
it was the first commercial fly by wire aircraft...
The real genesis of Airbus was Concorde.
No lol
@@Lee247Jamaica Yes, it was the reunion of companies and countries for the Concorde project that led to the birth of Airbus. And up to the end of Concorde, Airbus was the supplier for support and spare parts.
9:14 HWHAT?!
I didn't know those facts
7:31 boeing 737 with 33k units sold: am i a joke to you?
Where in the world did you get that from? The 737 has around 15,000 orders so I’m really interested in where you got 33K from
What about Olympic Airways rise and fall
Bro I knew all of these💀
U forgot to say that the A330 is actually older than the A340
It is?
Wasnt the a340 first in 1991 and a330 1992
it's the opposite
Wut are u guys on abt lol
The A330 is younger than the A340
A330 during Qantas flight 72 Computer; I wanna control You >:)
MEA baby🇱🇧
Airbus will put Boeing out of business sooner then later in my opinion
The only Fact you need to know is that the Queen was in the air before Airbus even came to life, and it's still in the air....
And Airbus is still alive
Your #7 A300 was first wide body twin” directly contradicts #10 A300 directly competed against Boring.
This video is a treasure trove of factual errors.
#7 is true (A300 was the first wide-body twin-engined aircraft as the 767 came out 4 or 5 years later) and #10 is true the A300 competed directly against the 747 and then the 767 when it was released.
The facts in the video are all pretty well known though so the title is inaccurate.
Boeing is still more of a pilot’s plane. Pilots who are type rated in both Boeing aircraft and AirBus aircraft informs me, who is an Boeing pilot, that they preferred flying Boeing aircraft because they like an aircraft that has the pilot more inclusive, where the AirBus has the pilot less inclusive.
Holland is a small region in the country called The Netherlands. As one of the UK's closest neighbours it's surprising this is advanced Geography for an aviation channel. It may be a small point but it's moments like this that spread ignorace and make us all a little stupider while we hoped to learn useless facts about Airbus.
Holland? Can't find that country on the map.....
It's called the Netherlands.
@@TheDelusionalist04 As a Dutch person I'd have to say Technically you're right... Nut North and South Holland are the two provinces most influential in the nNtherlands.. the other provinces are sort of hill billy country although we hardly have hills maybe a few in the south.. anyways we're not offended if you call us Holland the other provinces don't have much to add... Now let's see what civil war I have started!!! :-)
@@petervan1353 The other provinces not much to add to the Netherlands? Let me guess, you live in one of the big cities? Because the northern provinces brought billions on natural gas-income the past few decades, the south is the biggest technological hub you can imagine. The Netherlands is more than only north/south-Holland, don't forget that.....
@@Selivio Ha see like I predicted this is the start of a new civil war!!! Sure we got some Florins from the gas up north but look at the damage it caused and will cause in the future.Talk about a carbon footprint we added with those gas fields! That techno hub you talk about is probably Eindhoven close to Rotterdam so it's almost South Holland... We can Colonize Eindhoven and add it to South Holland. You're talking peanuts here
When Airbus was trying to sell the A300B4 to Philippine Airlines, as the airline is Govt controlled in the 70's, It became a political tool by the President of the Philippines when the British Government did not allowed PAL to have a landing slot at Heathrow in the 70's over Sabah territory with a British Client State Malaysia. President Marcos offered that PAL will buy the A300B4 provided PAL will have landing slots at Heathrow. Airbus lobbied with the British Govt and PAL was granted a landing slot, I guess it has something to do with a British supplier that will benefit as any other supplier with purchases. Ever since Airlines in the Philippines prefer Airbus over Boeing due to Airbus is cheaper to purchase but expensive to maintain and Boeing is expensive to purchase but cheaper to maintain reasoning, got that information from an Air Philippines Executive whom they got refurbished 737's from a bone yard as a former Southwest.
Boeing needs to refresh everything from ground up, and Airbus well needs to look after freighter options. The A380 would work excellent as an converted freighter
It wont. Its too inefficient. If you cant utilise the entire cabin space its a waste. The MTOW is too low for cargo operations for a plane that is ungodly huge. They literally would have to design a new plane.
You better be joking if you mean A380 and don't mean A350
What is not said is the huge government subsidies that scarebus enjoys.. although Boeing is a contractor for the US, its comerical division is essentially left to fend for itself.. also scarebus has enjoyed being the recipient technological innovation in aeronautical advancements. Like fly by wire , high bypass engines and composite structures.. scarebus as a whole has not really innovated more like it has evolved a design to its next logical iteration.
My ex girlfriend looks like the Beluga XL
Same size aswell
Can you do the same for boeing, @Long Haul by Simple Flying, who ever wants it, click the like button...
airbus is like
an iphone...always trying to keep it simple
Too many excessively long ads!
Seems like you are running out of idea.. DID YOU KNOW AIRBUS IS A PLANE MANUFACTURER? Like dude…
next time on boeing
wow..... can't imagine i started ny addiction in the aviation industry from Sam Chui.... 'till i subscribed airplane-focused RUclips videos hahaha
One extra thing, Airbus are the furthest thing from a real company as it’s possible to get, if they had to survive commercially they would be bankrupt. They are not a company they are a state subsidized jobs program.
Holland is not a country. You mean the Netherlands.
i all know this
Airbus pulling a amd move on boeing.
Because Airbus is a collection of partners, they were forced to manufacture parts of the planes all over Europe. This is obviously not very efficient, but they somehow made it work. Boeing didn't have that disadvantage, but that didn't stop them from outsourcing all sorts of things from suppliers literally half a world away. And, unlike Airbus. these were not own company manufacturers they were independent businesses with independent goals and methods. Cue massive supply problem #1. Boeing's got to be the dumbest smack on the planet, there's literally nothing they can't screw up.
Hehe
lolcow Eurofighter
In my opinion the Dream lifter is ugly
You missed one major thing people might not know about Airbus!
Namely that they don't particularly like having pilots on their aircraft and are seeking to engineer them out. Arrogant enough to believe that the clever computer people can foresee any non-normal situation that may occur and provide an automated remedy for such a malady years in advance of the fact.
The very height of foolishness IMHO.
As you alluded to in your narration, Boeing have placed significantly less faith in their computer people to foretell the future, and more faith in the pilot's ability to respond.
Quite a significant difference in design philosophy.
Funny that...
Its backed by British Government and EU.
It recieved funding from the govt in pandemic and yes it also has issues like boeing bt their issues are over shadowed by boeing
I'm sure fuel pump issues are just as bad as killing 375 people despite knowing the issue, having your government get rid of competition (C Series), and having the FAA rush the plane into service.
@@skyaerospace166 sorry sir u seemed to have got the wrong idea what i was saying above. I simply meant they also have known unknown issues thats an unknown fact
@@kaustubh160 so i assume the US government has never bailed boing out? and also boeing forced the government to overturn a decision to buy the a330 tanker instead of boeing 767. Plus donald j rump forcing china to buy boeing planes to easy tariffs none of that happened right
10 things you may not know may as well include it’s powered by jet engines. All basic common knowledge
What are those?? :D
Airbus fans
ATR props
Without those countries government subsidies (financially) Airbus would not exist. Had the US done a similar financial support Europe would have cried foul
Some more interesting facts about Airbus:
- Initially the A300 had so few sales that the Airbus founders thought their dream was done for, dead and cremated. Airbus was two weeks from judicial liquidation when a new order suddenly came in, saving the consortium at the eleventh hour.
- A crucial step for Airbus was to break into the US market. It was the largest and most important aviation market at the time and no manufacturer could hope to survive without sales to US-based airlines, which was difficult among other reasons because of American distrust against anything "foreign". Airbus ultimately leased four A300s to Eastern Airlines for 6 months, free of charge as a non-committal trial. At the end of the six months period, Eastern was so happy with the aircraft that it bought the four airframes and ordered 19 more.
- In the spirit of building a pan-European project the Airbus leadership took it for granted that the A300 would be powered by Rolls-Royce engines. But RR was bailed out by the UK government, which wasn't favourable to getting involved in anything too European and didn't think that the Airbus idea had any future. So instead RR focused on the RB-211 engine for the Lockheed L-1011. Airbus eventually made a deal with GE instead. The rest is history: the L-1011 was a commercial failure (in large part because of its excessive cost and delays, attributed partly to the tumultuous and protracted RR engine development). On the other hand, for Airbus and GE it was the start of a long and fruitful collaboration.
- The A380 wing fence tips were manufactured by Boeing.
- The Airbus production logistics with suppliers and assembly sites scattered across Europe was originally planned that way to preserve national egos in the pre-EU days and ensure that none of the partners felt short-handed. It turned out to be an efficient method that is still used today.
- Before it built its Beluga fleet, Airbus used two Super Guppys to ferry its airplane components between plants. Many people didn't miss the irony of Airbus using cargo planes based on a Boeing design.
I love BOTH Boeing and Airbus. Airbus has really been strong the last few decades, but if they really invest a lot of money and resources into this zero emissions nonsense, they'll take a giant step back.
Aviation manufacuters face distortion and contortion war trying to defile or misfogure reputation
Nothing can ever beat the queen of the skies, whether it be an ugly a380 or a330.
A330 was never intended to replace the 747
The pesky illegal $7.5 billion in subsidies sure helped AB to stay in business and undercut the competition. The largest amount the WTO ever declared. EU was crying like a baby.
BOEING fans
"#3 Airbus also has extensive helicopter, space and military divisions" 7:35 I am surprised you didn't mention the A400M (Atlas) turboprop transport, a replacement for some Lockheed Hercules military transports. It seems 176 have been ordered, and 108 been delivered since 2013 to the militaries of 7 European countries and Malaysia (with a Kazakhstan order pending, and a letter of intent with Indonesia). airbus.web.factory.eu.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/2022-06/2022-05_MRS_GEN_Ord-Deliv%20by%20country.pdf .
It is interesting to speculate if some lessons from the design and production of the A400M could come to have an impact in the commercial space. As a turboprop, perhaps it could be converted to battery electric (or fuel cell) propulsion with regional or shorthaul application, sooner than the Zero-e hydrogen program. Such a large plane might have uses in intercity shuttles where a high speed train network is not available, or in developing countries with short or rough landing strips. And the lessons from the A400M, including its use of composites, could be used to make smaller regional and short-haul turboprops, perhaps with a reduced carbon footprint compared to conventional jets. Since Maersk is already pioneering the use of green methanol in container shipping, perhaps Airbus could adopt methanol as a fuel for an airframe somehow descended from the A400M turboprop, for use with commercial cargo or passengers (and of course military/humanitarian transport. Low carbon militaries!) . Methanol is already a liquid, more convenient than hydrogen, and although it is not as dense as conventional kerosene jetfuel, that shouldn't be a problem for a plane with a large maximum take-off weight (MTOW) like the A400M Atlas.