The C-130 was first built in 1955 and the A400M was first built in2003. They both are incredible aircrafts of their time. Of course the A400M is much more modern and have better technology than the C-130. But the C-130 have accumulated over 75 million of flying hours in so many countries around the world since inception.
The biggest reliability problem was with the engine gearboxes, but many other problems occurs, most because the compexity from the systems who make the A400M capable to use civilian jet flying routes.But other problems occurs because the propeller counterwaise rotating of each side: this produce heawy turbulences behind the aircraft and make lateral parachute jumps dangerous and fuel feeding impossible, but some modifications make this now ok... But, for example, the Antonov AN70 was a better base concept (counter rotative propellers, better performances, more "commercial" room...), need only improvings of the systems to catch fly specifiactions from the A400M , for less money...but the european commission reject the AN70 only because Ukraine was not in EU...
The J-model Herky now has a 'glass cockpit (ironically the systems partially designed by airbus!) and is at least as modern systems-wise as the airbus. However, the Herky has a logistical history that does date back to 50's and people know how to fix/maintain/and keep flying Hercules. If you break a Hercules bad enough to ground one permanently you have truly achieved something! One hit a bulldozer in Vietnam if flew four more mission with no ramp before they could ground the airplane long enough to replace the ramp!
Hmmm I believe the comparison should be in between these two aircraft and the Boeing McDonald Douglas C-17 Globemaster 3. By far the C-17 is the far more capable aircraft able to carry over size and more cargo! The idiots in the Bush 43 and Obama administrations along with the brain dead California Senators and congressmen let this program die!!! The USAF only built 220!!! Every C-130 in all branches of service should have been replaced on a one for one bases. Imagine an AC-17 Gunship. Well at least it is being built in the Movies and TV shows!!!
Vospers B. Thorneycroft don’t take this the wrong way but you sound very ignorant right now. Your answer is a little cringe; First the C-17 was originally designed to replace the 130, but replaced the C-141 due to the fact that the 130 had a niche that the 17 couldn’t fill which was: short takeoff, landing/takeoff on underdeveloped airstrips, short range tactical airlift. Simply put the 130 can land and take off in places that the 17 never could because the 17’s weight is too big, her turbofan engines are capable of sucking in F.O.D that will fuck it up, and her presence is too high profile meaning she becomes a big target when taking into account her size. Second an attack variant of the 17 like the AC130 wouldn’t be feasible at all due to: her high cruising speed means that slowing her down will increase the chance of stalling mid air, jet aircraft have horrible fuel efficiency when flying at lower speeds, plus the 130 is more maneuverable to make those tight circle turns at a slow enough speed to provide close air support . Lastly the cost would be the biggest thing from this ever happening; a single AC130 today goes for 100mil while a single C17 is 200mil, maintenance for the 17 is more due to the turbofan engines the higher number of maintainers taking care of the systems that a 17 has over the 130, not to mention the risk of a higher cost more advanced aircraft getting shot down. All in all both aircraft serve different purposes; think of the 130 as a van, while the 17 as a box truck, both can be used for moving, but if I only need to move a couch to my new apartment I could use both but it would make much more sense to use the van (130). Same if I want to do a drive by; the van is big enough for multiple shooters, but more maneuverable to get away. You may be right about the government being dumb on letting Boeing shut down production on the 17 since the AF plans on creating new Airlift Squadrons in the near future but have no idea where they’re going to get more heavy lift Aircraft.
Wow, the Atlas makes the Hercules look positively small and rather old fashioned. Still love the Herc though, and it's proven to be an astoundingly good design, likely to remain in service for over a century, which is almost beyond belief.
I am sixty five years old and I've watched the C-130 fly as a teenager. The Hercules had stand the test of time and been used all over the world. Very popular and economic. I also like to watch the A400M and believe it to be more modern than the 130 but let's hope it also can stand the test of time.
Two different planes for two vastly different missions. The C-130 is a smaller combat cargo aircraft specifically designed to operate on poorly maintained airfields. The A400M is much more akin to the C-17, a class in which I cannot adequately compete. Instead it offers to bridge the gap between the two offering more cargo than a C-130 (substantially less than the C-17) yet with better fuel efficiency than either the C-130 or C-17. For nations with a smaller fighting force they are great planes. However, Russia and the US (and to a lesser degree China) have all shown interest in larger transports than the A400M while maintaining a fleet of smaller C-130 sized cargo aircraft. (The Russian variant of a C-130 is the less capable AN-12)
A400M operated by Royal Malaysian Air Force aviators performed superbly n beyond expectation in a humanitarian relief efforts in Sulawesi, lndonesia. It was numerously highlighted in RUclips. Well done A400M n its crew! Impressive!
It's an Airbus A400M Atlas. Similar to Lockheed Martin C130J Super Hercules but it is bigger than the later. It is smaller when compared with Airbus C17 Globemaster.A400M is considered as successor to C130J & C130J 30, both have propeller engines.Both in service used as tactical air lifters. The C-27 is basically “half a Herc” (Hercules). Half the payload and range of a Hercules. The A400 is basically “twice a Herc”. Twice the payload and range of a Hercules. The A400 is also basically “Half a Globemaster” Half the payload and range of a C-17 Globemaster. Indeed the A400 was specifically designed to fit halfway between the airlift niches created by the Hercules and the Globemaster. After that, everything else are relatively minor detail differences. All four can land on unpaved fields, all four can drop paratroops, all four can airdrop equipment, all four can carry rolling stock, all four can carry 463L pallets, all four are compatible with NV goggles, all four can inflight refuel, etc etc etc. Of course due to the size differences between the four there are differences in the number of pallets, number of troops, size of equipment, size of vehicles, number of vehicles, etc etc that can be carried. The other differentiator is the range. In each case, the bigger aircraft has the greater range relative to the smaller aircraft. Speed is also a discriminator. The C-27J and C-130J have essentially the same cruise speed. A400M with its scimitar props is faster. C-17 with its turbofans is the fastest. And finally there’s price. Airplanes are essentially built by the pound. The bigger the heavier and the higher the price. Both in terms of purchase price and operating cost. Fitted with 4×4 Europrop International TP400 D6 Turboprop engines produce 11000 horsepower with max cruise speed 421 knots (780 Kms /hr) range up to 4800 nautical miles (8890 Kms). It's fuel economy is 0.17 nautical mile/ gallon with service ceiling of 40000 feet. It really turns in the direction it's seen in the video. If you go from the front left outer engine turns clockwise & inner engine anti clockwise. While on the right outer propeller turns anti clockwise, the inner one turns clockwise. It costs about 152 million US$.
C-130 is an icon of decades of incredible service. A400M is the now and future for any kind of military transport mission. Airbus spent tons of money in this aircraft, there were major failures, but it is intented to replace the C-130 in long term (flying since the late fifties) withour being a jet engine like the C-17 and having the same hablities of an C-130 but having more takeoff weight, more speed, capable of evasive maeuvers, carry more load and T/O and landing in dirty almost non runways.
hmm, i like them both, but i think the C-130 could get more thrust out of it's engines with a more efficient propeller design, but other than that i wouldn't change much at all.
I believe the C130 has started to use those props on some of their air crafts like our hurricane hunters.....remember the long history of improvements it has gone through over the years and it is still improving.
@@nlfn1959 yeah its a really great plane i just hope the A400 and C17 doesnt take its place... because the hercules is by far my favorite plane in the world and i dream to fly one some day...
The C-130J uses the more efficient 6 curved blade design, giving them better overall speed and efficiency that extends their range on the same fuel capacity
C-130 is iconic. I love that front with those classic windows! I really hope the a400m will be successful going forward (being Euro and an aviation enthousiast I simply have to stan for EADS). Those swept and sleek props are a sight to behold!
The A400M is beautiful, but can the A400M landed on an Aircraft Carrier? Something a C-130 has done BTW.. The C-130 is 60 years old, still flying, still being made and improved. The C-130 is the workhorse of air forces across the globe. We see Airbus is trying to get into the game and I get it. The A400M is just a copy of the C-130 with their design improvements. . The A400M might be another, we wanted it, but we really didn't need aircraft.
Saying the A400M is a copy of C-130 is like saying the AH-64 Apache is a copy of the AH-1 Cobra. It doesn't even make any sense. Both aircraft were made in the same category fulfilling the same role with minor differences and one having more efficiency and advantage than the other. For one thing, the A400M is designed as a tactical airlift that has strategic capabilities. Don't get me wrong, I love the C-130 but by trashing out what the A400M is supposed to be? be my guest
The C 130 is a smaller plane. I do not see one place replacing the other. You might use the C 130 for paratroppers and lighter cargo and the A 400 for heavier cargo.
esta comparacion es absurda .. el A400 es un avion de ultisima generacion, el hercules vuela desde que soy un chaval, y tengo 54 ... ambos son fenomenales pero estan comparando cosas totalmente diferentes y 3 tecnologias atras. si deseas comprar hazlo con un C17 quizas ...
El A400M Atlas es el sucesor del C-130 Hercules, al menos en Europa, claro que si tienen que ver uno con el otro ya que pertenecen a la misma categoria de areonaves, ademas resuelve uno de los peores defectos del viejo C-130, las helices rotan en oposicion a su pareja, lo cual aunque parezca una tonteria, tiene su importancia, ya control de la aeronave es mucho mas preciso, si te giran todas las helices en el mismo sentido, estas hacen resistencia al tratar de girar mas de un lado que del otro.
feliccie andorro para eso esta el C130 súper Hércules que es la versión mas nueva del Hércules y tecnológicamente esta a la par del A400M y para los Hércules mas viejos esta la configuración C130M que básicamente es una actualización completa de aviónica lo cual también lo colocaría a la par del A400M en tecnología
¡Por fin un comentario coherente! El C-130 es un icono pero el futuro es el A400 Atlas. Y no se puede comparar a un C17 por un motivo sencillo: el C17 es exclusivamente un vión de carga. Un A400 se consigue transporte+baja velocidad a altitud deseada para lanzamiento paracaidista, por eso se eligió turbohélice a reactor.
Hercules C130 VS Airbus A400M Atlas parecen similares la diferencia que resalta son las helices el hercules c130 tiene 4 aspas y el A400M tiene 8 aspas, el hercules C130 tienen muchos años en el mercado, y el A400M son relativamente nuevos.
El tema es que en tamaño y capacidad el A 400 está a mitad de camino entre el Hércules y el C 17. Para un país que no tiene C 17 ni Hércules tiene sentido el A 400.
We use our C130 for a lot more than just cargo point A to point B. Lots of search and rescue....mainly search. Lots of fishery patrols requiring search. Lots of evaluation flights after a catastrophe. Our pilot/co-pilot and flight engineer have spotted a lot of things. Look at the front windshield of A400M compared to C130. It's like they have horse blinders on the A400m. Looks like the windshield of an airliner that only needs to see enough to take off and land.
Good question, It's a plane unit they use to test things, and sometimes they use the tape to secure some surface elements, even it's broken in some parts as seen in the video...
Ese pico que lleva en el morro, es la pértiga de refueleado. El A400 M puede repostar en vuelo mediante su pértiga y así conseguir más autonomía. El combustible se lo puede traspasar por ejemplo el 330 MRTT
Noooooo no se puede comparar el C 130 con el A 400 M,porque de largo gana el A 400 M, es un avión más grande y por tanto tienen mayor capacidad de carga que el C 130, por lo que gana de largo el A 400 M, él C 130, es un excelente avión de transporte táctico, pero no puede igualar ni de lejos las capacidades y prestaciones que tiene el nuevo A 400 M.
Russian and European designers both know where the iconic look of their cargo planes originate, the United States. Anyone hating on the C130 needs to remember how many thousands are in service, how many millions of combat hours they have flown, and how many decades the United States have been making them. It only took Europe 60 years to catch up, no big deal.
You forgott that the most countries from Europe had a efficient military airforce long before the USA, and in ww1 the US pilots fly with french aircrafts and use many french weapons ...Did you known the older Russian and european cargo aircrafts? looks no...AN22, Noratlas say nothing to you...but this aircrafts occurs only end 50' because in Europe whe had ww2 who destroy 2/3 of the industry, in the USA nothing from this, this explain why USA was the richest country of the world after WW2 ......
m8, Europe isn't going around starting wars for oil, i mean, to liberate oppressed ppl...but good job, keep spending what u have and borrow some more from the Chinese to buy some more planes and whatever someone's selling, i'm sure they appreciate the steady income...and when u need to go to the hospital, let's hope u got some kind of insurance..peace
It only took Europe 60 years to catch up? That is one of the dumbest statement I have read in a long time. Here is a fun fact for you to chew on, almost everything the US has was built on technology taken from the Germans after WWII. I suggest you do some research before you try swinging your balls again!
Diemerstein. Isn't it so as to that is why the US probably is the most TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED nation after WWII because of it's "Multitude of MIXED Cultures and also resoundingly MIXED superior Knowledge" all combined of its Immigrants from all corners of the Globe in pursuing of what is now Famously called "The American Dream"?
Al acabar el conflicto con Marruecos ya no se necesitaba el camuflaje del desierto , de la parte superior del avión y del azul cielo en la inferior. Según fueron llegando a revisión general en OGMA , Portugal, se fueron cambiando de color hasta que se acabó el presupuesto. Esa es la razón de los distintos colores.
Your tittle have VS but not was a VS, only scenes of this 2 carriers, and why C130 vs A400M, the first is a middle carrier and another a great carrier, not same class.
Se han ido pintando gris OTAN poco a poco cuando iban a revision general pero han quedado algunos y es de suponer que ya no se pintaran puesto que estan a punto de ser sustituidos
However both are Turboprops there is No comparison between C-130 Hercules and A400M Atlas, The Atlas is a match for the C-17 not to the C-130 which is smaller.
Can't land or take off a C-17 on a rough strip, hence the us of turboprops on the A-400. That's the point of the aircraft. The RAF uses all three main transport aircraft....C-130, A-400 and C-17. They have different roles. The A-400 has much bigger load capacity than the Herc., especially in therms of armoured vehicles such as MBTs etc.
The biggest problem with the A400M is its engines. They chose to make their own engine rather than use an engine from an experienced manufacturer like Pratt and Whitney. This decision, probably led by corruption, likely killed this airplane. Nations will fly it, because they already paid for it, but it will never live up to its promise. The C130 is a flying tank. It was flying before I was born, and will continue to fly long after I am dead.
Un unicornio?? jajajajajaja eso es una sonda para reabastecimiento en vuelo. La tienen muchos aviones militares e incluso helicópteros. También vale para tender la ropa en caso de apuro. jajajajajaja.
Un unicornio?? jajajajajaja eso es una sonda para reabastecimiento en vuelo. La tienen muchos aviones militares e incluso helicópteros. También vale para tender la ropa en caso de apuro. jajajajajaja.
A400 production has ceased as problems are trying to be resolved. France and Germany are now ordering C-130J's When France needs to deploy to Mali, they get a FREE RIDE from the USAF C-17's
Yes without the C-130, there would be no A400M. The role of the C-130 shaped much of today's tactical airlift history. But let's try to think of it this way mate: it's the same way we thought of Humvees replacing jeeps or how the M16 replaced the M14 and M1 garand. Or how the aircraft carriers became the most important and efficient capital ships along with the advent of missile technology that made traditional battleships obsolete
@@JavierRullanRuano y quien ha dicho lo contrario para mí el HERCULES fue es y será el mejor avion de transporte fabricado. Todavía no vi al 400 en la Antártida ❄❄❄
@@JavierRullanRuano ¿en qué campo? ¿En ventas nada más? Cuando se trata de vender estos aviones cuál es mejor o peor ocupa el tercer lugar primero son las relaciones entre gobiernos y las megafactorías que los producen y después cuál es mejor o peor porque la realidad es que el A-400 es muchísimo mejor pero muchísimo mejor es muy superior avión. Por ejemplo todos los pilotos que necesitan responder repostar en vuelo han dicho que es mucho más fácil pero mucho más fácil repostar en el A-400 que en el Hércules porque el A-400 a tener rotaciones invertidas en las dos salas una cancela a la otra y prácticamente no hay turbulencias en la parte de atrás mientras que los cazas y otros aviones y helicópteros repostan en vuelo. Y eso en días de turbulencias en días de mucho viento de mucha lluvia o cualquier cosa así es muy importante porque tienes que repostar en vuelo y es mucho más fácil mucho más estabilizado tras el A-400 que tras ser Hércules que es muy muy generador de turbulencias en la parte trasera del avión.
Should have checkout A400M superb n unbelievable performance under the command of Royal Malaysian Air Force aviators in Sulawesi, lndonesia natural disaster relief effort highlights in RUclips last month. You'll be shocked!
Es dificil responder en forma breve . Si vas a utilizar un avión con un mantenimiento ordenado y lo vas a cumplir yo prefiero el avión gringo porque son mas responsables en la entrega de repuestos . En cambio si tengo que hacer vuelos en tiempos peligrosos y suspender el mantenimiento o hacerlo en forma precaria sin dudas que eligiría el ruso,ya que soportan mas los malos tratos y la falta de mantenimiento.
Have flown in this C-130 a lot of times in the Pacific regions. Love your dedication, VR57 crew.
The C-130 was first built in 1955 and the A400M was first built in2003. They both are incredible aircrafts of their time. Of course the A400M is much more modern and have better technology than the C-130. But the C-130 have accumulated over 75 million of flying hours in so many countries around the world since inception.
The biggest reliability problem was with the engine gearboxes, but many other problems occurs, most because the compexity from the systems who make the A400M capable to use civilian jet flying routes.But other problems occurs because the propeller counterwaise rotating of each side: this produce heawy turbulences behind the aircraft and make lateral parachute jumps dangerous and fuel feeding impossible, but some modifications make this now ok...
But, for example, the Antonov AN70 was a better base concept (counter rotative propellers, better performances, more "commercial" room...), need only improvings of the systems to catch fly specifiactions from the A400M , for less money...but the european commission reject the AN70 only because Ukraine was not in EU...
The J-model Herky now has a 'glass cockpit (ironically the systems partially designed by airbus!) and is at least as modern systems-wise as the airbus. However, the Herky has a logistical history that does date back to 50's and people know how to fix/maintain/and keep flying Hercules. If you break a Hercules bad enough to ground one permanently you have truly achieved something! One hit a bulldozer in Vietnam if flew four more mission with no ramp before they could ground the airplane long enough to replace the ramp!
Hmmm I believe the comparison should be in between these two aircraft and the Boeing McDonald Douglas C-17 Globemaster 3. By far the C-17 is the far more capable aircraft able to carry over size and more cargo! The idiots in the Bush 43 and Obama administrations along with the brain dead California Senators and congressmen let this program die!!! The USAF only built 220!!! Every C-130 in all branches of service should have been replaced on a one for one bases. Imagine an AC-17 Gunship. Well at least it is being built in the Movies and TV shows!!!
Vospers B. Thorneycroft don’t take this the wrong way but you sound very ignorant right now. Your answer is a little cringe; First the C-17 was originally designed to replace the 130, but replaced the C-141 due to the fact that the 130 had a niche that the 17 couldn’t fill which was: short takeoff, landing/takeoff on underdeveloped airstrips, short range tactical airlift. Simply put the 130 can land and take off in places that the 17 never could because the 17’s weight is too big, her turbofan engines are capable of sucking in F.O.D that will fuck it up, and her presence is too high profile meaning she becomes a big target when taking into account her size. Second an attack variant of the 17 like the AC130 wouldn’t be feasible at all due to: her high cruising speed means that slowing her down will increase the chance of stalling mid air, jet aircraft have horrible fuel efficiency when flying at lower speeds, plus the 130 is more maneuverable to make those tight circle turns at a slow enough speed to provide close air support . Lastly the cost would be the biggest thing from this ever happening; a single AC130 today goes for 100mil while a single C17 is 200mil, maintenance for the 17 is more due to the turbofan engines the higher number of maintainers taking care of the systems that a 17 has over the 130, not to mention the risk of a higher cost more advanced aircraft getting shot down. All in all both aircraft serve different purposes; think of the 130 as a van, while the 17 as a box truck, both can be used for moving, but if I only need to move a couch to my new apartment I could use both but it would make much more sense to use the van (130). Same if I want to do a drive by; the van is big enough for multiple shooters, but more maneuverable to get away. You may be right about the government being dumb on letting Boeing shut down production on the 17 since the AF plans on creating new Airlift Squadrons in the near future but have no idea where they’re going to get more heavy lift Aircraft.
@@il6yr8 thank you for your valuable comment 👍
Wow, the Atlas makes the Hercules look positively small and rather old fashioned. Still love the Herc though, and it's proven to be an astoundingly good design, likely to remain in service for over a century, which is almost beyond belief.
Truely. However, has anyone heard any news about the AC-130s?
I am sixty five years old and I've watched the C-130 fly as a teenager. The Hercules had stand the test of time and been used all over the world. Very popular and economic.
I also like to watch the A400M and believe it to be more modern than the 130 but let's hope it also can stand the test of time.
I doubt it !
regolo gellini Why?
Things are not built as they used to...
No hay comparación posible. Entre uno y otro hay 50 años. 50 años de evolución....
Two different planes for two vastly different missions. The C-130 is a smaller combat cargo aircraft specifically designed to operate on poorly maintained airfields. The A400M is much more akin to the C-17, a class in which I cannot adequately compete. Instead it offers to bridge the gap between the two offering more cargo than a C-130 (substantially less than the C-17) yet with better fuel efficiency than either the C-130 or C-17. For nations with a smaller fighting force they are great planes. However, Russia and the US (and to a lesser degree China) have all shown interest in larger transports than the A400M while maintaining a fleet of smaller C-130 sized cargo aircraft. (The Russian variant of a C-130 is the less capable AN-12)
A400M operated by Royal Malaysian Air Force aviators performed superbly n beyond expectation in a humanitarian relief efforts in Sulawesi, lndonesia. It was numerously highlighted in RUclips. Well done A400M n its crew! Impressive!
Both are good, but A400M is more fancy
.. love your video assemblages .. just what we want to see .. aircraft in flight .. 👍👍
Thanks!
It's an Airbus A400M Atlas. Similar to Lockheed Martin C130J Super Hercules but it is bigger than the later. It is smaller when compared with Airbus C17 Globemaster.A400M is considered as successor to C130J & C130J 30, both have propeller engines.Both in service used as tactical air lifters.
The C-27 is basically “half a Herc” (Hercules). Half the payload and range of a Hercules.
The A400 is basically “twice a Herc”. Twice the payload and range of a Hercules.
The A400 is also basically “Half a Globemaster” Half the payload and range of a C-17 Globemaster.
Indeed the A400 was specifically designed to fit halfway between the airlift niches created by the Hercules and the Globemaster.
After that, everything else are relatively minor detail differences. All four can land on unpaved fields, all four can drop paratroops, all four can airdrop equipment, all four can carry rolling stock, all four can carry 463L pallets, all four are compatible with NV goggles, all four can inflight refuel, etc etc etc. Of course due to the size differences between the four there are differences in the number of pallets, number of troops, size of equipment, size of vehicles, number of vehicles, etc etc that can be carried.
The other differentiator is the range. In each case, the bigger aircraft has the greater range relative to the smaller aircraft. Speed is also a discriminator. The C-27J and C-130J have essentially the same cruise speed. A400M with its scimitar props is faster. C-17 with its turbofans is the fastest. And finally there’s price. Airplanes are essentially built by the pound. The bigger the heavier and the higher the price. Both in terms of purchase price and operating cost. Fitted with 4×4 Europrop International TP400 D6 Turboprop engines produce 11000 horsepower with max cruise speed 421 knots (780 Kms /hr) range up to 4800 nautical miles (8890 Kms). It's fuel economy is 0.17 nautical mile/ gallon with service ceiling of 40000 feet. It really turns in the direction it's seen in the video. If you go from the front left outer engine turns clockwise & inner engine anti clockwise. While on the right outer propeller turns anti clockwise, the inner one turns clockwise. It costs about 152 million US$.
C-130 is an icon of decades of incredible service. A400M is the now and future for any kind of military transport mission.
Airbus spent tons of money in this aircraft, there were major failures, but it is intented to replace the C-130 in long term (flying since the late fifties) withour being a jet engine like the C-17 and having the same hablities of an C-130 but having more takeoff weight, more speed, capable of evasive maeuvers, carry more load and T/O and landing in dirty almost non runways.
Javier, felicidades por tus excelentes videos.
A400M ATLAS 💪💪💪💪
hmm, i like them both, but i think the C-130 could get more thrust out of it's engines with a more efficient propeller design, but other than that i wouldn't change much at all.
I believe the C130 has started to use those props on some of their air crafts like our hurricane hunters.....remember the long history of improvements it has gone through over the years and it is still improving.
@@nlfn1959 yeah its a really great plane i just hope the A400 and C17 doesnt take its place... because the hercules is by far my favorite plane in the world and i dream to fly one some day...
The C-130J uses the more efficient 6 curved blade design, giving them better overall speed and efficiency that extends their range on the same fuel capacity
I prefer the a400, such a nice turboprop
Respect to both aircraft and their respective manufacturers. But growing up in the US, the C-130 has always been iconic to me.
thor20014 The A400M is better and that is all we care about. A400M is also way more beautiful
C-130 is iconic. I love that front with those classic windows!
I really hope the a400m will be successful going forward (being Euro and an aviation enthousiast I simply have to stan for EADS). Those swept and sleek props are a sight to behold!
The A400 is better? Ask the pilots on the test flight in Spain that crashed killing 4 of the flight crew.
Patrick Taylor Compared to the thousand C130 crashes that occurs almost every single year
Patrick Taylor A400M is thrice better than c130
The A400M is beautiful, but can the A400M landed on an Aircraft Carrier? Something a C-130 has done BTW.. The C-130 is 60 years old, still flying, still being made and improved. The C-130 is the workhorse of air forces across the globe. We see Airbus is trying to get into the game and I get it. The A400M is just a copy of the C-130 with their design improvements. . The A400M might be another, we wanted it, but we really didn't need aircraft.
Saying the A400M is a copy of C-130 is like saying the AH-64 Apache is a copy of the AH-1 Cobra. It doesn't even make any sense. Both aircraft were made in the same category fulfilling the same role with minor differences and one having more efficiency and advantage than the other. For one thing, the A400M is designed as a tactical airlift that has strategic capabilities. Don't get me wrong, I love the C-130 but by trashing out what the A400M is supposed to be? be my guest
Andew70. You forgot that LC-130 which is equipped with skis operates in the ice sheets of Antarctica.
The C 130 is a smaller plane. I do not see one place replacing the other. You might use the C 130 for paratroppers and lighter cargo and the A 400 for heavier cargo.
Love c-130 n a400m Malaysian air force from Indonesia
Nontiene comparación. Si al A400 le salen pegas se iran corrigiendo. Pero' es mejor avion de todas todas y se fabrica en sevilla. No en masaschuset
esta comparacion es absurda ..
el A400 es un avion de ultisima generacion, el hercules vuela desde que soy un chaval, y tengo 54 ...
ambos son fenomenales pero estan comparando cosas totalmente diferentes y 3 tecnologias atras. si deseas comprar hazlo con un C17 quizas ...
El A400M Atlas es el sucesor del C-130 Hercules, al menos en Europa, claro que si tienen que ver uno con el otro ya que pertenecen a la misma categoria de areonaves, ademas resuelve uno de los peores defectos del viejo C-130, las helices rotan en oposicion a su pareja, lo cual aunque parezca una tonteria, tiene su importancia, ya control de la aeronave es mucho mas preciso, si te giran todas las helices en el mismo sentido, estas hacen resistencia al tratar de girar mas de un lado que del otro.
feliccie andorro para eso esta el C130 súper Hércules que es la versión mas nueva del Hércules y tecnológicamente esta a la par del A400M y para los Hércules mas viejos esta la configuración C130M que básicamente es una actualización completa de aviónica lo cual también lo colocaría a la par del A400M en tecnología
¡Por fin un comentario coherente! El C-130 es un icono pero el futuro es el A400 Atlas. Y no se puede comparar a un C17 por un motivo sencillo: el C17 es exclusivamente un vión de carga. Un A400 se consigue transporte+baja velocidad a altitud deseada para lanzamiento paracaidista, por eso se eligió turbohélice a reactor.
Hercules C130 VS Airbus A400M Atlas parecen similares la diferencia que resalta son las helices el hercules c130 tiene 4 aspas y el A400M tiene 8 aspas, el hercules C130 tienen muchos años en el mercado, y el A400M son relativamente nuevos.
El tema es que en tamaño y capacidad el A 400 está a mitad de camino entre el Hércules y el C 17. Para un país que no tiene C 17 ni Hércules tiene sentido el A 400.
Keren Malaysia.. Goods
I Would Like to See the Lockheed C-130 J Model and AIRBUS A-400M Turned into GUNSHIP Models 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Bennie Mabe j
Ac-130
We use our C130 for a lot more than just cargo point A to point B. Lots of search and rescue....mainly search. Lots of fishery patrols requiring search. Lots of evaluation flights after a catastrophe. Our pilot/co-pilot and flight engineer have spotted a lot of things. Look at the front windshield of A400M compared to C130. It's like they have horse blinders on the A400m. Looks like the windshield of an airliner that only needs to see enough to take off and land.
What is that silver tape de-laminating around the fuel probe?
Good question, It's a plane unit they use to test things, and sometimes they use the tape to secure some surface elements, even it's broken in some parts as seen in the video...
Thank you, sir!
i love the C-130 😀😀😀
Me too🤗🛫
Ese pico que lleva en el morro, es la pértiga de refueleado. El A400 M puede repostar en vuelo mediante su pértiga y así conseguir más autonomía. El combustible se lo puede traspasar por ejemplo el 330 MRTT
Noooooo no se puede comparar el C 130 con el A 400 M,porque de largo gana el A 400 M, es un avión más grande y por tanto tienen mayor capacidad de carga que el C 130, por lo que gana de largo el A 400 M, él C 130, es un excelente avión de transporte táctico, pero no puede igualar ni de lejos las capacidades y prestaciones que tiene el nuevo A 400 M.
Russian and European designers both know where the iconic look of their cargo planes originate, the United States. Anyone hating on the C130 needs to remember how many thousands are in service, how many millions of combat hours they have flown, and how many decades the United States have been making them. It only took Europe 60 years to catch up, no big deal.
You forgott that the most countries from Europe had a efficient military airforce long before the USA, and in ww1 the US pilots fly with french aircrafts and use many french weapons ...Did you known the older Russian and european cargo aircrafts? looks no...AN22, Noratlas say nothing to you...but this aircrafts occurs only end 50' because in Europe whe had ww2 who destroy 2/3 of the industry, in the USA nothing from this, this explain why USA was the richest country of the world after WW2 ......
m8, Europe isn't going around starting wars for oil, i mean, to liberate oppressed ppl...but good job, keep spending what u have and borrow some more from the Chinese to buy some more planes and whatever someone's selling, i'm sure they appreciate the steady income...and when u need to go to the hospital, let's hope u got some kind of insurance..peace
It only took Europe 60 years to catch up?
That is one of the dumbest statement I have read in a long time.
Here is a fun fact for you to chew on, almost everything the US has was built on technology taken from the Germans after WWII.
I suggest you do some research before you try swinging your balls again!
Diemerstein. Isn't it so as to that is why the US probably is the most TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED nation after WWII because of it's "Multitude of MIXED Cultures and also resoundingly MIXED superior Knowledge" all combined of its Immigrants from all corners of the Globe in pursuing of what is now Famously called "The American Dream"?
The US is not the most advanced nation on earth, I suggest you travel the world a bit.
Lockheed will still be producing C-130s long after the A400 line has shut down.
Hercules might be produced for 80 years. Only avionics and engines need to be upgraded between versions.
Your post does seems weighted toward the 400M simply by images of each aircraft!
Al acabar el conflicto con Marruecos ya no se necesitaba el camuflaje del desierto , de la parte superior del avión y del azul cielo en la inferior. Según fueron llegando a revisión general en OGMA , Portugal, se fueron cambiando de color hasta que se acabó el presupuesto. Esa es la razón de los distintos colores.
Your tittle have VS but not was a VS, only scenes of this 2 carriers, and why C130 vs A400M, the first is a middle carrier and another a great carrier, not same class.
?Cual es la razón de que unos C-130 del EAE van pintados con camuflaje del desierto y otros van pintados solo de Gris?
Buena pregunta, imagino que dependera de la unidad concreta a la que estan destinados.
Javier Rullan Ruano Todos los aviones C130H han estado destinados en el Ala 31 de Zaragoza , por tanto esa respuesta no puede ser válida.
Se han ido pintando gris OTAN poco a poco cuando iban a revision general pero han quedado algunos y es de suponer que ya no se pintaran puesto que estan a punto de ser sustituidos
However both are Turboprops there is No comparison between C-130 Hercules and A400M Atlas, The Atlas is a match for the C-17 not to the C-130 which is smaller.
a400 is a 2000 design the Hercules is older than my mom ..!!!
The Hercules is also much, much cheaper than the Atlas
lets say , 10 times cheaper !!!!!!! Hercules is big bang for the money ...........
I just checked, it is five times cheaper than an A400M. The C17 cost 25% more than an A400M but can carry nearly twice the payload.
Can't land or take off a C-17 on a rough strip, hence the us of turboprops on the A-400. That's the point of the aircraft. The RAF uses all three main transport aircraft....C-130, A-400 and C-17. They have different roles. The A-400 has much bigger load capacity than the Herc., especially in therms of armoured vehicles such as MBTs etc.
C130 is the best. Its still competing with a 65 year more modern design, you cant say that of anything else.
The biggest problem with the A400M is its engines. They chose to make their own engine rather than use an engine from an experienced manufacturer like Pratt and Whitney. This decision, probably led by corruption, likely killed this airplane. Nations will fly it, because they already paid for it, but it will never live up to its promise. The C130 is a flying tank. It was flying before I was born, and will continue to fly long after I am dead.
Says who? The vicar?
In very beginning... is that first boat yours? It looks so similar to my sailboat...weird.
1953 i flew 53-3129 first one thrty built
Esta comparación es absurda, el Hercules es un avión diseñado con regla de cálculo en los años 50 aún así se mantiene vigente
Malaysia have Hercules c-130 and A400M
C130 is badass 😎
That a400 pilot is shure heavy handed.
El atlas europeo tiene un Enorme parecido con el hercules c-130 americano El cambio en las aspas o helices de los motores
Hola me gustaria saber porque el A 400 M tiene un pico en encima del morro que parece un unicornio
+Lo mejor en juegos No te puedo ayudar, alguno de los muchos sensores que lleva imagino...
+ Javier Rullan Ruano In flight refueling boom :)
pode ser um radar
Un unicornio?? jajajajajaja eso es una sonda para reabastecimiento en vuelo. La tienen muchos aviones militares e incluso helicópteros. También vale para tender la ropa en caso de apuro. jajajajajaja.
Un unicornio?? jajajajajaja eso es una sonda para reabastecimiento en vuelo. La tienen muchos aviones militares e incluso helicópteros. También vale para tender la ropa en caso de apuro. jajajajajaja.
A400m can perform stunts at high speeds(820km/h of max speed) but the c-130 is just lesser than 700km/h of max speed
Boopydoopy975 Who knows? See you in 50 years!
A400 production has ceased as problems are trying to be resolved. France and Germany are now ordering C-130J's When France needs to deploy to Mali, they get a FREE RIDE from the USAF C-17's
saya suka
A400M😎
AIRBUS A400M GRIZZLY ATLAS 💪💪💪💪
Unfair to try to compare these aircraft. Without the C130 there would never be an aircraft anything approaching N A400.
Yes without the C-130, there would be no A400M. The role of the C-130 shaped much of today's tactical airlift history. But let's try to think of it this way mate: it's the same way we thought of Humvees replacing jeeps or how the M16 replaced the M14 and M1 garand. Or how the aircraft carriers became the most important and efficient capital ships along with the advent of missile technology that made traditional battleships obsolete
PAF uses C-130 ever since 1965....such a robust American hardware..
The A400 is held together with gaffer tape!!
A400m better rotas'n (rotation) dezine
LIKE C130 HERCULES, IS MORE SURE
I love c130. Because Pakistan army use this. But a400 also good
Looks like the A400M is losing it's "100 mile-an-hour tape" from around the refueling probe and along the top of the port wing. Hmmmmm......
Don't you mean "160 KPH" tape since it is a French product?
Hardly French alone!
The A400M is such a beautiful aircraft, it just needs time so history can find a place for him.
MMM es como comparar al abuelo de 65 con el nieto de 18. Cada uno tiene su tiempo, pero el abuelo aparte de tiempo tiene experiencia
No creas, el Hercules tiene mucho juego todavia y el A400 no ha tenido el exito esperado...
@@JavierRullanRuano y quien ha dicho lo contrario para mí el HERCULES fue es y será el mejor avion de transporte fabricado. Todavía no vi al 400 en la Antártida ❄❄❄
Pero necesita viagra.
@@JavierRullanRuano ¿en qué campo? ¿En ventas nada más? Cuando se trata de vender estos aviones cuál es mejor o peor ocupa el tercer lugar primero son las relaciones entre gobiernos y las megafactorías que los producen y después cuál es mejor o peor porque la realidad es que el A-400 es muchísimo mejor pero muchísimo mejor es muy superior avión. Por ejemplo todos los pilotos que necesitan responder repostar en vuelo han dicho que es mucho más fácil pero mucho más fácil repostar en el A-400 que en el Hércules porque el A-400 a tener rotaciones invertidas en las dos salas una cancela a la otra y prácticamente no hay turbulencias en la parte de atrás mientras que los cazas y otros aviones y helicópteros repostan en vuelo. Y eso en días de turbulencias en días de mucho viento de mucha lluvia o cualquier cosa así es muy importante porque tienes que repostar en vuelo y es mucho más fácil mucho más estabilizado tras el A-400 que tras ser Hércules que es muy muy generador de turbulencias en la parte trasera del avión.
A400m 👍👍👍👍
por favor no se pueden comparar.
El A400M es el sucesor del C-130, en Europa van a retirar sus unidades por el nuevo A400M.
¿ Y ?, ¿And ?
A400M do mais top
There are no segments that demonstrate a direct comparison.
¿ Y ?
...que retiran los viejos C-130 por el nuevo A400M.
A400M....
"VS" implies a comparison, not just some video footage of both planes.
Atlas400M is the best.
LITE WHATSHAPS
*pesawat angkut ini dalemnya penjara , terbang ke arab tuk jeblosin si rizieq mezum ke penjara, HEBAT*
Org terbodoh di planet ini adala cebong seperti anda..
wtf c130 is to..................old should change
THE C-130 WILL BE FLYING, WHILE THE A 400 IS IN THE SCRAP YARD !!!!!
shut up
Should have checkout A400M superb n unbelievable performance under the command of Royal Malaysian Air Force aviators in Sulawesi, lndonesia natural disaster relief effort highlights in RUclips last month. You'll be shocked!
C-130 J
Cuando el A400M cumpla mas de 50 años de construcción como el C-130 ,solo en ese momento se podrá comparar , ademas para mi Airbus no es confiable .
Es dificil responder en forma breve . Si vas a utilizar un avión con un mantenimiento ordenado y lo vas a cumplir yo prefiero el avión gringo porque son mas responsables en la entrega de repuestos . En cambio si tengo que hacer vuelos en tiempos peligrosos y suspender el mantenimiento o hacerlo en forma precaria sin dudas que eligiría el ruso,ya que soportan mas los malos tratos y la falta de mantenimiento.
B