@@nottoday3817 I can imagine framerate or some other filming factor could be at work with the appearance of the propellers. Do they look anything like that to the naked eye?
@@stevefromct168 I bet the whole point is to show that they finally have designed a plane that can do it safely. B-52 is a 1950's designed plane. Would be sad if we have not learned nothing in 50 years.
@@stevefromct168 The position itself is not that dangerous if you respect all parameters. That B52 lost lift due to way too slow speed, not to mention pilot was known for that kind of dangerous situation.
I live in Jersey, Channel Islands, right on the main flight path and we have Atlas over fairly often to train, I'm 36 years old and I still run to the window when I hear something 'different' about, In fact, I still run to the window when I hear sirens going past just to see what service it is, maybe my Missus is right and I am just a Man-Child after all, lol Happy 2020 🍻
I'm much more impressed with this A400M display than I was by the F-35A display. Europe now has two VERY high end tactical transport options in production, with the Alenia C-27J and the Airbus A400M. I really hope Airbus will continue to develop the A400M into various special missions variants, similar to what Alenia/Leonardo has done with the C-27J. Though with Airbus already developing a whole range of special missions variants of the C-295 right now, I'm not sure how likely that is at the moment.
L'A400M est trop grand et génère trop de turbulences pour ravitailler des hélicoptères en vol. Si la France vient d'acheter un C130, c'est pour ravitailler ses Caracal en vol. Comparer le C130 et l'A400M n'a pas beaucoup de sens, certes ce sont deux avions de transport mais l'A400M est bien plus volumineux et dispose d'une autonomie bien supérieure. Pour le reste, le C130 est une machine extraordinaire et volera encore très longtemps, c'est indiscutable.
The use of propellers on the A400 seems brilliant, to me. At first, I wondered why the props seemed oddly, and overtly tilted downward relative to the wing. Which, at first glance, would seem to provide a thrust vector component counter to the wing’s lift. Then it occurs, that what the tilt is actually doing is providing a significant artificial airspeed over the wing. Greatly improving STOL performance. Imagine, that that any plane were sitting on a runway in a steady Hurricane wind. The Hurricane would provide enough effective airspeed over the wings to lift the plane, even though it were at standstill on the runway. Such an effect seems likely the reason the props are overtly tilted downward as they are. Brilliant.
That's the mystery. They aren't turning very fast at all. Two are going backwards I see. Interesting aero-dynamics at work. Maybe there's a helium balloon inside eh? Why the long hold at the start?
MalcolmXcrement Nope, the rotation of the props matches the shutter of the camera. If they were shut off they would still be spinning slowly and they’d be feathered.
Bradley AFV have grown from 27 tons to 33.5 but as the A400M can lift 37 tons and take it over 2000nm I would say that’s true. It certainly can take the Puma IFV. The idea being to fly out 5 A400M, four with Pumas and the final one with appliqué armour.
Ce A 400M certes est atypique et reconnaissable avec des hélices géantes qui ne font pas que brasser de l AIR !... On connaît tous leurs investissements dans des missions vitales et humanitaires de tout premier ordre.... Félicitations. Dans ce cas, priorité à l opérationnel. ...ce n est pas un défilé de mode...nos Militaires sont des guerriers pacifiques mais en action!... Vive l Armée de l Air & de l Espace Vive l Association des Anciens Élèves de l École de l Air Avec respect et grande admiration souvent!..
Mon Dieu! -- that plane's performance between 00:45 and 3:00 was absolutely on the bleeding edge. I practically had to pry my fingernails out of my armrests after they finally let up a bit. Whew!!! Stirring stuff, messieurs, truly stirring.
Those propellers have a lot of blades, but notice how the propeller blades' tips are swept back and are elliptical in shape to reduce vortices at the tips just as winglets reduce wingtip vortices and thus reduce lift-induced drag!
FOR THE SELF APPOINTED EXPERTS ON THIS PAGE. A Royal Air Force Atlas (A400M) has delivered a cargo load weighing 23 tons by parachute over Salisbury Plain in a record-breaking test of the transport aircraft’s next-generation capabilities. The drops, representing the heaviest overall load ever air-dropped by a UK aircraft, took place as part of trial to confirm Atlas’ ability to deliver heavy loads, such as military equipment, supplies and humanitarian aid, without needing to land. “Atlas has already proven itself on active service especially in the humanitarian relief role in the Caribbean last year and Indonesia earlier this year. “These trials confirm the RAF as having one of the most capable transport fleets in the entire world and are a significant step forward in qualifying Atlas for even more operations,” said Wing Commander Ed Horne, Officer Commanding LXX Squadron RAF. The trials were overseen by the Defense Equipment and Support (DE&S) in partnership with the RAF, the Joint Air Delivery Test and Evaluation Unit and Air Warfare Centre, QinetiQ and Airbus. Results from the trial, which took place on 6th November, will now be fed back into the Atlas development programmed which is qualifying the aircraft to perform such operations in active RAF service. By comparison, the maximum cargo weight deliverable via the Container Delivery System from a C-130J Hercules is approximately 15 tons. DE&S Atlas A400M Delivery Team Leader James Dowson said: “These successful trials - involving the largest load ever air-dropped by a UK aircraft - are an impressive demonstration of A400M’s ability to deliver essential cargo to where it is needed. “This has been a fantastic team effort bringing together staff from DE&S, the RAF A400M community at Brize Norton as well as our Industry partners to mature tactical capabilities for front line use in RAF operations.” The UK’s Atlas fleet is being developed to complement the Hercules fleet in support of transport operations all over the world. Atlas trials are undertaken by 206 Squadron which is based at RAF Brize Norton alongside front line squadrons XXIV and LXX Sqns. The international Atlas programme, being delivered by Airbus, is supporting around 8,000 jobs in the UK. In total the UK RAF will receive 22 Atlas aircraft which are all expected to be delivered by the early 2020s.
Jet engine are not efficient in low altitude and not so "dirty friendly" .So, better for heavy strategic plane (or fast, like fighters), but not for a tactical (even if the A400 is a heavy tactical) who must operate on dirty ground with small length for landing/takeoff. Propellers are more flexible.
STOL capabilities look amazing. Hope this is on the radar (pun intended) of many countries as a HERC replacement, though not sure of its cargo capacity. looks like its between the HERC and C17
3:16 is hilarious. One of the people on the flight line was making the universal semi truck blow your horn arm motion and the pilot threw back the universal jerking off arm motion 🤣🤣😂
I think they’re slogan is “taking loads a C130 can’t carry to places a C17 can’t go”. Apparently jets can get bogged very easily even if they can land they can’t taxi in many unsealed runways.
not at all Paul. although you can change from 60fps to 30fps with this camera, that change will effect the recording quality and hardly, if at all, effect the visual effect as seen here. not knowing the mode the video was made with, I can only guess it was in Sports Mode as I've seen similar results when I used to shoot video with a video camera (if I do video now, I use a dSLR at motorsports shoots and always dial the shutter speed down to at least 1/50sec). Ideally, to give prop blur, the shutter speed will need to be lower and can be manually adjusted within this camera's menu system. a lower shutter speed will effect the exposure, so the use of ND filters is also recommended, especially in bright light situations. I recommend having a look at the UK Aviation Movies channel for some excellent examples of prop blue in video. cheers
@@SportsFotos42 I think I know what you mean but that's not the shutter speed, its the aperture and/or ISO (or film speed). I'm a photographer since 1980, (strictly still-life). I presently shoot a Nikon D4S which is capable of 4K video. Adjusting the shutter speed when shooting still shots will get effects like what you're speaking about. However, the video function only opens the shutter once and it opens it to its maximum. I'm betting that you mean the "aperture" or the film-speed ("ISO" is the speed rating/adjustment at which film can absorb light. In a DSLR, it's the sensor instead of the film). I'm betting that you mean the "ISO" and/or "aperture". In still-life images, the smaller the aperture, (F16, F18, etc.), the farther your DOF is in front of, and behind the subject. When you want a very short DOF in front and in back of the subject, you would set the aperture to a large setting (such as F5, F4, F2.8, etc.). The slower the shutter speed, the blurrier is the moving subject, (such as a waterfall). However, that effect is very dependent on the aperture and ISO settings. Shutter speed, aperture, and ISO can be adjusted to create different effects in still-life. However, in DSLRs, the video capability only offers aperture, ISO, and frame rate options. The shutter in video mode opens to its maximum size and must stay fully opened during the entire recording, (just like a video film camera would do back in the 80's). If the shutter closes, it will block the light and the subject's image will be kept from getting to the sensor. This is particularly true with DSLRs. The shutter opens when you begin recording and does not close until you stop recording video. This is why you can't see anything when you look through the viewfinder of a DSLR while shooting video unless you buy special attachments, (which feed through the lens not through the camera). That said, if I want to shoot a still image while I'm video recording the subject, cameras like mine can do that. I can set the shutter speed for that still image just as I would if I was not shooting video. Then when I press the shutter release, the camera captures the still image without interrupting the video. Although, many less expensive cameras will interrupt the video when shooting a still image during the video process. In the D4S, the shutter speed for that image will only effect the still image not the video and will not interrupt the video. The actual video process in a DSLR doesn't open and close any shutters except for once during the single, initial, opening when the recording starts, and then closes once when the recording stops. I'm sure that you meant ISO or maybe even aperture. Rich
appreciate the response, but shutter speed is 100% what I meant and if the original poster changed his camera's shutter speed to a lower one, the props would blur. please be aware that the camera used for this video does not have ISO control (and ISO has nothing to do with this). it is true that the aperture may need to be changed to allow for the extra exposure to compensate for the slower shutter (note I also mentioned the use of an ND filter earlier).... these are the only "manual" settings this Panasonic camera can give... although changing the recorded video type only gives options of 25fps or 50fps... I didn't realise that Nikon dSLRs didn't have the capability of adjusting the shutter speed when shooting videos. all of my dSLRs give me that option while shooting and even my little Panasonic DMC LX-100 allows me to do the same. as you know, the shutter does not open/close for each frame, however the shutter speed you select will determine electronically how the camera exposes the sensor to light for each frame, much like a regular shutter, and the result should be more blur (prop blur in this case) with a lower shutter speed. this website may be of some interest to folks out there: vimeo.com/blog/post/frame-rate-vs-shutter-speed-setting-the-record-str/ cheers
@@SportsFotos42 I have no doubt that Panasonic is using the term “shutter speed” to describe a setting that would give a comparable special effect if it were shot with a still image camera. There is NO shutter opening and closing at 60 fps in the video camera, (which I believe you have noted as well), and I’m sure now, that you meant Panasonic referred to a special effects adjustment as a “Shutter Speed”. Just because they may have ‘labeled’ the control to accomplish that special effect, as “Shutter Speed” doesn’t mean they are actually adjusting the speed of any shutters. The control merely BEHAVES like a shutter adjustment if it was shot with a still image camera. Therefore, Panasonic uses a misnomer for their customers to better understand. That actually makes sense from a ‘customer-friendly’ marketing POV. They know that their customers are not familiar with the far more technical and accurately labeled pro equipment. As far as I’m concerned, Panasonic’s failure to use a more technical term to describe a special effect is not my problem. I’m standing on my original statement, which is that no shutter speeds can be adjusted in a video camera, (not in the real sense of the term.). In addition, I think you know that and deliberately attempted to mislead me rather than explain the actual and true meaning of your camera’s controls. Apparently, Panasonic offers some in camera special effects that would otherwise be accomplished in the editing phase if not in-camera. Many non-pro cameras (and lately, even pro-bodies), include these little things and I think that does make things more convenient. I think my D4S offers some in-camera video effects similar to this feature but I don’t shoot much video so I didn’t really look into it. BTW: Nikon & Canon produce lower quality, economically priced cameras just as companies like Panasonic do. Even though both companies (Nikon & Canon), are overpriced, the lowest quality cameras they produce would likely be as good as ‘upper-mid’ level models from companies like Panasonic. Trust me, Panasonic and the many other economically priced camera manufacturers, haven’t even come close to making a camera as advanced as a Nikon D4S. FWIW
It appears to me that the 2 outside props are spinning in an 'Outer' direction and the two inside ones spin inwards towards the fuselage. Maybe something to do with stability.
@@Soma874 That is known as 'counter-rotating propellers'. It helps reduce 'P factor' which is the moment arm of energy that due to the rotation of the propeller(s), has the effect of rotating the aircraft to the right. What I'm referring to is the appearance of the spinner of the No. 1 engine to be different than the other three. Look again, you'll see what I mean.
Who would have ever thought you could take off with a cargo plane this size, go straight up, turn back and then up again all within the length of an airstrip?
And you can fit the most of the modern vehicle without dismount some stuff in the C130. That's the reason of born of the A400M having the same landing capabilities of the C130 with a bigger cargo capabilities (Weight and size). Even the USAF want a cargo like the A400M today... So your comment is just a proof of your lack of knowledge.
I think Air Bus has a winner here. Nice looking plane but only time will tell if it will out shine the C-130 in the long term. It might make a cool R/C project.
A400M is a COPYCAT of the Ukrainian Antonov 70, designed and flown in the 90's, with probably a sellout of engineering data and blueprints by the Ukrainian maffia that rules the country. US C-17 is older, heavier and better.
Merci pour cette excellente vidéo ! J'ai vraiment hâte que le A400M règle les quelques petits problèmes restant pour clouer le bec à tous les oiseaux de mauvaise augure qui s'imaginent qu'un appareil aussi novateur pourrait sortir d'usine sans aucune amélioration à faire ! Ils n'ont qu'à jeter un petit coup d'oeil à l'histoire du C130 Hercules, qui bien qu'infiniment moins novateur à son époque, a mit plusieurs décennies avant de donner pleinement satisfaction ! On parlait aussi de "désastre industriel", mais ce "désastre" a tout de même rapporté des milliards à Lockheed...
Il est incroyable et pourtant je n'y connais rien mais ont peut voir que pour un engin aussi gros il y a une certaine grâce et cet accélération m'a étonné ! j'ai vu que vous parliez français et je voulais savoir si vous pouviez me dire pourquoi il a des hélices alors que les autres gros porteur ont des réacteurs ?? (désolé pour mon amateurisme !)
@@pakman5636 Je ne suis pas un expert mais il me semble que le principal avantage est la consommation moindre turbopropulseurs (moteur à hélice) par rapport aux turboréacteurs pour des avions évoluant sous les 900 km/h
@@guhiguha6060 Les hélices sont de loin supérieures aux réacteurs pour l'accélération initiale et la poussée inverse Cela confère de meilleures performances aux décollage et atterrissages sur terrains courts.
@@guhiguha6060 Les hélices déplacent un large volume d'air à une vitesse relativement basse comparativement aux réacteurs. Elles ont plus de 'mordant" a basse vitesse, donc permettent une accélération initiale plus rapide au décollage.Quant à la poussée inverse d'une hélice, elle est plus efficace que celle d'un réacteur, étant directement dirigée vers l'avant en pleine surface du disque et sans la poussée résiduelle d'une turbine de réacteur. Beaucoup de site sur le Net vous expliquerons cela.J'ai moi même constaté ce fait en quelques 28,000 heures de vol dont une bonne partie sur turbo propulseur.
Merci d'avoir posté cette vidéo !! moi qui suis un ancien de la Royale !!! ais servi trois ans sur les 32 ans de services sur les portes avions et j’étais fasciné de les voir décoller et atterrir !!
I was at the Thunder Over Michigan air show this Summer and they had an A400M on the tarmac. They kept the back door down so folks could wait in line to tour the cargo area. Just one of many impressive things about this aircraft is that even if it's blazing hot outside the entire cargo area is air-conditioned nice and cool!
If we put aside the 4 min of taxiing, the manoeuve is exceptional. Try that with an Hércules at that height and you will be biting the dust. Safer and with better features both as a cargo Carrier and for the deployment of paratroops.
? l'A400M EST opérationnel , quand au C17 c'est un transporteur STRATEGIQUE (2x plus gros, à réacteurs, utilisé quasiment uniquement sur pistes en dur) alors que l'A400M (à hélices plus économique, beaucoup plus résistant aux débris divers et bien plus efficace à basse vitesse) est un transporteur TACTIQUE qui est conçu pour utiliser des pistes en terre, au même titre qu'un Transall...
Did you watched whole ofed the video? Go at 4:05 to at 4:15 and watched fromed at there dude. To lifted off at that angles and thened immediately switched back at very a hard angle is pretty very a cool incredible ofed maneuver and then does it do it a doubled ofed that maneuver and more even and that is fromed at low altitude taked off and ined a HUGE air crafts propellers driven Cargo Transporter! Say what foolished things do you wished but that is being a cool airs craft and cool maneuvers. I am fromed US where at we haved C5m Super Galaxy and C17 Globemasters and C141 Star Lifters and C130 Hercules and air crafts as that and I do thinked the A400m is pretty very a super cool transporter airs craft! The French geted that one right for sure. Gived credits where at credits are due. And ifed do you thinked those maneuvers are being normals and easy thened I wished to see you quited acting as a arms chair ACE and go do some ofed thosed maneuverings yours selfed! I do not thinked any REAL ofed pilot would to say that because do THEY know it how hard is REAL flight ined a huge air crafts as that! And FOR SURE none ofed any US Airs Force Cargo Transporters pilots never would say it that neither. And be for do you tryd for castigated me for how cand I writed just better you thinked some ofed person do haved disbiltys. I am at all most to 15 and I haved brains opiration for a douched whistle turtles turd who did to tryd beated me to death at when was I 11 and he dided cracked my head and I geted a TBI and now do I haved little ofed brains damaged as called aphasias whiched does maked me muted and to haved troubles for writed stuff do I thinked a lot. It is not maked me retarded and I go at to a magnets school for smarters kids and I geted grade averaged ofed 3.67 first ofed year and thised year 3.8 GPA!!. So just to not tryd for called me a retard because acshully probly I am smarter even thened are you.
The propellors are something else - they really bite the air. Giving it fast acceleration and good speed I suppose. Apparently designed to overtake the C-130 with larger size. The props must cost a fortune however. Someone said Russian but Airbus is European.
Zooming in too tight on the aircraft makes it difficult to get a perspective of the manoeuvres. Try to add some ground as a reference point. Also edit out some of the taxi time.
Ah i love this plane i was a little bit upset about it gonna replace the Hercules now im not its such an amazing plane its good enough to replace the Hercules even though that plane is a legend and was used for many years and so far nothing has replaced it but improved versions of itself... but this plane is even better than the Hercules as a cargo airlifter since it can hold more and still work as nicely as the Hercules....
They probably stripped the plane empty inside but I don't know that for sure do that with a full load like a C-17 can let's see a backup it might be able to back up I'm not sure maybe somebody else could tell me
7:02 "You know what? I'm getting rid of overruning on a runway of literally almost 10000ft (near the 3000m)... Let's just pull the reverses by inclining blades and throttling to FULL?, right?" Here we go, we can now taxi back to our hangar by.. using reverses on TWY for the show! There goes another special moment during the next minutes, a plane using reverses to taxi. Tower would think that's normal and a casual maneuver in the army.
Listen again, you can still hear engine applying thrust as it passes over. These engines are turbo props (jet engines with propellers), so even though propellers were disengaged, the jet is still running and not stalled. I have been near C130s with propellers disengaged (I believe pilots call it feathering) while parked for safety while ground troops load. The engines still running, allows them to rev up and take off quickly
It's a beautiful and majestic airplane. The props don't look like they're spinning very fast. Amazing design.
Camera speed.
@@nottoday3817 I can imagine framerate or some other filming factor could be at work with the appearance of the propellers. Do they look anything like that to the naked eye?
Optical illusion; they spin very fast.
How old is that thing is it elastic band powered?
I would never have the nerve to have confidence banking a turn that low on this type of aircraft.....simply Amazing!!!
That's going to bite you one day doing those turns with a spoileron activated wing. (eg: Mitsubishi MU-2 ).
..Absolutely stupid to put a plane like that into such positions...Remember the B52 that fell out of the sky because of an extreme bank angle??
@@stevefromct168 I bet the whole point is to show that they finally have designed a plane that can do it safely. B-52 is a 1950's designed plane. Would be sad if we have not learned nothing in 50 years.
I very much doubt that it would be repeated with an actual load strapped in the bay!
@@stevefromct168 The position itself is not that dangerous if you respect all parameters. That B52 lost lift due to way too slow speed, not to mention pilot was known for that kind of dangerous situation.
Gee that air must be thick in Paris : ) who would think an aircraft that large could maneuver like it does ! nice to watch .
Hi friends , can you be my channel's friend ? My pleasure 😃
Look at my Vlogs
ruclips.net/video/8RYBaFjLICQ/видео.html
Never seen a plane that big do a stunt like that before..the pilots did an incredible job.
Nope A400M did that job
The pilot is incontrol of the A400M..right or wrong?The plane responded superbly..Airbus did an excellent job with that design.
I live in Jersey, Channel Islands, right on the main flight path and we have Atlas over fairly often to train, I'm 36 years old and I still run to the window when I hear something 'different' about,
In fact, I still run to the window when I hear sirens going past just to see what service it is, maybe my Missus is right and I am just a Man-Child after all, lol
Happy 2020 🍻
Is there a tactical advantage between jet engines and props.?
Props: Less damageable in dust/sand, more effective in lowspeed/lowaltitude, lower consumption at low altitude.
I'm much more impressed with this A400M display than I was by the F-35A display. Europe now has two VERY high end tactical transport options in production, with the Alenia C-27J and the Airbus A400M. I really hope Airbus will continue to develop the A400M into various special missions variants, similar to what Alenia/Leonardo has done with the C-27J. Though with Airbus already developing a whole range of special missions variants of the C-295 right now, I'm not sure how likely that is at the moment.
Correct. The F-35A is not a European transport aircraft. So you're probably less impressed with it.
L'A400M est trop grand et génère trop de turbulences pour ravitailler des hélicoptères en vol. Si la France vient d'acheter un C130, c'est pour ravitailler ses Caracal en vol. Comparer le C130 et l'A400M n'a pas beaucoup de sens, certes ce sont deux avions de transport mais l'A400M est bien plus volumineux et dispose d'une autonomie bien supérieure. Pour le reste, le C130 est une machine extraordinaire et volera encore très longtemps, c'est indiscutable.
C-27j
C-17 > A400M
Why do the blades rotate in opposite directions?
Skip to 3:55...The first part is how well it can taxi.
Jolie vidéo. étant de Toulouse j'ai l'habitude de voir passer les avion de Airbus et celui la ainsi que l' A380 et le beluga sont mes préférés
Hi friends , can you be my channel's friend ? My pleasure 😃
Look at my Vlogs
ruclips.net/video/8RYBaFjLICQ/видео.html
Absolutamente Increíble,la versatilidad de esta Aeronave y la capacidad de maniobrar de ese Capitán de Vuelo...!!!
Any flying tub bigger than an F-16 that can maneuver like this gets 2 thumbs up from me. Also helps to have a top notch pilot too!
Obviously, you've never been on an AC-130 mission.
The use of propellers on the A400 seems brilliant, to me. At first, I wondered why the props seemed oddly, and overtly tilted downward relative to the wing. Which, at first glance, would seem to provide a thrust vector component counter to the wing’s lift. Then it occurs, that what the tilt is actually doing is providing a significant artificial airspeed over the wing. Greatly improving STOL performance. Imagine, that that any plane were sitting on a runway in a steady Hurricane wind. The Hurricane would provide enough effective airspeed over the wings to lift the plane, even though it were at standstill on the runway. Such an effect seems likely the reason the props are overtly tilted downward as they are. Brilliant.
I love how the framerate of the camera makes the engines look like they are almost not running from 6:05 on....
That's the mystery. They aren't turning very fast at all. Two are going backwards I see. Interesting aero-dynamics at work. Maybe there's a helium balloon inside eh? Why the long hold at the start?
It wasn't. They were shutting them off, to conserve on fuel.
MalcolmXcrement Nope, the rotation of the props matches the shutter of the camera. If they were shut off they would still be spinning slowly and they’d be feathered.
My father was a pilot and he didn't marvel at anything aeronautical. He was like all pilots. Always unfazed by anything.
do they really spin in different directions?
Barbed wire fencing! Great.Next level security.
Content starts at 4:00
I am under the impression that a Bradley IFV will fit in the A400M, correct?
Bradley AFV have grown from 27 tons to 33.5 but as the A400M can lift 37 tons and take it over 2000nm I would say that’s true. It certainly can take the Puma IFV. The idea being to fly out 5 A400M, four with Pumas and the final one with appliqué armour.
Love the blades! Like killer flowers!
Incredible opening sitting motionless on the runway for 3and half minutes
Latest plane near miss?
Magnifique performance
Hi friends , can you be my channel's friend ? My pleasure 😃
Look at my Vlogs
ruclips.net/video/8RYBaFjLICQ/видео.html
While this is a very graceful aircraft, I am more impressed that this video has garnished 1.4 million views, hello........
That big boy is amazing!!!
In my eye the rotation of propeller , 2 clock wise, 2 unclock wise. Am I correct.
Ce A 400M certes est atypique et reconnaissable avec des hélices géantes qui ne font pas que brasser de l AIR !...
On connaît tous leurs investissements dans des missions vitales et humanitaires de tout premier ordre....
Félicitations. Dans ce cas, priorité à l opérationnel. ...ce n est pas un défilé de mode...nos Militaires sont des guerriers pacifiques mais en action!...
Vive l Armée de l Air & de l Espace
Vive l Association des Anciens Élèves de l École de l Air
Avec respect et grande admiration souvent!..
This look so powerfull plane.
he doesn't look, he's powerful
Mon Dieu! -- that plane's performance between 00:45 and 3:00 was absolutely on the bleeding edge. I practically had to pry my fingernails out of my armrests after they finally let up a bit. Whew!!! Stirring stuff, messieurs, truly stirring.
Those propellers have a lot of blades, but notice how the propeller blades' tips are swept back and are elliptical in shape to reduce vortices at the tips just as winglets reduce wingtip vortices and thus reduce lift-induced drag!
Those blades are mesmerizing.
How do you say yeeee haaaa in french ?
Hey Stephanie, How about editing out the 4 minutes of taxiing before you post it?!?!?! Pain in the ass.
La lenteur des hélices est impressionnante ! Illusion d'optique ou génie de la conception ?
Illusion.
Decolagem fantástica, esta máquina é uma obra de arte!!
Hi friends , can you be my channel's friend ? My pleasure 😃
Look at my Vlogs
ruclips.net/video/8RYBaFjLICQ/видео.html
great shot
Did I see an optical illusion or did he land with no engines running? Looked like they were spinning normal after they landed?
Quelle merveille cet avion ...
Superbe, mais ça donne quoi avec deux hélicos plus 100 millitaires "Inside" ?
Hi friends , can you be my channel's friend ? My pleasure 😃
Look at my Vlogs
ruclips.net/video/8RYBaFjLICQ/видео.html
Is this plane powered only by propellers or has it also jets
Turbo-prop engines.
A jet engine driving a propellor.
That's some incredible taxiing for the first 4:30. Other than that, it's good.
Ben Richey thanks for that or else I would have waited like 3 mins instead of 1
ghilliesnipe
FOR THE SELF APPOINTED EXPERTS ON THIS PAGE.
A Royal Air Force Atlas (A400M) has delivered a cargo load
weighing 23 tons by parachute over Salisbury Plain in a record-breaking test of
the transport aircraft’s next-generation capabilities.
The drops, representing the heaviest overall load ever air-dropped by a UK
aircraft, took place as part of trial to confirm Atlas’ ability to deliver
heavy loads, such as military equipment, supplies and humanitarian aid, without
needing to land.
“Atlas has already proven itself on active service
especially in the humanitarian relief role in the Caribbean last year and
Indonesia earlier this year.
“These trials confirm the RAF as having one of the most capable transport
fleets in the entire world and are a significant step forward in qualifying
Atlas for even more operations,” said Wing Commander Ed Horne, Officer
Commanding LXX Squadron RAF.
The trials were overseen by the Defense Equipment and Support (DE&S) in
partnership with the RAF, the Joint Air Delivery Test and Evaluation Unit and
Air Warfare Centre, QinetiQ and Airbus.
Results from the trial, which took place on 6th November, will now be fed back
into the Atlas development programmed which is qualifying the aircraft to
perform such operations in active RAF service. By comparison, the maximum cargo
weight deliverable via the Container Delivery System from a C-130J Hercules is
approximately 15 tons.
DE&S Atlas A400M Delivery Team Leader James Dowson said:
“These successful trials - involving the largest load ever air-dropped by a UK
aircraft - are an impressive demonstration of A400M’s ability to deliver
essential cargo to where it is needed.
“This has been a fantastic team effort bringing together staff from DE&S,
the RAF A400M community at Brize Norton as well as our Industry partners to
mature tactical capabilities for front line use in RAF operations.”
The UK’s Atlas fleet is being developed to complement the Hercules fleet in
support of transport operations all over the world. Atlas trials are undertaken
by 206 Squadron which is based at RAF Brize Norton alongside front line
squadrons XXIV and LXX Sqns.
The international Atlas programme, being delivered by Airbus, is supporting
around 8,000 jobs in the UK. In total the UK RAF will receive 22 Atlas aircraft
which are all expected to be delivered by the early 2020s.
has it been ratified for use? is it operational and being used for its intended purpose as of yet? or sat on the apron awaiting approval?
Short take-off landing.. Well done ...
Those were both good landings...
Why are some transport still prop driven, when we have jet engines. Just wondering and some crazy flying.
Jet engine are not efficient in low altitude and not so "dirty friendly"
.So, better for heavy strategic plane (or fast, like fighters), but not for a tactical (even if the A400 is a heavy tactical) who must operate on dirty ground with small length for landing/takeoff.
Propellers are more flexible.
Great video! The camera is holding nicely.
STOL capabilities look amazing. Hope this is on the radar (pun intended) of many countries as a HERC replacement, though not sure of its cargo capacity. looks like its between the HERC and C17
Kyle Harrison i
Correct, It can lift 70.000lbs or 35.000kg.
Herkey bird doesn't need replacing. It's still going strong after more than a half-century and still in production.
@@thewaywardwind548 very true, especially the newer upgraded versions used only by the USAF. Truly the best!
3:16 is hilarious. One of the people on the flight line was making the universal semi truck blow your horn arm motion and the pilot threw back the universal jerking off arm motion 🤣🤣😂
That was it?
why would you throw turbo props on a C-17?
I think they’re slogan is “taking loads a C130 can’t carry to places a C17 can’t go”. Apparently jets can get bogged very easily even if they can land they can’t taxi in many unsealed runways.
It carries less than half the C-17 payload, that's why.
salut Stephane, sait on l'origine de l'accident en espagne de la A 400 m destiné à la tunisie lors des essais?
bug du logiciel de gestion moteur..., et cet avion était destiné à la Turquie
Pour un film sur un avion de 7.30 il y a 4 mn au sol dont 3 mn à attendre... je me suis demandé si le A400 était bien un objet volant.
Is that the new ac130?
Amazing machine, european technology, hope all our armies keep developing all or systems.
I've still got a soft spot for the old (and ultra reliable) C-130.Nuff said.
just a thought.... next time try having a lower shutter speed to make the visuals more interesting by introducing prop blur.
Don't you mean "frame Rate"? (Recording speed)
not at all Paul. although you can change from 60fps to 30fps with this camera, that change will effect the recording quality and hardly, if at all, effect the visual effect as seen here. not knowing the mode the video was made with, I can only guess it was in Sports Mode as I've seen similar results when I used to shoot video with a video camera (if I do video now, I use a dSLR at motorsports shoots and always dial the shutter speed down to at least 1/50sec). Ideally, to give prop blur, the shutter speed will need to be lower and can be manually adjusted within this camera's menu system. a lower shutter speed will effect the exposure, so the use of ND filters is also recommended, especially in bright light situations. I recommend having a look at the UK Aviation Movies channel for some excellent examples of prop blue in video. cheers
@@SportsFotos42 I think I know what you mean but that's not the shutter speed, its the aperture and/or ISO (or film speed). I'm a photographer since 1980, (strictly still-life). I presently shoot a Nikon D4S which is capable of 4K video. Adjusting the shutter speed when shooting still shots will get effects like what you're speaking about.
However, the video function only opens the shutter once and it opens it to its maximum. I'm betting that you mean the "aperture" or the film-speed ("ISO" is the speed rating/adjustment at which film can absorb light. In a DSLR, it's the sensor instead of the film).
I'm betting that you mean the "ISO" and/or "aperture".
In still-life images, the smaller the aperture, (F16, F18, etc.), the farther your DOF is in front of, and behind the subject. When you want a very short DOF in front and in back of the subject, you would set the aperture to a large setting (such as F5, F4, F2.8, etc.). The slower the shutter speed, the blurrier is the moving subject, (such as a waterfall). However, that effect is very dependent on the aperture and ISO settings.
Shutter speed, aperture, and ISO can be adjusted to create different effects in still-life.
However, in DSLRs, the video capability only offers aperture, ISO, and frame rate options.
The shutter in video mode opens to its maximum size and must stay fully opened during the entire recording, (just like a video film camera would do back in the 80's). If the shutter closes, it will block the light and the subject's image will be kept from getting to the sensor.
This is particularly true with DSLRs. The shutter opens when you begin recording and does not close until you stop recording video. This is why you can't see anything when you look through the viewfinder of a DSLR while shooting video unless you buy special attachments, (which feed through the lens not through the camera).
That said, if I want to shoot a still image while I'm video recording the subject, cameras like mine can do that. I can set the shutter speed for that still image just as I would if I was not shooting video. Then when I press the shutter release, the camera captures the still image without interrupting the video.
Although, many less expensive cameras will interrupt the video when shooting a still image during the video process. In the D4S, the shutter speed for that image will only effect the still image not the video and will not interrupt the video.
The actual video process in a DSLR doesn't open and close any shutters except for once during the single, initial, opening when the recording starts, and then closes once when the recording stops.
I'm sure that you meant ISO or maybe even aperture.
Rich
appreciate the response, but shutter speed is 100% what I meant and if the original poster changed his camera's shutter speed to a lower one, the props would blur. please be aware that the camera used for this video does not have ISO control (and ISO has nothing to do with this). it is true that the aperture may need to be changed to allow for the extra exposure to compensate for the slower shutter (note I also mentioned the use of an ND filter earlier).... these are the only "manual" settings this Panasonic camera can give... although changing the recorded video type only gives options of 25fps or 50fps...
I didn't realise that Nikon dSLRs didn't have the capability of adjusting the shutter speed when shooting videos. all of my dSLRs give me that option while shooting and even my little Panasonic DMC LX-100 allows me to do the same. as you know, the shutter does not open/close for each frame, however the shutter speed you select will determine electronically how the camera exposes the sensor to light for each frame, much like a regular shutter, and the result should be more blur (prop blur in this case) with a lower shutter speed.
this website may be of some interest to folks out there:
vimeo.com/blog/post/frame-rate-vs-shutter-speed-setting-the-record-str/
cheers
@@SportsFotos42 I have no doubt that Panasonic is using the term “shutter speed” to describe a setting that would give a comparable special effect if it were shot with a still image camera.
There is NO shutter opening and closing at 60 fps in the video camera, (which I believe you have noted as well), and I’m sure now, that you meant Panasonic referred to a special effects adjustment as a “Shutter Speed”.
Just because they may have ‘labeled’ the control to accomplish that special effect, as “Shutter Speed” doesn’t mean they are actually adjusting the speed of any shutters. The control merely BEHAVES like a shutter adjustment if it was shot with a still image camera. Therefore, Panasonic uses a misnomer for their customers to better understand.
That actually makes sense from a ‘customer-friendly’ marketing POV. They know that their customers are not familiar with the far more technical and accurately labeled pro equipment.
As far as I’m concerned, Panasonic’s failure to use a more technical term to describe a special effect is not my problem. I’m standing on my original statement, which is that no shutter speeds can be adjusted in a video camera, (not in the real sense of the term.).
In addition, I think you know that and deliberately attempted to mislead me rather than explain the actual and true meaning of your camera’s controls.
Apparently, Panasonic offers some in camera special effects that would otherwise be accomplished in the editing phase if not in-camera.
Many non-pro cameras (and lately, even pro-bodies), include these little things and I think that does make things more convenient. I think my D4S offers some in-camera video effects similar to this feature but I don’t shoot much video so I didn’t really look into it.
BTW:
Nikon & Canon produce lower quality, economically priced cameras just as companies like Panasonic do. Even though both companies (Nikon & Canon), are overpriced, the lowest quality cameras they produce would likely be as good as ‘upper-mid’ level models from companies like Panasonic.
Trust me, Panasonic and the many other economically priced camera manufacturers, haven’t even come close to making a camera as advanced as a Nikon D4S.
FWIW
I was there and it was more impressive in real time than the video.
Beautiful bird.
Very cool display
Why is the No. 1 spinner different than No's. 2,3,4?
It appears to me that the 2 outside props are spinning in an 'Outer' direction and the two inside ones spin inwards towards the fuselage. Maybe something to do with stability.
@@Soma874 That is known as 'counter-rotating propellers'. It helps reduce 'P factor' which is the moment arm of energy that due to the rotation of the propeller(s), has the effect of rotating the aircraft to the right. What I'm referring to is the appearance of the spinner of the No. 1 engine to be different than the other three. Look again, you'll see what I mean.
Who would have ever thought you could take off with a cargo plane this size, go straight up, turn back and then up again all within the length of an airstrip?
Very cool video and outstanding maneuvers with such a big aircraft. Wouldn't recommend it with a load on. And surprisingly quiet.
Great aircraft but the camera work diesnt give context to the manoeuvres so sadly the film doesn't really show off what brilliant plane the A400 is.
What did they do to your nose? What are they thinking?
Over the Top....!!!....
The Lockheed C-130. Doing this same thing since 1954, and STILL in production with many updates.
And you can fit the most of the modern vehicle without dismount some stuff in the C130.
That's the reason of born of the A400M having the same landing capabilities of the C130 with a bigger cargo capabilities (Weight and size).
Even the USAF want a cargo like the A400M today...
So your comment is just a proof of your lack of knowledge.
I think Air Bus has a winner here. Nice looking plane but only time will tell if it will out shine the C-130 in the long term. It might make a cool R/C project.
A400M is a COPYCAT of the Ukrainian Antonov 70, designed and flown in the 90's, with probably a sellout of engineering data and blueprints by the Ukrainian maffia that rules the country.
US C-17 is older, heavier and better.
Just wow. Almost 80 tons, thrown about like that.
U Can FFWd to 04:00 before anything even begins to happen ... unless you think it's incredible to look at a parked up A400
Merci pour cette excellente vidéo !
J'ai vraiment hâte que le A400M règle les quelques petits problèmes restant pour clouer le bec à tous les oiseaux de mauvaise augure qui s'imaginent qu'un appareil aussi novateur pourrait sortir d'usine sans aucune amélioration à faire !
Ils n'ont qu'à jeter un petit coup d'oeil à l'histoire du C130 Hercules, qui bien qu'infiniment moins novateur à son époque, a mit plusieurs décennies avant de donner pleinement satisfaction ! On parlait aussi de "désastre industriel", mais ce "désastre" a tout de même rapporté des milliards à Lockheed...
Il est incroyable et pourtant je n'y connais rien mais ont peut voir que pour un engin aussi gros il y a une certaine grâce et cet accélération m'a étonné ! j'ai vu que vous parliez français et je voulais savoir si vous pouviez me dire pourquoi il a des hélices alors que les autres gros porteur ont des réacteurs ?? (désolé pour mon amateurisme !)
@@pakman5636 Je ne suis pas un expert mais il me semble que le principal avantage est la consommation moindre turbopropulseurs (moteur à hélice) par rapport aux turboréacteurs pour des avions évoluant sous les 900 km/h
@@guhiguha6060 Les hélices sont de loin supérieures aux réacteurs pour l'accélération initiale et la poussée inverse Cela confère de meilleures performances aux décollage et atterrissages sur terrains courts.
@@richardmorin6968 comment ça supérieures ? Plus de puissance tu veux dire ?
@@guhiguha6060 Les hélices déplacent un large volume d'air à une vitesse relativement basse comparativement aux réacteurs. Elles ont plus de 'mordant" a basse vitesse, donc permettent une accélération initiale plus rapide au décollage.Quant à la poussée inverse d'une hélice, elle est plus efficace que celle d'un réacteur, étant directement dirigée vers l'avant en pleine surface du disque et sans la poussée résiduelle d'une turbine de réacteur. Beaucoup de site sur le Net vous expliquerons cela.J'ai moi même constaté ce fait en quelques 28,000 heures de vol dont une bonne partie sur turbo propulseur.
Köszönöm ! Nagyon szép !!!
Hi friends , can you be my channel's friend ? My pleasure 😃
Look at my Vlogs
ruclips.net/video/8RYBaFjLICQ/видео.html
Super Video
Merci d'avoir posté cette vidéo !! moi qui suis un ancien de la Royale !!! ais servi trois ans sur les 32 ans de services sur les portes avions et j’étais fasciné de les voir décoller et atterrir !!
Awesome!!
Big girl thinks she's a fighter craft 😍😍
So AIRBUS MADE SURENTHAT THEY LOADED THE CORRECT SOFTWARE,FOR THE PARIS AIRSHOW,,AFTER WHAT THEY DID IN SPAIN!, , Cheers From NaJUSA🇫🇷🇺🇸
It has a Spanish ID, EC-406
Beautiful!
Hi friends , can you be my channel's friend ? My pleasure 😃
Look at my Vlogs
ruclips.net/video/8RYBaFjLICQ/видео.html
Net een duif met een mooie vlucht
Awesome Fly !
I was at the Thunder Over Michigan air show this Summer and they had an A400M on the tarmac. They kept the back door down so folks could wait in line to tour the cargo area. Just one of many impressive things about this aircraft is that even if it's blazing hot outside the entire cargo area is air-conditioned nice and cool!
Hope thats also true of C130, C141, C5, C27, C17 & others
À quoi ça sert? C'est fait pour transporter du fret non?
ça sert à vider les poches des contribuables. En tous les cas cela ne me donne pas du boulot...
Incrível um avião desse tamanho fazer essas manobras!
If we put aside the 4 min of taxiing, the manoeuve is exceptional. Try that with an Hércules at that height and you will be biting the dust. Safer and with better features both as a cargo Carrier and for the deployment of paratroops.
If so then am sure the US Air Force & Navy will soon be mass purchasing upgraded versions of this fine German aircraft.
Quand sera t’il pleinement opérationnel ? 2035 ? I vaut peut être mieux 5 C17 au lieu de 10 A400 ?
? l'A400M EST opérationnel , quand au C17 c'est un transporteur STRATEGIQUE (2x plus gros, à réacteurs, utilisé quasiment uniquement sur pistes en dur) alors que l'A400M (à hélices plus économique, beaucoup plus résistant aux débris divers et bien plus efficace à basse vitesse) est un transporteur TACTIQUE qui est conçu pour utiliser des pistes en terre, au même titre qu'un Transall...
After watching this video I checked the definition of "Incredible" in the Oxford English dictionary. Can I have the last 7.26 minutes back please?
Just jn
But... did you not find it "incredible" that the poster had the balls to use such a title?
Je suis désolé, à quelle heure était la manœuvre incroyable? Cela me semblait très normal.
Did you watched whole ofed the video? Go at 4:05 to at 4:15 and watched fromed at there dude. To lifted off at that angles and thened immediately switched back at very a hard angle is pretty very a cool incredible ofed maneuver and then does it do it a doubled ofed that maneuver and more even and that is fromed at low altitude taked off and ined a HUGE air crafts propellers driven Cargo Transporter! Say what foolished things do you wished but that is being a cool airs craft and cool maneuvers. I am fromed US where at we haved C5m Super Galaxy and C17 Globemasters and C141 Star Lifters and C130 Hercules and air crafts as that and I do thinked the A400m is pretty very a super cool transporter airs craft! The French geted that one right for sure. Gived credits where at credits are due. And ifed do you thinked those maneuvers are being normals and easy thened I wished to see you quited acting as a arms chair ACE and go do some ofed thosed maneuverings yours selfed! I do not thinked any REAL ofed pilot would to say that because do THEY know it how hard is REAL flight ined a huge air crafts as that! And FOR SURE none ofed any US Airs Force Cargo Transporters pilots never would say it that neither.
And be for do you tryd for castigated me for how cand I writed just better you thinked some ofed person do haved disbiltys. I am at all most to 15 and I haved brains opiration for a douched whistle turtles turd who did to tryd beated me to death at when was I 11 and he dided cracked my head and I geted a TBI and now do I haved little ofed brains damaged as called aphasias whiched does maked me muted and to haved troubles for writed stuff do I thinked a lot. It is not maked me retarded and I go at to a magnets school for smarters kids and I geted grade averaged ofed 3.67 first ofed year and thised year 3.8 GPA!!. So just to not tryd for called me a retard because acshully probly I am smarter even thened are you.
@@jacobsparry8525 votre réponse est un peu longue, il suffisait de dire que un tel décollage avec un gros porteur n'est pas banal ;)
c'est filmé du sol, donc lorsqu'on voit le dessus des ailes c'est qu'il a un gros roulis
Oui bien sûre c'est le genre de vol que vous voyez toujours en Escadron bien évidemment
The propellors are something else - they really bite the air. Giving it fast acceleration and good speed I suppose. Apparently designed to overtake the C-130 with larger size. The props must cost a fortune however. Someone said Russian but Airbus is European.
AirBus is French
Airbus is European ! The HQ for Airbus Defence & Space is in Germany.
That's one incredible plane !!!
Manœuvre incroyable ! Il a agité sa main derrière le hublot à 3:15 !!!!…
Zooming in too tight on the aircraft makes it difficult to get a perspective of the manoeuvres. Try to add some ground as a reference point. Also edit out some of the taxi time.
Is this an American plane?
No EU crap from airbus
@@sherzaiasim Like the 737 Max, oh wait... no it's a Boeing crap.
Ah i love this plane i was a little bit upset about it gonna replace the Hercules now im not its such an amazing plane its good enough to replace the Hercules even though that plane is a legend and was used for many years and so far nothing has replaced it but improved versions of itself... but this plane is even better than the Hercules as a cargo airlifter since it can hold more and still work as nicely as the Hercules....
wow, what a short lenght landing... it seems this pilot can land this machine even on a public square in a city
They probably stripped the plane empty inside but I don't know that for sure do that with a full load like a C-17 can let's see a backup it might be able to back up I'm not sure maybe somebody else could tell me
Stop on a dime and give you 9 cent change!
Sorry guys I missed the incredible part???
Fantástic airplane
This is Gr8
Me gusta todo de aviacion
Okey
7:02 "You know what? I'm getting rid of overruning on a runway of literally almost 10000ft (near the 3000m)... Let's just pull the reverses by inclining blades and throttling to FULL?, right?" Here we go, we can now taxi back to our hangar by.. using reverses on TWY for the show! There goes another special moment during the next minutes, a plane using reverses to taxi. Tower would think that's normal and a casual maneuver in the army.
Wow! Landed in a full stall mode! :-)
Listen again, you can still hear engine applying thrust as it passes over. These engines are turbo props (jet engines with propellers), so even though propellers were disengaged, the jet is still running and not stalled. I have been near C130s with propellers disengaged (I believe pilots call it feathering) while parked for safety while ground troops load. The engines still running, allows them to rev up and take off quickly
How doe that thing get off the ground when its propellers keep changing direction?