The British “lesson” of the Airbus A400M

(BRUSSELS2) The delay of the European plane, the Airbus A400M, in which the British participate, caused a senior British army official, during a recent sitting in the House of Commons, to suffer a fire quite packed with questions and answers from deputies (this happened on December 1, a few days before the first flight of the "Grizzly".

His answers are very interesting. Because they draw a clear line of what the British Army wants: Yes the Airbus A400M is still needed. Yes it is irreplaceable. No, the purchase program should not be rebalanced. But yes next time, we won't do it like that, with so many partners.

Here is the lesson learned by Sir Kevin O'Donoghue, head of the hardware department. Pure British pragmatism in a way.

Working together is essential, but in pairs rather than 7 or 8

“The lesson I draw is that collective projects are essential. If we don't cooperate with our partners, then you can't get the equipment you want because our production is too small in number. That's one end of the spectrum. On the other hand, if you have 7 or 8 partners, they all have their views. (...) Remember that the A400M program was a year late at the start Fair because it took the German government a year to sign the MOU! (Memorandum of Understanding) It's really hard to deal with that. My preference is therefore for a two-person production, bilaterally, that others can join later. A bit like the JCA (joint cargo aircraft) model.

Doing the smallest operation is impossible today with Afghanistan

A deputy asked the question: can we survive without the A400M? Do you really need him. And the general to answer: The airlift, which is absolutely vital in Aghanistan, survives. But I would have to say that it is fragile. It's actually my highest logistical risk (...). What we can't do is have other operations that would have to use the planes used from that airlift. (...) It is not a question of the size of the operation. A small operation may require aerial means, it depends on where they are and the nature of these. »

The A400M is a valuable aircraft that fills a void in the market

The British MP is a little stubborn. So he asks the general: why do we need an intermediate plane, why not be satisfied with the C130 and C17, and buy more? General's response: Simply put, the A400M packs twice as much as a C130 and half as much as a C17. the A400M will become a good aircraft as soon as it is in service, it will be invaluable. The C130, maybe, is in the lower, tactical segment of the market. The C17 is very expensive, very useful, very capable and at the other end of the market, strategic. And there is a void in the middle. » When asked whether it would not be necessary to rebalance the purchase program (C17/C130/A400M), the general answers correctly: " I don't think so ". UK MOD Equipment Resource Manager Guy Lester adds: “It is not currently in our ambitions to have a rebalancing. No. Essentially, even with the pressures on the program, it's more about looking for cost-effectiveness”.

• The lesson I draw from it is collective projects are essential. If you do not collaborate with partners, then you will not get the kit you want because the production numbers are so small. So that is one end of the spectrum. At the other end of the spectrum, if you have got seven or eight partners, they have all got a view, and it was David Gould, I think, two years ago, if you remember, said the program slipped one year right at the beginning because it took the German Government a year to sign the MOU. It is very difficult to cope with that. My preference would be a bilateral product which others could join. That would be my lesson.

• The air bridge, which is absolutely vital to Afghanistan, is surviving. I would still describe it as fragile. It is still my highest logistical risk, but it is surviving. What we cannot do is any of the other contingent operations which we should be able to do without using aircraft from that strategic bridge. (...) It is not just on this scale. Quite small scale operations require, depending where they are and the nature of them, air lift.

• C17s are very expensive; they give you a certain capability. In very simple terms, an A400M carries twice what a C130 will carry and a C17 carries twice what an A400M will carry. The A400M is going to be a good aircraft when it comes into service; it is going to be invaluable. The C130, perhaps, is right at the bottom tactical end of the market. The C17 is very expensive, very competent, very capable, at the strategic end of the market, and there is a gap in the middle. - Mr. Lester: It is not what is currently in our sights for being rebalanced, no. Essentially, even with the pressures on the program, it is still looking quite like a cost-effective capability at the moment.