What are SA’s airlifter options after A400M withdrawal?
Date: 14 May 2010
By: Keith Campbell
Late last year, South Africa withdrew from the Airbus Military A400M programme and cancelled its order for eight of the European military transport and tanker aircraft. But the South African Air Force (SAAF) still needs new strategic transport aircraft to replace its current force of seven Lockheed Martin C-130B Hercules (two others were damaged in accidents and are believed to have been removed from service), most of which are now nearly 50 years old. These are operated by 28 Squadron and it is believed that only five are operational at the moment.
The SAAF acquired seven C-130Bs in 1963, while two more were transferred from the US Air Force (USAF) in 1997 and 1998. The SAAF's original seven Hercules had their centre wings replaced and their outer wings refurbished in the period 1969 to 1972, while their engines were upgraded from the Allison T-56A-7 to the Allison T-56A-15. During the early 1980s, they received a basic avionics upgrade and, from 1996 to 2009, they experienced a total avionics upgrade - a programme that significantly overran its scheduled duration. The two ex-USAF C-130Bs had already been fitted with new wing centre sections, like those on the SAAF aircraft, and with outer wings from the later C-130H model.
Thus, little scope is left for, in particular, further structural upgrades to the SAAF's Hercules. Moreover, across the globe, not many C-130B models remain in service, and the SAAF may now have the world's single biggest operational fleet of this, the oldest version of the Hercules, still in service (all C-130As have been retired).
Further, the SAAF also needs a replacement for its force of Boeing 707s. These were operated by 60 Squadron as air-to-air refuelling tankers, electronic warfare platforms and strategic transports. Three Boeing 707-328C aeroplanes were obtained in 1982, followed by a fourth in 1990 and a fifth in 1992, but, by 2005, the force had been reduced to just two aircraft and the type was phased out of SAAF service in late 2007.
The SAAF's C-130B Hercules has a range of 7 803 km and a top speed of 579 km/h, an empty weight of 33 684 kg and a maximum takeoff weight of 70 308 kg. Since being re-engined with the Allison T-56A-15 powerplants, which power the C-130H model, the SAAF's C-130Bs probably have the same maximum payload capacity as this later version - 19 369 kg. Each C-130B has a crew of four and can carry up to 92 troops.
The Boeing 707-328Cs had a range of 9 265 km and a top speed of 886 km/h, an empty weight of 66 406 kg and a maximum takeoff weight of 151 315 kg. They could be fitted with a variable number of seats for passengers, depending on the requirements of the mission, but the original civilian airliner version of the 707-328C could carry up to 189 passengers, plus a crew (flight and cabin) of nine.
A400M RATIONALE
Thus, when South Africa chose the A400M, the idea was that eight aircraft would replace 12, and that one type would replace both the C-130B and the 707 and would fulfil both the strategic transport and refuelling roles.
But there was another idea, too - to benefit the local aerospace industry. By joining the A400M programme at the time it did (April 2005), South Africa became a partner in the project, not just a customer. The result was that two of South Africa's leading aerospace companies, Denel Saab Aerostructures (DSA) and Aerosud, became level one partners in the programme and not just recipients of offset work.
DSA was given responsibility for the top shells for the centre fuselage section - these can be thought of as being equivalent to roof panels. The company is producing two top shells for each aircraft - one each in front of and behind the wing box, which joins the wing to the fuselage. In addition, it is making very large wing/fuselage fairings, manufactured mainly from composite materials but including aluminium parts. Each such fairing is 15 m long, 7 m wide and nearly 3 m high. DSA was also originally responsible for the ribs and sword (main spar) for the vertical tail fin, as well as the centre wing box structural components. All these parts are classified as primary structures.
Aerosud is mainly responsible for secondary structures, namely the nose fuselage linings, cargo hold linings and cockpit linings, but the company is also making the cockpit rigid bulkhead, the wing tips and the nose fuselage galleys.
As partners in the programme, the two companies were and are responsible for the design and engineering as well as the manufacture of these structures and components. In an offset deal, they would have merely manufactured parts and components designed and engineered elsewhere.
But now, Airbus Military has told the predominantly State-owned DSA that, with immediate effect, it has withdrawn two small A400M work packages from the local company. These are for the manufacture of the the sword of the vertical tail fin, and for the manufacture of the ribs for the vertical tail fin. DSA continues to be responsible for the centre fuselage top shells and the wing/fuselage fairings. The work packages for South African private-sector aerospace company Aerosud have not yet been reduced in any way.
"We're trying to protect the big workshare packages, because South Africa is important to us," said Airbus spokesperson in South Africa Linden Birns. "But we are under a lot of pressure to redistribute the workshare on the A400M. European countries have agreed to put additional funding into the A400M and so are eager for additional work."
It is believed that Airbus Military is under growing pressure to, in particular, increase Turkey's share of the work on the A400M. Turkey has ten A400Ms on order. "So far, we have been able to protect the big DSA packages and all Aerosud's work, but we won't be able to do this indefinitely," cautioned Birns.
It is a matter of government policy that there be a 50% defence industrial participation (Dip) obligation on any defence acquisition programme that exceeds $2-million, a requirement that was created specifically to strengthen South Africa's aerospace and defence industries. The question of Dip will thus feature strongly in any choice this country makes regarding the future transport and tanker aircraft for the SAAF.
THE ALTERNATIVES
There are not many options available to South Africa. It would, perhaps, be best to start by looking at the capabilities of the A400M. It is a large aircraft; its cargo hold has a length of 17,71 m, excluding the rear ramp; the rear ramp is itself 5,4 m long; the cargo hold is 4 m wide and 3,85 m high (aft of the wing, the hold is 4 m high). It will carry a total of 47,7 t of fuel internally, have a maximum takeoff weight of 136,5 t, a maximum landing weight of 120 t, and a maximum payload of 37 t. With a 30-t payload, the A400M is forecast to have a range of 4 535 km while, with a 20-t payload, this would rise to 6 390 km. The first two prototype A400Ms are now flying.
Regarding the SAAF's transport needs, apart from the A400M, possible options are the Boeing C-17 Globemaster III, the Lockheed Martin C-130J Hercules II (both US designs), the Embraer KC-390 (a Brazilian design), the Ilyushin Il-76MF (from Russia), the Antonov An-70 (Ukraine), the Shaanxi Y-8 and the Shaanxi Y-9 (both Chinese products).
The Shaanxi Y-8 and Y-9 must be classified as rank outsiders. The former is nothing other than a copy of the Antonov An-12, a Soviet design dating from the 1950s (although the latest Chinese models have been modernised somewhat). The Y-9, on the other hand, is basically a new aircraft, unveiled in model form in 2005, and designed to rival the C-130J.
The prototype was meant to have flown in 2006, but still has not done so. In fact, it seems that the prototype has not yet been built. Construction will only start if China's People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) agrees to become the launch customer for the type. It appears that the first flight of the Y-9 will occur at least a year after Shaanxi gets the go-ahead from the PLAAF.
In a Chinese-language press release issued in July last year, the company admitted that the delays in the programme had been caused by "unbalanced department workload, lack of research capability, project planning, funding, in addition to a shortage of parts, limited parts assembly lines and final assembly, and limited test flight capabilities". "There were also technology limitations, frequent accidents due to low safety standards, poor quality control, undefined pro-cedures and poor production work flows," in the words of the China Defence Blog website's English paraphrase of the release.
Russia's Il-76MF is set to resume production in the near future - the production line has been moved from Uzbekistan to Russia - and is a stretched version of the Il-76MD military transport version (there are civil and military models of the Il-76, and South Africa has made extensive use of leased civil Il-76s to provide logistics support for peacekeepers deployed elsewhere in Africa) with more powerful engines. It has a maximum payload of 60 t and a range, with maximum payload, of 4 000 km, or 6 200 km with a payload of 40 t.
Cruising speed is between 830 km/h and 850 km/h. It has been reported that the unit cost for an Il-76MF fitted with Western avionics would be from $50-million to $75-million.
Regarding South Africa's Dip requirements, Russia is known to be eager to develop cooperation with the South African aerospace industry, and Ilyushin falls under the State-owned United Aircraft Building Corporation (UAB). So, although there would be little in the way of design and engineering work on the Il-76MF for South African companies, the Russians might be able to offer such work on other aircraft programmes, such as the Ilyushin Il-214 (in which India is already a partner) or the UAB MS-21 programme.
Ukraine's Antonov An-70 has suffered from a very prolonged and troubled development.
The first prototype made its initial flight in 1994 but was lost in a fatal crash the next year, the result of a mid-air collision, while, in 2001, the second prototype was damaged in an emergency landing but subsequently repaired. In 2002, the An-70 became a joint Russian-Ukrainian project but, in 2006, Russia pulled out - only to rejoin it in 2008.
The An-70 is a direct competitor to the A400M, with a reported maximum payload in the range of 35 t to 47 t, a range (depending on payload) of 3 000 km to 5 100 km and a 425 m2 cargo area. The first production aircraft, for the Ukrainian air force, is expected to be rolled out later this year. It is claimed that the An-70 unit purchase price will be 40% less than that for the A400M. But Ukraine's ability to provide South Africa with meaningful Dip is very unclear.
The Boeing C-17 is the biggest and most expensive option available. It has a maximum payload of 76 t and a usable internal fuselage width of 5,49 m, and is in service or on order with Australia, Canada, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, the UK and the US.
It cost Australia $1,4-billion to buy four C-17s and bring them into service, and India is interested in acquiring ten of the giant airlifters in a deal that could cost as much as $5,8-billion. As with the Il-76MF, there is little really valuable Dip work Boeing could provide on the C-17 itself, but Boeing is a giant group and could no doubt find equally valuable and beneficial work for South African companies on other projects.
However, all these types have, from the SAAF's perspective, a big drawback - they are solely transport aircraft and cannot undertake air-to-air refuelling.
South Africa would thus have to buy tanker aircraft as well as transport aircraft, thus undermining a key aim behind the original decision to buy the A400M.
Of the options available, only three can undertake both transport and refuelling with the same airframe - the A400M itself, the KC-130J version of the Hercules II, and the KC-390.
(The proposed joint Russian-Indian Multirole Transport Aircraft will, if it goes ahead, not be ready in time for the SAAF, and so is not a realistic option.)
The Embraer KC-390 programme was formally launched in April 2009 with the signing of a contract between the company and the Brazilian Air Force, which is believed to be planning to buy 23 of the aircraft. The maiden flight of the first prototype is scheduled for 2014.
The KC-390 will be powered by two 27 000-lb (about 12 000 kg) thrust turbofan engines and will have a gross takeoff weight of 72 t, with 22 t of fuel (carried in the wings) and a maximum 19-t payload. It will have an internal fuselage width of 3,2 m. It will have a 1 100 m takeoff run and a range (fully loaded) of 1 500 nautical miles, with a maximum speed of Mach 0,8 (that is, 80% of the speed of sound). The programme is expected to cost $1,3-billion and will involve international strategic partner countries and companies.
DSA has been interested in participating in this programme for some time and, in March, the Brazilians publicly identified South Africa as one of the partners in the programme.
Thus, the KC-390 programme brings the same industrial advantages as the A400M programme - partner status, with the concomitant responsibility of designing and engineering, and not just manufacturing, components and systems for the aeroplane.
However, South Africa may be a partner in the KC-390 without having to buy the aircraft, provided it finances its participation itself.
As for the KC-130J, this version of the Hercules II was developed for the US Marine Corps, and 36 were in operational service with the Marines as of December, with another ten on order. The KC-130J has the same cargo carrying capabilities as the standard C-130J - that is, an internal fuselage width of some 2,74 m, a maximum payload of 21 t, a maximum cruise speed of 660 km/h and a maximum range of 3 890 km.
The Hercules II is operated, or has been ordered, by Australia, Canada, Denmark, India, Israel, Iraq, Italy, Kuwait, Norway, Qatar, the UK (the launch customer) and the US. As of December 31, 2009, 252 C-130Js of all versions had been ordered and 171 delivered.
Australia's buy of 12 stretched C-130Js cost that country $585-million, plus a separate $292-million maintenance and support contract. Again, as with UAB and Boeing, Lockheed Martin would probably be able to supply significant Dip programmes from other projects it was developing, and not from the KC-130J itself.
Finally, there is the A400M itself. South Africa left the programme "due to extensive cost escalation and the supplier's failure to deliver the aircraft within the stipulated timeframes", in the words of the South African government's explanation of the decision. But it has recently emerged that the country was facing no increase in the price for the eight Airbus Military A400M military transport and air-to-air refuelling aircraft it had on order when it cancelled its participation in the programme late last year.
A few weeks before the cancellation decision was announced, then South African defence acquisition, disposals and research and development agency Armscor CEO Sipho Thomo stated that the cost to South Africa of the the A400M programme had rocketed from R17-billion to R47-billion. However, the recent deal between Airbus Military (and its parent group, EADS) and the seven European countries which form the core of the A400M programme, aimed at saving it, saw these States agreeing to jointly invest a further €3,5-billion in the programme, which will see them acquiring about 180 A400Ms. If the same deal were applied to South Africa, assuming the cost increase is the same for each and every aeroplane, it would mean that the programme would have cost this country about another €19,5-million or roughly R200-million for each A400M, or something like an additional €156-million, or R1,6-billion, in total - a far cry from Thomo's figure of a R30-billion increase - taking the total cost to R18,6-billion.
So, it is far from impossible that South Africa may rejoin the A400M programme.
Source: Engineering News
