Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Se non costera troppo è sicuro. Piuttosto, c'è qualche cifra attendibile sui costi del 400M? Se costasse troppo, può essere tattico fin che vuoi, complementare al 17 finché ci stanchiamo di scriverlo, ma molti Paesi non lo acquisteranno, o gli preferiranno qualcosa di più rustico. In fondo si tratta di portare un carico sul teatro operativo, gli effetti speciali servono fino a un certo punto.

Essere in grado di trasportare i nuovi mezzi ruotati blindati che si stanno progettando in questi anni non lo ritengo un effetto speciale: il C-130 è semplicemente incapace di farlo a causa dei limiti dimensionali della fusoliera e del carico utile trasportabile. Altri carichi voluminosi poi mettono in crisi l'aereo...

Non è un aereo rustico...è un aereo non più adeguato al ruolo e alle nuove necessità...

L'incremento di dimensioni e pesi dei tipici carichi trasportati, anche solo a livello tattico, si traduce in una riduzione dello spettro di missioni e mansioni effettuabili dall'aereo.

L'AN-70 invece rustico non è nemmeno poi tanto, ma sicuramente non è proponibile per il mondo occidentale...

Edited by Flaggy
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 425
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I motori, con la loro scelta contestata e lo sviluppo tribolato, c’entrano relativamente col problema del lancio dei paracadutisti dai portelli laterali. Questo consiste nel rischio di possibile colli

La condanna a morte della partecipazione italiana al programma ha radici “antiche”, che partono anche prima dell’accordo con LM e affondano nel rifiuto degli altri partner di assegnare una grossa fett

L'A400M ha appena ottenuto un altro record. Gli extra costi dovuti a ritardi e problemi hanno superato i 10 miliardi di euro...? http://www.opex360.com/2020/02/13/les-surcouts-du-programme-europee

Guest intruder

Parlavo dell'Antonov, non del LM. E per effetti speciali intendevo una sofisticazione troppo spinta che non so fino a che punto paghi in questo tipo di maccbhine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Parlavo dell'Antonov, non del LM. E per effetti speciali intendevo una sofisticazione troppo spinta che non so fino a che punto paghi in questo tipo di maccbhine.

Me ne sono reso conto...e in effetti ho completato il discorso includendo con un EDIT l'AN-70...

I motori dell'AN-70 sono ancora più complessi e problematici dei TP400...

Non dimentichiamo che l'AN-70 ha dei propfan, mentre i TP400 sono più tranquille turboeliche veloci...

Edited by Flaggy
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest intruder

Stavi editando mentre rispondevo, a quanto pare. Comunque faccio una piccola osservazione: se nel prossimo decennio continueranno i problemi di questo, e tutto lascia supporre di sì, servirà un aereo in grado di scaricare in mezzo al nulla un blindato pesante o roba simile, e i costi continueranno a salire, la crisi a colpire, scommettiamo che qualche Paese occidentale troverà l'An70 proponibile? I cinesi potrebbero venirci incontro aggiustandolo un po', e se il gioco vale la candela lo faranno.

 

 

EDIT: l'A400M sta a 100 milioni di euro, e pare una cifra ottimistica, diciamo 125-130 milioni di dollari, cioè oltre il doppio del 70.

Edited by intruder
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ho una domanda un pò sciocco, una di quelle domande che fanno i non tecnici...

I dati che circolano sulle capacità di carico dell'A400 sono dati certi o ancora da verificare nelle prove in volo? Cioè le 37ton che Airbus ha divulgato sono dati acquisiti e certi, oppure stime fondate sulle presunte capacità di spinta dei motori? Il TP400 ha volato per la prima volta 2 mesi fa (conducendo prove di base, foto sotto), come si fa a stabilire con certezza al banco se potrà portare in volo quelle 141ton (peso aereo+peso carburante+peso carico massimo)?

 

1stengineflight05.jpg

 

EDIT: intanto accontentiamoci di questo :asd:

a400mdesertland1024.jpg

a400mfighterrefuelling1024.jpg

Edited by paperinik
Link to post
Share on other sites
Stavi editando mentre rispondevo, a quanto pare. Comunque faccio una piccola osservazione: se nel prossimo decennio continueranno i problemi di questo, e tutto lascia supporre di sì, servirà un aereo in grado di scaricare in mezzo al nulla un blindato pesante o roba simile, e i costi continueranno a salire, la crisi a colpire, scommettiamo che qualche Paese occidentale troverà l'An70 proponibile? I cinesi potrebbero venirci incontro aggiustandolo un po', e se il gioco vale la candela lo faranno.

Se vuoi scommettiamo, ma rinunciare all'A400M per incasinarsi con un aereo che i cinesi non hanno la capacità di mettere a posto e di far funzionare come va bene agli occidentali, la vedo una possibilità tanto remota da essere irrealizzabile per tutti o quasi.

Ricordo che ritardi e problemi dell'A400M sono in gran parte causati dai motori e in particolare dall'onnipresente elettronica che li gestisce...ma non credo che i cinesi abbiano la capacità di risolvere quelli ben più gravi dell'AN-70...che sono problemi di concetto (i propfan sono immaturi) di fronte ai quali quelli del TP400 sono bazzeccole.

 

Il costo del lavoro in Cina è inarrivabile per il mondo occidentale, ma ciò non significa che si debba essere disposti ad accettare prodotti più scadenti a fronte di sensibili riduzioni di costo.

Se questo poi significa dare l'ennesima mazzata all'industria Europea e non fare passi avanti nello sviluppo delle nuove tecnologie, è una ragione in più per non comprare un AN-70 cinese.

A volte scegliere un prodotto piuttosto che un altro, anche a fronte di caratteristiche similari, ha delle implicazioni che vanno largamente al di là della mera differenza di prezzo.

La perdita di know-how, la dipendenza dall'estero e l'impoverimento tecnologico generalizzato hanno effetti micidiali a lungo termine che colpiscono tutti, anche chi sceglie certe strade cercando il risparmio.

 

EDIT

Ho una domanda un pò sciocco, una di quelle domande che fanno i non tecnici...

I dati che circolano sulle capacità di carico dell'A400 sono dati certi o ancora da verificare nelle prove in volo? Cioè le 37ton che Airbus ha divulgato sono dati acquisiti e certi, oppure stime fondate sulle presunte capacità di spinta dei motori? Il TP400 ha volato per la prima volta 2 mesi fa (conducendo prove di base, foto sotto), come si fa a stabilire con certezza al banco se potrà portare in volo quelle 141ton (peso aereo+peso carburante+peso carico massimo)?

Queste cose vengono viste fino dal progetto generale del velivolo.

Non è che si stima la potenza del motore, ma lo si progetta e dimensiona per ottenerla.

Oggigiorno certi errori grossolani non si fanno più e le previsioni teoriche vengono di solito confermate a livello pratico garantendo magari anche qualche margine di crescita.

I motori poi possono essere tarati sulla potenza richiesta senza grandissimi problemi: quello che è necessario verificare è se il livello di potenza richiesto è raggiungibile mantenendo l'affidabilità e la necessità di manutenzione ai livelli previsti dalla specifica.

Edited by Flaggy
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest intruder

The French government is looking at gapfiller options to avoid a tactical airlift shortage resulting from delays with the Airbus Military A400M transport.

 

 

A400MEADS.jpgA400MfromTail-AirbusMilitary.jpg

 

Options are being eyed and will be presented to French President Nicolas Sarkozy in coming months, says defense minister Herve Morin. France’s C-160 Transalls are aging and France believes it needs a gapfiller of some sort since it cannot stretch the service lives of the existing fleet until the A400M comes on-line - now four years later than expected.

 

Several options are being looked at, including using leased A330s to take up some air transport roles, says a French official traveling with Morin in the United States. Other options include working with European partners that perhaps could make the airlifter available, Morin tells the Center for Security and International Studies during his stay in Washington. Another is to try to draw on the C-17 fleet that a subset of NATO members are providing.

 

But Morin indicates he is not interested in backing away from the A400M, even though U.K. parliamentarians are raising the question of whether that would make sense. France is pushing Britain and Germany, in particular, to work with the Airbus Military industrial consortium to adapt the current contract and requirements to allow the A400M program to proceed. Ministerial representatives from the member countries, and the Occar European acquisition agency, are expected to meet this month to discuss a way ahead. Germany has been reluctant to change the terms of the existing fixed-price development contract.

 

Morin also used his visit in the United States to make a pitch for the Pentagon to buy the Airbus A330-based tanker offered by Northrop Grumman and EADS. The European product is simply better, he argues, noting that it won all the competition against its Boeing 767 rival, from Australia to Saudi Arabia.

 

He says, “It’s the first time we have a better product.”

 

 

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/sto...A400M030309.xml

 

 

 

 

 

The United Kingdom needs to consider whether the Airbus Military A400M airlifter is in such a state of disarray that “abandonment would be preferable,” the British Parliament’s Defense Committee has said.

 

The Committee’s “Defense Equipment 2009” report singles out the A400M along with the Future Rapid Effect System (FRES) armored vehicle as procurement programs of particular concern.

 

The report, while praising the Defense Ministry’s Defense Equipment and Support procurement organization, and the urgent operational requirements process, raises fundamental concerns about military procurement and the underpinning research and development to support such programs.

 

“Once the extent of the delay to the A400M program is confirmed, the MOD needs to decide whether it considers the program to be so delayed that abandonment would be preferable, and to take timely decisions either to procure or to lease other airlift assets so that a capability gap in air transport does not develop.”

 

FRES program a ‘fiasco’

 

The Royal Air Force has 25 of the A400M aircraft on order.

 

Likewise, the panel describes the FRES program as a “fiasco” and notes, “The FRES utility vehicle no longer appears to be a priority.” “This program (FRES) was poorly conceived and managed from the outset. The MOD has wasted both its and industry’s time and money.”

 

The committee laments the ministry’s failure to publish an updated version of its Defense Industrial Strategy on schedule – initially anticipated in December 2007.

 

It also continues to criticize cuts in military R&D spending as shortsighted. “The MoD must recognize the very high priority of research and reverse the cut in research spending.”

 

Commenting on the report, Ian Godden, Society of British Aerospace Companies chief executive, says industry “fully supports the very high priority given to defense research in the report. “It is vital to reverse the downward pressure on research and technology spending that threatens the future security of our nation.”

 

Godden goes on to suggest that until “government and industry have clear priorities for future investment in defense and security...and the MOD’s budgetary situation [is] resolved, we see little point in pushing for an update of the Defence Industrial Strategy.”

 

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/sto...A400M022609.xml

Edited by intruder
Link to post
Share on other sites
Se non vedo non credo. E' già stato abbastanza umiliante per i francesi comprarsi gli E-2, le catapulte e... :asd: le eliche

Hai dimenticato i ganci d'arresto :asd:

 

Oltre al problema del ritardo stava emergendo un calo del peso trasportabile dall'aereo e questo potrebbe essere una discriminante anche più pesante, visto che molti paesi hanno costruito i nuovi veicoli tagliati sull'aereo, specie la sagoma.

Link to post
Share on other sites

da AW

 

UK Seeks To Lease C-130J Lift Over A400M

 

LONDON – Britain is considering leasing up to five additional Lockheed Martin C-130J Hercules to help plug the capability gap left by continuing problems with the European Airbus Military A400M.

 

The United Kingdom is interested in taking more C-130Js by 2012, which likely means it will need to conclude an agreement this year if the in-service date target is to be met. The Royal Air Force (RAF) earlier ordered 25 C-130Js, with deliveries beginning in 1999. All but a handful of the RAF’s aging C-130Ks are due to be retired by 2012.

 

Alongside a C-130J lease, the ministry is further considering adding to its six-aircraft fleet of Boeing C-17s to provide additional airlift.

 

RAF airlift is under strain due to having to sustain the air bridge between Britain and Afghanistan in support of the 8,000 military personnel deployed to combat operations there. Delays in the A400M program are only exacerbating the issue.

 

Senior British Defense Ministry officials are believed to have met March 4 to examine proposals for the ministry’s next round of funding, known as Planning Round 09. The need for additional airlift may have been one of the considerations addressed during the meeting.

 

The British debate comes as the French government also is looking at gapfiller options to avoid a tactical airlift shortage resulting from delays with A400M (Aerospace DAILY, March 4).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alla Lockheed Martin non hanno di certo problemi di contratti o forniture, ma certo è che i problemi dell'A400 stanno favorendo non poco l'interesse per il C-130J (idem per il C-17 di casa Boeing).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest intruder

EADS and its industrial partners would have to repay European governments 5.7 billion euros if the A400M military airlifter were terminated, although the bill is unlikely to come due with key aircraft customers remaining committed to the project.

 

With the aircraft not expected to fly before April 1, the Occar European procurement agency could cancel the aircraft contract, forcing EADS and others to repay pre-delivery payments and other costs. However, a cancellation decision has to be taken unanimously, causing EADS Louis Gallois to say he believes that outcome to be "absolutely unlikely." Gallois expressed confidence Germany and France would remain committed to the project.

 

Nevertheless, the company likely faces another potentially big financial charge this year, which could weigh on earnings in 2009. The company already has had to take more than 2 billion euros in financial provisions to account for program delays. The scope of the charge will not be determined until A400M customers and the industrial consortium have defined the contractual road forward.

 

Even if a program-wide termination is unlikely, Individual customers can still cancel their individual aircraft orders. However, even such a course of action is not straight-forward. A cancellation for cause can only be made of those aircraft "substantially delayed," EADS says. So later delivery slots - which could still be on time -- could only be cancelled with some restitution to industry.

 

Negotiations with Occar about adjustments to the contract are due to commence soon, says EADS chief financial officer Hans-Peter Ring.

 

EADS expect the first customer delivery to take place three years after the first flight of the A400M.

 

Flight trials of the TP400D turboprop engine on the C-130 flying test bed have been progressing, with three flights now complete. Gallois says the results are good. At least two more flights will be performed under the engine flight trials phase, he notes.

 

Meanwhile, Gallois also says talks on Eurofighter Typhoon Tranche 3 production are also progressing well. Gallois says a deal could be in hand prior to German general elections, due in September. Other industry officials have indicated the governments need to give some sort of signal on the way forward before then, to avoid a production gap.

 

EADS closed 2008 with revenue of 43.3 billion euros, and 2.8 billion in earnings before interest and taxes, with a profit of 1.6 billion euros, recovering from 2007's 446 million euro loss. For 2009, the company sees revenue roughly on par with 2008 levels, although earnings are expected to be hit not just by the looming A400M charge, but also customer financing needs on the commercial side, and higher research and development outlays.

 

 

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/sto...channel=defense

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Guest intruder

A400M Faces Long Haul On Contract Talks

 

Robert Wall/Spain wall@aviationweek.com

 

 

rafa400m4b.jpg

 

 

Sorting out the future for the A400M military airlifter may take most of the year, even if customers commit this summer to continuing with the program.

 

A critical milestone is fast approaching­ for the TP400D turboprop's full-authority digital engine control (Fadec) software: Its initial flight-test is scheduled for this month. The Fadec software has become the pacing item for the airlifter's first flight, owing to problems with attaining the needed civil certification with the European Aviation Safety Agency.

 

Airbus Military is locked in detailed discussions with buyers about the program's status, schedule problems, technical challenges and roadmap to recovery as it tries to convince the seven core countries not to exercise their option to walk away from the A400M, which has fallen more than two years behind schedule. Parties in the project have declared a moratorium on deciding the program's future until July, to allow time for a thorough exchange of information.

 

But that does not mean a decision will in fact come in July. Industry has warned that it will not see the program through to completion unless the fixed-price contractual arrangement for development and production is modified. Under the current terms the contract is loss-making for industry. "We give ourselves until the end of the year to reach a common understanding" between industry and government, says Domingo Urena, the chairman and managing director of Airbus Military. Urena took over the program after EADS restructured operations to gain more control of the A400M's development.

 

Urena expresses optimism that some agreement will be reached, noting that a contract modification or update is probably all that will be needed.

 

In addition to relief from the fixed prices, the A400M industrial team is looking for adjustments to some performance requirements it says are simply too costly to meet at this point. Urena insists, though, that there are also areas where the airlifter exceeds demand.

 

An accord around year's end could coincide with the A400M's first flight, which the industrial team still hopes to pull off this year. Customers have been given a target date, but Urena won't ­disclose it, citing the sensitive nature of the government-industry deliberations.

 

However, the achievement controlling the timing of that event, EASA's engine certification, is planned for the end of the year, says Nick Durham, president of the Europrop International (EPI) consortium developing the TP400. Durham says a version of the MTU-developed Fadec software to allow first flight was nearly ready last year, when developers realized it failed to meet EASA development standards and couldn't be certified. Developers then went back to recode the software, adhering to EASA standards, Durham says. EPI members had to triple their workforce to do the recoding.

 

Developers decided not to seek a waiver from EASA to commence flight trials with a noncompliant Fadec while they rewrote the software in parallel. Jacques Desclaux, EPI's executive vice president, says there were indications the waiver would not have been granted. Other program officials say some on the A400M development team also were concerned that flight-testing done with a noncompliant Fadec would have to be redone, too.

 

In effect, though, that decision contributed to customer dissatisfaction with the program and made its delays all the more visible. Still, A400M officials are reluctant to second-guess the move, noting that in hindsight things often look different.

 

Durham says overall engine development is now 90 percent complete. Icing tests, medium-sized bird and water ingestion and short-duration tests, such as fuel icing, have yet to be performed. Extended endurance trials also must be finished. Specific fuel consumption is meeting specifications, with engine weight within about 1 percent of target. Durham says ways to lighten the engine have been identified.

 

In parallel, the powerplant has been undergoing extensive ground trials and has completed nine flights on a modified C-130 flying testbed, logging more than 25 hours. "We have not detected any major issues," Urena says. It is primarily the EASA certification requirement that has put the program behind schedule.

 

The Fadec is not the only subsystem to lag, but it has drawn the most attention and been most closely linked to the delay of first flight.

 

In addition to the Fadec software problems, the A400M is struggling with weight. Peter Scoffham, Airbus Military vice president for defense capability marketing, insists weight was never a program specification and the airlifter is within the margins of the range/payload demand. While he agrees that the A400M may not be able to carry some ground vehicles customers want, he says that is because they were added to the equipment list late and do not conform to the weight parameters agreed to at the outset. German officials say they want the A400M to carry the Puma, but that vehicle is too heavy for the transport.

 

Urena says that, as with all aircraft programs, weight is not a trivial issue, and efforts are underway to lower it. But until flight trials start, the weight question remains open.

 

One circumstance in which weight could be critical is a soft field landing at 45 degrees. The performance criteria call for the airlifter to be able to perform 40 missions on a muddy airfield (or CBR 6 standard). If weight is too high, that number may be reduced, Scoffham concedes, adding that the situation can be mitigated in many operational scenarios simply by shifting the landing area slightly.

 

The industrial team's focus now is to get to first flight and start accruing the almost 4,000 flight-test hours. Along with engine development activities, the first-flight aircraft (MSN001) is about to undergo outdoor fuel-testing. Static engine ground runs will follow in midsummer, Urena says.

 

Due to delays, the A400M test program will soon have two flight-test aircraft available. MSN002 has completed power-on, and the fuselage for MSN003 is scheduled to arrive here this month to start final assembly. Wing assembly has begun.

 

Meanwhile, the limit-load campaign on the static test aircraft, MSN5000, should finish around mid-month. Ultimate loads testing is planned for October.

 

Urena says building customer confidence that industry can deliver on the new promises made will be key in the coming weeks and months, but he is optimistic that no customers will abandon the project.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...
Guest intruder

France Eyes C-130Js to Fill A400M Gap

 

Jun 5, 2009

 

 

 

Michael A. Taverna mike_taverna@aviationweek.com

 

 

 

 

France will consider leasing or buying Lockheed Martin C-130J air transports as part of a plan to meet urgent airlift requirements until it receives its first A400M transports, or in the event the program is terminated.

 

EADS' A400M is years behind schedule and currently locked in a three-month standstill while the European launch nations discuss possible remedies, including a new delivery timetable and price schedule, a possible cutback or stretch-out in orders, and relaxation of specifications and penalties with prime contractor EADS and its Airbus Military aircraft group. The standstill ends at the end of June, at which time partners will be free to exercise provisions allowing them to modify their purchase or pull out of the 20 billion euro ($28 billion) program.

 

Pursuing the undertaking and fixing development problems related to the TP400M engine, mission systems and aircraft performance could cost 5 billion euros or more.

 

Meeting with reporters today, French Defense Minister Herve Morin said the launch customers will meet next week on the side of a NATO meeting to appraise the situation. Discussions are currently focused on four points: penalties, price revision, a price escalation clause and the industrial risk, including new delivery schedule and production rate. He said France and Spain remain committed to continuing the program, but that there is still not indication as to whether Germany will budge on specifications, and whether Britain will follow through with threats to pull out. He agreed the resignation of U.K. defense minister John Hutton earlier today could complicate talks.

 

Morin said the list of options to ensure fallback capacity in the absence of the A400M has been expanded to include lease or purchase of an undetermined number of C-130Js. Defense officials had previously said they would entertain lease of Boeing C-17s via a nascent NATO pool arrangement, as well as further use of Russian AN-124s leased by the alliance, the acquisition or lease of EADS Casa 295s, and moving forward the acquisition of Airbus 330 multirole tanker transports.

 

He said he had approved the modernization of the 10 newest C160 Transalls so they could remain in service until the first A400Ms arrive in 2014-15.

 

The A330 option would be limited to a couple aircraft and would not have any bearing on plans for a full-fledged MRTT program competition, either as a private financing initiative or a conventional purchase or lease, Morin said. Whatever the capacity solution retained the overall budget for the A400M, including interim capability requirements, could not exceed the current budget envelope, he pointed out. This could imply reducing or stretching out France's planned 50-unit A400M buy.

 

Morin declined to comment on EADS assurances that the A400M would make its first flight by year's end. But he insisted that the program remains worthwhile, with attractive export prospects, including in Australia. He said flight tests of the A400M's TP400 turboprop engine are going well and that the engine "is giving full satisfaction," according to armaments agency DGA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Se lo fanno davvero sarà una mazzata paurosa alle casse dell'AdlA.

 

Infatti non lo faranno. Tireranno avanti con i Transall.

 

Hanno + bisogno di elicotteri pesanti tipo CH-47.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Come sono bravi a mettere il pepe al sedere di EADS!

 

infatti dovrebbero fare come baffone :

 

da un post di Enzo Bonsignore

 

La conoscete la storia del telegramma di Stalin? Giuro che è vera. Nel dicembre 1941, i direttori degli stabilimenti aeronautici nr.18 a Chenkman e nr.1 a Tretyakov ricevettero il seguente telegramma:

 

"Voi state giocando uno sporco tiro alla Patria e all'Armata Rossa - stop - Voi non vi siete sinora curati di produrre un sufficiente numero di Il-2 - stop - L'Armata Rossa ha bisogno di Il-2 come del pane e dell'aria - stop - Chenkman consegna un solo Il-2 al giorno, mentre Tretyakov consegna uno o due MiG-2 - stop - Questo significa prendersi gioco della Patria e dell'Armata Rossa - stop - Abbiamo bisogno di più Il-2, non di MiG - stop - Se lo Stabilimento nr.18 crede di poter continuare a sabotare la Patria consegnando un solo Il-2 al giorno, commette un grave errore e dovrà subirne le conseguenze - stop - Vi prego di non abusare ulteriormente della pazienza del governo e vi ordino di aumentare la produzione di Il-2 - stop - Questo è l'ultimo avviso - stop - Stalin".

 

Chiunque conosca anche solo vagamente la storia dell'Unione Sovietica - e in particolare il carattere e la mentalità di Stalin - potrà facilmente immaginare che cosa significasse ricevere un telegramma del genere nel dicembre 1941 e farsi quindi un'idea delle reazioni dei destinatari.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest intruder
Come sono bravi a mettere il pepe al sedere di EADS!

 

 

Be', se qualcosa non va bisogna anche avere la decenza e l'onestà di riconoscerlo. Ai militari servono aerei da trasporto, non chiacchiere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Il programma continua: decisione presa in una riunione dei ministri della Difesa dei 7 paesi interessati, tenutasi a Castellet in Francia, venerdì 24 luglio.

 

Eccovi il link all'articolo relativo:

 

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/defense/article...ogramme_a_400_m

 

 

Sull'A400M, un approfondimento, in francese, al link seguente:

 

http://bruxelles2.over-blog.com/article-34101036.html

 

 

e la traduzione automatica in inglese, al link che segue:

 

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=ht...Flanguage_tools

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...