As a matter of fact the Hercules with the record now is owned by Transafrik and carries Reg.#S9-BAT It has been doing all sorts of things in it's lifetime. Under US registry as N916SJ it was owned by a CIA fronted company and when not involved in covert operations it operated mostly in Africa flying into dirt strips under charter to the UN World Food Program and other groups. Now, virtually all of it's work is on charter operations for the UN in Sudan and other such places. That's about as demanding as it gets and the work is not just occasional. It's full time.
Herc # 315 Makes Aviation History
- Thread starter Bruce Monkhouse
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 344
- Points
- 880
Sorry partner... UN charter flying is not even one iota as demanding as what the TAL boys in Trenton put on their birds. Dirt strips and flying in Africa is not considered demanding work, it is just ops normal for the C-130.
I find it interesting that the CIA is openly admitting to the use of this particular civilian registered Herc for its covert ops in the past. I guess the boys in Langley are pretty open with all that secret stuff, eh? :
I find it interesting that the CIA is openly admitting to the use of this particular civilian registered Herc for its covert ops in the past. I guess the boys in Langley are pretty open with all that secret stuff, eh? :
There is nothing on this thread indicating that the CIA openly admits to anything. :
I have a hobby of keeping track of C-130s and most of them have a recorded history.Some very committed people have managed to put together a lot of information regarding the careers of individual airframes.
Unfortunately the Canadian Hercs have no recorded history other than their production dates and with the passage of time it's almost impossible to retrieve any significant history.
I have a hobby of keeping track of C-130s and most of them have a recorded history.Some very committed people have managed to put together a lot of information regarding the careers of individual airframes.
Unfortunately the Canadian Hercs have no recorded history other than their production dates and with the passage of time it's almost impossible to retrieve any significant history.
- Reaction score
- 22,224
- Points
- 1,360
Beenthere, you seem to be rather combatitive and like to put forth a lot of unsubstantiated information.
First off, you state that Canadian Hercs have no recorded history other than production dates. I'll let the folks here decide how that statement sounds, even the non-aviators can probably figure out the veracity of such a statement.
Then, you "roll your eyes" that nothing in the thread indicated that the CIA openly admits to anything...okay, we look through the thread and find that YOU state that N619SJ was run by a CIA front company...so the CIA didn't openly admit anything, the only bit worthy of : appears to be your own statements.
In keeping with the general user guidelines of this board, perhaps if you either backed up statements with references, or more information in your profile or qualified what you say in a more substantive manner, the members of this board would be less inclined to think of you in less than endearing terms.
Cheers,
Duey
First off, you state that Canadian Hercs have no recorded history other than production dates. I'll let the folks here decide how that statement sounds, even the non-aviators can probably figure out the veracity of such a statement.
Then, you "roll your eyes" that nothing in the thread indicated that the CIA openly admits to anything...okay, we look through the thread and find that YOU state that N619SJ was run by a CIA front company...so the CIA didn't openly admit anything, the only bit worthy of :
appears to be your own statements.In keeping with the general user guidelines of this board, perhaps if you either backed up statements with references, or more information in your profile or qualified what you say in a more substantive manner, the members of this board would be less inclined to think of you in less than endearing terms.
Cheers,
Duey
Well just for a start. My first post was in defense of the presumed factor of flight time on airframes being a cause of problems with the C-130. When people have great concern over something like this I consider that an example such as I gave regarding a similar aircraft with approximately twice as many hours should be complimentary as it would indicate that 45,000 hours on an aircraft that has had excellent maintenance is not such a bad thing.
Response from Short Final--Rolls eyes because thread is 9 months old. I'm sorry SF but I just got here and it's new to me.
My next response is in defense of C-130 including the fact that the civilian C-130 has also led a hard life.
Zoomie responds with a post indicating that he knows all about what charter work and TAL are about.
So now you interpret my defense of the C-130 as being combative. Just look at the combative responses to my defense
.
As for historic records of Canadian C-130/CC-130 aircraft the only thing that I have seen is their date of manufacture. Maybe someone here has more information and they can post it. I have never found the source.
As for backing my posts with references. Will do.
Response from Short Final--Rolls eyes because thread is 9 months old. I'm sorry SF but I just got here and it's new to me.
My next response is in defense of C-130 including the fact that the civilian C-130 has also led a hard life.
Zoomie responds with a post indicating that he knows all about what charter work and TAL are about.
So now you interpret my defense of the C-130 as being combative. Just look at the combative responses to my defense
.
As for historic records of Canadian C-130/CC-130 aircraft the only thing that I have seen is their date of manufacture. Maybe someone here has more information and they can post it. I have never found the source.
As for backing my posts with references. Will do.
A
aesop081
Guest
mover1 said:
Which one of the 2 might you be ?
;D
- Reaction score
- 22,224
- Points
- 1,360
beenthere said:
1. Hours are one thing, usage spectrum is another...CC130's are used hard, especially E's in TAL. No doubt servicability is as good as it is because of tech humping their 6's...harder today than in the past with manning, but our 130 fleet's acheivments are right up their with the life of high timers working contracts around the world.
2. My comment about the :
was about yours after your CIA/open admission bit...not on SF dissing you for showing up 9months later...as you said, you just arrived...fair cop.3. Zoomie compares UN charter to dirt strips in Africa to TAL, not states he knows "all about charter work"...
4. Aside from in-service dates of each airframe, there are piles of K1017's with every Herc hour on them in archives. I still don't understand your statement about no history to the CF CC130 fleet.
5. Backing up material: You were absolutely clear when you said you didn't have the numbers but understood that servicability was down, fair enough... the other stuff was neither qualified nor caveated. Some may say that this really isn't necessary but it is something that makes this board a little bit more than a bunch of kids asking each other 'sup? As folks become known here, other members get a feel for where they're coming from and understand what's factual and what is opinion, and there's a bit of slack handed out from time to time.
It's clear you have decent knowledge of the 130 fleet, but three posts in and yes, I think there was more combativity than there was solid statement of fact making your case. Perhaps it might have been clearer if you said something like, "although the CF Hercs do fly lots of hours in challening roles, I believe that significant reductions in the MOC500 technicians servicing the fleet also had a large part to play in less than optimal servicability..." from the outset. Your principle point, I believe, got lost in the lower level back-and-forthing.
So, welcome to Army.ca and I look forward to discussion tpt and many other issues! 8)
Cheers,
Duey
A
aesop081
Guest
well, after a little bit of a distraction....
As the aurora fleet advances in age ( all our airframes here are past 21 000 hours) and no replacement in sight i cant help but feel that we will , in time, have a thread similar to this for the CP-140.
As the aurora fleet advances in age ( all our airframes here are past 21 000 hours) and no replacement in sight i cant help but feel that we will , in time, have a thread similar to this for the CP-140.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
to back up dueys post, the Canadian hercs are very well documented. i have been working on them at SPAR for 3 years now and the amount of paperwork for maintenance is overwhelming. some say it's more important than the aircraft itself.
beenthere-- where do you get your information from about hercs?
beenthere-- where do you get your information from about hercs?
A
aesop081
Guest
The CP-140 fleet's employement history is rather well documented, i can't see the CC-130 being any different.
I'm talking more of the history of individual aircraft. I know that there is a complete technical history but going back to the original post on this thread we know that 315 has accumulated more than 45,000 hours of flying time but it would be really interesting to be able to go back over time and read about some of the things that the aircraft has done. It's just general interest of course and of no great value but it would help to give some perspective of what the military does.
I'm sure that the legend of 333 has a lot more fiction than fact. When you consider that the individual parts get shuffled around like a deck of cards in Vegas it's hard to associate serviceability to a tail number.
The latest saga in Alert involved a Herc that spent weeks up there on a one night stopover. I haven't heard the real story but it involved just about every thing that can go wrong with the aircraft happening in a chain of failures. It is something that has never happened before.
After 6 months In Alert I'd be happy to leave on anything that moves in a southerly direction. ;D
The latest saga in Alert involved a Herc that spent weeks up there on a one night stopover. I haven't heard the real story but it involved just about every thing that can go wrong with the aircraft happening in a chain of failures. It is something that has never happened before.
After 6 months In Alert I'd be happy to leave on anything that moves in a southerly direction. ;D
- Reaction score
- 114
- Points
- 680
She didn't earn her nick-name for nothing. After 6 years in Trenton, 3 years in 10 Hgr ASF supporting Aircraft spares to 8AMS and Snags she had the highest US rate on many occasions. Her AOG/IOR rate was well-known and she once sat in the slot for quite awhile so Snags/AMS could perform robs from her for the 'less-broken' birds.beenthere said:
I love her though. She got me home safely and I've had the priveledge to fly on her on many an occasion. My thanks go to the hard-workings lads and lass' who keep her in the air.
Bert
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 230
beenthere said:
Aircraft snags and maintenance issues can occur at any time. The problem in this circumstance isn't so much that snags occur but
where they occur. If an aircraft runs into difficult in Alert, replacement parts/assemblies and repair crews may have to be acquired from
the South and flown north. That takes time. Sometimes during repair, it is discovered more parts are required and further time is lost.
Murphy's laws works against everybody even the military. In my opinion having served in Alert, survived two BoxTops and an Op Hurricane,
things run rather smoothly all things considered.
In fact they usually do run smoothly for the Herc because the aircraft has enough systems to provide lots of backups and over the years a number of methods have been devised to get around some snags which would keep the aircraft from operating. Some very ingenious methods have been developed to overcome some things that in the early days of Herc operations would have meant sending for parts.
One of the worst things is leaving the aircraft out in the cold which really invites problems.
I had a personal experience up there one time where we had several malfunctions after an overnight stop when it was very cold and used it as justification to bring about a change in the itinerary of the weekly 85/86 flight during the winter period. It got changed so that the overnight was in Thule rather than Alert.
It just doesn't make sense to set things up to invite trouble when there's a better way to do it.
One of the worst things is leaving the aircraft out in the cold which really invites problems.
I had a personal experience up there one time where we had several malfunctions after an overnight stop when it was very cold and used it as justification to bring about a change in the itinerary of the weekly 85/86 flight during the winter period. It got changed so that the overnight was in Thule rather than Alert.
It just doesn't make sense to set things up to invite trouble when there's a better way to do it.
- Reaction score
- 22,224
- Points
- 1,360
Yup, aircraft definitely don't like the cold.
When we'd go somewhere cold with the Chinook or Twin, we'd take the battery out overnight and bring it wherever we were staying overnight (mod tent, hotel, etc...). That way the battery still works. Then the problem is a cold-soaked aircraft, in particular the fuel systems...very cold weather would usually results either in an engine hang on start, or more recently on the Griffon, an engine run-away (high-side governor failure). Coldest I've started at was -42 in Kirkland lake in a Twin, she definitely didn't like it...spewed huge clouds of white smoke on start and for about 30 secs after light of...took about 20 mins for all Ts&Ps to come green. Such cold/warm/cold cycles are rough on aircraft, that's for sure...
Cheers,
Duey
When we'd go somewhere cold with the Chinook or Twin, we'd take the battery out overnight and bring it wherever we were staying overnight (mod tent, hotel, etc...). That way the battery still works. Then the problem is a cold-soaked aircraft, in particular the fuel systems...very cold weather would usually results either in an engine hang on start, or more recently on the Griffon, an engine run-away (high-side governor failure). Coldest I've started at was -42 in Kirkland lake in a Twin, she definitely didn't like it...spewed huge clouds of white smoke on start and for about 30 secs after light of...took about 20 mins for all Ts&Ps to come green. Such cold/warm/cold cycles are rough on aircraft, that's for sure...
Cheers,
Duey
A
aesop081
Guest
Duey said:
Those words bring back alot of memories,,,,,then i moved on to the CT-142 !!
2 full from the back.....
Similar threads
