• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The CC-130-J Hercules Merged Thread

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
1,634
Points
1,160
DexOlesa said:
Boy, that would not be kind on the paint job. However, with the engines mounted high on a c-17, as shown in the video, very little would get kicked up by reverse thrust. Most dust and debris comes off the wheels.

...until the groundspeed becomes low and there is a danger of letting the reverer dustball pass forward of the engines, which would be a very bad thing, hence guarded against.

regards
G2G
 

Haletown

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
what Globesmasher said . . .  we need two aircraft and these two work exceptionally well together.

Add in some slightly used C27J's form the USAF retirement yard and we'd have a  triple whammy.  Use for SAR and easily re-purposed  to general aviation uses on an as required basis  . . that common cockpit is  a big advantage.
 

HB_Pencil

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Haletown said:
what Globesmasher said . . .  we need two aircraft and these two work exceptionally well together.

Add in some slightly used C27J's form the USAF retirement yard and we'd have a  triple whammy.  Use for SAR and easily re-purposed  to general aviation uses on an as required basis  . . that common cockpit is  a big advantage.

Unfortunately, those are going to the US Coast Guard it seems.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
377
Points
910
Bump .....

1024px-F-16_Fighting_Falcon.jpg
  vs

DSC_3578%20C-130J-30%2001-1461%20115AS%20right%20front%20in%20flight%20m.jpg



C130J for the Win!
 

Rifleman62

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
29
Points
530
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2016/01/07/defense-departments-love-affair-with-super-hercules-continues.html?cmpid=NL_SciTech

US Defense Department's love affair with the Super Hercules continues

By Allison Barrie  Published January 07, 2016  FoxNews.com

NOW PLAYING - Video at link

The Defense Department is set to expand its fleet of Super Hercules aircraft, a hi-tech workhorse that mixes versatility with toughness.

The DOD is awarding Lockheed Martin a contract worth more than $1 billion to build 32 of the C-130 Super Hercules. It is part of a $5.3 billion contract to eventually provide the U.S. Air Force with 78 of these aircraft - 30 MC-130Js, 13 HC-130Js and 29 C-130J-30s and the U.S. Marine Corps six KC-130Js.

“We are proud to partner with the U.S. government to continue to deliver to the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Coast Guard the world’s most proven, versatile and advanced airlifter,” said George Shultz, vice president and general manager, Air Mobility & Maritime Missions at Lockheed Martin. “This multiyear contract provides true value to our U.S. operators as they recapitalize and expand their much-relied-upon Hercules aircraft, which has the distinction of being the world’s largest and most tasked C-130 fleet.”

Considered the standard tactical aircraft, the C-130J can deploy in tough battle situations as well as extreme environments including Antarctica. The aircraft can carry payloads upwards of 42,000 pounds. According to Lockheed’s calculations, it can transport 92 combat troops, 64 paratroopers - or it can handle a combination of the two up to the maximum weight.

Though one of the biggest aircraft in operation, it can be landed in tiny spaces from a dirt strip in the jungle to a landing strip on snow – where it often will be equipped with skis. It is also fast, managing to reach speeds of 417 miles per hour with a range over 2,000 miles. It can also climb to 28,000 feet.

But this aircraft is not only transporting troops and supplies. More recently, it’s being equipped with state-of-the-art equipment that allows it to be used in special operations, armed intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

It’s also increasingly taking on missions far beyond the battlefield – delivering tens of thousands pounds of relief supplies, conducting search and rescue operations and taking part in firefighting.  When deploying to fight fires, the aircraft leverages the Modular Airborne Firefighting System that can drop 3,000 gallons of water, or a fire retardant - within five seconds.

Related: Cold War-era weaponry in pictures

Hercules first took flight in 1954 and more than 2,400 Hercules have rolled out since then and the aircraft has supported the US military for 60 years. There are 11 variants of the C-130J.

The popular aircraft flies for 16 nations and 19 different operators. The Super Hercules global fleet has flown more than 1.3 million flight hours.

Ballet dancer turned defense specialist Allison Barrie has traveled around the world covering the military, terrorism, weapons advancements and life on the front line. You can reach her at wargames@foxnews.com or follow her on Twitter @Allison_Barrie.




 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
377
Points
910
Bump -

Thoughts on logistics and international trade.

Suppose the Prime Minister opts to support the UN through logistics, engineering and medical services.
Suppose the Prime Minister, as part of this effort were to complete the Operational Support Hub network envisaged by Natynczyk back in 2010 (Kingston - Jamaica, Cologne, Dakar, Mombasa, Kuwait, Singapore, Busan - together with Esquimalt, Trenton and Shearwater).

Would there be useful business for additional cargo aircraft?

If yes then which.

CC-177 line is closed - there may be one or two units unspoken for but.....

So that leaves Airbus 400M and Herc.
There is also a sidebar discussion here to be had about the FWSAR aircraft and its potential role as a cargo lifter.

Lets take a look at the Airbus.  It isn't a C-17 but it is bigger than the Herc and has longer legs and can carry a LAV-6.

If the Canadian government were to purchase the Airbus machine, would that be a sufficient consolation prize for that portion of the Montreal aerospace community not involved in the F35 that the F35 could be favourably sold to the supporters of the Prime Minister's faction?

 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,113
Points
940
I wonder if most long range resupply could be done by leased/rented cargo aircraft like a 747? The C-17 could provide vehicles movements and such, but a lot of the day to day stuff could go standard airfrieght.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
377
Points
910
Colin P said:
I wonder if most long range resupply could be done by leased/rented cargo aircraft like a 747? The C-17 could provide vehicles movements and such, but a lot of the day to day stuff could go standard airfrieght.

That too, and leave the C17s and the C130s for tactical lift?













 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,601
Points
890
The CAF already uses standard shippers.  There's an array of considerations that goes into selecting the appropriate method for transportation, by land or by sea or by air, by military or by contracted transportation.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
377
Points
910
Bump


A trend?

The US Army asks for more transport ships (JHSV) and commissions them into Army service.
The US Navy claims them and puts them into the Merchant fleet under contract - but at least keeps them operating.

The US Army asks for more transport aircraft (C27J) and commissions them into Army service.
The US Air Force claims them and discharges them stating that they can do the job with the existing C130 fleet.

The US Air Force now down-sizing its C130 fleet.

The US Air Force also shut down the production line on the C17s, heavily used to support the US Army and Special Forces.

One might be tempted to add the A10 to the trendline.

Jointery seems to continue to be problematic.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,113
Points
940
The new standard to judge Tactical Airlift aircraft by is; "How many refugees involved in a hasty evac can we cram into it?"
 

Ostrozac

Sr. Member
Reaction score
119
Points
430
The new standard to judge Tactical Airlift aircraft by is; "How many refugees involved in a hasty evac can we cram into it?"
A C-17 is big, but you’d be able to squeeze more people into a C-5 or an AN-124. A bit of a moot point, however, as all three airframes are out of production. If you want more lift, your best option is probably more C-130J. Buying some Airbus A400M might also be an option; it does seem overly complicated to have A-400M in addition to C-17 and C-130J, but that’s how the RAF do it.
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
515
Points
1,060
Davis-Monahan AFB has a bunch of C-17s, and they regularly bring aircraft out of mothballs for Foreign Military Sales. Too bad they'd be super useful, our last government was only interested in buying old aircraft if they were useless.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
480
Points
860
Davis-Monahan AFB has a bunch of C-17s, and they regularly bring aircraft out of mothballs for Foreign Military Sales. Too bad they'd be super useful, our last government was only interested in buying old aircraft if they were useless.
If by our ‘last government’ you mean under Harper, it was the opposite. 17 new C-130J Super Hercs, 15 new Chinooks, 5 new C-17s, and a few small but useful birds for SOFCOM.

If by 25 used Australian legacy Hornets, which had to be upgraded just to be in our service, and 15 new SAR aircraft which didn’t make much sense in any way other than lowest bidder… sadly that last government is still our current government 😕😔
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
480
Points
860
A C-17 is big, but you’d be able to squeeze more people into a C-5 or an AN-124. A bit of a moot point, however, as all three airframes are out of production. If you want more lift, your best option is probably more C-130J. Buying some Airbus A400M might also be an option; it does seem overly complicated to have A-400M in addition to C-17 and C-130J, but that’s how the RAF do it.
If we are talking lift in regards to people (how many flights will it take to move X number of people to a general theatre) - would more Hercs or more Polaris (let’s skip ahead and go with A330) make sense?


Closing down the C-17 line was short sighted. I’m sure they could have found a way to keep that production line going, even if minimal or slowly.

I understand the USAF had 240+ of them in service when the decision was made, and plenty more being restored and refurbished also. Boeing built 5 additional aircraft prior to closing the line completely, and all 5 aircraft sold fairly quickly.

Strategically I do believe it was short sighted though. Even just from a strategic business perspective - if something happens and countries need to upgrade or replace their airlift capabilities, Lockheed and Airbus can answer the call. Boeing can’t. (Boeing was also under piss poor management at the time, which may have played a factor.)

In a coalition context, C-17s seem more valuable than fighters, and reinforces whether you are a serious player or not. Can you fly your people out of situations like Kabul? Or do you have to call someone else to do it?
 

dimsum

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
890
Points
940
In a coalition context, C-17s seem more valuable than fighters, and reinforces whether you are a serious player or not. Can you fly your people out of situations like Kabul? Or do you have to call someone else to do it?
At some point, someone told me that a coalition context, there are tons of shooters. There are never enough spotters (ISR platforms), transports, and tankers.
 
Top