A bad $70million dollar machine? The C-130j - Page 2

May 15th, 2005  
Luckily I have first hand knowledge of the J. It's additional propellers give it more "go" and can take off in a shorter distance. It has a greater weight capacity and had a great following by the marines which jumped her. I'd like to see them put into gunship roles.
May 16th, 2005  
Last month after one of my jumps, a couple C-130Js rolled in about 30 minute behind us. It was a night mission and I did not hear the aircraft until it was almost directly over me. It even sounded like a UAV and that was at 1000 feet.

The jumpers i talked to on the ground had no problems related to hitting the aircraft.

The Juliet models can also hold an additon HMMWV, and I believe 75 jumpers compared to 55.
May 16th, 2005  
Originally Posted by chewie_nz
i know that the Jay is one of the options the RNZAF is looking at for replacing our aircraft. hope these problems aren't as major as they seem
The RNZAF needs to look at its procedures or funding though as they have a huge number of "break down groundings" these days.
May 17th, 2005  
Australia has been using C130-J's quite successfully for some 5 years.
We use wind deflectors when doing para drops so no dramas there, and the HUPRA system to recover hooked up grunts.
We moded ours differently to the yank ones. Including engines and cockpit set up. A shaky start initiallly but going great now.
The US Air NAtional Gaurd who use Js are liasing with Australia to perfect operating procedures and fault analysis dramas they have been having.
2 aussie Js in the middle east are carrying 10% of the current airlift capeability for that theatre.
Not a bad effort.
May 21st, 2005  
Originally Posted by Shadowalker
I thought they were replacing the CH-46 with V-22 Osprey due to reliability problems, due to the age of the fleet.
I think the v22 still has engine rotation problems doesn't it?
As for the ch47, the decline of that bird was when all the heads were either restricted or unrestricted, unrestricted heads were still fully functional, while the restricted heads were only supposed to be flown flat, no turns at all. Last time I worked ona 46 mrh, thbey had dcb 50 installed on them.
June 29th, 2005  
Originally Posted by chewie_nz
i know that the Jay is one of the options the RNZAF is looking at for replacing our aircraft. hope these problems aren't as major as they seem
Not for another 10 years or so chewie, the life extension will take them out to 2020. I would like to see how the J does lifting a LAV3 and transporting it a decent ditance without refueling. I heard the H's couldn't make Aussie with a LAV on board due to its weight.
June 29th, 2005  

Topic: The C-130J Poison Pill


Every now and then I catch the Congressional defense committees testimony from the different chairs of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This episode was on the different high ticket defense budget items -- ie F-22A, JSF, DD-X and the C-130J. Of course the Senators from Georgia were asking cream puff questions on the C-130J and the F-22A. You know, the nation will be in total peril if they are canceled. Has nothing to do of course with the fact that both are made in Georgia.

Then came the surprise. Senator Warner asked about the termination cost if the C-130J. I was surprised that was asked anyway as the C-130J is basically a private venture from the beginning where a four decade airframe has a massive improvement with new engines and a new cockpit. The manufacture already had a factory and production line for it. A number of foreign air forces with large C-130 fleets wanted the C-130J to replace their older C-130s. Lockheed Maritta had orders for the C-130J before the US government had placed any orders. The USAF and the US Army did not want to order the C-130J, but instead just rebuilding the present C-130 fleet and using the money for more C17s. Unfortunately at that time the most powerful member in the House of Represenatives who was from Gerogia forced them to order some for the USCG and then the USMC. The Camel had his nose in the tent. And the USAF plans not to order the C-130J was doomed -- I mean DOOMED!

Well, folks as I listened I understood why the question was asked. It seems that L-H and its supporters in Congress have inserted a "poison pill" into the C-130J program. The termination provision of the C-130J contract calls for between 500 and 600 million dollars. ALMOST THE TOTAL COST OF THE PRESENT ORDERS BY THE USAF FOR THE C-130J.

Finally, I know it will never happen in my life time (or before the second coming of Jesus or the Mahid) Congress persons from states where weapons are being built should recluse themselves during Congressional testimony on those subject.

Jack E. Hammond

NOTE> The member referring to paratroopers banging against the side of the C-130J on exiting. That was an early problem with the C-17 and not the C-130J.
June 30th, 2005  
I'm really supprised that Senator Warner didn't demand that the thing be built here in VA.
August 10th, 2005  
dont even talk about the osprey, i think that things like cursed. teh older c-130 is fine. the JSF and F/A-22 r both needed. JSF is carrier based, right?, the F/A-22 is needed for surgical strikes in stealth and it def. guarantees air superiority.