Re: Lockheed C-130 Hercules (RAF)
Posted: 25 Jul 2019, 17:32
I still don't think we've had confirmed what the "new capabilities" are have we?
News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.
https://www.ukdefenceforum.net/
Thanks. I have heard a lot of complaining about C-130 withdrawal and the points often said are identical to those listed above. Capacity / Numbers is obvious. Capabilities I was however more dubious about. Many of them are set to be picked up around 2025 ( a.k.a RAF centenary long certification and integration; spear 3, meteor, new typhoon radar to name examples). Whenever I ask for specifics as to which capabilities will be lost the aforementioned is always the response.
My answer would be to buy 8 more A400's to directly replace the airlift lost from the retirement of the J's.new guy wrote: ↑23 Apr 2023, 18:52 This is what chat GPT gave me one capabilities lost with C-130 retirement .
"The retirement of the C130 by the Royal Air Force (RAF) will result in the loss of several capabilities that the A400M cannot fully replace. These capabilities include:
1. Capacity. Many of the C-130 will go without direct replacement and overall air-lift capacity will be reduced.
2. Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) capabilities: The C130 has the ability to operate from short, rough, or unprepared airstrips, which is essential for military operations in remote or austere locations. The A400M can operate from semi-prepared runways, but it is not as versatile as the C130.
3. Tactical airlift: The C130 is a highly maneuverable aircraft that can operate in tight spaces, making it ideal for tactical airlift operations such as air drops and delivery of supplies to troops on the ground. The A400M is larger and less manoeuvrable, which limits its usefulness in these types of operations.
4.Special operations support: The C130 has been extensively used in special operations missions such as infiltration, exfiltration, and resupply of special forces teams. While the A400M has some capabilities in this area, it is not as well-suited for special operations missions as the C130.
Overall, while the A400M is a highly capable aircraft, it cannot fully replace the unique capabilities of the C130. The retirement of the C130 will therefore result in a loss of flexibility and versatility for the RAF in certain types of military operations."
Agree disagree? What solutions are there to fixing the capability gap? More A400M? Focus on moving capabilities over to A400M quicker? Other aircraft like C295 (£40m), Embraer C-390 millenium, C-2, KAI consept? New C-130?
mrclark303 wrote: ↑23 Apr 2023, 23:04My answer would be to buy 8 more A400's to directly replace the airlift lost from the retirement of the J's.new guy wrote: ↑23 Apr 2023, 18:52 This is what chat GPT gave me one capabilities lost with C-130 retirement .
"The retirement of the C130 by the Royal Air Force (RAF) will result in the loss of several capabilities that the A400M cannot fully replace. These capabilities include:
1. Capacity. Many of the C-130 will go without direct replacement and overall air-lift capacity will be reduced.
2. Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) capabilities: The C130 has the ability to operate from short, rough, or unprepared airstrips, which is essential for military operations in remote or austere locations. The A400M can operate from semi-prepared runways, but it is not as versatile as the C130.
3. Tactical airlift: The C130 is a highly maneuverable aircraft that can operate in tight spaces, making it ideal for tactical airlift operations such as air drops and delivery of supplies to troops on the ground. The A400M is larger and less manoeuvrable, which limits its usefulness in these types of operations.
4.Special operations support: The C130 has been extensively used in special operations missions such as infiltration, exfiltration, and resupply of special forces teams. While the A400M has some capabilities in this area, it is not as well-suited for special operations missions as the C130.
Overall, while the A400M is a highly capable aircraft, it cannot fully replace the unique capabilities of the C130. The retirement of the C130 will therefore result in a loss of flexibility and versatility for the RAF in certain types of military operations."
Agree disagree? What solutions are there to fixing the capability gap? More A400M? Focus on moving capabilities over to A400M quicker? Other aircraft like C295 (£40m), Embraer C-390 millenium, C-2, KAI consept? New C-130?
I would also buy 12 C27J's, for SF and light transport loads. Using A400 for some tasks is like sticking a transit load of pallets onto an Articulated lorry, it's overkill.
The C27 has some very impressive STOL capabilities and can carry a fair load too.
point 2 ) I watched the A400 rough ground trials a few years back and I can say now the load it can carry on/off of grass is very goodnew guy wrote: ↑23 Apr 2023, 18:52 This is what chat GPT gave me one capabilities lost with C-130 retirement .
"The retirement of the C130 by the Royal Air Force (RAF) will result in the loss of several capabilities that the A400M cannot fully replace. These capabilities include:
1. Capacity. Many of the C-130 will go without direct replacement and overall air-lift capacity will be reduced.
2. Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) capabilities: The C130 has the ability to operate from short, rough, or unprepared airstrips, which is essential for military operations in remote or austere locations. The A400M can operate from semi-prepared runways, but it is not as versatile as the C130.
3. Tactical airlift: The C130 is a highly maneuverable aircraft that can operate in tight spaces, making it ideal for tactical airlift operations such as air drops and delivery of supplies to troops on the ground. The A400M is larger and less manoeuvrable, which limits its usefulness in these types of operations.
4.Special operations support: The C130 has been extensively used in special operations missions such as infiltration, exfiltration, and resupply of special forces teams. While the A400M has some capabilities in this area, it is not as well-suited for special operations missions as the C130.
Overall, while the A400M is a highly capable aircraft, it cannot fully replace the unique capabilities of the C130. The retirement of the C130 will therefore result in a loss of flexibility and versatility for the RAF in certain types of military operations."
Agree disagree? What solutions are there to fixing the capability gap? More A400M? Focus on moving capabilities over to A400M quicker? Other aircraft like C295 (£40m), Embraer C-390 millenium, C-2, KAI consept? New C-130?
I was always a big fan of the C-27J (unlike its operators). However one of the biggest selling points was engine and systems commonality with the Hercules fleet, which is obviously not going to work if it's replacing it.mrclark303 wrote: ↑23 Apr 2023, 23:04 My answer would be to buy 8 more A400's to directly replace the airlift lost from the retirement of the J's.
I would also buy 12 C27J's, for SF and light transport loads. Using A400 for some tasks is like sticking a transit load of pallets onto an Articulated lorry, it's overkill.
The C27 has some very impressive STOL capabilities and can carry a fair load too.
Australia is not exactly having a great time with Gucci European aerospace platforms. Tiger / Taipan / Spartan....R686 wrote: ↑24 Apr 2023, 10:03
Well not according to the RAAF
https://www.australiandefence.com.au/de ... or-spartan
In an online story posted on July 25, Defence revealed it has redefined the role of its twin-engine Leonardo C-27J Spartan to ‘enhance response and engagements’ by focussing on Humanitarian Aid and Disaster Relief (HADR), crisis response and regional engagements across the Indo-Pacific.
Excellent points Jensy, if we are talking a common transport fleet, then 8 more A400's.Jensy wrote: ↑24 Apr 2023, 11:36I was always a big fan of the C-27J (unlike its operators). However one of the biggest selling points was engine and systems commonality with the Hercules fleet, which is obviously not going to work if it's replacing it.mrclark303 wrote: ↑23 Apr 2023, 23:04 My answer would be to buy 8 more A400's to directly replace the airlift lost from the retirement of the J's.
I would also buy 12 C27J's, for SF and light transport loads. Using A400 for some tasks is like sticking a transit load of pallets onto an Articulated lorry, it's overkill.
The C27 has some very impressive STOL capabilities and can carry a fair load too.
The C-295 would be something else I could see slotting between CH-47 and A400M.
However it comes down to the cost argument of having small, niche fleets that require unique support, versus the advantages of having commonality across a larger fleet that might sometimes be overkill on certain ops.
Getting a second batch of A400M should be a priority, especially if there's any remaining Spanish orders that they're not taking up.
If it's a matter of small loads over long distances, at speed, then it might well be a tilt-rotor (not necessarily V-280) that we should be looking at for the 2030s onwards.
P.S: worth remembering that nearly all the J model Hercs that will be retired are C-130J-30s, with the lengthened fuselage. Not as much difference in size with Atlas as you might think, though much less payload over most distances.
Absolutely. I'm sure some of us remember when FRES was supposed to fit in the back of a C-130! Would need at least two and a team of engineers with plasma torches to pull that off with Ajax....mrclark303 wrote: ↑24 Apr 2023, 15:06 Excellent points Jensy, if we are talking a common transport fleet, then 8 more A400's.
The main issue with the C130 as a design, is obviously the physical dimensions of the hold.
All the equipment the Army uses has grown in size over the last 25 years and now much simply can't be loaded into a C130.
You can read that one or two ways, one that agrees it's exactly that, or the other is a smoke screen for Australian SF use, in a sort of "nothing to see here, move along please" .R686 wrote: ↑24 Apr 2023, 10:03mrclark303 wrote: ↑23 Apr 2023, 23:04My answer would be to buy 8 more A400's to directly replace the airlift lost from the retirement of the J's.new guy wrote: ↑23 Apr 2023, 18:52 This is what chat GPT gave me one capabilities lost with C-130 retirement .
"The retirement of the C130 by the Royal Air Force (RAF) will result in the loss of several capabilities that the A400M cannot fully replace. These capabilities include:
1. Capacity. Many of the C-130 will go without direct replacement and overall air-lift capacity will be reduced.
2. Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) capabilities: The C130 has the ability to operate from short, rough, or unprepared airstrips, which is essential for military operations in remote or austere locations. The A400M can operate from semi-prepared runways, but it is not as versatile as the C130.
3. Tactical airlift: The C130 is a highly maneuverable aircraft that can operate in tight spaces, making it ideal for tactical airlift operations such as air drops and delivery of supplies to troops on the ground. The A400M is larger and less manoeuvrable, which limits its usefulness in these types of operations.
4.Special operations support: The C130 has been extensively used in special operations missions such as infiltration, exfiltration, and resupply of special forces teams. While the A400M has some capabilities in this area, it is not as well-suited for special operations missions as the C130.
Overall, while the A400M is a highly capable aircraft, it cannot fully replace the unique capabilities of the C130. The retirement of the C130 will therefore result in a loss of flexibility and versatility for the RAF in certain types of military operations."
Agree disagree? What solutions are there to fixing the capability gap? More A400M? Focus on moving capabilities over to A400M quicker? Other aircraft like C295 (£40m), Embraer C-390 millenium, C-2, KAI consept? New C-130?
I would also buy 12 C27J's, for SF and light transport loads. Using A400 for some tasks is like sticking a transit load of pallets onto an Articulated lorry, it's overkill.
The C27 has some very impressive STOL capabilities and can carry a fair load too.
Well not according to the RAAF
https://www.australiandefence.com.au/de ... or-spartan
In an online story posted on July 25, Defence revealed it has redefined the role of its twin-engine Leonardo C-27J Spartan to ‘enhance response and engagements’ by focussing on Humanitarian Aid and Disaster Relief (HADR), crisis response and regional engagements across the Indo-Pacific.