Global Aviation Magazine : 60 Years of the Hercules
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HSP ULLA
HSP 2001 CVRT trial was mine that had the transfer release failure. Wasn't there also some contention on the HSP Mk2 failure to release drills in that the ALM might be required to dress aft of a possible live load?
Looking at logbooks - I flew 22 ULLA sorties with just the one failure already mentioned. No one else had an ULLA maldrop during the period. All double ULLA. I understand that triple ULLA was more prone to problems, mainly on impact, before my time.
Looking at logbooks - I flew 22 ULLA sorties with just the one failure already mentioned. No one else had an ULLA maldrop during the period. All double ULLA. I understand that triple ULLA was more prone to problems, mainly on impact, before my time.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: M4 Corridor
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Triple Ulla
An interesting fact we discovered whilst training up a Lyneham crew when I was on JATE was that if the landing gear rolled along the ground on the extraction phase, the latch went across and the load would not extract. Quite an attention getter.
That's interesting Doug.
Obviously the touchdown relay came in to operation. obviously explains why the pallets rolled off the aircraft whilst taxiing by USAF and USMC aircraft must have been "manually manipulated" overboard. As seen on videos covering Khe San re supply etc. did we ever roll freight "off the back" whilst still on the move ?
Smudge
Obviously the touchdown relay came in to operation. obviously explains why the pallets rolled off the aircraft whilst taxiing by USAF and USMC aircraft must have been "manually manipulated" overboard. As seen on videos covering Khe San re supply etc. did we ever roll freight "off the back" whilst still on the move ?
Smudge
Last edited by smujsmith; 28th Apr 2015 at 17:16.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't speak for the C-130, but that's a specific design feature of the C-17. The C-17 is designed to stop on the runway, the pilots bring the engines up to high power with brakes on, the loadmaster does a "gang release" of all the pallet locks, and the pilots release the brakes, literally driving the aircraft out from under the pallets. USAF calls this "combat offload" on the C-17.
That sounds like a great concept KenV, as long as the ground movements people can clear the runway of the cargo very quickly. If it's a manual, dismantle and carry the freight away, it could deny following aircraft the opportunity to land. Thanks for the info though, come on loadies, we must have offloaded like this at some point in time.
Smudge
Smudge
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Erewhon
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it was the release switch on the flightdeck that didn't work on the ground IIRC, part of the ADS. Wasn't there a switch down the back to allow it to be tested sur la terre?
So the gear touching the ground would prevent the release of the drogues to pull the main chutes out.
It's possible I'm talking utter bollocks but something is ringing a bell . . .
So the gear touching the ground would prevent the release of the drogues to pull the main chutes out.
It's possible I'm talking utter bollocks but something is ringing a bell . . .
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Former Home of the Hercules, Wilts
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Smudge yes but not very often. I can recall doing it at Imperial County airport in Grand Centre just outside El Centro when we arrived too late to land at El Centro as the airfield had shut and the freight was needed ASAP. We then had to beg the use of a rough terrain forklift from a site down the road to pick the pallets up and load them onto the vehicles which came for them.
WE992,
Thanks for that. I remember Imperial County from my "El Centro" det. Although my only claim to fame was "borrowing" a "huffer" from the USN at El Centro, whilst awaiting the arrival of GTC spares, and having it stolen from the Holtville strip
Thank goodness I never signed for it, I would still be paying now. Having taken part in the Sarejevo Airlift, I'm sure a rolling offload would have aided our swift departure from the target zone, but as I remember, there was no taxiway to dump it on, and, with an aircraft arrival every 15 minutes, might have pushed the guys on the ground.
Smudge
Thanks for that. I remember Imperial County from my "El Centro" det. Although my only claim to fame was "borrowing" a "huffer" from the USN at El Centro, whilst awaiting the arrival of GTC spares, and having it stolen from the Holtville strip
Thank goodness I never signed for it, I would still be paying now. Having taken part in the Sarejevo Airlift, I'm sure a rolling offload would have aided our swift departure from the target zone, but as I remember, there was no taxiway to dump it on, and, with an aircraft arrival every 15 minutes, might have pushed the guys on the ground.Smudge
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: wiltshire
Age: 65
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Smuj,
It required special pallets with built up sides so you could (a) lock the pallets into the side guidance and (b) fork them out of the way after offloading. The J did an exercise in the boonies of Louisiana in 05 which involved tac offloads. They borrowed the special pallets from the USAF and we sent the nsn and specs back to UK, for the expense versus potential usage deemed to be a non starter, shame as it was fun to watch.
It required special pallets with built up sides so you could (a) lock the pallets into the side guidance and (b) fork them out of the way after offloading. The J did an exercise in the boonies of Louisiana in 05 which involved tac offloads. They borrowed the special pallets from the USAF and we sent the nsn and specs back to UK, for the expense versus potential usage deemed to be a non starter, shame as it was fun to watch.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Dougie, I think the weight on wheels switch was hooked in to the parachute bomb rack selector switch on the flight deck.
Ken, Our J has the early generation Brooks and Perkins with the bicycle chains and operating leavers. (No electrical interlocks at all) If I recall the port side lever had to be operated to open ALL. two levers on the Port side, one to shuttle the bicycle chain which enabled the individual latches to be selected open or close. the The Stbd lever was operated to EMERG to release the springs on all of the airdrop latches operated a shaft with a series of cam followers to jettison the load in either a true airborne emergency (Pallet on fire) or Combat Offload.
I think the HOEU did pay on the grass at Lyneham letting a few pallets go. The 463L pallets were in short supply (like Rocking horse s#it) following a debacle betwixt AAR Cadilac/Capewell and Amsafe Bridport who were fitting them up in the UK. I think dropping a pallet off the ramp rendered it unsuitable for further use hence the ones Ksim speaks of. I think these fell out of the DRAS (Dual row airdrop system) 88 x 108 on the C17 cheaper than a Type V and more effective than a double row of 48" wide CDS.
Ken, Our J has the early generation Brooks and Perkins with the bicycle chains and operating leavers. (No electrical interlocks at all) If I recall the port side lever had to be operated to open ALL. two levers on the Port side, one to shuttle the bicycle chain which enabled the individual latches to be selected open or close. the The Stbd lever was operated to EMERG to release the springs on all of the airdrop latches operated a shaft with a series of cam followers to jettison the load in either a true airborne emergency (Pallet on fire) or Combat Offload.
I think the HOEU did pay on the grass at Lyneham letting a few pallets go. The 463L pallets were in short supply (like Rocking horse s#it) following a debacle betwixt AAR Cadilac/Capewell and Amsafe Bridport who were fitting them up in the UK. I think dropping a pallet off the ramp rendered it unsuitable for further use hence the ones Ksim speaks of. I think these fell out of the DRAS (Dual row airdrop system) 88 x 108 on the C17 cheaper than a Type V and more effective than a double row of 48" wide CDS.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Norwich
Age: 78
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JackW,
A crew from hell for sure, I'm sure many on here will recognise the participants. It's a good clip though, and shows that Albert was often "in harms way".
Smudge
A crew from hell for sure, I'm sure many on here will recognise the participants. It's a good clip though, and shows that Albert was often "in harms way".
Smudge
Brian,
yes there was a switch down the back (on the starboard side) to check the bomb racks on the ground. This switch was not originally fitted in the a/c. It appeared when all the a/c were modded for ULLA. A 28v socket also appeared under a small panel on the ramp to power the EPERA.
Prior to the switch fitting a jumper lead had to be used between two connectors to test the bomb rack on the ground. In the early days the Air Eng had to witness and sign for this test. Lots of bomb rack problems in the eraly days due to robbing from a/c to a/c and poor rigging instructions.
I believe the 'K' was the only model to have twin bomb racks. I wonder if the 'J' does.
I have described our 'famous ' high altitude ULLA maldrop in an earlier post.
This was due to the incorrect manufacture of the 'Y' strop. I do not recall any other real problems dropping ULLA but it did seem to be very height sensitive !
My recollection of the a/c touching the DZ is that it was after the load had gone. I could hear and feel the wheels and the Eng would get a light up of the anti skid system.
R4H do I understand you were doing these trials in 2001 ?
The ALM was always required to go aft down the port side in the event the MSP did not leave the a/c. Been there got the strip ! This was to visually check what had or had not worked. With a high frame double load the only thing you could check from 245 was whether the extractor had deployed.
The state of the EPERU etc required the walk aft. You would of course have pulled the EPERU emergency handle that you had so carefully tied up to the stanchion at 245. In theory this rendered the main parachutes incapable of deploying as you wandered down to the ramp. If all was OK you could then fit the the additional aft restraint chains (not 'Emergency Chains') close up the a/c and RTB to wait for the JATE investigation team. I think I have bored on enough for now !
yes there was a switch down the back (on the starboard side) to check the bomb racks on the ground. This switch was not originally fitted in the a/c. It appeared when all the a/c were modded for ULLA. A 28v socket also appeared under a small panel on the ramp to power the EPERA.
Prior to the switch fitting a jumper lead had to be used between two connectors to test the bomb rack on the ground. In the early days the Air Eng had to witness and sign for this test. Lots of bomb rack problems in the eraly days due to robbing from a/c to a/c and poor rigging instructions.
I believe the 'K' was the only model to have twin bomb racks. I wonder if the 'J' does.
I have described our 'famous ' high altitude ULLA maldrop in an earlier post.
This was due to the incorrect manufacture of the 'Y' strop. I do not recall any other real problems dropping ULLA but it did seem to be very height sensitive !
My recollection of the a/c touching the DZ is that it was after the load had gone. I could hear and feel the wheels and the Eng would get a light up of the anti skid system.
R4H do I understand you were doing these trials in 2001 ?
The ALM was always required to go aft down the port side in the event the MSP did not leave the a/c. Been there got the strip ! This was to visually check what had or had not worked. With a high frame double load the only thing you could check from 245 was whether the extractor had deployed.
The state of the EPERU etc required the walk aft. You would of course have pulled the EPERU emergency handle that you had so carefully tied up to the stanchion at 245. In theory this rendered the main parachutes incapable of deploying as you wandered down to the ramp. If all was OK you could then fit the the additional aft restraint chains (not 'Emergency Chains') close up the a/c and RTB to wait for the JATE investigation team. I think I have bored on enough for now !
Ksimboy,
So, there was a plan for the J to do rolling offloads then. Just typical that the bean counters used funding to stop it. I'm sure there would have been a practical application for it. Especially as, it seems, it's a standard operation for the C17.
Smudge
So, there was a plan for the J to do rolling offloads then. Just typical that the bean counters used funding to stop it. I'm sure there would have been a practical application for it. Especially as, it seems, it's a standard operation for the C17.
Smudge
I was at Stanley in 82 when the runway was closed to fixed wing movements for 2-3 weeks. Can someone who was involved tell us how long the mail drop/grab flights were. Also any interesting tales from that operation.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The C-17 does not use 3rd party cargo handling systems. The C-17 cargo handling systems and air drop systems were all designed in-house by Douglas Aircraft and were fully integrated into the C-17's cargo floor and loadmaster stations. There are 18 463L pallet positions in the C-17 and all the pallet locks are electrically operated and can be released individually or in groups, including releasing them all in a "gang release".
I know Airbus folks looked at the C-17 cargo handling systems and considered a similar system on the A400M. But I understand (but cannot confirm) that they decided this was too expensive and went with 3rd party systems similar to the C-130, which each service had to buy on their own, separate from the aircraft.
For a C-17 "combat offload", the pilots do an assault landing which minimizes the landing rollout and then they back taxi to the approach end of the runway by backing up under aircaft power using thrust reversers. While backing, the cargo door is opened and the ramp lowered to the level position. When they get back to the other end of the runway they stop, hold brakes, run up the engines to high power, the pallet locks are released, the brakes are released, and after the last pallet drops clear, the ramp and door are closed while simultaneously increasing power to max and they accelerate and take off again. The entire evolution from initial touch down to back in the air can be done in as little as two minutes, theoretically less time that it takes the bad guys to spot the plane and get mortar rounds on target. Of course this means the guys on the ground have to dodge mortar rounds while they are unloading/moving up to 18 pallets of stuff.
Since the C-17 can deliver up to 18 pallets at up to 10,000 lbs each in this manner, there is "usually" no need for another delivery for awhile, so having the runway tied up with cargo should (theoretically) not be a problem. But this is not always the case and it was not the case in Afghanistan and in Iraq on a number occasions. If the runway is long enough, a different but similar tactic is used. In this case the aircraft lands upwind as usual and does a high speed taxi to the other end of the runway. At the other end the C-17 does a quick turn around (C-17 can turn around on a 90 foot wide runway under its own power) and then does a combat offload at that end, but this time accelerates and does a downwind takeoff going back out the way it came in. Since its taking off very light it can usually be done with little runway even going downwind. With a long runway (6000 ft or longer) up to four C-17 loads (72 pallets!) can be offloaded very quickly in this manner. More typically, two loads of vehicles are quickly driven off and then two loads of pallets are combat offloaded. A complete Marine LAV Company (LAV=Light Armored Vehicle, based on the 8x8 MOWAG Pirhana) was delivered this way into Afghanistan.
Here's a video of a C-17 combat offload of 16 pallets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJt97q49GRU
I know Airbus folks looked at the C-17 cargo handling systems and considered a similar system on the A400M. But I understand (but cannot confirm) that they decided this was too expensive and went with 3rd party systems similar to the C-130, which each service had to buy on their own, separate from the aircraft.
For a C-17 "combat offload", the pilots do an assault landing which minimizes the landing rollout and then they back taxi to the approach end of the runway by backing up under aircaft power using thrust reversers. While backing, the cargo door is opened and the ramp lowered to the level position. When they get back to the other end of the runway they stop, hold brakes, run up the engines to high power, the pallet locks are released, the brakes are released, and after the last pallet drops clear, the ramp and door are closed while simultaneously increasing power to max and they accelerate and take off again. The entire evolution from initial touch down to back in the air can be done in as little as two minutes, theoretically less time that it takes the bad guys to spot the plane and get mortar rounds on target. Of course this means the guys on the ground have to dodge mortar rounds while they are unloading/moving up to 18 pallets of stuff.
Since the C-17 can deliver up to 18 pallets at up to 10,000 lbs each in this manner, there is "usually" no need for another delivery for awhile, so having the runway tied up with cargo should (theoretically) not be a problem. But this is not always the case and it was not the case in Afghanistan and in Iraq on a number occasions. If the runway is long enough, a different but similar tactic is used. In this case the aircraft lands upwind as usual and does a high speed taxi to the other end of the runway. At the other end the C-17 does a quick turn around (C-17 can turn around on a 90 foot wide runway under its own power) and then does a combat offload at that end, but this time accelerates and does a downwind takeoff going back out the way it came in. Since its taking off very light it can usually be done with little runway even going downwind. With a long runway (6000 ft or longer) up to four C-17 loads (72 pallets!) can be offloaded very quickly in this manner. More typically, two loads of vehicles are quickly driven off and then two loads of pallets are combat offloaded. A complete Marine LAV Company (LAV=Light Armored Vehicle, based on the 8x8 MOWAG Pirhana) was delivered this way into Afghanistan.
Here's a video of a C-17 combat offload of 16 pallets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJt97q49GRU
Ken V,
brilliant vid, showing exactly how it could have been done by Albert too. I have some unpleasant memories of doing a "walk round" of our aircraft during the offload at Sarajevo, which this sort of offload would have precluded. I have found a new respect for the C17, a mighty beast indeed.
Smudge
brilliant vid, showing exactly how it could have been done by Albert too. I have some unpleasant memories of doing a "walk round" of our aircraft during the offload at Sarajevo, which this sort of offload would have precluded. I have found a new respect for the C17, a mighty beast indeed.
Smudge