PDA

View Full Version : Happy Birthday Charlie - 50 Years Old


kokpit
23rd Aug 2004, 13:04
C-130 celebrates fifty years of production

The C-130 Hercules celebrates its 50th birthday today as the company that builds it, Lockheed Martin, holds a ceremony to commemorate its first flight on 23 August 1954, from Burbank to Edwards Air Force Base in California.

The first flight of the YC-130, which was actually the second of two prototypes built, came on 23 August 1954, with company test pilots Stan Beltz and Roy Wimmer at the controls. Dick Stanton was the flight engineer and Jack Real was the flight test engineer. During the 61 minute flight, the aircraft was flown from the Lockheed plant in Burbank, Calif, to what was then known as the Air Force Flight Test Station at nearby Edwards AFB.

Beltz is said to have quipped: "She's a real flying machine. I could land it crossways on the runway if I had to." "As we look forward to another half century of C-130 production, I think Willis Hawkins, the designer of the Hercules, said it best. He noted that the C-130 may not be the most attractive aircraft, but it is still in production and still doing the job it was designed for. No one else can say that," says Ross Reynolds, Lockheed Martin C-130J programme vice president. "Hawkins also said before the first aircraft ever flew that if it was designed right the first time, it could be sold everywhere, and history has proven him correct. He said he felt that we must have done it exactly right. I couldn't agree more."

Hawkins, now 90 and mentally sharp and physically active, recalls that the Air Force's request for proposal for what became the C-130 contained only seven pages. The then-Lockheed Aircraft Corporation responded with a proposal that was 130 pages, quite a contrast to the many thousands of pages required to respond to current government proposals.

More than 2,260 Hercules aircraft of all types in more than 70 different variants have been delivered to 60 countries. Today, 67 countries, counting those that bought used aircraft, fly the Hercules. The C-130J is the latest version to come off the longest, continuous, active military aircraft production line in history.

A total of 179 C-130Js are on order, and 113 have been delivered to date. In the US, Air Force Reserve Command and Air National Guard units fly C-130Js. The Marine Corps operates KC-130J tankers and the Coast Guard has introduced the HC-130J into service. International C-130J operators include the Royal Air Force, Royal Australian Air Force, Italian Air Force, and the Royal Danish Air Force. The capabilities and performance of the C-130J in supporting light, fast and lethal combat operations make it a true transformational asset.

In July 1951, the then-Lockheed Aircraft Corporation's Model 82 was chosen over designs from Boeing, Douglas, and Fairchild to be the US Air Force's new tactical transport aircraft. Later designated C-130 and nicknamed Hercules, this transport aircraft, with its distinctive shape and four turboprop engines, has been in continuous production since early 1954, or nearly half the entire history of powered flight. The C-130 is the product of the longest, continuous, active military aircraft production line in history.

The C-130 entered operational service in 1956 and since then, aircrews have, quite literally, been everywhere and done everything. It is safe to say that anytime there is a conflict, a natural disaster, or situation where significant quantities of people, supplies, or equipment have to be on scene quickly anywhere in the world, Hercules crews will be flying them there.

You name it and the Hercules has been used to do it. The C-130 has been flown from both poles; landed or airdropped cargo at every hot spot from the Congo to Vietnam to Kosovo to Afghanistan and Iraq; and hauled relief supplies to every outpost on the globe. It has been used to airdrop 15,000 pound bombs, paratroopers, and leaflets that weigh ounces. The C-130 serves as a gunship; monitors and jams enemy radio transmissions; it is used to track icebergs in the North Atlantic and drug traffickers in the Caribbean and Pacific.

The Hercules is flown into hurricanes to obtain wind and rain data; it is used to drop retardant on forest fires and insecticide on mosquito infestations. A modern-day Noah's ark, the C-130 has been used to haul whales, camels, horses, and cows. It has been used to medevac thousands of casualties to hospitals. As further proof that this aircraft can be used for everything, there was once a four-ship aerial demonstration team that flew C- 130s. Incredibly, a C-130 once carried 452 people, despite being designed to carry only 90. In 1963, a Hercules crew landed on and took off from an aircraft carrier 21 times. That particular aircraft is still in active service with the US Marine Corps.

There have been five major military versions of the C-130 along with close to 70 special purpose variants. Between 1954 and 1959, 231 C-130As were built. Production of the C-130B ran from 1958 until 1963 and resulted in 230 aircraft. A total of 488 C-130Es were built from 1961 to 1974. The most produced version of the Hercules so far is the C-130H, with 1,205 aircraft coming off the assembly between 1964 and 1997. Production of the L-100, the civilian variant, totaled 115 aircraft and production ran primarily from 1964 to 1987.

Today's C-130J represents a nearly complete reinvention of the Hercules. The C-130J, first flown in 1996, has a wingspan of 132 feet -- 12 feet longer than the Wright Brothers' first flight -- a height of 38 feet, and comes in two lengths. The short fuselage aircraft is 97 feet, the same as all previous models, and the longer aircraft is 112 feet, which allows it to accommodate more payload. The longer aircraft can carry a maximum payload of 47,812 pounds. Maximum range with a 25,000 pound payload is more than 3,700 nautical miles without external fuel tanks.

BEagle
23rd Aug 2004, 13:09
And it's still a ba$tard, horrible thing to travel in as a passenger!

PPRuNe Radar
23rd Aug 2004, 13:13
Shouldn't it be 'Happy Birthday Albert' ?

:confused:

Top Bunk Tester
23rd Aug 2004, 13:15
Wash your mouth out BEags:

Gear Up; Flaps Up; Hammock Up; Wake Up.......Oh are we on finals at Akronelli already?

airborne_artist
23rd Aug 2004, 15:03
And it's still a ba$tard, horrible thing to travel in as a passenger!

I went with 49 others as a passenger all the way to Eglin AFB in sunny Florida in an Albert. Flying with Stelios is a luxury in comparison....

BEagle
23rd Aug 2004, 15:44
The C130 is an exceptionally fine aeroplane for tactical transport, paradropping and the like. As a strategic passenger aircraft it sucks!

The A400M will cruise 100 kts TAS faster and will also fly higher. But in the back end it'll still be the same Gitmo Bay class of travel luxury as a/c like the C-17 and KC-135.

Whereas in the back of the GAF A310MRTT it is extremely comfortable indeed! Proper seats, twin aisle fit and they look after their aircraft very well! And you should see the one that their Head of State uses - proper shower unit, hairdryer socket of course (German in joke), very comfy day room, exellent master bedroom. Far, far better than the old VC10 Royal fit!

brakedwell
23rd Aug 2004, 15:54
BEagle
I remember a C130 positioning flight from Lyneham on one of those Travelling Causeway fiascos. I was deaf for a week, which was useful as my new co-pilot turned out to be the biggest whinger on the squadron!

adrian mole
23rd Aug 2004, 16:26
Had the privelege of visiting the Lockheed Plant at Marietta/Dobbins AFB on board XV292 in December 1991 as part of the 25th Anniversary of RAF use. Sadly the only people allowed to take cameras inside were the PRO guy and Ted Muniandy (an Air Eng) and even though we posed in front of the 2000th C130 to roll of the lines I haven't seen the photos. A great bird which has taken me all over the world. We were also specially honoured to have an up-close inspection of one of the only two then in-being F22 Raptors.

Brakedwell

I found my answer was slightly different - What's the difference between a Loadmaster and the GTC? Well, when the GTC stops so does the whining...

kokpit
23rd Aug 2004, 16:28
Shouldn't it be 'Happy Birthday Albert' ?

Only if it were the birthday of the RAF's C-130s and the one belonging to the Blue Angels.

IRC, it's only these aircraft that are affectionately known as 'Fat Albert'.

Trumpet_trousers
23rd Aug 2004, 16:41
The C130 is an exceptionally fine aeroplane for tactical transport, paradropping and the like. As a strategic passenger aircraft it sucks!

....and there's the nub of the problem.....God forbid an accident occurs whilst carrying passengers - perhaps then the 'policy' makers will sit up and listen......just ask the Canadians what it's like to suffer the misfortune of a crash with pax on board......those seats aren't called 'paratroop seats' for nothing..

PPRuNe Radar
23rd Aug 2004, 17:49
Thanks Kokpit.

Must confess I've never heard anyone call them a 'Charlie' before though. Herky Bird is probably the only other name I have seen.

juliet
23rd Aug 2004, 19:14
tends to be called Charlie or Charles in places further south.

BEagle
23rd Aug 2004, 20:14
I note that the A400M has to meet civil certification standards. It'll be interesting to see how they can provide side facing paratroop seats which also comply with the mandatory safety requirements of JAR 25.562.....

reynoldsno1
23rd Aug 2004, 20:34
Ear plugs, ear defenders, stretcher, comfy pillow - best sleep I've had on any aircraft, bar none....:)

airborne_artist
23rd Aug 2004, 21:09
I note that the A400M has to meet civil certification standards. It'll be interesting to see how they can provide side facing paratroop seats which also comply with the mandatory safety requirements of JAR 25.562

A partial solution would be to have palletised forward-facing passenger seating a la C17 for non-para troop movements.

You'd still need bench style seating for para ops.

cja197
23rd Aug 2004, 21:29
BEags - Do you really think A400M will manage 440Kts TAS? The prop theory I did at Uni says I think not....

Morrissey
23rd Aug 2004, 21:44
Flap (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=141172&referrerid=80937)

BEagle
23rd Aug 2004, 22:01
airborne_artist, Airbus Military state that the A400M will meet civil certification standards (JAR 25) 'complemented where appropriate by specific military requirements'. Which therefore presumably includes cabin crashworthiness and passenger survivability standards mandated under JAR 25. The C-17 is not certificated to JAR requirements, as far as I'm aware.

cja197 - the Tu95s we used to intercept a while ago cruised at a far old clip - up to M0.83 at FL360, I gather - somewhat more than 440KTAS! So I guess the prop theorists didn't know everything....? And the Tu-114 civil derivative once averaged 470KTAS+ over a 3000 mile course with a 25t payload. The A400M will cruise at M0.68 to M0.72 and is designed to carry 37 tonnes over 4900nm. The flight envelope edge (limited to 300KCAS) is linear from 300KTAS at sea level to a TAS peak of about 430KTAS just below FL250, then decreasing to about 410KTAS at FL350, remaining constant at that value up to the FL370 ceiling. Initial cruise altitude after taking off at the 130t MTOM will be FL310 at a cruise speed of 425KTAS.

Wholigan
23rd Aug 2004, 22:25
Once travelled from Cold Lake via east coast to Sweden to Baden Soellingen in an Albert. Never got off it. Hated every second. My mates at Lyneham can't understand why I say "sod off" each time they say "wanna trip mate?".

Solid Rust Twotter
24th Aug 2004, 02:42
T'was called a Flossie in S'Efrica but don't know what it's called now or if they've even got crews to operate it.:(

lasernigel
24th Aug 2004, 08:16
The toilets are a real joy to use when its bumpy.Managed to smear the "seat" quite well once.It's a mighty long trip to BATUS in one of them.

BEagle
24th Aug 2004, 09:56
And the A400M will have a proper airliner bog or two, plus other more rudimentary facilities for the grunts wiv' guns in the back!

Cerberus
26th Aug 2004, 06:45
Whats wrong with A340-600s in full up pax fit and bollox to the tactical cargo, unless.... you like flying 30% longer, sitting sideways, 6 inches of leg room between you and a bomb with no where to take a dump whilst eating crappo sandwiches out of the dreaded white lunch box. Oh, the joys of being sprayed with OJ when you inserted that blunt straw into the teeniest carton of drink known to man in a vaguely pressurised cabin.

I remember once getting airborne from Leeming with an aircraft full of live rockets to deploy to the gulf. To make sure we started off feeling like crap, we had all just had injections in every available extremity. They were so good for you that they all had code words. (Sorry, apart from one, though that sounded like a code word too - Anthrax) 7 hours to Cyp, staring at a bunch of winders, sat in a parartroopers seat did wonders for morale and ensured that we were all fighting fit on arrival.....not! The good news was yet to come, 2 hours on the ground at the terminal and then another interminable slog to Dhahran. 10 hours in bed and off on CAP.

Whilst we are at it, why did they individually cling film wrap, bite size, finger sandwiches in fast jet lunch boxes? Did they think your hands shrunk if you'd flown above mach one?

Cerberus:zzz: