Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

RAF C-130J's to be retired early?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

RAF C-130J's to be retired early?

Old 27th Feb 2021, 15:33
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Freedom Sound
Posts: 316
RAF C-130J's to be retired early?

Not trying to start a slanging match or anything similar but it appears MOD is thinking about NOT keeping the J's until 2035. Well the good old bean counters think they can save spending on an upgrade by using those very noisy Airbus A-400's instead. As you can hear those A-400's even when they are at 25,000 ft, they are not going to be much use for carrying our troops from Hereford around in any "stealthy" manner are they.
esscee is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 16:03
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 62
Half expected this to happen and not really surprised in todays climate, a really shame flew on these several times whilst in the air force. It has served many air forces worldwide in various roles, but hope it has a bit bit more time left in service in the UK!!
Boeing Jet is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 16:13
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 500
But the J’s not as fast as the A400 according to today’s Daily Mail article ‘Death of Hercules’ which puts its speed at 889 mph!
(Yes, I know I shouldn’t read such a rag)
NRU74 is online now  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 17:02
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 46
Expect the Herc to be gone by 2023 possibly 2025. All work on upgrades has been stopped
Kilonovember52 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 17:18
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 30
The C-17's will do a much better job than the A400's so why not use them?
The...Bird is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 17:21
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: UK
Posts: 131
Madness, Utter madness. Albert was retained for the SF role. A400 and C17 cannot satisfy that role.

Last edited by ExAscoteer2; 27th Feb 2021 at 17:57.
ExAscoteer2 is online now  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 17:31
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Hopefully it doesn't go through and they realise the stupidity and insanity of it.
The...Bird is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 17:34
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 46
I know someone who works within the Herc community at Brize. The expectation there is that the fleet will be chopped probably by 2023 not beyond 25.
Kilonovember52 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 17:42
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,487
Rumours rumours rumours! None of you know the facts. Anybody would think this was a bloody rumour site...
pr00ne is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 18:00
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 904
The A400M is a good strat aircraft but has serious flaws with regard to the Tac environment. It would be a major error to withdraw the C130J before the Atlas has overcome its problems. If it ever does...

Last edited by Ken Scott; 27th Feb 2021 at 20:08.
Ken Scott is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 22:06
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Uranus
Posts: 870
Looks alright to me...

The B Word is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 22:37
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,846
The A400M is a good strat aircraft but has serious flaws with regard to the Tac environment.
Which are?

This is like the old 'J' vs. 'K' bolleaux of PPRuNe many years ago. Only even more absurd.....
BEagle is online now  
Old 28th Feb 2021, 08:01
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,948
Bolleaux indeed; +one to that. C130 might be slightly quieter, but it’s hardly “stealthy”
ShotOne is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2021, 08:13
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 7
To oversimplify, J is a K with knobs on that never got cleared for the full gamut of capabilities that the legacy aircraft could perform. It is still a C-130 with decades of accumulated knowledge and experience to know what it can do, which is a lot! The A400m is a brand new aircraft designed by people who make fantastic airliners - and that is reflected in what happens up front and how well it performs in the bits that look like airliner ops - but the disconnect comes when airdrop or any military specific action is required. This is either because it simply hasn’t been released for use by Airbus yet in the block upgrades - for the sake of avoiding journos scraping things out of context I’ll avoid mentioning specifics - or because it simply hasn’t been tested and introduced as a feature.

There are - as always - two mindsets at work. One which simply assumes this new aircraft should do the same as the old aircraft but with bigger numbers. The second thinks we should reassess what the requirements for a TacAT / SF Support aircraft are, which will save cash in T&E, Training, Aircraft Fatigue etc. The first group - usually operators of previous types - will always slate the second as apologists for when the new aircraft can’t do a particular skill the old one could, but as time and tech progresses, will we need to have our A400M wazzing around at OLF (or even low level other than over the DZ) or dropping a multitude of different store types (of which only a ew ever get used)? The line is there somewhere but in n age where capability doesn’t trump cash and risk aversion is king, my money’s on the 400 being a Strat Airifter with some lite-tac capability as its cheaper and safer.
throwaway1 is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2021, 08:18
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 67
Originally Posted by The B Word View Post

So why does the A400M have a black radome when its peers worldwide seem to paint them in the aircraft colours? Seems odd!
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2021, 08:44
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 904

Looks alright to me...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
There’s a bit more to Tac flying than wazzing down the Mac Loop.

This is probably not the (open) forum for a discussion of the competing capabilities of the types.
Ken Scott is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2021, 10:18
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: east ESSEX
Posts: 3,857
Convert some to Tac 2/3 point tankers.....
sycamore is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2021, 10:51
  #18 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 11,298
The more difficult question is, if money and manpower for new kit requires something (as in a fleet with all costs in support it implies) has to go - what would you chop instead?

Other rumours indicating, of course, as usual, that the Puma fleet and RAF Regiment are also already on the possible chop list.....
ORAC is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2021, 11:32
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 7
Purposefully being controversial: If A400M can carry most of what a C-17 does in terms of physical size and distance, and there are more of them, it might make sense to find savings in the aircraft whose remaining USP could be outsourced to a chartered Antonov on the odd occasion it’s required. This would have the secondary benefit of building up the A400M. I’m sure the what-if brigade will come along citing requirements for an organic outsize airlift capability in the event of situation X but is that any more of a watertight argument than the ones made by the C-130 guys but replace ‘outsize airlift’ with ‘specialist tactical airlift’?
throwaway1 is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2021, 11:38
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Uranus
Posts: 870
Still looks good to me...

The B Word is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.