hehe

No problem man, glad to see it was an easy fix

are you asking for TC-130 or C-130T?

There are huge cannon plug disconnects for echs that kill entire sides. look forward of booster reservoir and aft near the ring sections where aircraft is extended. most likely one of those is loose

use tail support stand (milk stool), thats what it is for

Depends on which TC-130 you are talking about. Some were modified to be EC-130's and then had the equipment removed for EC mission but still had the EC-130 exterior (drag/flight characteristics). Essentially was just used to keep currency for pilots without putting hours on the EC-130. What tail number are you specifically asking about?

Send me a PM, I can give you the lead engineer's information at Robins. They are VERY familiar with the ins and outs of why your fleet is grounded and who you need to talk to.

The reason that the C-130T crashed IS known. USAF and Navy engineers already know this. Recently received a brief on it, not going to discuss here, until it's publicly released. The USAF did not ground because they CHOSE not to after looking at the risk levels. Anyone that went to 2018 PIWG at Robins can tell you this same information and more if they want to.

send me a PM. I have an excel product that breaks it down. engine wise, the only difference is -15 for air force and -16 for Navy (very very very small difference)

I dont know what article you are initially referring to but the air national guard is about to get alot of Js, Active duty only has 3 bases with legacy left and they are all special mission aircraft that are already funded to be replaced. Moffett ANG, Patrick ANG, and New York ANG are next in line for HC-130J since alaska has received theirs. I can really dig and tell you exactly who is next in line, if you want.

Baltimore is most likely and what was projected a few years back. They were first J unit in Air Force and were supposed to get them back but A-10 not retiring has held that up.

sent you a message sonny.

Sorry to hear it, he was a wealth of knowledge and always helpful.

If it was Tim, he lent me his copies. Thanks though.

Yes, I bought up all the ones I could find online. Would be interested in buying scanned copy of your book as well.

I am collecting these because I will be starting the production list back up. So far I have around 6 versions of Lars' book but want to get as many as possible (hopefully every revision) so I can make a good version that will do his book justice. Ive contacted Lockheed for inputs and have access to all US tails numbers (old, new and future). Any and all inputs are welcome. Expect a book in the next couple months.

looking to buy YOUR copy of Lars' book. Started collecting them, message me or post what version you have, odds are very high that I will buy it if I dont have that revision. Thanks

What model? Without knowing this, this is all I can give you for now. I'm assuming, from your post, that the reservoir level is fine on the ground with the engines running. If that is true, I would change the system filters for Utility (case drain, pressure and vent). If this changes nothing, check accumulators. Are you having to service accumulator pre-charges often for normal brakes or utility system accumulators? If nothing changes from there, I would need to know what model. Depending on the year, you could have things like case drain relief valves, runaround circuits, suction boost runarounds, etc. Let me know what model and I can help you out.

http://www.janes.com/article/71363/belgium-grounds-c-130s-over-safety-concerns

Mechanically, make sure that the rudder pedals and set in a midway position (not fully aft). Look for this condition: "If control wheel is held fully counterclockwise with a force of 40 pounds or more and rudder pedals are adjusted to full aft, there may be contact between aileron tension regulator lever and rudder pedal adjustment lever. This contact is not a binding condition and is a result of stretching the aileron control cables. A problem does not exist unless full aileron travel cannot be achieved or the affected parts become dam-aged and need to be replaced." Hydraulically look for this: You need to look into your return system. The only way all flight controls are linked is through pressure and return. The fact that pilots/and yourself did not mention issues with pressure, it is safe to assume the issue lies in the return. First, change all return/case drain filters and vent filters in booster and utility. Second, if problem is not solved, check the return line check valves for the packs. If you have bad return check valve(s), the pressure leaving packs through the return can flow back into the other packs. For example, with a failed aft boostpack return check valve, the aileron return pressure can back flow into the rudder/elevator. Third, change the filters in the packs themselves (aileron,rudder, elevator). If you still have issues, start isolating packs. It's possible that you have failed pack(s) that are dumping too much return pressure back into the return line. For example, an elevator boostpack bypass that is dumping too much back to return can effectively turn the return line into a pressure line. This overpowers the normal return fluid that wants to come out of the packs when they are moved and will essentially bind them up. Similiar to how the pack would feel if you tried moving it with the return lines capped off. Start by turning off elevator. The fact that the elevator required more input to move, makes me think you have a bypassing actuator or an incorrectly setup bypass that is dumping off too much pressure back to return. Hope this helps. 1C-130H-1 224.pdf

http://www.aeroresearchcds.com/book_shelf.htm

I'm assuming you have exhausted the FI for the associated faults? What are loads on TR's? What part number generators are you using? There are two different C-130J generators. Have you recently completed any heavy maintenance or are these pilot reported from a flight? Foreign J? USAF?

If you use Lockheed's SMP manuals, can you contact me. I need a reference out of them or access to them if possible. Thanks

Not sure what model you have or what avionics suite but.....does your aircraft have two batteries? Most US models have a main utility battery and a second avionics battery (usually called SCNS battery). If you have two, swap them to get a good battery in main location. Are you having issues with voltage on both batteries?

I don't remember the reference off the top of my head but I remeber there being a cutoff voltage for battery replacement. It was something like if battery is found below 22 volts, replace battery. Can only recharge if it was above 22 volts if I remember correctly. I would imagine that the battery is toast at 7 volts anyway and should be replaced, most electronics on the aircraft need a minimum of 18 volts to operate.

If we assume that one switch has failed, there are two ways to look at it. IF one flap has stopped moving completely AND has a failed switch, the other flap will continue to operate until it gets to the set position of the flap handle. IF both flaps are still moving, just not in asymmetry AND have a failed switch, they will stop at the next set of switches. A left wing switch and a right wing switch MUST activate in series to energize the flap emergency brake valve and hydraulically set the asymmetry brakes. The flap torque tube moves 32 revolutions per 1 revolution of the asymmetry switch cam. So under normal setting of the asymmetry brakes, 3-5 percent difference in flaps is approximately 10 revolutions of the flap torque tube. Under the condition that both flaps are moving just not in symmetry and you have a failed switch, the flaps would rotate to next set of switches. So they would get 6-10 percent difference before setting. If you look at the diagram I posted, imagine a flap torque tube snaps on one side exactly where the diagram is drawn. There is no way ever that the asymmetry system could set if it had a failed switch because the power must pass through to the other set of switches. Hope that helps