External Tanks on C-130J

[Guest]

Most photos I have seen of the J-model are without external tanks, but I have seen at least one J-model photo with externals (may have been a Brit).

Is there a standard configuration, or is it by customer request?

[loadsmith]

greetings....as far as I know the only folks with the external tanks are the Hurricane Hunter folks and the Harrisburg(193d) folks. Not really certain about the foreign AFs and none of ours at LR have any. Hope this helps.

[Guest]

1. Is the basic J configured for field installation of external tanks?

2. If so, can the standard E/H externals be used on the J?

[Railrunner130]

I imagine the J model has the same four external hard points as most Herks have. I think the tankers have a slightly different set up though.

[Herkeng130]

The Italians have externals on their Js (At least the ones they deployed to Afghanistan had them fitted)

[Guest]

The Italian may have been the one in the picture I saw. It was a J-model with Aerial Refueling pods, external tanks, and was doing a FARP with helicopters. That is the only J-model that I have seen with external tanks.

Check out the picture in this Lockheed Martin C-130J brochure:

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/corporate/press-kit/C-130J-Brochure.pdf

[dagebow]

The J\'s are wired for externals and the hard points excist as per the H wings, but due to the engines being more economical, thus increasing the range of the aircraft, most air forces have opted not to use the external tanks. I believe (recalling my J training)the E/H tanks can be fitted but different wiring and probes would be required for the tanks as the J\'s fuel indication system is different to the E/H system.

[mc130fe]

KC-130J are also using external tanks. I know the future AF tanker version will have tanks too.

[Dan Wilson]

TalonOneTF wrote:

Most photos I have seen of the J-model are without external tanks, but I have seen at least one J-model photo with externals (may have been a Brit).

Is there a standard configuration, or is it by customer request?

The tanker you are looking at FARP\'ing in the brochure is a USMC KC-130J

Dan

[Lkuest]

I heard a rumor that because of the increased wind resistance, weight, and the resulting increase in fuel needed to maintain airspeed, the external tanks on the J-model increased the potential maximum flight time by only one hour. Just a rumor. It didn\'t make much sense to me, but I would imagine it wouldn\'t help much considering the range of a J-model without tanks.

The E and H models retain the externals for other reasons. It\'s an effective counterbalance that reduces stress on the wings in flight. Even though they are rarely used in most situations, they actually help reduce wing fatigue.

[n1dp]

Coast Guard HC-130Js; three airframes have had \"H\" externals installed. The work cards called for GTF-6 Fuel quantity tester to be used. We worked on prototyping the USCG Maintenance Procedure Cards for that system. The GTF-6 connects to a box in the \"hayloft\" that takes all the analog fuel quantity inputs and coverts to a digital signal(s) to be sent though the magical data bus, on to the land of the two man flight station (via fail-safe mission computers?). No need to send data to the SPR panel.

As far as performance; I have \"heard\" that low level performance was not as good as expected with the externals. Low level is where the CG earns much of its fight pay. I think the 23 hour endurance mentioned in some Lockheed briefs was for point A-B?

[stevoe]

Most of the Italian C-130J have the externals, and something more...

http://www.airfighters.com/photo_15347.details.large

[RZHill]

HMMMM as the externals provide a down force on the wings to help with loading, are the \"j\"\'s gonna have wing problems such as we had in the 80\'s?

Or is it to keep flying time down to crew duty day as it would be hard to get 4 Zero\'s in the cockpit at one time.

RZ

[Dan Wilson]

Even though they are rarely used in most situations

Dunno, I always preferred to use the externals over the aux tanks.

But then again my last 11 years were with the MC-P\'s and or HC\'s so we normally had fuel in all the tanks.

RZ, I would almost guarantee they start to have outer wing cracks in a couple of years. What they should have done to prevent that was to put in the purchase contract that any repairs due to Lockheed\'s known engineering failures CANNOT be repaired at government expense and Lockheed must foot the bill.

Bet you would have seen new outer wing and center wing designs then!(but then again those general officers wouldn\'t have gotten those multi million dollar \"consulting\" jobs).

Dan

[bobdaley]

As I understand it the USCG is using external tanks off 1600 series H models now parked.

Bob

[US Herk]

I believe the J has slightly re-designed CWB (I think some H3 have it too) using some of the upgrades of the SOF CWB. Don\'t know what the EBH limit is on the newer ones (SOF is 85K).

Here at WR-ALC last week & this helping train them on T2 - saw 0011 in the jig getting ready to pull CWB with new one sitting next to it - apparently was delivered two weeks ago. Good to see first T2 getting a box (1212 doesn\'t count!)

EDIT: \'92 & up do have strengthened CWB, but EBH limit is still the same. Current production J-models will be getting SOF-style CWB with increased EBH starting next year...

...this from the CWB bubbas here at WR-ALC today.

[duckhunter04]

In the Coast Guard we have 6 J\'s and I think 3 of them have externals on them now (not 100% sure of #). We took them off 3 of our planes we got rid of. From what my J buddys say, the J is plumbed and wired for Ext and refueling pods from the line. But they do use the same Ext.

[US Herk]

Something else to consider - the J was originally delivered w/o externals due to having the same, or increased range as a classic w/o them. This, however, was based on being able to climb to their optimum cruise altitude which is in the upper FL300s. ATC won\'t let them up there because they\'re too slow to mix it up with the airlines. Even the low FL300s are usually unobtainable due to short-range airline & mil-jet traffic.

When kept below FL300, they end up burning more fuel & not realizing the speed increases they are capable of. The RAF\'s standard Lyneham-to-Akrotiri run is almost a wash J v K - the J does have the edge, but not by much...

[CGRetired]

Of the 6 Js the CG has, only 2 have the tanks. They were put together from pieces parts, reworked and rewired. We are planning on putting tanks on all the Js if the $$ comes through. Yes, the range down low where we work is not as great as advertised, that\'s why the tanks are coming. We also modded the flight deck for 5 seats! The FE is now a FM, Flight Mech. Hallaluyah!

[AMPTestFE]

That was probably a Marine tanker.

[PerfManJ]

External tanks are not included in in the baseline configuration for slick Js. The KC-130J and new HC/MC-130J models come equipped with external tanks and air-refueling pods.

All J models can be equipped with external tanks, but most operators choose not to use them. The improved fuel efficiency of the J model eliminates the need for the extra fuel capacity of the external tanks for most missions. Removing the external tanks reduces the aircraft empty weight, which translates to either increased payload capacity or fuel savings, and reduces airframe drag, which also yields fuel savings.

On the other hand, the external tanks relieve bending at the wing-root when in flight. This reduces wing fatigue over time, but I'm not sure of the long-term impact (there are many factors in determining wing life). As with most things in aviation, its a trade-off.