fenmonster Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 There is a nav on the HC and MC J he is the combat systems operator they are talking about. Sorry about that. I was typing from my outdate, E-model slick "knowlage" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APG85 Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Any reason why this plane is designated an HC-130J and not an HC-130N or P or something else. Why does it retain the J designation. I'm sure there's a reason for not giving it a new letter. Will everything built on the J airframe keep the J letter at the end? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talon2test Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 [ATTACH]1074[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]1075[/ATTACH] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalbasher Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 No profile shots by chance do you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3_Super_Bee Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Any reason why this plane is designated an HC-130J and not an HC-130N or P or something else. Why does it retain the J designation. I'm sure there's a reason for not giving it a new letter. Will everything built on the J airframe keep the J letter at the end? How many HC-130N's or P's you see running around with glass cockpits, FADEC engines, and 6 bladed props, as well as a host of other things the N/Ps don't have. Because the "J" is a "J" and nothing else. Nothing has changed on the aircraft to change the "J" designation. Only mission set-up has changed thus, C-130J to HC-130J or MC-130J. Later on down the road when the "J's" start getting major upgrades to mission suites then the "J" designation might change. Take the EP-3... The first ones were EP-3A's base on you guessed it P-3A's, then came EP-3B, base on once again you are correct P-3B's..... The EP-3E was also base upon the P-3A, BUT, it was the 5th version of the EP... but you ask why are there no EP-3C's(Japan has them, but they don't count they are on their own program), or EP-3D's? Because they're are, but exist only on paper. Now you might ask, but there are EP-3E's also based on the P-3C... The Alpha "echos" are ARIES aircraft, and the Charlie "Echos" are ARIES II. And here ARIES gets capitalized because its an acronym for "Airborne Reconnaissance Integrated Electronic System" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Wilson Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Any reason why this plane is designated an HC-130J and not an HC-130N or P or something else. Why does it retain the J designation. I'm sure there's a reason for not giving it a new letter. Will everything built on the J airframe keep the J letter at the end? Yep, in 99.9% of the cases regardless of mod will end in J for J model. You reference humpy’s, so I will address them, especially since they are pretty much the ONLY E model herks that aren’t E models. Normally all your herks are built off the base cargo version (i.e. C-130) and any changes will be reflected with a special mission designator like the H in HC-130P (Rescue) but the P and N models specifically were built as P and N (and HC-130H) models out of the factory, compared to the E models rolling out of the factory there were some big differences on the humpy’s. They had a different wing than the other herks up to that time, different wings (what would later be the H model wing I think), structural airframe components for the gear are bigger than E models, (this is because the HC was designed to operated 20% of its programmed life at 175,000 lbs as opposed to 155,000 for the E model), the heavy square window paratroop doors and square scanners windows, as well as other changes my thumping head cant recall right now. In 74 the Factory started the trash hauler (core model) H line (H, H1, H2, H2.5, H3), and all the new birds that came out designated as H models are still H models regardless of mission equipment installed, like the Talon 2’s, converted from H2’s are still H2’s (even with all the smack they put in). The only exception that I can think of is the U model gunboat, as far as I know they changed the core designation to U from H since they already had a squadron of H1 model gunships. There was such a huge difference between the two with installed equipment, type guns installed etc. that they redesigned the core airframe as a U, I guess it was to prevent confusion between the two different airplanes since they both have different capabilities. You will note that the HC-130H were all changed to the core designation of N model (or was it H to P, I cant remember) back in the early 90’s, and further on the MC-130N models were redesignated MC-130P’s. The H to N was pretty much a necessity to avoid confusion since Lockheed decided to build different H models in the 70’s even though they built H models in the 60’s. AFSOC redesignated the N models to P models pretty much as just a consolidation thing. I am sure what I screwed up here will be jumped on by our fellow board members LOL Hope this helped Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casey Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 MC-130W, again there was already an MC-130H. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Wilson Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 Oops, forgot about the Combat Wombat:D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APG85 Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 Thanks Dan. The P-3 stuff had me all screwed up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3_Super_Bee Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 I am sure what I screwed up here will be jumped on by our fellow board members LOL Dan I think you hit the nail as square on the head as you can with this. It can be confusing. They come up with the designation thing back in the early 60's to help stop all the confusion in designations, but here we are 40 some odd years later and its all jumbled up again. Thanks Dan. The P-3 stuff had me all screwed up Sorry about that. I knew the answer, but didn't cross the P-3s in the C-130 world very well there. You don't even want to go down the P-3 designation road either it is to say the least, jacked-up big time, and that's being nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meh130 Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I think all of the original HC-130s for the Air Force were built as HC-130Hs, and then when they put the Fulton STAR on them they changed the designation to HC-130P. The HC-130N were built later and did not have the Fulton nose. The change in designation might have been for air refueling, as the original HC-130Hs were not helicopter refuelers, they were aerial search and command and control platforms. AFSOC had both HC-130Ps and HC-130Ns, but they changed the designation of all to MC-130P with the SOFI mod. All of the Rescue HC-130Ps have had the nose modified to an "N" nose to accommodate the APN-241 radar, but I do not know if they changed the designation. The HC-130H2 and HC-130H3s in the Guard have a designation something like "HC-130(H)N" and "HC-130(K)N" I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meh130 Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 ... the heavy square window paratroop doors and square scanners windows The square windows came with the HC-130Ns, which were built as refuelers from the start. The HCs which were built as HC-130Hs and later modified to refuel had the regular round windows. When I was in the 71RQS we had no birds with square windows. The loadmaster had to open the troop door during refueling to pass signals to the helo. I think they modified these airplanes later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 When the MC-130Es were first modified by LAS-Ontario for pods, the paratroop doors were locally modified (lots of structural beef-up) for the square windows and were heavy. Later, new doors were purchased and installed that were designed and built for the square windows, and were considerably lighter. The old modified doors may not have been scrapped, and may have wound up as a substitute part number.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Wilson Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I think all of the original HC-130s for the Air Force were built as HC-130Hs, and then when they put the Fulton STAR on them they changed the designation to HC-130P. The HC-130N were built later and did not have the Fulton nose. The change in designation might have been for air refueling, as the original HC-130Hs were not helicopter refuelers, they were aerial search and command and control platforms. AFSOC had both HC-130Ps and HC-130Ns, but they changed the designation of all to MC-130P with the SOFI mod. All of the Rescue HC-130Ps have had the nose modified to an "N" nose to accommodate the APN-241 radar, but I do not know if they changed the designation. The HC-130H2 and HC-130H3s in the Guard have a designation something like "HC-130(H)N" and "HC-130(K)N" I think. Uh, hmmm, err, well, err hmmmmmYour right! I cant keep the sequence of mods right in my brain anymore so Thank you for the correction. Actually the re-designation was done for a simpler reason (or more complex, depending on how you look at it) The HC-P/N were changed over to MC-P's so we could draw on the black money available (SOCOM type funding) instead of having to rely on blue money (normal USAF funding); SOFI mod didn't directly cause the designation change. The square windows came with the HC-130Ns, which were built as refuelers from the start. The HCs which were built as HC-130Hs and later modified to refuel had the regular round windows. When I was in the 71RQS we had no birds with square windows. The loadmaster had to open the troop door during refueling to pass signals to the helo. I think they modified these airplanes later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Sorry for the quality, didn't realize the camera was set on "crappy" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APG85 Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 No forward scanner windows...on a Rescue bird? I would think that would have been a requirement... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmat Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 No big thing. The early CG SC-130Bs, which became HC-130Bs did have the forward cargo doors and did not have scanner windows. But you are right about the AF HC-130s. Best wishes, Grant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APG85 Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 I was in Rescue for 7 years (67th ARRS - RAF Woodbridge) and we used the scanner windows constantly. Unless the mission has changed over the years, they were critical to many CSAR missions... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Wilson Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Yep, we know the scanners windows are important to the mission, and Lockheed knows the scanners windows are important to the CSAR mission. Thats why I fully expect Lockwasher to suggest a mod to put them in - post production for a uhem modest fee!!:mad: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APG85 Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 The mod to put them into 62-1863 was extensive and required a huge beef-up doubler on the exterior of the aircraft. I guess engineering requirements have changed since the 1960's when the scanner windows were installed in the HC-130 fleet (originally done on the factory floor without "battleship" plating on the fuselage). Maybe it was the age of a 1962 model that called for it...I'm no engineer.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yawdamper Posted May 29, 2010 Share Posted May 29, 2010 The mod to put them into 62-1863 was extensive and required a huge beef-up doubler on the exterior of the aircraft. I guess engineering requirements have changed since the 1960's when the scanner windows were installed in the HC-130 fleet (originally done on the factory floor without "battleship" plating on the fuselage). Maybe it was the age of a 1962 model that called for it...I'm no engineer.... All of the production scanner windows have a doubler also, their just internal to the skin. Post production is always more difficult than working with a clean sheet. The existing portholes and their structure, existing fastener patterns and always the budget. A flush internal doubler could be added but you have to change all the ring segments, dimple the skin, internal doubler and new ring segments and get it to work at a butt joint. It can be done, but to afford it you may have to do the work overseas, New Zealand sounds good, I might volunteer for that one, but there goes the budget again. Here's to in production return of the scanner window! Coast Guard might like that also. While we're there lets just thicken the skin to .070 so we can get rid of the dimples and put in simple countersinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APG85 Posted May 29, 2010 Share Posted May 29, 2010 I don't recall a large doubler on the interior, but it makes sense. Then again, it's been a long time (1992) since I ripped the insulation back in that area on an HC-130N or P Model. Still can't understand why scanner windows weren't part of the basic production contract for these new planes. I think the crews will really miss them. Just my opinion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyclark Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 We aren't experiencing any cracks on the HC-130P, but then again, I don't think we pressurize that high on a continued basis. Square angles are not good, grasshopper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Hopefully ACC/AFSOC will get smart and utilize the same set up as the WC-130J's. The forward escape hatches can be modified/produced with the square troop door window instead of the port hole style window. This is an easy mod that doesn't require structural changes to the fuselage. These first two airplanes are also just a "beginner" version until all of the OT is done. They are really just a modified KC-130J for the most part. I imagine there will be changes made as OT progresses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yawdamper Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 A beginning yes, simply a modified KC, some may argue. Add ECHS, UARRSI, FLIR, 60/90 and everything that makes those systems work. Try taking a KC to a MOD facility and telling them any of those additions are a simple mod. There is more to come and I look forward to seeing these planes grow and become the instruments that make a difference and save lives. "So That Others May Live" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.