fltsload Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Officials with the 27th Special Operations Wing at Cannon AFB, N.M., have actviated the 522nd Special Operations Squadron. "We will commit ourselves to excellence, be dedicated and courageous, and we will always, lead the way," said Lt. Col. Paul Pendleton, who took command of the reformed unit, whose history dates back to World War II. The 522nd SOS will be USAF's first unit assigned the MC-130J Combat Shadow II, which is due to begin operations in 2012. The unit's role will be covert infiltration, exfiltration, and resupply of special forces in hostile and denied regions. Pendleton received the unit's laurelled guidon from 27th Special Operations Group acting commander Col. Charles Myers during the April 7 stand-up ceremony. The 522nd, known as the Fireballs, was one of the most decorated air units during World War II. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMPTestFE Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 So, I thought the "infiltrate, exfiltrate, and resupply of special forces in hostile and denied regions" was the realm of the Combat Talon?? Shadows pretty much just refuel, right? Not a prior AFSOC guy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jansen Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Well, that was the old MC-130P Combat Shadow, which was really just a renamed HC-130P. The new MC-130J Combat Shadow II is more in line with the Combat Talons, not sure why they didn't call it the Combat Talon III. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTII Raven Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Well, that was the old MC-130P Combat Shadow, which was really just a renamed HC-130P. The new MC-130J Combat Shadow II is more in line with the Combat Talons, not sure why they didn't call it the Combat Talon III. Because the Talon IIIs are coming later ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jansen Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Because the Talon IIIs are coming later ... Haven't heard anything to support that. Everything I have heard and seen so far says the Combat Shadow II will replace the Combat Talon I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polcat Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 He's referring to the MC-130J Combat Talon III that will replace MC-130H Talon IIs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jansen Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 He's referring to the MC-130J Combat Talon III that will replace MC-130H Talon IIs. Not for another fifteen years or so...the first MC-130H didn't enter service until 1991. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talonlm Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 He's referring to the MC-130J Combat Talon III that will replace MC-130H Talon IIs. More likely than not, the the CT3 will replace the MC-130Es, all of which are 47+ years old. We're good, airframe-wise, for another few years (2015-ish) but we can't go much more than that without big money from AFSOC to extend the life of the Combat Talon. AFSOC has the opportunity to acquire new iron--they'd be foolish to dump that much money into an airplane that will be more than fifty in a few years. T-2s have a lot more 'life' left in them without major rework, so I expect they will be around for quite a while yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jansen Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 More likely than not, the the CT3 will replace the MC-130Es, all of which are 47+ years old. We're good, airframe-wise, for another few years (2015-ish) but we can't go much more than that without big money from AFSOC to extend the life of the Combat Talon. AFSOC has the opportunity to acquire new iron--they'd be foolish to dump that much money into an airplane that will be more than fifty in a few years. T-2s have a lot more 'life' left in them without major rework, so I expect they will be around for quite a while yet. Is there some capability the CT1 has that cannot be filled by the CS2? Previous articles and speeches by AFSOC have indicated that the ten CT1s in service will be replaced by the CS2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
US Herk Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Is there some capability the CT1 has that cannot be filled by the CS2? Previous articles and speeches by AFSOC have indicated that the ten CT1s in service will be replaced by the CS2. CS2 cannot penetrate. CS2 cannot TF limiting ops to VMC low-level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick29 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 It appears General PK Carleton's wish of getting all the enlisteds off the flight deck is finally coming to pass. With the C-17 replacing the C-141 and the J model replacing the older C-130s, the flight engineer is going the way of the horse and buggy. I hate to see that, because the FE is an invaluable resource. When this first started happening, all the pilots I talked to hated it because, at some point, they're not going to be able to turn around and say "hey, engineer, what do you think?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talonlm Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 It appears General PK Carleton's wish of getting all the enlisteds off the flight deck is finally coming to pass. With the C-17 replacing the C-141 and the J model replacing the older C-130s, the flight engineer is going the way of the horse and buggy. I hate to see that, because the FE is an invaluable resource. When this first started happening, all the pilots I talked to hated it because, at some point, they're not going to be able to turn around and say "hey, engineer, what do you think?" Marines are flying their Js with a crew chief up front . . . not that it will make any difference to the AF bean counters. All they see is a supposedly lower price; true capability means little to them. As for the CS2 taking over all the missions of the Combat Talon (no such critter as a Combat Talon 1!), does the CS2 have an ECM suite or TF radar? Be about the only two things lacking I am aware of. If I recall correctly, the radar on the J is capable of TF, but I haven't heard anything about an ECM suite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
US Herk Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 If I recall correctly, the radar on the J is capable of TF, but I haven't heard anything about an ECM suite. No, it cannot. The APN241 cannot multi-task, it can only time share - the only way they can TF is either DTED or no updated picture. And contrary to the AFSOC/CC's multiple comments to the contrary, you can't just "fit a TF card" to an APN241 and make it a TF radar. The APN241, for as great as it is (and it is), is old technology based on the APG65 first fit to F16. There are far more capable off-the-shelf TF radars currently in the inventory.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agarrett Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Is there some capability the CT1 has that cannot be filled by the CS2? Previous articles and speeches by AFSOC have indicated............ I stopped reading right there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talonlm Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 And contrary to the AFSOC/CC's multiple comments to the contrary, you can't just "fit a TF card" to an APN241 and make it a TF radar. That's almost exactly what I remember hearing about the potential for J-model TF radar. So, in addition to the ECM issue, TF is a big question--and neither sounds overly cheap to fix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMPTestFE Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 No, it cannot. The APN241 cannot multi-task, it can only time share - the only way they can TF is either DTED or no updated picture. And contrary to the AFSOC/CC's multiple comments to the contrary, you can't just "fit a TF card" to an APN241 and make it a TF radar. The APN241, for as great as it is (and it is), is old technology based on the APG65 first fit to F16. There are far more capable off-the-shelf TF radars currently in the inventory.... The 241 will TF...very nicely I might add. We were ready to take 0572 into the mountains at night for testing when AFSOC pulled the plug. It merges DTED with the active scan very well, not sure what your source is. TalonOneTF may or may not be able to validate one of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDizzle Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 What about the MC-Ps that have the 241 now? Are they incapapble of TF? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Talon 1 F/E Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 The 241 will TF...very nicely I might add. We were ready to take 0572 into the mountains at night for testing when AFSOC pulled the plug. It merges DTED with the active scan very well, not sure what your source is. TalonOneTF may or may not be able to validate one of us. "Into the mountains at night for testing". What happened to the daylight testing? Even on a proven T1 system the FCF's on the radar were done during day light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straygoose Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 At Clark we did FCF's during daylight hours. Sure would not want to fly into Crow Valley at night with a system flying you a couple hundred feet low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMPTestFE Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 "Into the mountains at night for testing". What happened to the daylight testing? Even on a proven T1 system the FCF's on the radar were done during day light. I was implying that when we were ready for night, mountainous flight, we were finished & satisfied with day testing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMPTestFE Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 What about the MC-Ps that have the 241 now? Are they incapapble of TF? They are until AFSOC gives them the software/hardware mods, plus the training involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
US Herk Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 The 241 will TF...very nicely I might add. We were ready to take 0572 into the mountains at night for testing when AFSOC pulled the plug. It merges DTED with the active scan very well, not sure what your source is. TalonOneTF may or may not be able to validate one of us. First, it is not a "stock" APN241. It is a highly modified "system" - The APN241 cannot multi-task, that was my point. That's why the Combat Talon and Combat Talon II have TWO radars. Without going phased array, you cannot multi-task. Everyone I know who actually flew the AMP/241 TF eventually liked it, but there were lots of caveats - storage is an issue, DTED resolution is an issue, getting off planned route is an issue - too many limitations when you go blended. It's a great solution for what it is, a partial solution, or part of a package of systems. Phased array is where it's at if you only want one radar though. More expensive, but you have fewer moving parts, fewer overall components, higher reliability, and more capability. The real beauty of the 241 is logistics. It shortens the logsitics tail significantly for the common components. It's an outstanding radar. But I wouldn't want to put all my eggs in one basket like that...and DTED. What about the MC-Ps that have the 241 now? Are they incapapble of TF? They have a plain old ordinary APN241, just like the H3s (and some H2s). They cannot TF. They do NVG low-level with radar ground mapping...just like the MC-P without the 241. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMPTestFE Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 True, it's not stock at all. From what I learned talking with the radar engineers at Boeing, they were able to improve on the system quite abit since our last test flight. I don't know specifics, so I'd have to refer to those guys. All I know is, that towards the end of flight test, we were having way better luck with the system than the few flights I had on the legacy system at Duke. I certainly agree with your logistics comment too! Actually, during flight test, DTED seemed to be more...consistent. I'm sure, just like most anything, it'd take time to grow to trust something like that out in the weather & mountains at 250'. MC-Ws have the same plain 241 too. I kinda figured they'd be the first to use the TF capability, but I guess I'm wrong...again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTII Raven Posted April 16, 2011 Share Posted April 16, 2011 "The 241 will TF...very nicely I might add. We were ready to take 0572 into the mountains at night for testing when AFSOC pulled the plug. It merges DTED with the active scan very well, not sure what your source is. TalonOneTF may or may not be able to validate one of us. " Try it in weather ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTII Raven Posted April 16, 2011 Share Posted April 16, 2011 MC-Ws have the same plain 241 too. I kinda figured they'd be the first to use the TF capability, but I guess I'm wrong...again.They were to be the first with MCTF, till the decision to change essentially the entire 130 fleet to J's was made. 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.