bobdaley Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Other places have said Elmendorf will lose 4, I think 19 is a misprint as they only have 12 now. Special ops to WV, probably not AFSOC does not want to give up anything. 5 SOS MC-130P AFRC is gone and 711 SOS MC-130E is going. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Railrunner130 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 When I first read Dave's statement about CRW going Spec Ops, the first thing I thought of was maybe they're trying to get their 88's back!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave in WV Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 What I heard was a request for the 130th to be considered for conversion to spec ops but nothing was said about the 88's. The guys I know that crewed the 88's and the H3's they have now wish they still had the 88's. Hard to belive the 88's are coming up on 23 years old! (We got them in '89) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wysongj Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Good thing for Charlie West is one of their birds went to AMP, maybe they just won't get it back leaving eight in WV, not seven? Sad to see good units like St. Joe and Dallas loosing their birds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wysongj Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 That's 125 C-130's moving around (that's my quick horrible math, so it might be off). Does that make since? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wysongj Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Just read that St. Joe is suppose to get the H3's from Minneapolis. http://www.139aw.ang.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123288785 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fltsload Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Here is the break out for all aircraft. http://www.afa.org/PresidentsCorner/WashingtonPerspective/2012/State%20Impacts%20-%20Overall_V7.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdaley Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Does MSP AFRC have H2.5's or H3's? Is the 136 AS NY ANG or 328AS AFRC closing. Why park the H2's and keep the H1's? Because the H1's have new center wings? Thanks Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llecrupwt Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 MSP has 92 year group H3's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdaley Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Some of the 92's were H2's some H2.5 and some H3's and I can't find the list I had of the tail numbers. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHeflin Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 There was an article from a DFW newspaper, written several weeks ago, which was posted in the Early Bird discussing the move of the TANG Hercs up to Great Falls. Apparently (according to the article) prior to the move hangers and other buildings would have to be constructed before aircraft could be sent up and bedded down. Also, the AF did not intend to transfer crews, so new ones would have to be trained up. WTF! Again according to the article, the cost of this move would equate to keeping 2 Army Brigades functioning in garrison for 10 years. Good thing the AF is trying not to waste money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdaley Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) Of all the things in the latest let's rape the Guard and Reserve Program, moving the TX ANG Herks to Montana makes the least sense of all. The TX ANG has all new facilities at Carswell after being forced to move from Hensley Field. It will cost a bundle to build these again in Montana. A huge loss of jobs in Fort Worth. With the second largest Congressional delagation in DC being from Texas (about 34 I think) and Montana with only one congessman. What gives? By the way I looked up ANG and AFRC C-130 Squadrons. After the latest rape: The AFRC will have 8 C-130 Squadrons. They used to have 32. The following closed or transitioned out of Herks: 5 SOS, 63AS, 64AS, 67AS, 68AS, 96AS, 303AS, 303RQS, 304AS, 304 RQS, 305RQS, 314AS, 327AS, 336AS, 337AS, 356AS, 357AS, 704AS, 705AS, 706AS, 711SOS, 756AS, 758AS, 815AS The ANG will have 20 C-130 Squadrons. They used to have 34. The ANG did better than the AFRC because almost all transitioned rather than being closed. The following closed or transitioned all AS: 105, 133, 135, 136, 155, 164, 167, 171, 181, 183, 185, 189, 195, 204 Bob Edited March 5, 2012 by bobdaley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTII Raven Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 MSP has 92 year group H3's. Which they got from Niagara, when they swapped their H2s to be common with the ANG unit. Niagara got the MSP H2s plus four more from Nashville, which it looks like they are now losing ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTII Raven Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 This is from the AFA. Fiscal 2013 Actions: Eliminate 19 C-130H2s from JB Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, along with an active association there; remove three -H2s from Niagara, N.Y., and end a Reserve association there; remove 10 -H2.5s from Rosecrans AGS, Mo., six -H2s from Youngstown-Warren, Ohio, one -H2.5 from Louisville, Ky., one -H3 from Charleston, W.V., one -H2.5 from Cheyenne, Wyo., four -H2s from Stratton AGS, N.Y., seven -H2s from Dobbins ARB, Ga., and seven -H2s from Pittsburgh, Pa., resulting in the closure of the associated Air Reserve Station there. Fiscal 2014 Actions: Remove seven C-130Hs from Maxwell AFB, Ala.; eight -H2s from NAS JRB Ft. Worth, Tex.; and eight -H3s from Minneapolis-St. Paul. Also remove 10 C-130Js from Keesler AFB, Miss. Fiscal 2016 Actions: Remove eight C-130H2s from Savannah, Ga., and eight -H3s from the active component at Little Rock, Ark. Fiscal 2017 Actions: Remove eight C-130H2s from Niagara, N.Y., three -H2s from the Reserve component and six H3s from the active component at Little Rock and two -H3s from Charlotte, N.C. Cheyenne gets rid of their lone 2.5 get a H3 in return so they will have 12 H3s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C130Hcc Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Charlotte already lost two H3s to other guard units a few years ago. As Bob said, they are also slated to lose two more in 2017. If there are any decent people left in state government they need to be contacted, also your federal congress critters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry myers Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 An article in this weeks Dayton Daily News stated the AF has decided to retain 24 C-130s that were slated for removal from service to satisfy upcoming budget constraints. This winning effort was a result of state governors lobbying efforts. My observation is that when all is said and done the final numbers will little resemble the orginial purposal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Railrunner130 Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 Yeah. I'm not sure what to make of it all. I think AF Magazine had a comment in there that the governors still weren't happy. While it seemed like Texas had a good campaign going to save them from giving their planes to Montana, it sounds like a dead issue now. I don't know if they won or not. I wonder if they're trying to save the A-10s now too. I don't think anyone wants to save the C-5A and the Guard would certainly benefit from the C-17 for disaster relief efforts. We were told recently that our 84's were now scheduled to go to DM and that we'd get newer airplanes. I haven't seen anything in writing about it. I wonder if saving these 24 prevents that from happening. Even if you figure in the Aircat data, these airplanes still have a good, long, useful life left ahead of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdaley Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Seems another strictly political move. It reaches new heights of silliness when they are talking about buying 24 new J models for 3 ANG units. TX is waging a good campaign to keep the herks rather than sent them to MT. It seems a big waste of money and people to move them. If they are going to give 24 Herks to the ANG, If the numbers they used to justify the last force structure cuts are correct, I personally think they ought to just take the aircraft from AFRC and give them to ANG. I don't think any of this is justified except on the basis each state saying we want the jobs and the money. This may all go away after the election. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave in WV Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 It looks like the Governors and Congress are bucking the AF's plan to gut the reserves and especially the ANG. Nothing against the AD but it costs less to operate a reserve unit than an AD one. Getting rid of reservists to keep AD troops is not a cost cutting move. 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.