Jump to content

C-130J Program History


PerfManJ
 Share

Recommended Posts

I came across this article the other day from the May 2013 edition of Combat Aircraft magazine. It is part 1 of 2 on the C-130J program. Lots of good info on the development program and all the upgrades since then.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/142174301/Kaminsi-T-May-2013-Super-Hercules-Part-One-C-130J-Development-and-USAF-Service-Combat-Aircraft-Vol-14-No-5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll agree that it will be interesting to see how Lockheed does for SeaHerc sales. I think the P-8 is paving the way for the next generation. I'm also eager to see if anyone buys the commercial J. I think the market is out there but will the price tag be reasonable and the operating expenses favorable? Time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The P-8 was an interesting choice for the mission. Swept wing jets can go higher and faster, but the maritime mission is all about radius and time-on-station/loiter. A straight-wing turboprop aircraft has advantages low-and-slow.

As for the civil J, that has been discussed since the J program started. The original J was FAA certified but that configuration was never produced. With all the changes and upgrades over the years, it will be a significant effort to update the cert. Then again, the L-100s in service are going to need to be replaced at some point and there isn't really another airframe out there with the same capabilities, until Embraer's KC-390 comes along. LM has to decide if the market is there to justify the cost. In the meantime, the civil version of KC-390 could pull the rug out from under them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also eager to see if anyone buys the commercial J. I think the market is out there but will the price tag be reasonable and the operating expenses favorable? Time will tell.

Currently, the price tag doesn't make this a viable option...that and certification issues.

As for the civil J, that has been discussed since the J program started. The original J was FAA certified but that configuration was never produced. With all the changes and upgrades over the years, it will be a significant effort to update the cert. Then again, the L-100s in service are going to need to be replaced at some point and there isn't really another airframe out there with the same capabilities, until Embraer's KC-390 comes along. LM has to decide if the market is there to justify the cost.

Lynden is going to be the last L100/L382 operator - they're the only ones replacing CWB. Lockheed approached Lynden a few years ago about the J, but the price wasn't going to be viable. Lynden has also looked into C17. When it comes to niche transport, Lynden is about as varied as it gets. Lynden International is about 25 different transport companies from trucking, rail, hovercraft, specialized shipping, littoral, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lynden is going to be the last L100/L382 operator - they're the only ones replacing CWB.

Ernie,

I think Tepper Aviation has also replaced their CWB's, as has Prescott Support. There are 3 others operating 3 L-100-30's that Lockheed says were never built. I can't recall the msn's right now. I don't know what their CWB status is though.

I think your point, though, is that Lynden is the last actual US commercial airline to operate the L-100. Just had to pick that nit.

Don R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it would be expensive for the certification on a L-100J, but it was done once already. 70 airframes is 3 years of production and a 21% increase in total orders for the J, based on the current order book of 330. With the belt-tightening in the defense sector, it seems like a good hedge.

My point earlier was that there is also no competition for an L-100J - nothing else out there can do that mission. But Embraer is partnering with Boeing and plans to offer a stretch civilian model of the KC-390, which is sized EXACTLY to compete with the C-130. Now is the time for LM to undercut them by getting to market first. Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ernie,

I think Tepper Aviation has also replaced their CWB's, as has Prescott Support. There are 3 others operating 3 L-100-30's that Lockheed says were never built. I can't recall the msn's right now. I don't know what their CWB status is though.

I think your point, though, is that Lynden is the last actual US commercial airline to operate the L-100. Just had to pick that nit.

Don R.

Don,

I'm not sure Tepper has...I can find out easily enough, I think. ;) Prescott might've done their one plane...and there is a linkage. I know the other 'major' commercial operators like Safair and Transafrik haven't and aren't. Lynden is certainly the only part 121 operator and as such, keeps their planes very well maintained.

I know it would be expensive for the certification on a L-100J, but it was done once already. 70 airframes is 3 years of production and a 21% increase in total orders for the J, based on the current order book of 330. With the belt-tightening in the defense sector, it seems like a good hedge.

My point earlier was that there is also no competition for an L-100J - nothing else out there can do that mission. But Embraer is partnering with Boeing and plans to offer a stretch civilian model of the KC-390, which is sized EXACTLY to compete with the C-130. Now is the time for LM to undercut them by getting to market first. Just my two cents.

The challenge isn't just the cost of the certification and planes, it's the viability of squeezing any money out in the supplemental part 121 world and making them pay for themselves. The most expensive plane in the world is viable if the market supports the costs, and while there is money to be made in the niche airlift world, even the supplemental part 121 portion of that market (which is tiny indeed), it requires relatively low overhead. Lynden paid a ridiculously low price for the last plane they purchased, N407LC. I know they owner has talked with Lockheed about the J-model extensively, but the margin just isn't there right now. Who knows what tomorrow brings.

As for performance, the 3.5 engines, EVH, & 8-bladed props, if they can ever get STCed, will provide performance very close to that of the J for a tiny fraction of the price while saving fuel. I think Lynden would go that route over a J, as would most operators. It's all about keeping the overhead costs low.

All that said, if you had a company and could ink the correct long-term contract, a J might be a wise investment...I'm just not certain the performance difference justifies the cost difference right now. The flip side is there are few L100s in good enough shape to pursue any real business with, so perhaps that's the angle for the J. Just hope they don't price themselves out of the market...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When LM produced the L-100 back in the 60s, there was a huge market for it in oil field exploration/constuction projects and other such programs that required large amounts of equipment being hauled into very remote locations, that had minimal material handling equipment (MHE). Flash forward to 2013 and that market isn't nearly as large, the world is a lot smaller place and the availability of outsize airlift by low cost, Eastern bloc aircraft and crews has turned the once mighty commercial Herc into a niche product. There are fewer remote areas in the world and there are more airports, roads and infrastructure out in the wilderness. Not to mention that the price of a Herc today is not exactly what you would call a bargain.

Back in the 70s LM floated the concept of the L-100-50 (10 pallet positions and 1 on the ramp), but even back then the handwriting was on the wall. It's too bad because I'd love to see a commercial revival and companies similar to Alaska International, Saturn, TIA, NW Territories, Pacific Western, etc. start flying again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob they're probably only worth the price of scrap. They've been rode hard and put away wet for too many years and the owners made sure they squeezed out every last drop of goodness from those birds. SafAir did likewise. No much doubt that Lynden will end up being the last man standing (soon) in terms of a true "commercial" Herk operator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob,

I agree with MHeflin. I think the only way they could sell those airplanes would be for scrap and spares -- and I think the spares would be questionable to a legitimate buyer. No telling how old they are or where they came from. Even back when I left Transafrik in 12/95, the airplanes (both the Hercs & the 727's) were flying simulators.

Even though Safair flew the crap out of their Hercs, they were maintained with some semblance of a scheduled maintenance program. It was when they were dry leased to operators like Angola Air Charter that they were abused. Without checking Lars' book, I'm pretty sure that AAC crashed a couple of leased Safair Hercs.

I also agree with MHeflin's "last man standing" comment.

Don R.

Edited by DC10FE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the existing L-100s age, they will get more and more expensive to maintain. If the support that LM currently provides for them is any indicator, I don't think they'll be rushing to offer an L-100J anytime soon. The margins are better in the military market. I guess my point was that the L-100s are going to wear out eventually and if the operators want to continue with their business model they will need an airframe that can perform that mission. Right now, there is nothing else that can do it except the C-130. Its a niche market, but one with demand. Then again, a lot of the existing L-100s are in foreign military service. Has LM taken that into account in their market analysis?

The upgrades currently available to improve performance will require time and money to get STCs. EPCS and the Series 3.5 are the most likely candidates and they will provide fuel and maintenance cost savings. The Series 3.5 can also provide more takeoff power at high-hot conditions (off the 19,600 in-lb torque limit). I think that Rolls-Royce is working on FAA certification of the Series 3.5 upgrade and plans to offer it for the P-3 as well. The NP2000 prop is a major change with some safety impacts that would require significant effort. And I don't think UTC and LM are too interested in making that happen for the civil market. Another option is the drag-reducing "micro-vanes" developed by LM which cut the drag produced by the aft fuselage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see LM's push for the J - less this, more that, yada, yada, yada. But being an old legacy Herc guy, for me, give me a properly maintained legacy Herc anytime. I see it like an old vehicle, sure you'll put some bucks into maintenance and repairs, but you'll forgo the large monthly car payments. How many of us have bought a new vehicle and at the first scratch have a shit-fit over it? How many of us have put a new engine or 2 into our loveable old truck? Changed a transmission or 2? Put 2k into a complete brake system replacement (like I did on my old Passport)?

Sure upgrades on the legacy Herc are spendy, and I understand both sides of the argument. But damn..... I'm sure that there will be times, and maybe already have been times, when a pilot thought to himself (herself?), damn wish I had a FE/Nav so I could get their thoughts on something.

Guess I'm just old and crotchity but I loved being a FE on Hercs. Being a FE was the 2nd best thing to piloting a Herc. Couldn't enjoy doing the actual yanking and banking, but had the 2nd best seat in the house. As an enlisted guy, getting off the crew bus at 0-dark-30, dropping my bags at the crew door steps, thinking what a life, plus I get $2 a day to do this job and plus this stylish olive-drag flight suit. Then I start my initial pre-flight step, open the battery compartment door looking for the forms and there aren't there. Climb the crew ladder, no forms on nav table. Then start looking for the crew chief so I can ask him where's the frigging forms. Maintenance truck pulls up and he says he's got a red-x that needs to be signed off before he can apply power. Start thinking to myself "fck, just another day in paradise."

Maybe LM should have their own version of the cash-for-clunkers program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a big difference between the mission of a military Herc and a commercial Herc. First of all you don't move pallets with an L-100. Not cost effective at all. The majority of customers in the commercial world are freight forwarders and they want their stuff moved as cheaply as possible. Which means belly freight on pax birds and we're talking pennies to move pounds. Blade time on a commercial Herc is going to cost anywhere from $8K per hour (which is dirt cheap) on up. The more specialized the load, the more remote the location, the more you can charge. But at the end of the day it all come down to economics.

You can bet your boots that if there was a huge untapped market out there and a ton of money to be made, the Marietta Mafia would be all over it and cranking out L-100Js night and day, 7 days a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now, there is nothing else that can do it except the C-130. Its a niche market, but one with demand. Then again, a lot of the existing L-100s are in foreign military service. Has LM taken that into account in their market analysis?

Yes, it is a "niche market," but Transafrik has 5 commercial Hercs parked at Fujairah and 1 at Entebbe because they can't find contracts. This is according the the ex-Director of Operations. They are being low bidded by East European Antonov and Ilyushin operators who will lease their airplanes to the UN for, I think he said, either $650 or $850/hour (An-12). A Herc operator can't compete with that. Of course, as I stated in a previous post, the condition of TFK's airplanes leaves a lot of legitimate lessors pretty leery to lease them unless it would be an AMCI type of contract. The Ugandan 5X registration doesn't help either.

Just my 2¢.

Don R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found a few more interesting tidbits on the C-130J program that I thought I would add to the thread. The first is a video presentation on some of the technical challenges encountered during the J test program, given by LM Chief Test Pilot for Airlift Programs, Wayne Roberts. The second is a video of Mr. Roberts performing the C-130J air show routine, both in and out of the cockpit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3xkaqE3cS4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYH0j71Qr_k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I know it would be expensive for the certification on a L-100J, but it was done once already. 70 airframes is 3 years of production and a 21% increase in total orders for the J, based on the current order book of 330. With the belt-tightening in the defense sector, it seems like a good hedge.

My point earlier was that there is also no competition for an L-100J - nothing else out there can do that mission. But Embraer is partnering with Boeing and plans to offer a stretch civilian model of the KC-390, which is sized EXACTLY to compete with the C-130. Now is the time for LM to undercut them by getting to market first. Just my two cents.

I'm also eager to see if anyone buys the commercial J. I think the market is out there but will the price tag be reasonable and the operating expenses favorable? Time will tell.

Currently, the price tag doesn't make this a viable option...that and certification issues.

Follow-up one the L100J

The FAA certification on the airframe is still CURRENT. No need for re-cert there. Only the software needs to go though re-cert, and that's not that big a deal, nor as costly as a full cert.

If things continue to move as planned. Possible production could start in 2016/17. TWO customers interested. One of the two is supposedly the one that really got the ball rolling on this thing. The only hold back right now is cost, and that's just about there. It will be a completely stripped down Herc.

NO ONE here has even come close to naming the customers either. Think BIG BOY box movers. Not these little chump change operations, you all have listed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FedEx?

I heard they were interested in LM's recent attempt to convert C-5As for civil use (L-500).

While the airframe may still have a current cert, its more than software that has changed since the full 382J cert in ~1998. A lot of hardware on the flight deck and engines has changed in 15 years. And they probably have to strip it down to at least match the takeoff and landing performance of the 382G with the same payload.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

think. ;)

As for performance, the 3.5 engines, EVH, & 8-bladed props, if they can ever get STCed, will provide performance very close to that of the J for a tiny fraction of the price while saving fuel. I think Lynden would go that route over a J, as would most operators. It's all about keeping the overhead costs low.

I can certainly agree with the upgrades helping out alot, but don't think the performance will approach the J...at least, not very closely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can certainly agree with the upgrades helping out alot, but don't think the performance will approach the J...at least, not very closely.

Return on Investment wouldn't even be close...RR claims the 3.5 engine pays for itself in 4-5 years. Better hot/high/heavy takeoff performance, higher cruise, lower fuel flow - what's not to like? ;)

Don't get me wrong - I support the J - just don't think it's currently viable. That may change soon as most of the L382G time out their wings. Only Lynden is doing CWB replacement right now...nobody else is commercially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...