C130H2FE

All AD, Guard and Res E's, H1's and H2's that didn't have it installed during manufacture got SCNS, one B was done as a testbed but it was decided to not do the B's as they would be retired soon. All HC's and WC's got SCNS too.

Agree 100%!

DIDO!!!

It is what is left of the Polish Herk. last time I saw it it was sitting nose in the air engines and wings have been removed.

I believe the APN-241s were first installed on the Louisville H2.5s. That was the primary reason for going to the H2.5 unofficial designation.

Jim

The H2.5 as they are call were done by TCTO, at the same time EFIS was installed, the guard was going to do the entire fleet of H's but since AMP was going to "fix" everything the mods stopped. Just goes to show you how old the AMP program is! My 2 cents

It looks like inflight a Brit J, you can see the outline of where the inflight refueling probe goes just above the right circle.

The 3000 psi brakes didn't show up untill about 83 models, oldest H2's don't have them, from what I gather the reason it was done was there was more braking avalible than the 2030 brakes could supply under certain conditions. when I do FCF's on dry runways it is very hard to get the anti skid to cycle to verify operations.

My 2 cents.

I've been to 33k, however when our 80's were new we took off the external tanks do to a problem with them for a short time, had one crew go to 42k, great fuel flow!

Is that a privateer in the background in the second to last pic?

Not sure what a Privateer is, the plane in the background is a Navy B24. four engines but has one tall tail right?

That's a good article Tiny, just to add to the fun, the Guard 78,79 and 80 tails had there outer wings swapped the B models in the early 90's just before the B's went the boneyard, added several K to our aircraft weight. We call them stiff wings.

why do we LSGI for two minutes prior to shutdown.....I've know "save the turbines," "prevent clogging up the fuel nozzles" and "to eliminate coaking" Are all these equally valid reasons? If so what exactly is taking place; beside the obvious 69-75.5, bleed air valves opening etc. I don't understand how LSGI prevents "coaking".

In LSGI the fuel nozzles are being cooled by bleed air coming into the burner section. I know it sounds confusing. The bleed air in LSGI is cooler than normal GI and the temp where JP-8 cokes is just higher that the air coming in. So if we don't allow the fuel nozzles to cool then they are more likely to coke than with the 2 min cool down. Hope this answers your question.

ADI Sel switch to Norm applies to H3's and H2 with EFIS (Glass flight instr), when in SKE it's giving different information to the EADI, it's hard to complete a preflight when the

ADI isn't displaying the proper information on the Autopilot check. Hope this clears some of this up.

Mansfield tails to St Joe and St Joes going to Little Rock Guard.

When did this happen?

And the light still exist to this day in the same compartment. The lens case should be on the Nav's table.

We had the same failure before, it caused both main tire to deflate, the plugs melted as advertised! Cause was the same anti-skid valves not porting pressure.

RZ is right the 78's are the first H2's, two major system changes that differ an H1 from an H2 are the autopilot/flight director (105) and no wing isolation valve, H2's only have a bleed air divider valve. Also the H2's have two cb for the fire bottles. The H2.5's were done by the guard, only the 12 Kentucy and 8 Mansfield tails were done. We stopped moding when AMP was announced otherwise we might all have had it done by now!

My 2 cents

I wish all could understand. Freedom isn't given, its won. Winning come with sacrifice.

I was there as a kid, my father was stationed there from 69-72, I remeber the HC-130's well. If you haven't been there lately the place has changed alot.

Dump rate from one mast is not much different that using both. As other post stated if the fire continues you might have the engine fall off as the Pope E model did. From what I have heard it is the only time an engine fell off and the plane was not lost, not something I want to try! If you do decide to dump from the wing with a engine fire will it ignite? Not sure, never asked that question before. I tend to think it will not ignite but it would be determined on how far back the flames extend behind the engine.

Before I would think about dumping, take care of the engine fire. Before you can dump enought fuel to matter you might have a wing off light. Point to be made is if you can't stop a fire on an engine, LAND! But I was to start dumping with a fire anywhere on a wing I would use the other dump mast only, why take a chance to futher complicate things, after all at this point a bad day is getting worse!

My 2 cents worth

Part number is 344444-4R & -4L, which is what that drawing number is that I posted.

We lived in Travis housing when I was in the eigth grade, circa '68. There was an elementry school right outside the housing area that I ran my go kart up to. I remember the processing plant, because if the wind blew just right, the smell was gawdawful.

I lived at Travis in 68 too, I was in 3rd grade, I went to the school at the gate. Dad was transfered in 69 to Lajes.

Thanks for the correction, only way I remember the tail is we had 79-0477 for a while before sending it to Reno.

56-0477 is sitting on the ramp at Sav IAP being used as a fire dept trainer right now, it came to Sav in the 80\'s to be used as a BDA trainer but it is still intact. Look at Sav near the middle of the runways near the fire house you should see a lone 130 not far from the ANG ramp.

Love it, I\'ll see if I can find a picture of Hunter when it was an Air Force Base.

LC130LOAD1 wrote:

AMPTestFE wrote:

After reading your inputs I gotta say that it sounds like it was a goat rope.

What\'s wrong with using Snow Aviations stats and data?

Sounds like they didn\'t look at the data from the Hawkeyes either.

Gotta tell ya, there\'s a little bit of difference between the LC-130\'s and the \"slicks\".

So does that mean that the USAF/ANG is going to have to do tests all over again with the LC-130\'s \"just to make sure\"?

It took you guys a week to get an engine?

WTF, Channel Islands/NAS Point Mugu is about 40 minutes away as the crow flys.

You mean the CA ANG didn\'t have an engine?

Those NP2000 props will be just the ticket for Antarctic ops, now they\'ll really be able to over-torque engines down there.

Hard to go to Channel Island, they have J\'s now, not a -15 to be had. The hope is to get more usable thrust for the same torque, a more effecient prop, as for Snow data they modified the plane that will not be done so their data is not accurate.