A400M

Add to that the fact that any 'MRTT' is never treated as such - it is a tanker that has to be begged for if it is to be used as a transport. Folks comparing Tri* are talking bollocks too, they were supposedly MRTT but in reality we had frames in 3 different configurations.

Plus, MOG restrictions, runway lengths etc mean that you can't always operate your 'airliners' where you would like to.

You mean you cant land an A330 on a Welsh beach** coluor me suprised - I guess perhaps the A400 does bring something to the table voyager doesnt whoda thunk it




**In this context By land i mean to touch down and come to a stop in a controlled safe manner capable of taking off again, rather than landed on the beach and at the following grid references
 
"The comparison study indicates that the A400M is quieter in flight during initial take-offs and
final approaches than the C17, C130 and VC10. However, under high power EGR, the A400M
has higher noise emissions. This should be considered within the airport noise management
plan. The position of the APU should also be considered when selecting the stands to be used
as the directivity of the A400M is opposite to that of the C130. However, it should be noted
that the A400M EGR requirements are estimated to be lower than for the C130 and C17."
 
"The comparison study indicates that the A400M is quieter in flight during initial take-offs and
final approaches than the C17, C130 and VC10. However, under high power EGR, the A400M
has higher noise emissions. This should be considered within the airport noise management
plan. The position of the APU should also be considered when selecting the stands to be used
as the directivity of the A400M is opposite to that of the C130. However, it should be noted
that the A400M EGR requirements are estimated to be lower than for the C130 and C17."
EGR = Diesel engine "Exhaust Gas Re-circulation"

. . . . no wonder it is noisy, if those are four BFO diesel engines !! ;) .
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
Add to that the fact that any 'MRTT' is never treated as such - it is a tanker that has to be begged for if it is to be used as a transport. Folks comparing Tri* are talking bollocks too, they were supposedly MRTT but in reality we had frames in 3 different configurations.

Plus, MOG restrictions, runway lengths etc mean that you can't always operate your 'airliners' where you would like to.

yes dear, those A400’s regularly running parcel deliveries to Cyprus and Dubai are doing stuff no regular box shifter could ever do.
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
"The comparison study indicates that the A400M is quieter in flight during initial take-offs and
final approaches than the C17, C130 and VC10. However, under high power EGR, the A400M
has higher noise emissions. This should be considered within the airport noise management
plan. The position of the APU should also be considered when selecting the stands to be used
as the directivity of the A400M is opposite to that of the C130. However, it should be noted
that the A400M EGR requirements are estimated to be lower than for the C130 and C17."

and when will you be running your engines at maximum power during low level flying and take off?
.....rough field stuff, the Sort of landing in the sticks with chaps with beards stuff.
 
and when will you be running your engines at maximum power during low level flying and take off?
.....rough field stuff, the Sort of landing in the sticks with chaps with beards stuff.
You are verging into Warlord/boys own territory now.

EF need to be on a 24 hour watch, in the correct ‘rough field’ just as the bearded men arrive who never bothered with any Intel etc.

Come on, you can do better.
 
They would be competing with themselves?

And stretching a 66 year old airframe may be slightly more complex than inserting x feet of length?
That’s what Marshall’s did with the C130 to make the Mk3 in RAF service. The stretched bit can be see on them as it is windowless.

Somebody may have mentioned this further down thread, but I haven’t read that far yet.

The J model Herc was late coming into service, something like 4 years if I remember correctly. Once we had it there were still problems, Paras couldn’t jump from one side as the prop wash pushed them into the airframe. The computers would log faults every time a switch was moved from one position to another. There was a lack of spares. One frame was a Christmas tree and even had bulbs robbed to service other frames. All aircraft take time to get fully into service.

RP
 
That’s what Marshall’s did with the C130 to make the Mk3 in RAF service. The stretched bit can be see on them as it is windowless.

Somebody may have mentioned this further down thread, but I haven’t read that far yet.

The J model Herc was late coming into service, something like 4 years if I remember correctly. Once we had it there were still problems, Paras couldn’t jump from one side as the prop wash pushed them into the airframe. The computers would log faults every time a switch was moved from one position to another. There was a lack of spares. One frame was a Christmas tree and even had bulbs robbed to service other frames. All aircraft take time to get fully into service.

RP
Dont forget the wing drop stall charecteristic - that meant it would never be suitable for low level S.F Insertion
 
Dont forget the wing drop stall charecteristic - that meant it would never be suitable for low level S.F Insertion
I haven’t heard of AFSOC having any issues with their MC-130J Commandos. Was the wing drop issue something that was fixed during development?
 
I haven’t heard of AFSOC having any issues with their MC-130J Commandos. Was the wing drop issue something that was fixed during development?

I honestly know nothing about it - It was part of the why the C130J is crap compared to the K when it arrived along with composite blades being too fragile for rough fields, afformentioned para drops, complexity,

It was certainly an oft repeated fact (it is plausible as one wing can stall before the other) in Marshalls and allegedly came via Testing / aircrew etc.

The point is that there were lots of C130J cant do it tropes - and some may have been invented facts - (A400 has them as well) but most if not all are now resolved.

The only complaint i can think of that probably has stood the test of time is that the J will never have the lets try to bodge it in flexibility the K had - But that really isnt an aircraft issue - its a litigation certification and health and safety one.
 
With regards to airborne operations, sometimes it’s the equipment being dropped that needs to be modified. For instance, US had to extend the static lines on the T10 chutes when testing the C17. Did the RAF ever qualify their chutes on C17s for jumping?
 
Its how you'd use a MC130J .
Everyone bailing out over the ramp is not an issue, going out through both side doors is a lot different.

When I think SF, I think section or platoon size, not anything larger. Out over the ramp would be very quick if your dealing small teams. Company sized drops will need two streams out of both sides if you want them out quick.
 
Its how you'd use a MC130J .
Everyone bailing out over the ramp is not an issue, going out through both side doors is a lot different.

When I think SF, I think section or platoon size, not anything larger. Out over the ramp would be very quick if your dealing small teams. Company sized drops will need two streams out of both sides if you want them out quick.
[drift]

150227085745-06-parachutte-jump-022715-super-169.jpg


[/drift]
 
Regarding FAF C-130J they are not used by the Poitou squadron which is the FRA SF FW squadron.

The KC-130J are used for the AAR of FAF Caracal helicopters when needed but it's only a fraction of their daily tasks.
 
How many user KUR's did LM delete as 'undeliverable' and ask the end users for more money for the privilege?
I’ll let you look on google for that as I just fixed the Ks.

Dont forget the wing drop stall charecteristic - that meant it would never be suitable for low level S.F Insertion
New one on me, but see above reply. I was a mere oick at the time. The J certainly progressed in service. The damp we had at Lyneham didn’t help and the J came good for what we used it for in the desert.

I recall that a lot of the noise complaints at Brize about the Hercs were because the noise was different and carried on for longer. A herc would start up and sit running for a while before taxiing. The jets would start and go. We also had to do more EGRs for things like reestablishing oil levels after the engines had been sat for a week(?) and not run. Even if a task only required a short run the engine would be run until the oil reached temperature and the coolers cracked open. One suggestion that was received from the public around Brize was the aircraft turn the engines off when coming into land. That certainly would be quiet until it lands on your house with a Big Bang.

With regard to bird strikes if you look you can find pictures of all sort damage done. I’ve had to dig gulls out of a leading edge when it punched straight through. If you hit a big bird it will do all sorts of damage.

RP.
 
Some jet engines require a minimum run time for any ground run. When you see any jet aircraft start up and taxy out, the longer the taxy, the better, as the engines are well up to temp before full power is demanded. Same with taxying back in. It's why they are able to shut down immediately upon taxying to the stand. So,if a mech changes a fuel filter, the aircraft will get a ground run of at least five minutes and will be checked for leaks immediately after. One very popular model needs at least 15 minutes run time on any start-up, as several of the internal clearances are temperature critical.
 

Latest Threads

Top