The war in Iraq requires a lot of aerial refuelling and moving a lot of stuff between crappy little airstrips. No airplane is better at both tasks than the venerable C-130.
After 40 years of building first-generation Hercules for dozens of customers all over the world, in the mid-1990s, Lockheed Martin switched to the new J model, which was supposed to be faster, longer-ranged and capable of carrying more cargo and fuel. But J customers have complained that new plane just isn’t as capable or reliable as the older models. The Air Force took almost a decade getting its Js into battle, and now the Marines are following suit. Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron 252 has deployed its KC-130J tanker-transports to Al Asad airbase in Iraq’s Al Anbar province, the type’s first foreign mission in Marine Corps service, and the news is good.
The fighter pilots of Marine All Weather Fighter Attack Squadron 332 rely on the KC-130s to extend their legs over western Iraq. So far, 332 has no complaints. The refuelers has been on time with the gas, which is more complicated than it sounds. Tanker crews have to be flexible and efficient to meet the fast-movers when and where they can — and in unpredictable weather.
Still, the C-130J was threatened with shutdown when the Defense Department went cost-cutting last December. Congress came to the rescue, but the Pentagon’s classified Mobility Study might try again to cancel future buys. Meanwhile, the market for second-hand first-gen Hercules is white hot, and the Lockheed Martin facility in Greenville, S.C. is working full-time to recondition retired C-130s for resale to customers like Poland and Pakistan. Only time will tell if the J model wins the same loyalty.
–David Axe
| Hercules’ Newest LaborLeave a ReplyNOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces. By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement | |
Here we go again. We scrapped the C-123 tooling then desperately wanted more in Vietnam but couldn’t get them — All we could get was newer, more expensive, “better” aircraft that just didn’t work as well.
And then there are the 50+ year old front-line B-52s that several times were to be replaced by newer, more expensive, “better” aircraft.
Now we are desperately rebuilding A-10s and early model C-130s because the newer, more expensive, “better” aircraft just don’t work as well.
Oh well, nothing new here…
Same deal with the C-5’s, where the tooling was destroyed so some other aircraft could win contract. Perhaps what we should do is land C-17s and C-5s into relatively safe Kurd territory (and/or Turkey) and ship things in through there instead of using Kuwait-Baghdad as our MSR. Might allow us to use the big aircraft closer to delivery point rather than landing them in Kuwait and sending material overland by truck through Indian Country.
Charles,
Sadly, there are only two small runways in Kurdistan — one in Erbil and another in Sulaymaniyah. All of the major runways in use in Iraq are ones inherited from the Iraqi Air Force, so any major change in the air lines of communication will require some serious investment.
More’s the pity. I figure most of the Iraqi Airforce’s fields are designed for fighters, since I doubt they had many heavy bombers or strategic airlift. Thus the biggest runways are going to be Baghdad International.
You do know that C-130 and C-17 are supposedly rated for landing in austere conditions, and that the MC used the highway system to land a C-130 during OIF I?