Jump to content

The end of C-130? Brazilian C-390 wins over new C-130 in Dutch competition


Recommended Posts

Vivaldi browser translate corrected by me

Quote

Defense made various demands on the successor to the C-130. Research made the C-390M look better than Lockheed Martin's C-130J, which was seen as an alternative. For example, the availability of the C-390M is higher, the device scores better on a number of operational and technical requirements and requires less maintenance. In addition, the C-390M with 4 devices(airplanes) can already meet the minimum requirement of 2,400 flight hours. The C-130J needs 5 devices(airplanes) for this.

https://www.defensie.nl/actueel/nieuws/2022/06/16/defensie-vindt-opvolger-voor-c-130-hercules

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not entirely surprising that an airplane that first flew in 2015 requires less maintenance than an airplane that first flew in 1954.

Edited by Dawes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/18/2022 at 1:16 AM, Dawes said:

It's not entirely surprising that an airplane that first flew in 2015 requires less maintenance than an airplane that first flew in 1954.

What? There are 1954 components in the current C-130? Haven't they done at least one near total redesign? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want an example of C-130 longevity try the RNZAF.....our current C-130H's were purchased in 1965 and are finally being replaced by C-130J's in 2024.

That's 59 years !!!

The airframes have been totally refurbished/reskinned (more than once?) but are now becoming very hard to maintain. 

Likewise with our P-3K2 Orions which have been round since 1966 are now being replaced by P-8's, the first of which is due in service late this year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think the two are an apples to apples comparison. In any case, if C130 production stopped tomorrow the type is prolific enough it would still probably be supported for almost half a century. Partially due to its relatively successful design and partially due to the US always being a steady customer. Barely anyone operates MiG-29s; F-16s still have new sales.

Edited by Josh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MiG-29 has like 20 operators, which is pretty nice given its production ended in 1991 :) and it still gets new sales, if you count the MiG-29M -line...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick comparison all medium transport aircraft available in the market (current and future). From top to bottom length, wingspan, height, weight, cargo weight and size of cargo bay.

Tabla%2BIl-276%2Bmarzo%2B2018.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, alejandro_ said:

Quick comparison all medium transport aircraft available in the market (current and future). From top to bottom length, wingspan, height, weight, cargo weight and size of cargo bay.

Tabla%2BIl-276%2Bmarzo%2B2018.png

 

What are the units used for the C-130 weights?  Somehow I doubt they are tons--pounds??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, shep854 said:

What are the units used for the C-130 weights?  Somehow I doubt they are tons--pounds??

It is in tons, I forgot to mention that in Spanish decimals are marked with , and thousands with . ie the opposite. C-130: 74.393 tons (long tons).
 

Quote

 Cargo bay dimensions are L x W x H or L x H x W


It should be L x W x H except for KC-390, where it is in L x H x W.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, alejandro_ said:

It is in tons, I forgot to mention that in Spanish decimals are marked with , and thousands with . ie the opposite. C-130: 74.393 tons (long tons).

That's kind of what I thought, but the additional digit had me wondering.  Use of commas where we Americans use decimals seems to be the norm in most of Europe.
 


It should be L x W x H except for KC-390, where it is in L x H x W.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/18/2022 at 1:16 AM, Dawes said:

It's not entirely surprising that an airplane that first flew in 2015 requires less maintenance than an airplane that first flew in 1954.

Not necessarily, it's' hard to say which of the two, with both produced in 2022, requires less maintenance. We'll see, I guess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/25/2022 at 5:15 AM, urbanoid said:

Introduced in 1999. 

First flight '96, and I was working on structural bits back in 93-94ish. 30 was a generalisation, but not far off :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...