The Ministry of Defence has placed its fleet of 14 C-130 tactical airlifters up for sale ahead of the type being removed from service next year.

The Royal Air Force will lose its entire fleet of C-130 Hercules aircraft by 2023 due to changes announced as part the Defence Command Paper, released in March last year, titled ‘Defence in a Competitive Age‘,  which states:

“The Royal Air Force will retire the BAe146 as planned by 2022 and take the C130 Hercules out of service by 2023. The A400M Atlas force will increase its capacity and capability, operating alongside C 17 Globemaster and Voyager transport aircraft and tankers.”

The C-130J Hercules transport aircraft are often used by special forces and the C-130J variants first entered service with the Royal Air Force in the late 1990s and some of the C-130s have been retired in recent years, but the remaining 14 had originally been due to keep flying until the mid-2030s.

It is understood that, where possible, their missions will be picked up by the fleet of larger A400M Atlas transport aircraft. This defence review was previously described by then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson as the largest review of its kind since the Cold War.

The Defense Equipment Sales Authority (DESA) published the RAF’s C-130J Super Hercules on the list of surplus defence equipment available for sale.

The brochure states:

“The C-130J is the RAF’s primary tactical transport aircraft, capable of airdropping a variety of stores and paratroopers into areas that would otherwise be unsafe for all on board, should they be required to land there. An updated version of the C-130 Hercules, the C C-130J can operate at night aswell as remain in formation during poor weather. Being able to refuel in the air midmid-flight enhances the aircraft’s capacity to travel incredibly long distanceswithout needing to land.

There is also the option to store Air Survival Rescue Apparatus in the cabin ahead of search and rescue missions, which enables the aircraft to deploy life rafts and emergency supplies to those who need it.

Whilst every care has been taken to ensure the information provided is accurate, up
up-to -date and complete, neither the UK MOD nor any of its representatives accept any liability for any errors or omissions in the information. It is stressed that the information provided is not and will not be a contractual statement of the condition or quantity of items. No guarantee of the accuracy is either given or implied. This asset is subject to availability.

The UK MOD reserves the right to withdraw this asset from the market at any time, without prior notice. The UK MOD reserves the right to modify or upgrade this asset
without notice. This asset is considered specially designed for military use. Contains
public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. All images
are MOD Crown Copyright 2021.”

You can browse the sales brochure here.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

153 COMMENTS

  1. Big mistake to not have a smaller transport C-27J or C-295.

    or the C-130 heir : Embraer C-390.but this is an heavier model and there is some overlap with A400.

    • We have a nice fleet of BN2 Islanders here, nice reliable planes that can get in and out of just about anywhere. Perfect for special forces…

        • Hi Daniele, we have 2 for inter island routes, based @ Tingwall under contract to SIC.
          A bit OT but if I recall correctly, the An2 as used by the Soviets was supposedly difficult to pick up on radar, wonder if that would apply to the Islander?

          • Hi Trevor. Thanks. No doubt plenty still around I was highlighting another little publicised cut where both types were removed.

            Firstly from 5 AAC without replacement and given to the RAF, and then also Northolt Station Flight.

            The need has not vanished and their role was ( presumably ) placed with the Shadow R1 and also with some Beechcraft planes operated by a private contractor on behalf of the Met.

            The usual increasing of tasks onto a smaller force resulting no doubt in gaps.

        • Well let’s hope so, I imagine the U.K. would do the same.
          It is a loss of air transport planes whatever way it’s worked out.
          Unless there are 14 other air frames bought that provide roughly the same availability it’s a cut. Hopefully the experts at defence hq know what they are doing and the A400, C17 and chinooks are enough lifting.

          • Of course it’s a cut.
            We are part of NATO. And in modern times that means, make your military as small and ineffective as possible, maintain to 2%, include police and other agencies in the defence budget to make it look like you spend 2% on defence, but you are intentionally using the word “defence” loosely. And depend totally on America.

      • Exactly. 👍

        I always thought a modern version of the Shorts Skyvan would be useful now for special forces, or in-theatre re-supply roles.

      • They carry just 9 passengers (or probably 4 or 5 guys with a lot of kit) or a 1.1 ton payload of modest dimensions.

    • Also small transport missions, not everything needs a giant 4 engine A400 with associated costs,
      There was a topic here about a sea rescue where an A400 was needed to drop 3 small rescue containers. That could have been done by a much smaller aircraft.

      I guess RAF will end up pay to some company to supply the small transport service…

      • Except keeping a whole fleet of aging aircraft online plus parts and training will cost far more than using one of fancy a400 for the mission. If u can only afford one type u need the biggest and best. It’s reality time economy is damaged and we need most bang for buck

        • When are we getting more A400 delivered… we always cut first and replace some time in the future
          And how many are we getting…

          • Are they expecting to pick up some of the Spanish older A400 they are supposed to be selling? I suspect Ukraine may have changed the landscape. In the the new order, it’s the quick or the dead. Too many nations are still thinking they can use peace time procurement. Need to start thinking WW2 (or should that be WW3, but with a few different player orientated nations?).

          • Rumour mill is working overtime on A400. It cannot compete with a C130 on some taskings though. The newer Chinooks have an extended range, but something like a Spartan would have a longer reach. Then why not keep the Herc? The thinking seems to be out of kilter with reality imo. Insertion needs an aircraft up to the job, I think an A400 is more of a strategic airlifter. Then these are the experts who got rid of Jaguar, Nimrod, Harrier and Sentry. And sent a task force without AEW cover lol. Nothing seems to change.

        • All that is valid. However, what missions are we pulling that now do not have assets available to them because the remaining assets now have to do the lot?

        • The cost aspect is fundamentally untrue: A400M is hugely expensive per unit and in terms of running costs, lacks capability and is unreliable; the C130J is newer and more advanced than the C17 (just to dispel any notion of the aircraft “aging”).

          • Well raf disagree, uk can only afford one, therefore they picked one which is newer, younger, faster, more efficient and when fully cleared capable of far more

    • Unfortunately Geoff, Farouk is right.. this move is extremely short sighted and if the sounds emanating from HMG are anything to go by, there is more pain coming.

      Silver lining is that No. 11 is apparently in favour of 3% GDP by 2030 – even though the PM won’t commit. I suppose we’ll find out next month in the autumn statement.

      • It isn’t short sighted if u can only afford one type do u go with smaller older more costly and dated or bigger faster cheaper to run and able to do more? This PM is accountant if u think defence will get 3% your nuts he has been anti defence all along. It’s hard decision time and two fleets of simalar aircraft is silly when the a400 soon will do everything that herc can

        • Can the U.K. not afford the running costs of the C130? I would agree on one type if the A400 numbers were going up but right now they aren’t.
          At least there is still transport aircraft.
          I think 8 C17, 22 A400, 60 chinooks, and the 9 air tanker. Obviously only 2/3 to 3/4 available at a time.
          It’s all the smaller planes that have been going. BA125, 146, islanders, C130.

          • No U.K. can’t afford three different heavy four engine transport planes, no other country flys that many, different planes = far more cost. The a400 nos are slated to go up with increased buy I believe

    • It’s not about flogging anything as on base of it uk will get nothing. It’s about running costs when already running one of largest most capable European forces

  5. This is a huge mistake that many suspect that we will come to regret. With a major land war underway in Europe and British forces deployed forward in the Batic countries, you would think that the MoD would find another way to make savings. Like scrapping Ajax and the usless second carrier PoW.

    • Ajax I agree with, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with POW. If you get rid of her we might as well get rid of both.

    • That has to be one of the dumbest things ever said on this forum. Why on earth would we scrap a brand new very capable ship that we’ve already paid for?

    • Without a strong navy there is no point in having an airforce or army. We are an island and need to protect our trade routes.

    • Couldn’t be more wrong about POW. It is a mighty effective asset & having 2 QE CVAs enables far more than a sole CVA.

      Ajax could go.

    • How would the British Army operate without recce/strike vehicles?
      Are you calling PoW useless because it has a technical issue? That will be fixed. All complex kit have faults and need fixing. One carrier alone would not be enough – I have always thought we need a minimum of 3.

      • Three is now past the point of no return. Not that I disagree- Naval rule of three & all that.

        Even if it’s fixed, Ajax & it’s various variants are not up to scratch. It’s simply taken too long. Other nations have produced better in shorter time. The old rules no longer apply. The allies would have lost WW2 with this type of thinking. There seems to be a disconnect between Ukraine & the reality it represents.

        To make it simple, there is Russia & there is China. There is two outliers in Iran & North Korea. Nobody else matters. Nobody! Anybody else is an unwanted blip that can be handled later.

        • Agree it is too late to get a 3rd carrier (or even just an LPH). There was a reason we had 3 Invincible Class – as we know, rule of 3.

          You would reject a fixed Ajax fleet?? Really? I agree its taken far too long – Scimitar ISD was 1971 – vehicles should have been replaced in the 90s.

          Fully agree your listing of our potential enemies. We have to be able to contribute meaningfully to alliance combat against each of those threats. A single modernised, networked division is the least we should be able to field on the army side.

          • I did not say I would reject a fixed Ajax fleet. I said even if fixed they are not up to scratch. Problem is they have mainly already been paid for & a good many are already built. Starting over would add years to the project. Ukraine has shown time is now critical. Right now, good enough will have to do.

          • OK DJ – I take your point. In what ways would the Ajax fleet not be up to scratch even if fixed?

  6. If we are going to cut something it should be C130, no one operates three separate fleets of four engines transports and the A400M is a far superior aircraft . There are certain things between the capability if a chinook and an A400M that C130 can do but not much.

    • I get that it’s the numbers though. If some extra A400 were being bought to fill the 14 it would be much more palatable.
      With the 22 A400 how long would it take to move an effective fighting force say 2500 miles away of 1500 troops and kit versus 22 A400 and 14 C130? Perhaps 3/4 would be available to fly at same time at a push.
      It’s constant cuts. I struggle to think of something that has grown in numbers when replacing something else.

        • Hi mate.

          But eventually, after cuts for the last 30 years, it is, sadly. I’m not looking at C17 her, but Atlas.

          22 Atlas.

          Minus those in maintenance.
          Minus the one in the FI.
          Minus the one on standby at Brize for varied tasks including SPAG.
          Minus the one used by SD Flight.

          How many left?

          Then add the SF mission that 14 Herc were used for. I assume most were used in that arena with 47 Sqn?

          Those 12-15 or more Atlas or how many are available on any given day now take that mission as well.

          What really gets my goat is that our armed forces are used, all the time, deployed constantly, on ops and exercises, and so we think it a good idea to at a stroke remove a quarter of the airlift fleet. This above all should be a growth area alongside ISTAR.

          If we were a nation with a military that looks good but sits on base all nice and shiny then yes, no need. Yet we know there are several nations like that with greater transport fleets in aircraft number who’s military do not deploy like ours do.

          I don’t accept that because they carry more and go further faster it makes it ok. They cannot be in two places at once and the military has many standing tasks that these planes are slotted into as part of the weekly plan for their use. I forget its official name. Defence organisations / units bid for these assets as they are in such demand.

          More Atlas? When? It may happen, it may not. That is a typical carrot dangled by HMG to justify cuts,which can then be withdrawn down the line, which has happened so often before.

          Examples. 2015 SDSR.

          Typhoon T1 retained til 2030, oh goody we all said amidst the cuts. Now going.
          Hercs retained til 2030 plus, when they had been due to be retired then. Oh goody. Now going.

          I’m deeply sceptical I’m afraid. I wish I was a fly on the wall to see just what carrot has been dangled in front of DSF.

          • I totally get what you are saying mate. And yes we are constantly having to do more with less. But I think that even if the MOD got a large cash boost next week, the RAF would still be ditching the Herc fleet. 4 transport aircraft types is to many, and the RAF are thinking about the future. Getting rid of the older kit, like Hawk T1, that are draining valuable resources. Now I know you can’t compare a Hawk T1 to a very capable Hercules. But the RAF would rather put that Hercules funding line into the A400 fleet. All that training, maintenance, aircrew and ground crew’s can now be concentrated on the A400 fleet and expanding the capability and availability. When you look at the big picture, the RAF transport fleet can achieve much more today then it did when we operated 60 odd Hercules and VC10/Tristar. I’m not defending cuts, and id rather Herc fleet stay, at least until a few more A400’s are on order. But I can understand the reasoning behind getting rid of older kit so more funding is available for the newer kit that is going to be around for the next 30-40 years, and develop that capability to its full potential. I wish the funding was available to do both, but if we want E-Scan on Typhoon, more F35B’s, SPEAR 3, more drones,and the general mamoth list of new capabilites we need across all 3 services, these are the difficult decisions that have to be made. I’m glad I’m not the one that has to make them. 👍

          • And all that is true as well my friend. There are valid arguments on both sides.

            For me, it always seems to be about tomorrow, not the then and now when assets are needed.

            I quite agree with the notion that well trained, well equipped but small professional forces with high tech kit can achieve results far beyond their size, we see in Ukraine the results of a handful of MLRS.

            But these are enabling assets. In logistics and enablers the assets and the numbers matter. And the future and tomorrow does not enable the now. I take the point that availability of Atlas and modern types is greater.

            There never ever seems to be a happy medium. It is always about tomorrow which never comes.

          • It’s always finding the balance between a greater number of less capable assets, or high end capability. I think for a long time now the train of thought has been better to have the best we can get even if it’s in smaller numbers, as the high end capability keeps us at the top table. And time and time again we still see our Armed Force’s meeting the needs of the day, and other nations with more kit, absent. We didn’t see rows and rows of French or German A400s packed up ready to evacuate Kabul. Someone at DSF and MOD must have crunched the numbers and decided we can cope without Hercules. Maybe that’s nieve of me, I’m not sure. Be interesting to see the results of this update to the strategy defence review.

          • Daniele

            The problem for UK is that as an island, it needs to be able to shift its army either by sea or by air. UK cannot (despite its best intentions), fight a land war on its own soil. It has always, for the last 1,000 years, expected the navy to keep home base secure. Hastings was last serious overseas invasion, which was swallowed up over time. It has always been at its best when fighting elsewhere.

            Time though to catch up with technology. Five years in modern technology circles is par for the course. Two years to get use to it, three years of usefulness, repeat. This means anything started 5 years ago needs a reevaluation & update. The world does not stand still because just because some think it should.

          • Hi DJ

            I see our Island status as an asset, not a problem. Which is why I have always called for a RN/RAF/Intelligence first policy. We are removing the very expeditionary enablers that help to enable our army to deploy overseas.

            We already have high technology in this domain, we have the Atlas in service. My point is what covers the multitude of tasks that Hercules performs now when Hercules is cut? 22 Atlas? Not for me, despite the 9 Voyager and 8 C17 on top.
            There are too few enabling assets no matter how much Atlas carries or how far and fast it flies.

            The only crumb of comfort for me is another A400 order and I remain high sceptical on that based on HMGs track record.

          • Daniele

            I also see it as an asset. The problem I was referring to, is that the Army needs to be expeditionary. As you highlighted (I perhaps did not do it as well as you), it can’t be done if you do not have the means to move the pieces in sufficient numbers (in both directions).

          • Ah, ok so we are in agreement. 👍 Yes Defo. For Europe it would also be handy if we reconstitute our railway capability.
            Something else they cut.

        • The numbers do play a big part though when you’re about to cut a significant portion of your air transport fleet and have yet to even come to a conclusion on how many new A400M’s will be ordered.

          It’s just more short-sighted thinking from the Government and the MoD – at a time where we are more likely to be at war than any point in the past 20 years they are cutting a capability without having a replacement ready.

          The new A400M’s is a multiyear progress, say we decide we want between 5-10, great but it’ll take well over a year to sort out the order by then the C-130’s will be out of a service and then a few years before we even receive one considering the backlog of orders on A400M’s currently.

          The whole concept of the military is about being prepared for an eventual conflict, this is heavily negated as a concept when the Government and MoD go out of their way to remove capabilities far before we have a replacement under the hope that nothing happens.

    • “Far superior” lol, based on what? That must be why the French and Germans reduced their orders and bought brand new C130J’s instead.

      A400M’s been in service for 7+ years and is still struggling to conduct even the most basic tactical air transport missions. It lacks capability and is proving itself to be quite unreliable.

  8. Is it a legal get out to misrepresent while advertising something for sale by claiming that you won’t be held liable for any misrepresentation?

    “But Your Honour, I told him as I smacked him over the head with the barstool, that neither I nor any of my representatives could be held liable for assault.”

    “Fair enough. Case dismissed.”

    “I don’t understand, sir. Why can’t we arrest Sir Charles, the notorious cat burgler?”

    “Because, Sergeant, he always leaves an embroidered glove at the scene of the crime, with a little label inside saying he won’t be held liable.”

    “Curses, sir! — pardon my language — but that’s fiendishly clever.”

    “Don’t worry, Sergeant. He’ll slip up one day and then we’ll have him.”

    Meanwhile, somewhere inside every Ajax……

  9. Painful times ahead then. From a financial point of view this does make some sense we are well covered with the other two types. From a tactical view this worries me, just how good is the a400? Because it’s going to need to be better than what we’ve already got.

      • Pretty irrelevant considering the standing tasks the ATF carries out every day, every week, with bids for the assets coming in from all corners of defence, and now there will be 14 less. Those 14 also supported the SF mission, which now the remaining assets must meet as well as their usual tasks.

        If we are talking one big operation dropping the lead AATF then yes, in that area Atlas is superior. Great asset.
        But I’m not talking about that.

        In a few years I can see ops cancelled and exercises not happening as the assets do not exist to deploy them or those assets airframe hours have been flogged, much as the C17s have as the commitments never reduce but the assets do.

        • Absolutely correct Daniele. The IDSR cut the transport fleet by 25%,.down from 55 aircraft to 41.

          There has been no corresponding cut in our force commitments or deployments. in fact with the SFAB and Rangers, deployments have increased compared with a decade ago.

          It is basically a 25% cut to help pay for the defence equipment black hole.

          If we need to deploy troops and equipment on any scale, we will henceforth have 25 front-line transports to do so rather than the current 34. That is pretty wafer thin, even for a single brigade deployment.

          The advantage of the C-130J is that it can handle austere runways and being fitted with station keeping kit, is ideal for SF operations and parachute insertion of troops and supplies. The A400 is not that suitable for these roles.

          There are no additional orders for A400s. The RAF wanted 23, got 22, of which the 21st was finally delivered this year and the last one is due any year now.

          The transport orbat was logical and didn’t need changed. With the A330 Voyagers handling air transport and AAR, we had 3 classes of cargo aircraft:
          Heavy lift with C-17As
          Medium lift with A400s
          Tactical lift with Hercules

          The only reason for the change is the financial cuts imposed by the ‘integrated defence review.

          • Ah, so someone else sees it as I do.

            My primary concern is the impact on SF as I believe many of those aircraft were with the dedicated SF Flight with 47 Sqn.

            What does that job now? Atlas.
            And what aircraft are doing the tasks those Atlas planes were doing but now are not available as they have to support SF? None. I don’t accept that all tasks will be staggered so the Atlas sometimes cannot be in two places at once.

            Good points re the smaller task units like SFAB and SOB.

            The original Atlas order I recall as 25, cut by 3 to 22.

            Additional Atlas I’ll believe that when I see it.

            Til then this is the usual more with less, no matter how good, fast, reliable, modern, or how much an Atlas can lift.

          • Good memory Daniele and quite right, the planned Atlas order was 25, they they decided to cut the squadron leader having his own aircraft plus one in reserve, so it was thought it would be 23, but then the abacus cost-cutters at the Treasury and MOD whittled it down to 22. What a constant struggle it is to even maintain the now- minimalist level of army and RAF service numbers and equipments.

            About the only thing the British MOD leads the world in is skilful cost-cutting and endless equipment fire sales without replacements.

            Gawd help us if we have to face even a near-peer conflict, we are relegating ourselves to being a minor partner in NATO and a very minor, token player out of area.

        • Not really u guys can say what you want but the cash isn’t there to run both. A400 can do loads more cheaper than the loved herc. The a400 can’t be spared so to keep the herc what shall we loose? A fighter squadron, a heli squadron? An f35 or two?
          It’s political suicide to throw money from benefits to defence so the fact remains while the economy is like this.
          You guys tell me what u want to lose??

          • There is cash – this is completely false.

            The problem isn’t the money, it’s how it’s spent – we’re spending billions on Ajax which is overbudget, overrunning and a catastrophically poorly managed programme because we refused to buy an off the shelf platform of which BAE Systems did offer platforms which where significantly better and could of been delivered already.

            Instead of scrapping Ajax and buying something cheaper and off the shelf we’re going to scrap the C130’s, not only does this drastically cut the transport fleets capacity and numbers but there has been no decision made on the A400M order for new aircraft, which means if it goes on time we’re still looking at a gap of a few years where we have no C130’s and no additional A400M’s.

            The current strategy of the MoD and the Conservatives is to hope that in the event of a war our enemies are nice enough to let us build up our numbers, fix our production lines and install the more advanced fighting equipment on our navy vessels – which just negates the purpose of a military if you’re going to be so unprepared.

  10. Another mistake in a long line of mistakes. No common sense these days. Looks like the Brits will once again have to depend on the Yanks for yet another capability they’ve given away.

        • You missed the Embraer 190 and that those airframe also split further into sub fleets like the 777-200 and 777-300 or 787-8 and 787-9. The reality is a lot of maintenance isn’t done by the operator these days. Companies like Lufthansa Technik, Sebina or in the case of the C130 its Marshalls do a lot of the maintenance.

      • Where should I start, Andy? You’ve commented quite a few times pushing this misinformation about A400M’s so-called capability.

        • Sim stick LLP
        • Medium/Heavy drop
        • maritime drop
        • extracted loads
        • ALARP (aircraft to aircraft, without TSW!!)
        • Oh, can SF Troops actually fit in the seats with parachutes fitted, too? Nope.

        I could go on.

  11. So angry about this. I know rotating the Service Chiefs is supposed to avoid bias but this Radukan man is really starting to get up my trumpet .

    There are people who need to do things in far away places whoight need a late night taxi. Sending in one if those M400s might not be the safest move.

    • Whilst I totally agree that the C130J should have been kept on: the decision to retire the type was made by the RAF well before Radakin was in post.

      • I agree in principle but Radukan is just theblatest in the amorphous MOD officer ejaculations. He has been got at and is now a creature of his superiors.

        What we need is a Captain who has been at sea and who does not take kindly to civil servants. I do not mean that as an insukt to MOD civil servants but rather to highlight the need we have of keeping both sides keeping an wyw on each other to avoid overreach. Radukan is an example of an officer, in my opinion only, who has been infected with professional MOD gobbledigook.

        • Radakin has managed something close to a miracle as 1SL IMHO.

          He is also coherent and believable as well as managing to navigate the MOD machine rather well.

          I’d not be so negative.

          • I would be.

            I can understand that he is doing what he thinks is in our best interests. I do not suggest hr is malign, in any way, but there are many ways of looking after our national interests through the prism of force.

            I would also, without finger pointing, say that he is CDS not 1st Sea Lord.

          • I make no comment on his achievements as First Sea Lord or not. That has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

            He has, in my opinion, served his own service more than he should have. I have been discussing, via many different replies, just what I think but I seem to only get replies which are personal in nature in reply.

            We are lucky that we have this forum of comments on well-researched articles in a subject matter in which we all have a common interest. Can we not use it in that way?

          • CDS is an advisory role alongside the Permanent Secretary. Given the fact that there’s a strong Defence Secretary with a mind of his own (praise the Lord!) and a war going on in Ukraine, can you really hold Radakin responsible for the decision to junk the Hercules? He’s not even a member of the Air Force Board. Why not Wigston or Knighton?

          • A very sensible and adroit point.

            I think the answer to your question lies in that Wigston is not fit to wear a pair of socks let alone his rank insignia.

            He is interested in quotas, HR and paperwork to such an extent that most airman who never came back would turn in their grave.

        • I’d trust Radakin’s opinion over any armchair admiral any day, and if you don’t think he’s been to sea you need to read up on his service record.

          • First, it’s armchair General, not Admiral.

            Secondly, I have not commented on his record. This is because I know nothing about it and it is irrelevant to the points I have made.

            I would also suggest that you treat the commentary here as a place to discuss amongst like-minded people rather than gutter near a tabloid publication. There is an awful lot if experience here which I have been lucky enough to learn from.

          • You don’t even deserve the rank of “armchair private” let alone “general”.

            Yes you have commented on his service record
            “What we need is a Captain who has been at sea ”
            Radakin has served on several warships and served as captain of a frigate. All those ships were “at sea”.

            You clear still have a lot to learn if you fail to appreciate the abilities of a former 1SL and current CDS.

  13. My understanding is the C-130K first entered RAF service in late 1966, when the last is gone next year, it will bring 57 years of RAF Herc service to an end, RIP.

    Here in Oz, the C-130A entered RAAF service in 1958 (first export customer), and the Herc fleet has clocked up 64 years of service to date, and counting.

    The current 12 C-130J-30, which entered service starting in 1999, was planned to stay in service until the end of this decade.

    But recent reports suggest they will be retired a bit earlier than planned, and it appears they may be replaced with an expanded fleet of up to 30 new Hercs, possibly 24 C-130J-30 and 6 KC-130J.

    Maybe some of those RAF Herc crews might want to come here to Oz? Transfer to the RAAF and enjoy the warmer weather, hey?

    Cheers,

      • G’day mate, hope things are well on your side of the ditch? Lovely sunny morning here in Sydney.

        Actually you’re wrong, it’s not 4, it’s 5! Five of the stretched C-130J-30 model (same as the RAAF).

        You might have thinking about the P-8A, that’s four aircraft.

        You need to get Jacinta to order a few more of each.

        Cheers,

        • morning John- been a wet old weekend here and I believe tomorrow Melbourne cup will be rainy. I think Jacinta’s days are likely to be numbered -11 months (ish) to the next general election.

    • DM, here it starts. I am concerned this new Tory administration will bring further cuts access all branches of the services. I’m thinking they’ll pull a version of Cameron’s 2010 reviews (possibly not as vicious though). They’ll justify it as necessary re. the state of the economy, rampant inflation etc. Sadly (and irresponsibly) the 2.5% of gdp defence goal will become a pipe dream.

      I wonder if my old mob in the SAAF will put in a bid for some of these J models as their C130B’s turn 60 years old early 2023!

      • I may be a good buy for them. Depends what shape the 14 are in. Maybe a bit used and abused but most things are 2nd hand. I wonder what has more flying hours on them? The RAF or SAAF aircraft.

        • Hi MS

          I’m pretty sure the SAAF B model will have significantly higher airframe hours, being 60 years old. I can’t imagine them buying more than 6-8 aircraft thought,.

        • I’m pretty sure Marshalls of Cambridge do all the refurbishment of the Hercules, the main problem being the Wing Spars tend to need replacing due to the high use they have had. This is not cheap so can understand the RAF offloading them to save on costs. The export customers seem happy to pay it though.

      • Morning Klonkie! Can’t believe the SAAF operated Hercs for 60 years! At that time they also had lots of Harvards with their radial engines that made that unique sound as they droned above. Another WW2 relic was son of Lancaster-the Shackleton still in SAAF service. At about that time the 16 Bucaneers left the UK bound for SA just before the order was curtailed by sanctions. We lost one, en route somewhere over West Africa I think. Did they see action in Nam? We had the Delta Mirages joined in the 70’s(I think!) by the swept wing F1’s. Meanwhile up in Rhodesia the RRAF operated a museum fleet of Hunters, Vampires and Canberras(later to great effect) I was a relatively fresh from Blighty Soutie and they had a lovely photo on the front page of the Rhodesia Herald of a gleeming silver Squadron of Lightnings just entering service with the RAF-the caption read Display of power. At about the same time the RRAF were taking delivery of ex RAF Hunters and my Salisbury born pal had to put up with my Pom bragging rights😂

        • Hey Geoff ,how are things? I’ve got 22 hours logged on Harvard’s before I was taken off SAAF pilot training course way back in 1982 Plenty of trips in pumas and Dakotas in the operational area over the next few years. Yore probably aware that 35 sqn in Cape Town still operate DC3’s turbo propped). That makes them close to 80 year old!

          • Howsit Klonkie-all good. Forgot about the DC3 wow! The Yanks certainly produce long life aircraft. The B52 is another example of vintage rules the skies! Talking of the DC series when I came to the then Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland in 1961 we flew in on a DC7c-last of the propeller driven!
            Admire you for your service-ops I presume mainly in SWA. It always tickled me that Sam Nujoma fought for the independence of Namibia in a party called South West Africa Peoples Organisation😄 Like Mugabe calling his lot the Rhodesian African National Union😂 fighting for the freedom of Zimbabwe

          • Good grief, DC3s? I vaguely remember flying across the Sahara, as a child, en route from the UK to Lagos in one of those (Tripoli to Kano leg, IIRC). That would have been in 1958/59 or thereabouts and they were regarded as “old” then!

            They’ve obviously aged well. Subsequent trips were in the Bristol Britannia and Boeing Stratocruiser. Neither still in service (displaced by jets), though the Stratocruiser got a second life as the Guppy

          • Hi Caribbean-I did Viscounts across the Irish sea to Belfast from London-had a distinctive sound heard from ground below!

    • I’m not sure what I think about this. As others have said, the MOD are keen to hold fire sales of unwanted defence gear at the every opportunity, regardless of the consequences. We are living in a very uncertain world. When threats manifest themselves, the days of quickly ramping up production of ships, aircraft and military hardware are long gone.

      • The MoD has always acted quickly to dispose (by auction usually) of defence equipment when it has been withdrawn from service.
        It makes sense from every angle – we cannot hold on to obsolete kit in warehouses for years and years in case WW3 comes along – even if it did, would ancient kit be effective?
        Very true that it takes ages to ramp up production and our production facilities are only 1-deep or non-existent for certain types of kit.

  15. Craziest shitty plan! The herc is so valuable in its size, capability and, yes, expendable where the Atlas won’t be! I can’t really say much more as I would rant on for hours!!!!!

  18. I honestly don’t think we need them anymore, with all the costs of having an older airframe.

    We could do with a few more A400Ms (to keep types to a minimum) or perhaps some C-27Js or C-295s (6-8 perhaps), but smaller aircraft are far easier to obtain quickly should we find ourselves needing them.

    India have just signed a deal for C-295s, with them to be built domestically from 2026. Orders like that we could possibly get in on.

  19. A sad goodbye to an iconic and capable aircraft that has been around for decades. Also the demise of the Bae 146 marks the end (apart from the Hawk) of wholly British manufactured aircraft in the RAF. I flew on one in it’s Avro clothing a few years back and it was briefly considered for commercial service as ideal for the short St.Helena runway.
    Slightly off topic-I cannot believe I am saying this but there is a really good article in today’s Mail online on HMS Medway intercepting some drug runners in the Caribbean complete with some great photos!!😮

  20. A few months ago i was woken by a low humming noise, so I went on to ADSB and it was an A400M at 30,000ft. I was either lightly sleeping or it woke me up.

  21. Keep a couple and convert to Spectre Gunships we’ve got another 30mms from all the Hunts and Sandown boats of the MCM that are going

  23. Not a good idea to sell the C130 with the Russian and Ukraine war still grinding on. Events could really catch the UK out.
    The amount of money saved cannot be that large compared to the defense budget.

  24. Good move. Need to properly commit to the A400M now. But we probably need a couple more and how about a few C295s while we’re at it

  27. Sad to see the HercyBird retired. I personally think it’s a huge mistake, at least under the present circumstances. I had a chat with an A400 pilot recently who said the same. We need a backup force reserve.

  28. When will the UK admit what the world already knows, that they no longer have a military capability. Strategic Defense review, Options of Change, another Defense Review, all fancy names for another round of defense cuts. The Royal Navy just withdrew 4 frigates, the reason; to allow manpower for the new frigates which over course won’t join the fleet for years. The next to go will be HMS’s Albion & Bulwark (HMS Ocean already sold) ending the Royal Navy’s amphibious capability. The RAF is smaller than the Israeli Air Force, the British army is smaller than the US Marine Corp. The RN is down to 9 frigates and 6 destroyers, 2 new aircraft carriers with no planes or escorts to put them to sea. Time to give up this farce of pretending the UK has a military, admit to yourselves the UK is a welfare state insignificant on the world stage, incapable of projecting power or even merely protecting its own interests. As a final act on the world stage resign the seat as a permanent member of the UN Security Council which having no military capable of enforcing UN decisions the UK has no right to have, and call for a Security Council reflecting the world of today. Sell the carriers, maybe Japan or India will buy them, the money could go right to the NHS. Very sad what has happened to a once great country.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here