The UK’s decision to retire the C-130 Hercules aircraft has sparked concerns among experts, as it may significantly impact the country’s airlift capability.
Andy Netherwood, a former RAF pilot with extensive experience, including three years flying C-17s for the US Air Force on exchange, recently testified before a parliamentary committee and emphasised the potential consequences of this move.
Netherwood’s expertise in both RAF and US Air Force operations lends significant weight to his concerns about the retirement of the C-130 Hercules. His hands-on experience with various aircraft types allows him to provide unique insights into the challenges the UK may face without this versatile transport aircraft.
Netherwood highlighted the unique role the C-130 Hercules plays in the UK’s military transport, particularly in accessing smaller, austere airfields. He explained, “Sometimes you just need a smaller aircraft because the airfield you go into is quite small… so it really matters how much space you take up on the ramp, and how much runway you need.” He noted that the larger A400 aircraft cannot always replace the C-130 in these situations due to physical limitations.
This could affect special forces operations and other military tasks, as they often require access to smaller airfields. Netherwood stated, “In terms of getting into tiny airfields, the one that springs immediately to mind is special forces, but actually it is anything. Every time we go into a conflict, the airhead is never a well-found, major, Heathrow-size airport; it is always a small regional airport or a small austere strip—so size matters.”
The removal of the C-130 Hercules from the UK’s fleet could also impact the country’s ability to maintain air bridges to strategic locations, such as Cyprus, the Falklands, and Diego Garcia. Netherwood suggested that while peacetime demands might be met with the remaining aircraft, “inevitably, though, we will hollow out the capability that we will need if we go to war.”
Furthermore, the UK’s ability to work with allies, particularly the United States, may be affected by the loss of the C-130 Hercules. Netherwood emphasised the value the US places on allies who can transport their forces and equipment independently, sharing that “one of the things they loved about the UK was that most of the time we can get ourselves from A to B and back again.”
While the integrated review refresh may reconsider this decision, the upcoming Command Paper in June will provide further clarity on the fate of the C-130 Hercules. As it stands, the removal of this critical aircraft from the UK’s fleet could have significant implications for both military operations and international relations.
That is why a C-27J class makes sense.
Australians use it for everything, recently sent one supporting F-35 deployment to Singapore – not even needed a C-130.
Not when you already have C-130’s in service.
Note that Australia have both – good for bush small landing zones – and since RAF is retiring C-130 would even make more sense.
C-27J operating from an Australian “highway”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg2-LDnzq_s
In addition to operating 10 C27J Spartans for short field operations (very useful for operating into small pacific islands and austere airstrips) the RAAF’s current fleet of 12 C130Js (some of which are approaching 30 years old) will be replaced by an expanded fleet of 24 new build C130Js, doubling its size.
Coupled with 8 C17s and 7 A330 MRTTs, the RAAF’s planned airlift fleet of 49 airframes provides it with a versatile capability for a full range of operations from HADR to SF and strategic airlift.
Yes a balanced fleet. It seems RAF only want to do “large strategic”
Edit: sorry did not acknowledged that Australia will get new C-130 like you say.
I would love the RAF to have C-27s
Not surprising really- HMG state they are investing in the armed forces whereas the reality is a never ending cycle of decline and loss of capabilities that were once in the past considered sacrosanct. If we are retiring the Hercules what exactly is going to undertake its lift capabilities?
The A400M- too few in number and we didn’t order the follow-up batch we were supposed too. primarily thanks to Germany reducing its planned order to almost zero and this pushed up unit price.
Not sure what the answer is but I’d have thought ordering more A400M’s would make a lot of sense.
Good to know that the “experts” agree with you.🙃
Need to hang on to Hercules really but we all know never going to happen 🙄
They are getting old now,higher maintenance costs for each airframe,and availability is at times is lacking.
My son is an avionics tech with the RAF..
The 130 is a jack of all that will never be replaced.
Too true, for too long the UK defences have been run by bean counters. We’ve managed to reduce our arm forces to an extent that they operate a minimal number of 30+ year old tanks, infantry support vehicles and frigates and a minimal number of fighter aircraft. All achieved in the last decade, splendid book keeping!
Other than the obvious cut that this decision is about, what’s the actual cost of retaining the asset for another few years? In the meantime put some more orders on a400m even if it’s 1 a year for 10 years that would allow a slow build up while keeping up the airlift numbers which Ukraine, Afghanistan and now Sudan have shown is or nearly is a number 1 priority.
Just get an amazon prime subscription and use the free shipping.
Germany, Sweden and France plan to develop a “A200m” style aircraft. Maybe this could make sense for UK to join this programme.
The C-130 heir already exists it is the Embraer C-390
Politics/costs aside, you could also throw in the Kawasaki C-2, or, if you wanted a slightly smaller/cheaper option then either the C-27 Spartan or Airbus C-295 might fit the bill.
Either way it is a capability that we should not be giving up purely as it seems on cost grounds. The proposed purchase of 6-8 additional A400 aircraft might never happen, additionally, as several posters have already stated, its big, probably too big for lots of tasks currently done by the Herc.
It shouldnt take a Defence review/consultation paper to state the obvious!!
The A400 takes more runway to both land and take off than the C-130…it’s not rocket science that it cannot replace all the C-130 roles and people suggesting otherwise were just purposefully missing the holes.In the end the A400 was always really a strategic airlift asset that also has some characteristics of tactical airlift.
Never a truer word spoken!
Just can’t help thinking that a bit of ‘out the box ‘ thinking around the ‘y20’ time could have seen us somewhat less reliant on the US if we had gone with the Japanese offering of P-1 instead of P-8 and then jumped in with the C-2? Yes we needed Her replacements a few years sooner, but still, what could have been, politics aside…..
Yeah imagine the A-400 in the Australian road youtube video i posted above.
Defence Reviews are too much reliant on the input from the treasury to the exclusion of virtually any other opinions. But the treasury do not have to go to war with insufficient and old equipment or manpower.
No kidding! Reducing the RAF’s airlift capacity further at a time of heightened international tension and a supposed re-engagement in the Indo-Pacific was always a weird decision.
A400m is definitely too big and too expensive for certain jobs and the C-130J’s have plenty of life left in them.
6 additional Atlas by the end of the decade to replace some of the Hercules and then 8 C-27J (or the modern equivalent) once the Herc’s have used and abused would make way more sense.
That would be a reasonable solution.
Pretty much confirming what many of us have been saying for months. Atlas cannot replace the Hercs for many tasks no matter how fast it is and how big a payload it can carry.
It can’t be in two places at once and you don’t always need a jumbo sized delivery vehicle or else all your online shopping would be delivered by a 40 ton artic rather than a transit van
Keep the C-130s and upgrade with the Rapid Dragon system
I’ve no idea how Rapid Dragon is any use in a contested environment?
C130 is a slow aircraft and would be very vulnerable to counter fire.
I’ve no real idea what actual military problem Rapid Dragon actually does solve other than duffing up mud hut conflicts. For which a drone with precision missiles is far more effective.
I know it will never happen but how hard would it be to convert the A350F into military spec?
It would be extremely efficient and spacious.
A350 !? since it can it land in semi prepared land terrain?
I suggested it because it’s a new aircraft with excellent economy and should have a decent service life. It has a frieghter variant so could maybe be modified?
Not possible to structurally modify a liner aircraft for tactical, operational transport. It obviously can transport troops and equipment’s within its limitations, it would need a proper airfield, proper equipment to unload cargo and passengers etc. It is not a C-130, C-27J with a ramp that can unload and take off from austere landing zones.
You don’t think his pretty broad, hands on experience is logical or evidence based?
About time someone said this out loud. We do need to keep a few squadrons of the Herc, it can get in and out of places the A-400 can’t. For me it is simple in terms an A-400 is strategic airlift, a Herc is tactical airlift. A better understanding could be an A-400 is node to node, a Herc node to front.
Another shock!. It has been blatantly obvious since it was decided to keep the Herc to the time not mush later when it was decided to get rid of it that we were in for another blunder and here it is. Almost every defence undertaking in the UK is being honed down, boned down or closed down. What do we hear from the military? Nothing. We are very close to being incapable of carrying out ant task independently.
Very true. Most on here seem to be blind to it though and fall for the crap about our handful of gold plated world class systems being so good it makes up for them not being able to be in 2 or 3 places at once. Anyone pointing that out just gets ridiculed though.
It’s happened to me more than a few times. There are some who seem to think that it’s wrong to question or criticize but as Churchill said ! ” just keep bug..ring on”😉
An FMS request for 12 MC-130’s was in the works to replace these.
Scrapping a world class SF support force is deranged.
Agree!
We already can’t do strategic lift alone, but if we cut the Army anymore we can probably get them all their in a 10 seater aircraft
I cant understand this decision. It makes no sense to me to not keep all the C130s and retain a squadron to operate them. These are fine aircraft with a usefulness beyond in many spheres in any conflict. Conflict is very possible in the next ten years or less. Maybe they will simply take them to some remote airfield and deliberately cut them up.
Some bugger lobbying the government behind this one and looking at making cash out of the defence industry. With current world situation only the current idiots running our nation would consider messing with a tried and tested capability. Businessmen cannot be trusted with our national security.
Just look at France & Germany. They have bought large numbers of A400M, but also a few new C-130J/KC-130J for special ops. 4 for France, 6 for Germany. Does not need huge numbers.
These folks would be better shouting about the stupid decision before the aircraft are actually up for sale and ops are winding down. Too little to late really.
The forces are just something that is though will be there to fix any solution thrown at them.
Perhaps one day when they are needed to help out they won’t be able to, then the questions will be asked. It shouldn’t need to be like that.
To be honest we don’t need to keep the C-130 fleet, but we do need an aircraft that has range and can also land and take off in very small spaces…there are lots of options…just not the A400M..it’s Great for most jobs..but it needs a lot more runway than some of the smaller tactical air lift options.
behind every decision, you will find an accountant…who has never been outside the M25