Training continues to expand the capabilities of crews flying the C-130J Hercules, despite the type now being put up for sale.
A 47 Squadron crew, overseen by a Qualified Flying Instructor from 24 Squadron, recently flew their C-130J Hercules from the home of the RAF Air Mobility Force at RAF Brize Norton to Royal Naval Air Station Yeovilton to run an Air Landed Arming and Refuelling Point or ‘ALARP’ site.
In a press release, the Royal Air Force go on to say that an Air Landed Arming and Refuelling Point allows a number of helicopters, fast jets or other aircraft to take on fuel where it usually wouldn’t be available to them.
“This includes improvised runways and in this case the taxiway at Royal Navy Air Station Yeovilton. The Air Landed Arming and Refuelling Point site is set up and run entirely by the aircrew and ground engineers of the Hercules. Air Landed Arming and Refuelling Point will be replaced by the Air Landed Aircraft Refuelling System or ALARS which is currently employed by the Atlas C.1, which employs the support of RAF refuelling specialists from Tactical Supply Wing.”
In this case, they add, the receivers included a pair of Merlins flown by the Commando Helicopter Force, alongside a single Wildcat operated by the Army Air Corps.
“Despite the torrential downpours that hit the aircraft during the refuel, the whole process was executed flawlessly.”
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.
Now here’s the thing. Why o why are the Herks going. The fleet has never been busier. Lunacy I tell you.
Logic and those who make such decisions should never be mentioned in the same sentence.
The Herks go just like the Nimrod. Suddenly urgent calls are made to our US cousins and Nato friends pleading them to fill the lost capability we abandoned.
Cap in hand to uncle Sam again.
I’m puzzled are we saying this kit is too dangerous to fly & can’t be fixed or are we saying there is better kit out there – we just need to pay for (or borrow) replacements?
The Nimrod project was a shambles. The Herky Bird is a whole different argument but one no one seems to be listening.
It might of been a shambles but the government disposed of an entire capability. That is the point I’m trying to make.
The issue was more that there was little evidence that Nimrod MRA4 would ever be safe to fly with the new certification regime that came in half way through its development post Haddon Cave.
There was a very long list of people who refused to sign off various bits of paper.
Then there was the whole issue of the control systems….
Honestly the fiasco could still have been going on now.
A lot of people who worked on the project, and I know personally, were relieved that they could get on with some work in the real world.
I whole heartily agree about MR4a. MR2 was still in service although in a parlous state especially with an air refuelling system that was never properly majored after the ad hock fit during the Falklands conflict. Having said that the C130j is an integral part of the transport fleet and once it has gone the capability it provides is gone. What I’m pointing out is as with the loss of Nimrod we ended up relying on our US and NATO colleagues to plug the gap until a decision was made to procure P8s. I fear that is what will happen… Read more »
Fair enough. Same with me really. There was a reason for Nimrod but Hercules?
Yes is 20+ years of evidence that the type works and is liked by the customers.
Never question those that know SB!!!
What would we replace Herclues with – more of the same, C17? what?
Can’t see the C17 coming into it or the Atlas really. Both the wrong type I think. So I guess Voyager. Rumour has it that there will be more but???
Defence paper says: “The A400M Atlas force will increase its capacity and capability”
Believe USAF will be very pleased to bid, and offer them a very nice second home. 🤔
Because those in power are not interested in our armed forces and we will agian because the poor relation after the ‘Herks’ have gone, and as many have replied we will rely on the Yanks or our NATO partners?
Our ‘New’ Prime minister isn’t going to want to spend any more on defence and he wont stop the sale.. Stupidity at its best!!
Except the A400 fleet is still growing in numbers, capacity, availability, and capability. 8 C17s provide a huge capability, and the Voyager fleet has a very large capacity for airlift and pax transfer. NATO members use our capacity and capability. I wish the Herc was staying, but the RAF are consolidating aircraft types for the future. We can’t keep everything, and expect to still fund future capabilitys. We can’t do it all.
I’d imagine most would understand it if there was an announcement on future A400M numbers. Ideally with a firm order, but at the very least some detail on the aspirational fleet size.
As things stand, we are seeing yet another cut and only a vague promise.
That is the key. Mentions of a carrot but nothing firm.
By past history, said carrots to justify cuts are themselves nibbled off further down the road, when the first cut has been all but forgotten by most save for the depressed like us who still have it in mind.
Ah yes, the old ‘jam tomorrow’ gig.
T45 hulls 7 & 8 sacrificed for the GCS order to be rough forward…that worked well.
A classic case SB!
Another, in 2009, closing RAF Cottesemore and cutting No 2 and No 3 Squadrons of Harrier GR9, but vowing to buy 22 Chinooks for the money.
Bullshit. Years later with the Tory 2010 government in power a much reduced number were finally ordered.
I must have a think, I might try making a list of carrots!
Close your eyes. You’ll see better in the dark.😃
By many accounts the Hercules Fleet is shagged out, due to a couple of reasons – (1) the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan kept them very busy which takes its toll,their Airframe hours may have reached a critical point regarding major servicing and rebuilds.(2) the entry into service of the A400 was seriously delayed which put more strain on the Hercules fleet than what was originally planned for.(3)the RAF should have been allowed to get more C17 quicker, rather than the protracted lease agreement for 4 then the realisation they needed another 4,a further 4 should have been added to… Read more »
It is, and quite a number had fatigue issues (not so much the J) on and below the cabin floor, due to the large amount of lads pissing on the floor when crammed in, for a number of hours low level, on a Bde lob. Gen!
The air forces Herks have just gone through a major wing spare replacement, much money has been spent and neither are they shagged. The original 4 C17s were bought out right when the additional 4 were purchased.
Yes I’m aware that the first 4 C17’s were eventually bought outright, my opinion is that full ownership should have been the case from the start. Wing Spar replacement is very expensive I agree, but is that not a symptom of heavy use ?.
Hi Mark, meanwhile down here both Australia and New Zealand are buying the latest C130J Hercs. Makes sense with logistical support, legacy and interoperability with each other and the US. Someone in the know must be thinking same with a consolidation on the A300M up in Europe plus politics, economics and supporting the UK/European air industry added in. Sure hope that any sales revenue earned is put to good use and not wasted.
*sorry, meant A400s.
Cap in hand indeed and what does that cost us ?
More than retaining the capability it provides.
Pathetic. We need as many air assets as possible.
It is not the aircraft that are being trained but the crews! The type of plane is relatively immaterial.
What! How can you train an aircraft? If you train crews you train them on the equipment that will be used. So instead of the Herk why is an Atlas not being used?
Yeah, but * The air transport group is being reduced by 25%, most of that from the firesale and non-replacement of the Hercs, despite them being good for another decade’s service. The type of plane is not immaterial when you don’t have anything to plug the gap, and ^ Atlas is large and expensive and not ideal for austere runways. And there aren’t going to be enough of them to do this role as well as take over the Hercs’ other roles like SF, para insertion, para supplies. So, not the best choice for the job and anyway there won’t… Read more »
Exactly. Bonkers.
keen to see what happens to these crew Mate. I do hope they are retained , hopefully theses folk will convert onto C 17, A400.s
Hi mate. They’ll have too as 47 Sqn, the Herc squadron, has crews who form the SF Flight. Both pilots, loadies and dispatch from 47 AD Sqn RLC all used to support SF, and are security cleared.
Not people you get rid of.
Cheers DM.
A400 has greater range with a larger cargo capacity and can do austere runways too.
The Hercs are knackered due to the usage they’ve had. In 2010 they planned to retire them in 2022, then this was stretched out to 2030 due to delays with the A400. Now the A400 is fully operational they’ve decided they no-longer need to try and keep them flying so long.
I wouldn’t say that 22 of them is fully operational, if they are to form our sole tactical airlift capability and fulfil lots of strategic transportation as well, then that number is nowhere near high enough and I believe further purchases are planned regardless. 8 C-17s and 22 A-400s doesn’t sound like a sufficient replacement for even the 8 C-17s, 21 A400-s and 14 C-130Js that we have today. I’m not familiar with A-400 capabilities on austere runways but I am aware that its takeoff distance is shorter than that of the Hercs. However, I am still concerned for the… Read more »
This is just practicing something that has been done since when i was in the RAF and i left over 20years ago!
We used the same system at RAF Stanley FI
True… but then if you don’t practice, the people who replaced you 20 years ago, won’t know what to do!
Yep, but then you practice on the aircraft type that will be used and develope the capability! not something that is on EBAY
No mate, you practice with all types that are in service at the time…
Remember, it is the Crews that are being trained… The concept of the operation is the same regardless of the type of airframe… Only some processes may be different due to type…
Those crews then have understanding of what is required before they learn to operate with a new type…
The USMC have used this exact technique to forward operate F35B Lightnings from forward operating bases. Why are we selling these aircraft ? We will get a pittance for them and they are good for another 10 years.
Sheer insanity.
The sale won’t be where the money is made. The money is saved from cutting out a complete aircraft type. No more separate spares, training lines etc etc. Supposedly it’s cheaper to run more of one aircraft type as opposed to more than one of multiple types. I don’t know how much cheaper. The fact that this Hercules is a complete cut with no replacement will save the most amount possible in future years. It doesn’t get away from the fact the transport fleet is down on aircraft and reliant on bigger aircraft for all roles. Now it’s chinook, A400,… Read more »
It should be considerably cheaper because you’re removing all training, spares and maintenance contracts.
You’ve also got the potential of adding more crews to current aircraft in service both from an aircrew perspective and ground trades.
And what will be the ongoing costs of this pointless training exercise? This is another example (along with all the latest woke stuff) of the RAF top brass losing its marbles.
The exercise is of significant value, as it had been done earlier this year with an A400M, which also involved a pair of Typhoons. The theory being that Typhoons can return to a rough airstrip without facilities and get rearmed and refuelled. It was a staple of the Herc fleet and was also done by the Chinook fleet. Where a Chinny would top up Lynx and Apaches.
The RAF have been practicing these techniques since WW2, it’s a skill that once is lost takes a while to get right again.
But it is a bit pointless doing it on the Hercules. Honestly if they aren’t needed park them up now. If they are needed don’t get rid of them.
The RAF will fly them until the 11th hour. So might as well make use of them. The budget for the year has been paid for. So apart from fuel used there’s not much to be made in savings, grounding the fleet now.
Honestly, what’s the point with them leaving service next year?
Well at least the money saved from selling off the C130J can be used to put up refugees escaping war in France in 4 star hotels, that is what the defence budget should really be spent on, saving 40 year old children. At least Labour , human rights groups and the BBC are pointing this out.
Farouk, pours himself a beer and sits back to enjoy the postive feedback from other concerned British citizens
Atleast Labour didn’t lie about what they stand for. Absolutely disgusted.
Labour lies like a cheap NAAFI watch Zach, they all do and to say otherwise is head in the sand sort of stuff.
Of course they lie, they want to scrap Trident and pull out of NATO, but saw what happened when they had a leader who publicly touted these views.
They didn’t do that last time they were in power. Main thing is we all stick to facts not opinion. Opinions vary dramatically from person to person. Some folks view labour as you stated above. Some folks view tories equally as bad. The truth is normally somewhere in the middle.
The tories still have time left to change people views of them and there record on defence.
But Corbyn planned to, he said so… thankfully he got an even worse result than Michael Foot.
“Their” record in Defence.
I don’t think he planned to. He put his view across and let the party vote on the trident replacement issue. Labour voted for it to stay while he was leader. We will never know for sure as labour never won that election with Corbyn as leader.
Let’s look forward and see what happens when the next election comes. I imagine it’s going to be one of the big 2 parties that wins.
I think there is a fairly decent likelihood there is going to be large parts of the country that turn red from blue.
Even with the Tories having two years to turn public opinion around, I think some miracles may have to be performed in order to keep them in power
Is that what’s the defence budget is being used for? I really really hope not. That’s some other departments responsibility not defence.
The tories have been in charge for ages now and defence has taken a hammering under them. Not saying it would be better under another leadership but the tories are no saints on defence. Or most things.
A400 is a piece of crap. That’s why nobody wants them. C130 Production line still churning them out. I have lost count of the C130 variants. C130 is a jack of all trades and master of nearly all. A400 still can’t do everything it was ment to. Not to mention the corrosion issue nobody speaks of.
What corrosion issue? What’s the issue with that?
Youve lost count of the number of C130 variants because its been in service since 1958!
At the moment everyone is divesting the C-130, UK and Holland selling up, US has halfed their fleet and is dragging their fleet on the costly Wingbox replacement which is required for all C-130 manufactured before 2009 due to early fatigue cracks only repairing 14 a year.
Australia is getting rid of its less than 20 year old C-130J and replacing them with… C-130J because it doesnt want to go to the expense of rectifying them itself.
The cost of a Wingbox replacement on a C-130H is $7 million, hardly costly. The USAF continues to procure the C-130J and funded 22 in its FY22 budget.
Nobody wants A400M Atlas? 10 counries have them in service or have ordered them.
“Hercules crews train for ALAHTKI (Air Landing and Hand The Keys In) Binning the herc FFS Biggest cluster in a giant bag of ongoing fucking epic defence clusters!
They are going …get used to it.
Its not aircraft numbers that count its lift capacity, range , sortie rate and speed that matter.
A400 lifts more weight, of bigger dimensions , further and quicker than a C130.
There is an excellent piece by the irrepressible Think Defence that in the first few pages shows why C130 is going. (Warning:- You will end up reading it all and go down a lot of rabbit holes!)
Vehicle Transportability – Think Defence
It’s a totally valid point and makes complete sense. I don’t know what loads get transported over what distances and how often. I’m assume the RAF does know.
I think most people’s discomfort from the news is that it’s seen as a cut. If the news was “retiring 14 C130 and buying 10 A400 as to bolster transport fleet” the news becomes easier to swallow. Or our heavy vehicle purchases have made C130 irrelevant.
MOD need a lesson in how the headlines get viewed. I also know 95% of the population properly don’t know what a C130 is
Agreed, it would have been far better to have announced there would be a commensurate uplift in A400s at the same time as the withdrawal of the Hercs. If the US are still buying C130s, why not suggest a swap of the RAF’s entire fleet [plus any spares lying around] for a couple of ‘used’ C17s [they operate over 200] …
I know A400 is bigger/better but you don’t always need a big airframe to move kit, If they had kept the 146 PCF’s i could understand, they were really useful for quick resupply flight with breakfix spares.
146 was good. BAe was using it until pretty recently for supply runs to its biggest ME customer. Now its gone they use a 737 cargo
In this part of the world its strategic air to the main hub at Minad then its a Herc or 400 onward to everywhere else
Is there any case to be made for, alongside an uplift in the A400M fleet to take up the more standard cargo duties of the Hercs, procuring a handful of something like C-27 Spartan or CASA CN 235/295 to take over the special forces roles?
My take is SF is niche. If they want a specialist airframe then they provide it. The Army has shot itself and the RAF in the foot with its vehicle choices. Look at Ajax. A 40T vehicle to replace what a Scimitar/Scorpion used to do in days of yore. Ok things have moved on but Ajax is not realistically deployable by air. An A 400 would struggle with a stripped down one. A Herc has no chance … it won’t even fit. If you want to deploy Land rover by air Herc is great…But even LR is going to be… Read more »
That is an issue. Air transportable vehicles are getting retired for heavier items. So either there never was a need for mass numbers of air transportable vehicles or someone’s forgotten how important it is.
I’ve finished reading your article suggestion. It was an interesting read. It providing a huge insight into aspects of transportability. Fact for the day is a 20ft container has the same weight limit as a 40ft container. 2nd fact the uk rail network is a bit of a nightmare.
Thanks for the suggestion.
The other articles are all worth a read. The FRES/Warrior articles are seminal and should be a first read by all PMs working in Shabby Wood on how not to run a project.
The reference works on Complex Weapons etc are also excellent.
And he does pallets, containers and bridges…
When you boil down on numbers the 400 can lift bigger, fly faster, for further. I believe you may be wrong on lifting more weight. A 400 max take off weight is 141,000 C 130 J is 155,000. Here is the real killer for the 400, max landing weight is 123,000 C 130 J 130,000. The C 130 is not going in my eyes. Lockhead produced on average 24 C 130 over the last 10 years. Airbus are producing around 9 A 400. On paper there is roughly 50 A 400 yet to be built \ delivered, the bulk of… Read more »
Its the end of the line for the RAF C130’s but at least the RAF should be pushing for at least 8 – 12 A400’s to give units as no matter how much a single aircraft can lift it can only ever do one job at a time. There is also a real need for a smaller lifter/multi role transport or should we just employ DHL to do the job? May save a load of dosh so can be spent on them poor souls coming to live in the good old UK with free house and all the rest they… Read more »
Maybe some of the pilots could retrain and fly the F35! Can’t believe we have more of them than pilots qualified to fly them.
There`s a good article on the Embraer KC390 in this months AFM, it looks to a layman like me like an excellent replacement for the C130 with a bonus dual role as tanker.
Anyone with real knowledge able to corroborate this ?
the powers that be haven’t a clue again cuts to safe money their are going to be areas where A400 atlas can’ t be used unlike C130 j can and what s the point of training people on the kit that being withdrawn from service , But we will have uncle Sam to fill the gap and more cuts to come under this prime minster .