Warbird Information Exchange

One of the Coast Guard C-130s obtained by Cal Fire got a new wing box in preparation for conversion to an air tanker. This is from today’s Fire Aviation website.

https://fireaviation.com/2022/10/06/coa ... mcclellan/

6556A42E-28AA-4A9B-97CC-0CF772222844 by tanker622001, on Flickr

6A55DE2C-4661-4506-BAB1-00EB6E76D02D by tanker622001, on Flickr

996EA463-CACD-445F-91D5-15FF57D77CB5 by tanker622001, on Flickr

So since they are spending a lot of money to re-box them...can we assume USCG '130s are lower time than comparable AF or Navy aurcraft?

Any corrosion issues with them being based near oceans for their operational lives?

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.

Much of the Herk’s center wing issues comes from low level, tactical maneuvering, heavy airdrop, and assault takeoffs and landings. The airframes were tracked in hours and “equivalent hours” where engineers applied a factor for these operations A hypothetical example would be “1 hour of low level produces stresses like 2 hours of normal cruise, etc”. Not that the USCG birds led an event-free life, but I expect their wings were in better overall shape than their USAF sisters. I can’t speak to the corrosion, but all DoD Herks went through some pretty intensive depot maintenance and I feel certain this was looked after.

Ken

_________________
"Take care of the little things and the big things will take care of themselves."

I would NOT assume lower hours for a USCG airframe, but likely better fatigue life. USCG tends to operate airframes (especially rotary wing) often many hours longer than their DoD counterparts. As I understand it the wing box issues were influenced by corrosion, mission severity and fatigue which resulted in lowering the lifetime hours on the center wing box. Combat delivery C-130's (USAF, Reserve and National Guard) and special ops C-130's were hit especially hard by fatigue issues with the center wing box. Flying heavy and pounding into strips on combat deliveries is harsh on the airframe. US Navy and Marine (K)C-130s generally had much more fatigue life remaining. The Coast Guard C-130's likely had "easier" lives but the wing boxes were timed out. So likely high hours, but generally in good shape. Likely a better place to start than a clapped out troop carrier.

edit: Ken beat me to it

Great link Larry, rarely see a "naked" C-130

Ken & sd89,
Thanks for the replies.
I love that kind of information.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.

_________________
Scott Rose
Editor-In-Chief/Webmaster
Warbirds Resource Group - Warbird Information Exchange - Warbird Registry

Be civil, be polite, be nice.... or be elsewhere.
-------------------------------------------------------
This site is brought to you with the support of members like you. If you find this site to be of value to you,
consider supporting this forum and the Warbirds Resource Group with a VOLUNTARY subscription
For as little as $2/month you can help ($2 x 12 = $24/year, less than most magazine subscriptions)
So If you like it here, and want to see it grow, consider helping out.



Thanks to everyone who has so generously supported the site. We really do appreciate it.

Follow us on Twitter! @WIXHQ