Warbird Information Exchange

Apparently AFSOC is wanting a Seaplane modified/version of the C-130.......

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/special- ... 00481.html

_________________
Mike in Florida
TSgt USAF Retired
Jan 86 - Sept 08
Aircrew Life Support
"Your Life Is Our Business"
(122X0, 1T1X1, 1P0X1)
NRA Life Member

That, or something similar, has been around conceptually since the 60's or early 70's. It is one of several concepts my dad priced for the DOD numerous times over his 30+ years at Lockheed Georgia, knowing that the DOD wasn't ever gonna order it... Lotsa wasted money trying to put numbers to the DOD's wish list.

This is what I came up with today on the AFSOC C-130J that showed up in my Aviation Week Online Daily Briefing and earlier related concepts.

9715FAA3-4560-4CDE-9796-BC0F06B1413D by tanker622001, on Flickr

0E880C07-0624-4FAF-9907-7142A4CDC5D9 by tanker622001, on Flickr

E3C8277C-0E14-4981-B11F-2D4DE882CC2C by tanker622001, on Flickr

A00F7510-57E2-4AC9-A52F-8DC8FB09BF38 by tanker622001, on Flickr

A1F862F9-9FC2-416F-A1F1-F45A30D6F189 by tanker622001, on Flickr

Why not just buy (or have Lockheed-Martin license-build) some of these?

ShinMaywa US-2 - Already in production and in service with the JMSDF. (Image courtesy Wikipedia)

_________________

All right, Mister Dorfmann, start pullin'!
Pilot: "Flap switch works hard in down position."
Mechanic: "Flap switch checked OK. Pilot needs more P.T." - Flight report, TB-17G 42-102875 (Hobbs AAF)

Here are my thoughts:

1. I doubt there is a budget to do this.

2. I would be curious to understand the missions the US can't currently do that SOCOM believes could be accomplished with a nautical Herk.

3. Infrastructure? The Herk typically carries palletized or rolling cargo handled by forklifts or K-loaders. How does DoD plan to do that on water?

4. Depending on mission requirements, the Japanese US-2 looks like a feasible alternative. Wikipedia says it carries 20 pax or 12 stretchers. The Herk, IIRC, is 96/72. US-2 gross takeoff weight is listed as 105,000, the Herk (peacetime) is 155,000.

5. See #1.

Ken

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

Great idea. Unfortunately, the DOD almost never buys something "off the shelf". They customize and upgrade it to meet their spec's, which adds a huge layer of cost and makes anything (even things that appear reasonable on the surface) cost an unreasonable amount. Now, a spec-op's amphib would certainly need a new avionics suite and defensive measures, but the history of the DOD shows it would probably need to have new engines, a span reduction or increase (whichever is more expensive) and 14 other changes.

For reference, see the Slingsby T-3A trainer. A simple and effective piston trainer for the Brits, but we took it, upgraded the engine, and it ended up so screwed up we scrapped the whole fleet...

My guess is that they are wanting this capability for the same military reasons as the Japanese have their flying boats. It would make sense to buy from the Japanese or better yet, buy up a couple dozen HU-16's and remanufacture them with Turbo-Prop engines. The HU-16 has once of the best hull designs and was the ultimate Grumman seaplane. When you take something like the C-130 and say, put it on floats, think about how long the takeoff run would be on water at gross weight. it would have very limited applications.

I like the model of the Hercules "boat" but I expect all it would do is sink as soon as you unsealed the ramp! I love the Herc and flew them for years, but I don't think you'll ever see one in the water like those drawings and model. Cool model though, whoever kitbashed that.

_________________
Defending Stearmans on WIX since Jeff started badmouthing them back in 2005.

Bit smaller but easy to modify and flown by many countries around the world.

Sean

Bring back the Pantobase!


Doug

I note in the latest rendering of our floaty-Herk the inner sides of the floats appear flat. Perhaps they telescope in to from a single unit under the fuselage to reduce drag a bit while in transit?

Or maybe they can go up the sides of the fuselage allowing conventional wheels and ramp for hard surfaces? The nose mount does not seem to support that, but found it interesting with the flat inner surfaces.