C-130J Super Hercules

Official video of C-130J by Lockheed Martin

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• C-130
• aviation
• space

[Roxanne898989]

today at school there was a military (canadian) demonstration on two people parachuting out of one of this aircraft it was cool ourw hole field was covered in colourful paper thing on the goal posts for the wind and it only took them 15 times to go around to study the wind but it was cool i got a video of it might post it up. a bunch of little kids where watching to and when ever a jet/small plane would go by they would point thinking it was it... silly kids lol

[stalkingalizee]

@davetileguy 5t has already been remedied with a lighter loading door and two lighter top shells for SOC1.  7t more to go by SOC3.

[davetileguy]

@stalkingalizee how will the weight issue just go away??I guess we'll see!!

[stalkingalizee]

@davetileguy Not if, but WHEN. It will not have a weight issue by SOC3. Working out the bugs is typical for any new aircraft, especially one with the largest turbo-props in the Western world. You should know well about bugs with the F-35. Lock Mart makes that target fail money pit so whatever. Only nation to drop A400M after signing was South Africa and we picked up Malaysia. Germany only dropped 7 planes, it is still the largest order. C-17 and C-130 are done, A400M is the future.

[davetileguy]

@stalkingalizee IF the 400 hits the market ,it's a fat cow that's 12 TONS over weight ,that's a serious design miscalculation which means it has other bugs, it's over budget and the Germans don't want it because it won't carry their lightweight tank ,Italy and Canada dropped their orders, and finally SCAREBUS had to ASK Lockheed Martin for technical specs and help!!!!!!!! wow that's sad !!! USA IS KING Boeing or Lockeed can do what 6 countries together cannot!!!

[stalkingalizee]

@AnteyPL Russians? I think you mean Ukraine.

Europrop has over 5000hrs on the engines and they are certified for all military conditions. They will soon gain civil certification which is far easier.

The price ratio I quoted was at current listing which is near its highs, it can only go down with this debt crisis looming. USD can't afford to go any lower or people can't buy gas and start hyperinflation. It is actually 24% undervalued which makes C-17 insane cost.

[AnteyPL]

@stalkingalizee

[1] So far, only Russians have been building so powerful turboprop engines. Nothing in kind ever emerged in USA or Europe, therefore it's unproven as problems in development have confirmed.

[2] About price, you are planin wrong but it's not my duty to discuss with firm belief in Euro supremacy.

[stalkingalizee]

@AnteyPL Respectfully, your only argument is the new aspect of the A400M. The price has already been agreed upon, and it is 2.3 times cheaper than the C-17 in USD or Euro. The concept of turboprops is proven beyond doubt... C-130 is living proof.

[AnteyPL]

@stalkingalizee

Respectfully, I disagree. 1. C-17 has longer production run, lower risk 2. C-17 is priced in USD, while A400M is in Euro 3. anyway - correctly aligned transport force requires mix of aircraft ranging from C-17 to C-27 and at least one design between 4. Flyaway unit cost of those aircraft IS comparable already 5. turboprop is more efficient than turbofan in terms of fuel, but not necessairly in maintenance - especially, that A400M uses unproven design at limits of the concept

[stalkingalizee]

@MrColaCollector A400M can do all that... and twice as well.