Last April the PAF returned to service its latest refurbished C-130--actually a civilian Lockheed L-100-20 model--which brought the fleet up to a grand total of three aircraft. The service has three more C-130s slotted for refurbishing at Asian Aerospace in Clark. If the funds can be found ($2-4 million each), the PAF transport fleet will be in good shape for the short to near-medium term. The problem lies in the next decade, when the issue of a replacement comes up for these by-then 40-year old airframes.

The latest version of the C-130, the "J"-series or Juliets, are formidably expensive machines at $68 million per plane, though still far more affordable than the likes of the Airbus A400M at $90 million and the Boeing C-17 at a heart-stopping $200 million. A very popular alternative has been the EADS/CASA C-295, three times easier on the budget than the C-130 at around $20 million. But the twin-engine C-295 is a much smaller machine than the four-engine C-130. Are there more capable C-130 replacement candidates within reach?



This is China's Y-8 "Balance Beam" AEW aircraft. It can be mistaken for a C-130 thanks to the familiar quad-turboprop configuration, but it's actually based on the civilian Shaanxi Aircraft Industry Group Y-8F600 cargo lifter, the latest development of China's multirole Y-8 family of military transports. Which are in turn based on the Soviet-era Antonov An-12 "Cub", the aircraft famously “stripped” onscreen in the Nicholas Cage starrer Lord of War.

The Y-8 is the workhorse of the PLAAF, and is able to carry a slightly heavier payload than the C-130, as well as transport the PLA’s Sikorsky S-70C helicopters. But the problem nagging the Chinese aerospace industry is the reputation for poor quality control attached to Chinese products in general. Eliminating this stigma explains the strategy employed in the development of the Y-8F600: substantial foreign cooperation, in the form of Canadian Pratt & Whitney engines, Dowty propellers and avionics from the UK’s Smiths Aerospace, and design assistance from, ironically, Antonov of Ukraine. Which should help alleviate fears that this is just another defect-prone “Made in China” product.

What has apparently remained true to form for the Y-8F600 is reflected in its relatively-low price, most often quoted online at $15 million. With powerful, state-of-the-art engines and refined aerodynamics the Y-8F600 is primarily meant for the civilian market, which demands quick turnaround times and low maintenance costs. Reports disagree on whether the new plane has a rear loading ramp ala C-130 or side cargo doors, but this may end-up a moot point since the future military version--the Y-9--is intended to have a ramp that can open in mid-flight. Iran is touted as a future buyer. Being the projected main transport of the PLAAF the Y-9 retains Chinese-made engines, but the export version will likely use similar engines as the civilian variant.

The big question remains: can the Chinese deliver on quality? At present, the PAF has the luxury of waiting for the Y-8F600/Y-9 projects to mature--or fail--before making a decision. So the more pressing question, are there other viable pretenders to the C-130’s throne available?

One problem with the Antonov 12's as well as the Y-8s is that the cabin is not pressurized, only the cockpit area is as well as the gunners comparment at the tail end. The cargo compartment is not. Which is the reason why it is so cheap. Among other things, it is therefore not as fuel efficient compared to the C-130 since it cant fly at the most fuel efficient altitude for turbine engines when carry passengers. It also means it sometimes cannot fly over weather and when it tries to, it wont be very safe or comfortable - only some of the reasons why it was not as commerically successful as the C-130.

As most air forces who operate the C-130 have discovered, the best replacement for an old C-130 is a new C-130. Or then again maybe the PAF should downsize and go with the mini-herc, the C-27J or maybe go AN-70 instead which is way bigger but still more affordable than the C130J. Granted of course all the bugs with it can be worked out.

Manokski, the old An-12/Y-8 had unpressurized cabins and Russian/Chinese powerplants. The new Y-8F600, on the other hand:

That's the civilian version, with a loading system from the German company Telair. The military Y-9 will have a rear loading ramp like the C-130. The Y-8F600 has P&W PW150 engines used on Bombardier's Q-series, along with the same Dowty props installed on the Chinese plane. So fuel efficiency will probably not be a issue.

The An-70 is a technological marvel. Problem is:

Maybe Ukraine will be able to finish the project but the price can only go up from here.

What can you say about Antonov's other product, the An-140?--Would Iranian involvement make it out-of-bounds for the PAF? How about Irkut's projected TTA, a C-130-sized twinjet that is also being proposed to India as a joint venture?

The best option I see would be to limit the use of C130s and other 2nd hand Hercs we might buy/lease in the future only to missions that require airlifting very heavy cargo like armored vehicles and construction equipment (for combat engineering and humanitarian ops) and the C130's long range (ferrying troops to peacekeeping missions abroad and emergency OFW Evacuations)


The smaller, 2-engine transports will fill in most of the other missions pulled off by C130s like base-base shuttle flights and airlifting supplies like weapons and ammo

the solutions which, i think, can relieve the pressure on the PAF C-130s are either by refurbishing the Fokker F27s and Nomad N22s that the PAF currently has or by replacing the Fokker F27s with the CN-235s and the Nomad N22s with C-212s or M28 Skytrucks. :armywink:

Y8 is not good that why we didnt buy it

Right, but you're building a copy of it, albeit a product improved one. There is also a version with a balance beam radar (whicht btw crashed recently) but I digress.

Call me biased but I would hesitate buying Chinese. It's not like they dont have enough leverage with us already so why give them more.

The Antonovs and the Ukrainian products in general are quite intriguing though and would seem to be good alternatives if they got the bugs ironed out.

I think it was Chuck Yeager who said it - "some planes just look right" and conversely fly the way they look. The AN-70 looks "right".

sir possible: like sir Manokski, i am also doubtful about the possibility of buying Chinese-made weapons and equipment. aside from doubts about the quality of such stuffs, the probability of buying something from a country that threatens our bare existence as a country is... well... :armyroleyes:

i guess the only "viable" replacement for our old C-130s would either be newer C-130s coming in the form of surplus C-130Hs (if there are such available. as far as i know, the last surplus C-130Hs available, those of the Danish Air Force, had been purchased by the Egyptian Air Force) or, if we have the money, C-130Js, or that spanking-new Airbus A400Ms, which are very expensive by the way. however, such replacement will not come soon so the PAF would most likely settle with its refurbished C-130Bs, C-130H and L-100-20.

again, in order to relieve the pressure on the C-130s, the PAF should be able to get replacements to its Fokker F27 Friendships and GAF N22 Nomads or get these F27s and N22s flying (although this one is quite doubtful).

Guys, the subject of a Nomad replacement is discussed in one of my older threads. As stated earlier, the PAF is in good shape for the short-to-near-medium term provided it succeeds in increasing its C-130 inventory. The problem as well as the subject of this thread then is finding a platform to fill the PAF's heavy-lift needs for the medium-to-long term.

I believe the debate over the An-70's technical merits pales in comparison to the uncertainty regarding the industrial status of the An-70 program. And at $50 million per plane according to most sources, can it be considered a viable option for an AF like the PAF?

The concerns over the origin of the Y8-F600 are mitigated by the fact that this is a civilian aircraft with a high-proportion of Western equipment. Engines in particular eat-up most of the logistics involved in operating aircraft and the Y8-F600's engines are Canadian and already flying in commercial airliners.

The recent crash of a Balance Beam AEW&C prototype was most likely caused by overloading. Apparently, the unfortunate a/c was crammed with 35 technicians as well as equipment not intended for mounting inside the aircraft. The Chinese feared the possibility of American SIGINT sniffing-out datalink communications between the a/c and ground stations; so they hit upon the brilliant idea of putting those ground stations and their operators inside the a/c as it took to the air for the test. Given that the a/c already had a heavy phased-array antenna on top of its fuselage...a bad call on the part of those responsible.

I'd gpr for the Antonov An-12B "Cub"
It's a bit bigger than the C-130 and also has 4 propelers.The abilities are supposed to be very similar to those of the C-130.
The An-12 is no longer being used in the Russian military...
We could try to make the same deal with City Hunters proposal for the F-20.

Why doesn't the PAF buy for a dirt cheap price servicable DC3/C47 airframes and have them converted into Bassler BA67s?

They can make another usable 2-engined complement to our few C130s.

If only the PAF did not scrap or sell its C47s.

wht do they intend to carry in the next decade?

me i'll suggest just buy a second hand Airbus A310-200 or -300
and have converted to 'combi'(convertible)and make a 'MRTT'.
there you go!we now have a multi role tanker transport a/c.
we have a air-to-air refueling tanker,wide body cargo,troop carrier.

in most conflict,most of these 'military cargo a/c that could land in unpaved
runways still land in runways anyway.
they're too expensive to risk it.

so what the point.

other possibilities:

ALENIA C27J SPARTAN

CASA C-295

or: ANTONOV AN-140

and as a radar plane,the Brazilian EMBRAER ERJ-145 SA/RS

What about some GIPPSLAND AERONAUTICS GA-8 AIRVAN from Australia for a price of $310 000 each??? They would be perfect for the small island and could also be used on the Spratleys as small air-taxis.

C-130J models or (models before the "J" came out)can only replace the older C-130's in service with PAF right now.

PAF should have to consider some other factor's also.

A Lockheed C130 is a heavylift longhaul transport plane. It can be used in both startegic and tactical transport roles and has full rough field capability.

A servicable C130 is the only replacement we will have for any C130 in our fleet. Unless someone comes up with a just as reasonably-priced competitor or if the US builds a new transport to fill the Herk's role.

What we are looking for is a more servicable less costly to operate transport plane that will supplement the C130 by doing the Herk's other missions like troop transport (from home-forward base), supply lift (for loads less than what a C130 carries like 105/105 MM shells and relief goods) and paratroop deployment.

How About Do-328-200?

Supplements to the C-130 are discussed in the Nomad replacement thread. The most likely prospect, given the reports of Polish defense assistance to the Philippines, being the M-28 Skytruck. As well as the Fokker 50 also discussed in another of my older threads. What we are looking for here is a medium-to-long term replacement for the C-130 after the current fleet has outlived its usefulness.

So far, the only qualified candidates in the C-130's size class submittted have been the Y-8F600, the An-70, and the Airbus MRTT noted by new poster el ramon. I also consider the An-140 and the TTA viable candidates since these are a step up over the C-295 class of transports.

sir, can i add the C-130J as a possible replacement for the current C-130 size-class?

Ideally, future PAF transports wouldn't be either/or but a combo of two types over and below the venerable (a required adjective) Herk.

Sayang nga yang An-70. As possible noted, Russia pulling out of the project with the Ukraine may have sucked the air out of it. Coulda been an option for countries that want something bigger than both the new-build C130J and still-on-paper A400M, yet also cheaper than both. We'll find out soon enough if Antonov can find a white knight.

As for that Chinese C130-class transport, while I wouldn't mind going Made in China with some mil equipment here and there, I don't think our capital equipment like primary transports or frontline strike fighters and such should be sourced from a country which, rightly or wrongly, our external defense scenarios are premised. (No, I don't expect a Chinese invasion but you know, just to be sure.)

Light transport...The height/width cabin dimensions of the CN-235 and C-295 were patterned after the Chinook. Not an issue for troop and CH47 cargo pallets but anything slightly bigger, and you'd have to call out your bigger transport. I'd go with the more capable baby Herk C-27J Spartan in this class.

Short term, we'd be lucky to get more refurbished C130s. For its low-end buddy, call Poland on its military loan offer and get the M128 Skytruck 'Plus', although lacking a rear ramp, more can be acquired than next size up CN235.

PAF2020-type discussion, An-70 (if it survives) as medium-heavy airlifter (local call sign: Bernardo Carpio hehe). C-27J as light airlifter. Also, for moving small groups of personnel or light cargo without having to call on transports with rear-loading ramps, Bombardier Dash-8 Q200 and King Air 350ER as operational support aircraft.

Ironically by the time, the Phil AF is in the market to replace their existing C-130 fleet of H-30's and B models and when most of these 'older' surplus C-130 models stored have been all used up (decades from now), I predict there will be C-130J-II Hercules versions available as surplus!

The problem is not the Phil AF's C-130's are old, it's simply a lack of funding to upgrade and modernize their existing fleet to keep them operational. This is not rocket science.

Lockheed C-130 HERCULES

"Whether hauling passengers, paratroops, or freight, the C-130 Hercules is the undisputed top military transport - reliable, economic, flexible, and able to operate from even the most primitive airstrips.

Even today, 40-years after it's first flight, many believe that the only replacement for a C-130 is another Hercules. C-130s are seldom retired: they fly until life-expired or until converted for use in another role for, while the 'Herk' is the world's greatest airlifter, it has been adapted to serve (with great success) in a host of other roles, from gunship to weather reconnaiseance platform."

The C-130, as the designers say, "Unlike most aircraft designs, the C-130 never really needed improvement. It was never underpowered. It never had important flaws. Though it has been improved over the years, the improvements have been, gradual."

There is simply no other aircraft readily available which can routinely land with full cargo on a 3,000-ft unpaved runway and make a 75-second combat off-laod with all four engines turning over. In a real pinch, an unmodified C-130 with a full payload can touch down in as little as 1,800 feet.

The basic design of th C-130 Hercules is unchanged today. It is a rare event: Somebody got it right the first time.

On the ground , the Hercules is easy to handle, it's rear-loading ramp design being a monument to pragmatism. Not so obvious is the fact that the ramp was an innovation when introduced, a load-carrying structure which increase's the aircraft's cargo capcity, yet an entry and exit way which can be quickly employed and, bbecause it is fully sealed, allows the whole cabin to be pressurised, unlike many of its rivals.

The C-130 is "designed like a boxcar", says Chief Master Segeant Marck Skurow of the 459th Airlift Wing at Andrews AFB, Maryland. Operated by the auxilary hydraulic system, as Skurow explains, "the aft cargo door opens straight up and the ramp comes down, in a single, co-ordinated move". The height restriction of 76-inches at the ramp is generous and allows for loading of most cargoes. When the ramp is closed, the C-130 can be fully pressurised for flights, which typically take place at around 28,000 feet, and the ramp itself can store 5,000 Lb. Combined with the utility of the ramp, when loading and unloading in a tight spot the "Herk' can turn itself in 170-feet with the nose gear canted to its maximum of 60-dgrees. (In Vietnam, pilots routiinely continued unloading when mortar rounds started to fall, then timed their turn-around and taxi-out based on the speed at which the explosions were coming at them.)

The numbers of C-130s in service alone ensure the type an important place for years to come, and thre is no end to production yet in sight.

"Whether hauling passengers, paratroops, or freight, the C-130 Hercules is the undisputed top military transport - reliable, economic, flexible, and able to operate from even the most primitive airstrips. Even today, 40-years after it's first flight, many believe that the only replacement for a C-130 is another Hercules. C-130s are seldom retired: they fly until life-expired or until converted for use in another role for, while the 'Herk' is the world's greatest airlifter, it has been adapted to serve (with great success) in a host of other roles, from gunship to weather reconnaiseance platform."

While today there are some undeniably attractive alternatives to the C-130, the "Herk" remains unique, since none of its rivals offer the same combination of payload, range, performance and rough-field capability, a time-experience-and combat-proven compromise which make the C-130 so versatile and flexible.

Some modern transports (like the C-17 and the unbuilt FLA) may be able to fly some missions better than a Hercules, but none will be able to fly so many different types of misson with such competence. The "Herk" remains a veritable 'Hero of the Skies'."

Source - WORLD AIR POWER Journal
Volume 18 1994

P.S. At the time of this article, it lists detailed info. on more than fifty Nation's Air Forces that operate the C-130 Hercules from Algeria, Bolivia, Cameroon, Chile, Gabon, Iran, Japan, Morocco, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, South Africa, Sudan, Turkey, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zaire and of course the Philippines to name ...just a few of the dozens of nations that have bought C-130s. And these are just the military versions.

the new C-130J price makes it a poor replacement of our C-130.
it still carries the same volume/mass of cargo but at 2 times the price!

i guess the ultimate successor to the C-130 was never built.
it was the YC-14 and the YC-15,unfortunately the program was cut before anyone was selected by the USAF to replace the C-130.

here is the McDonnell Douglas YC-15:




looks familiar?
the YC-15 after 20+years in storage is what eventually developed to become C-17 Globemaster III



here is the Boeing YC-14:






if only someone could restart this program,
it could be lucrative with almost all C-130 users are holding on to their old C-130 and not buying the inflated new ones.
pretty soon this will start falling out of the sky due to aging and whatta huge market this is!

^That's why the Chinese are getting in on the act. Which, keeping in mind their track record in taking over markets abandoned by other companies, makes perfect sense for them.

A few updates:

A cool $25 million per plane. Not a bad market to be in. I'm sure we'll have someone pop over to say "What a wasted opportunity for the Philippines!" :devilwink:

Shenyang Aircraft Corporation is the manufacturer of the Y8F600. Like I said on the first page they are chummy with the Canadians. And so, voila.

:fire:

I visited the 205th AW Squadron in Mactan Airbase (the home of the C-130's)

We only have 2 that are flying. the rest are grounded for repairs.

:sniper:

C130 class, perfect!

Antonov An 140 is good

Ya way not Antonov An 140

That looks great! With western avionics and engines, it will used for a very long time... :patrioticpinoy:

IF I'M TO BE ASKED, I OPTED FOR THE REVIVAL OF THE YC-14 AS THE PERFECT REPLACEMENT FOR THE OLD C-130, EVEN FOR THE C-130J...

THIS IS VERY SUITABLE FOR STOL AND SMALL AIRFIELDS JUST LIKE OURS...

When this works, and it does make cargo planes more affordable, we can have this to replace the C-130s. We'll just have to wait for them to have a ramp and a clam shell door for it.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/...er-x-plane.html


Lockheed Martin to build composite airlifter X-plane
By Graham Warwick
Click Here

Lockheed Martin is to modify a Dornier 328Jet to demonstrate advanced composite airframe technology for a future tractical transport.

The US Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) has authorised Lockheed's Skunk Works to proceed into Phase II of the Advanced Composite Cargo Aircraft (ACCA) flight demonstration program.

Aurora Flight Sciences was competing to build the X-plane demonstrator. AFRL is investigating opportunities for Aurora to collaborate with Lockheed on the demonstration of additional technologies.

Because AFRL wants the demonstrator to fly within 12 months, Lockheed will replace the mid/aft fuselage and empennage of the high-wing, twin-turbofan 328Jet with advanced composite structures.

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsse...px?ItemID=19957

"With ACCA we are attempting to reinvent the manufacturing paradigm through the strategic use of composite manufacturing technologies," says Frank Mauro, vice-president, advanced systems development for Lockheed Martin Advanced Development Programs, as the Skunk Works is formally known.

Compared with conventional manufacturing approaches, advanced composites will enable an 80-90% reduction in parts count, says Lockheed. ACCA is an opportunity to "change the way composites are used in aircraft manufacturing, leading to lighter, less expensive, more durable aircraft that are easier to maintain", says Mauro.

The Skunk Works used advanced composite manufacturing technologies, including a low-temperature, non-autoclave curing process, in building its Polecat unmanned air vehicle demonstrator. The flying-wing Polecat's structure was almost 100% composite and consisted of fewer than 200 parts.

Lockheed says the ACCA X-plane will have growth provisions allowing it to be used as a technology workhorse for additional advanced transport aircraft experiments. ACCA is one of several AFRL projects developing technology for a potential future Lockheed C-130 replacement, labelled AJACS (Advanced Joint Air Combat System).


- - - - - - - -


Hope its not a repost...

We will have the surplus C130s when USAF adapt those.

im not up to date here nowadays.. but whatever happened to the chinese Y-8? did they ever sold a unit to foreign customers?

A belated reply...My what-if here would be a "baby C-17" as C130 replacement. Like the C-27J is to the C-130J, give it two of the C-17's engines, a shorter cabin (but same width/height) and common avionics. I'm thinking it would have half the C-17's payload, be something in the A400M class, but would fly faster, cost similar to buy/operate (twin-jet vs quad-prop) and (with its powerful thrust reversers) retain short-field capability.

btw, the C-27J is the US Army and USAF's new "joint cargo aircraft (JCA)" to replace their Sherpas. While we can only afford used C-130s, I'd expect Alenia (probably with Lockheed) pushing the C-27J to RP and similar nations that would look to buy new cargo planes cheaper than J Herks.
.

Lockheed starts building new version of the C-130J

DATE:07/10/09
SOURCE:Flight International

Lockheed Martin officially launched production on 5 October of the first C-130 Hercules acquired by the US Air Force to support search and rescue missions since the Vietnam War.

The ceremony inside Lockheed's Marietta production facility also marked the launch of a new C-130 variant tailored for special operations missions, which company officials hope could lead to dozens - if not hundreds - of new orders by domestic and foreign customers for the 55-year-old tactical airlifter.

The USAF plans to acquire 22 new HC/MC-130Js to begin replacing 78 HC-130s flown by search and rescue teams and 37 MC-130s operated by special forces. More orders are expected to follow as the USAF continues to renew the ageing fleet.

The new design boosts the C-130J's maximum take-off weight to 74,400kg (164,000lb) and the assault landing weight to 64,400kg. The heavier model also includes an advanced wing design that guarantees longer service life, which has become a major issue for the C-130E models that the C-130J replaces.

Lockheed has also adapted the C-130J production process for the new variant. The refuelling receptacle is produced in-line instead of as a post-production modification. That single change eliminates eight months of extra production time, saving $8 million in manufacturing costs per aircraft, Lockheed officials say.

Lockheed has also fitted a forward looking infrared (FLIR) turreted pod - the Raytheon multi-spectral targeting system (MTS-A) - to the airframe structure beneath the flightdeck. The company is investing internal funds to design a retractable turret that could extend the HC/MC-130J's mission radius.

Company officials have also disclosed internal plans to develop a new outer-mould line for the venerable airlifter that can accommodate more equipment for special operations missions. One design concept displayed publicly so far reveals an enlarged nose section and a wider cross-section for the fuselage.

Flightglobal