Sonic67 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 284 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 11133 times:
I also heard that Lockheed also tried to modify a C-130 to land and take off from a soccer field using rockets to rescue the hostages in Iran. I heard the first test was successful but the second time they tried the wing ripped off and the AC and crew where lost.
Garnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 4981 posts, RR: 58 Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 11130 times:
Sonic - the idea wasn't to base C-130s onboard carriers, but rather to evaluate whether or not it would be effective as the COD.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
Sonic67 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 284 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 11122 times:
HaveBlue From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1981 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 11100 times:
Sonic,
I have video of the C-130 landing tests you are talking about. Are you familiar with JATO rockets? This C-130 had JATO bottles on the side and near top of the forward fuselage pointing FORWARD... the idea was to decelerate in short order. On the video I have and what you're talking about they hit the cans too early, while the plane was still in the air, and it effectively dropped out of the air (guessing 20' or so, haven't watched it in a while) and when it did the starboard wing came off and a fuel fire immediately started. I'm not certain, but I don't think any of the crew died. They did scrap the idea after that though.
And COD stands for Carrier Onboard Delivery, or what brings mail, cargo and crew on board while the Carrier is underway. The COD aircraft used for the last few decades has been the Grumman C-2 Greyhound, an empty cargo version of its sister, the E-2 Hawkeye.
And yes the U-2 took off from a carrier and the 130 took off and landed, unassisted, but neither was put into practice.
SATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 11096 times:
Seems entirely possible to me that both the U2 and C130 carrier tests were public test flights to provide cover for and/or support later covert operations.
Given the nature of carrier operations it could've happened and the only folks that would know are the flight crew and the guys in the island.
Sonic67 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 284 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 11085 times:
HaveBlue
Yes I'm familiar with JATO it was used since the 2nd WW. I should have known that. If you have chance can you post the video of the C-130.
HaveBlue From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1981 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 11046 times:
Sonic,
I didn't mean the question to be sarcastic, just rather typing how I was thinking, and not knowing if you had any idea what JATO was. I tried to upload the video to my homesite, but as I really have only ever uploaded pictures, it didn't work and I'll have to find a way around it. However, upon watching the video again after posting it does seem to have fired at about 20-30 feet and to clarify the wing didn't depart until the very hard landing, at which point the C-130 did a 90 degree turn to the right and caught fire, and according to the commentator 'the ship was lost' so I'm assuming from his lack of saying so that the crew was okay. It certainly looked survivable, though embarrissing.
2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8937 posts, RR: 65 Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 11041 times:
The airplane is a C-130, highly modified with rocket engines, yes rocket engines. This plane was modified in 1980 when the Iranians took over the American Embassy in Tehran. The plane was designed to land and take-off in the length of a soccer field,(~ 600 ft.) which was conveniently located across from the Embassy. The modification was done in record time 3-1/2 months. This was the final flight test, after which, the plane was to leave for Iran with 50 special missions troops.
However, as you can see, this crash ended the mission. The flight test director on the program gave us the scoop. If you watch the landing closely, you can see that the retro rockets on the top of the fuselage fire first, then approximately 3 seconds later, the bottom rockets are fired. Initial flight tests revealed that the bottom rockets were only to be fired when the plane was on the ground. They had so much stopping power, that if they were fired in the air, the plane would stop forward motion, and "drop" to the ground, as happened here.
The sequence was to be as follows: the pilot would fire the upper rockets @ 20' agl (above ground level) and then the navigator would fire the lower rockets when the plane touched down. A problem arose with determining when the plane actually touched the ground. The upper rockets caused so much noise, and vibration, that the crew lost the ability to sense when the airplane actually touched the ground. Thus, through trial and error, the navigator discovered that if he counted to 3 after upper rockets were fired, the plane would be on the ground. So that was the plan: pilot fires upper rockets @ 20' agl, navigator counts to 3, and fires lower rockets. Seems simple enough.
However, on this flight, with all the top military brass watching, the pilot thought he would make the landing as spectacular as possible, and without telling anyone, he fired the upper rockets @ 40' agl. Unaware of pilot's change of plan, the navigator counted to 3 after the pilot fired the upper rockets, and fired the lower rockets. Problem was they were still 20' in the air, and as you can see from the video, they literally dropped out of the sky, causing the plane to crack-up. Lesson learned: Flight test plans must be followed to the letter.
This one guy's deviation from the flight plan may have changed history. Had the landing been successful, the mission would have proceeded, and if it would have been successful, and the hostages rescued, Jimmy Carter may have won re-election. While the benefits of another term with Carter could be debated, there's no doubt things would have been different from the Reagan Era.
KAUST From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 69 posts, RR: 30 Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 11035 times:
Wow...imagine the huge THUMP for the sailors below deck when the C-130 made it's imprint upon the flight deck.
I have heard that most seasoned carrier crews can tell the plane by the sound they make, if not, I bet they could sure tell the mighty Herk!
KAUST
"Houston, this is Apollo 8. We are now in Lunar orbit."
HaveBlue From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1981 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 11024 times:
Yep, that's the video I have 2H4. And nice to hear the detailed description of what happened, all I had ever seen was the video but the details are interesting.
SlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10039 posts, RR: 75 Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 10888 times:
Spectacular video. Looks like a completely survivable crash though. I'll bet that is somewhat exciting, having the rockets fire and engulf the flight deck in fire!
I have seen a number of Herk wings fail during hard landings. Seems like an unfortunate design feature. One that comes to mind was on one of the drop zones at Fort Bragg. Maybe they need to invest some research in making the fuel system crashworthy in the zone where the wings seem to break.
Then of course there was the air tanker crash near Coleville California that effectively shut down aerial fire fighting in the US. And it did not even touch the ground. (until after...)
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
Sprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1673 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months ago) and read 10381 times:
I met the pilot that landed the C-130 on the USS Forrestal (CV-59). His name is Rear Adm. James H. Flatley III(ret). However I did not know it at the time.I was his driver. He was there at the change of command of my ship the USS Flatley (FFG-21), named for his father. Also IIRC he has the most traps of any naval aviator.
Sonic67 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 284 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10319 times:
2H4:
Thank you for that. That was impressive to say the least.
I had read about it in an aviation magazine but it seeing corrected a lot of misconceptions that I had.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 10291 times:
I recall seeing pictures of a Fokker F.28 doing approaches to a US Navy carrier, way back when. I think it was in conjunction with selecting a new COD aircraft to replace the Greyhound (which it would seem never happened).
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 284 posts, 
From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2520 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
