Scooter01 From Norway, joined Nov 2006, 1155 posts, RR: 8 Posted (6 years 6 hours ago) and read 3406 times:
It has come down to bickering about political prestige about replacing our 40 year old C-130 Hs with the purchase of 6 C-130Js for Norway's Air Farce (appologies to Roger Abbott and crew)
Quote: This is a mistaken decision, the old planes are good enough.
Well, the Herc is a good aircraft, but there is a reason why these aircraft have been sitting so much on the ground for the last few years, they are 40 year old aircraft. And I'm have a hard time understanding why some politicians are satisfied with using old and technically outdated, and in a battle situation possibly less safe aircraft to carry our troops around
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (5 years 12 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3239 times:
Quoting Scooter01 (Thread starter): It has come down to bickering about political prestige about replacing our 40 year old C-130 Hs with the purchase of 6 C-130Js for Norway's Air Farce (appologies to Roger Abbott and crew)
The article made it clear the opposition centered on not going through a bidding process before signing a contract. The question that immediately comes to mind is: What is there currently out there that is a direct competitor with the C-130J? A400 is still some distance down the road and as far as I know even it doesn't have a direct competitor because the C-130J doesn't compare; it's in a class to itself.
What's sad about the infighting is that it'll take the crash of one of the older C-130Hs to make those who fuss see that buying the C-130J was indeed a very smart move.
Prebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6019 posts, RR: 55 Reply 4, posted (5 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3133 times:
Denmark's old H-Hercs have already been replaced with four new J-birds, so it would be natural that Norway does the same so we can continue to (to some extent) share efforts to keep these extremely small fleets in the air.
I have heard that our old H planes are now in Egypt.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11711 posts, RR: 52 Reply 5, posted (5 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3052 times:
So what is the problem with the politicians? Norway's AF cannot sit around forever.
Scooter01 From Norway, joined Nov 2006, 1155 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (5 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3026 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5): So what is the problem with the politicians?
I think their feelings got hurt since they did not get consulted and to waste their time debating the issue. What other choice is there?
Norway needs new transports to be able to fulfill its international commitments.
On another note, the opposition to the C-130J claims that it is "more dangerous" to parachute off this plane than from the old C-130H. Seems that the jumpers gets sucked back towards the plane?
Anybody heard of this?
Scooter
"We all have a girl and her name is nostalgia" - Hemingway
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11711 posts, RR: 52 Reply 8, posted (5 years 11 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2958 times:
Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 6): On another note, the opposition to the C-130J claims that it is "more dangerous" to parachute off this plane than from the old C-130H. Seems that the jumpers gets sucked back towards the plane?
Anybody heard of this?
The C-130J will replace all missions of the Canadian Forces CC-130E/H they replace, including parachute jumping.
That is a bunch of garbage. That section of the airplane is the same as the "E" and "H" models. You can also slow to the same airspeed as the "E" & "H" use. Parachute jumpers had no problems with the (now retired) C-141, or the current C-17. The jumpers will always fall away from the airplane.
Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 7): How often do people parachute off a C130?.
The C-130 is the primary jump plane for the US Speicial Forces, as well as the 82nd Airborne Division (no the 101st Airborne Division no longer has the parachute jump mission).
So, what does the Norwegion opposition people to the C-130J propose for a replacement airplane?
Scooter01 From Norway, joined Nov 2006, 1155 posts, RR: 8 Reply 9, posted (5 years 11 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2950 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8): That is a bunch of garbage. That section of the airplane is the same as the "E" and "H" models. You can also slow to the same airspeed as the "E" & "H" use. Parachute jumpers had no problems with the (now retired) C-141, or the current C-17. The jumpers will always fall away from the airplane
That's my own opinion too, but an article in the Norwegian newspaper "Aftenposten" on Apri 04/07 claims that the US congress has put "restrictions" on the C-130J in regards to low altitude airdrops of soldiers (parachutists) and equipment. They also claim that there was an article in New York Times 3 years ago about a "problem" where the jumpers gets sucked back towards the airplane.
Norwegian Special Forces regularily practice jumping from our existing H-models
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8): So, what does the Norwegion opposition people to the C-130J propose for a replacement airplane?
They want to wait for the Airbus 400M as a contender, claiming that the wing-repairs done in Canada by L3SPAR are good for another 10000hrs. (meaning 10 more years)
The pro-130J people wants the new avionics and other systems that are "fresh"
Scooter
[Edited 2007-06-09 01:01:41]
[Edited 2007-06-09 01:03:35]
"We all have a girl and her name is nostalgia" - Hemingway
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11711 posts, RR: 52 Reply 10, posted (5 years 11 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2939 times:
Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 9): Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
So, what does the Norwegion opposition people to the C-130J propose for a replacement airplane?
They want to wait for the Airbus 400M as a contender
Norway will not be able to get A-400Ms for 9-12 years.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11711 posts, RR: 52 Reply 12, posted (5 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2895 times:
Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 11): ....and that's why they need to order the J-model NOW. They have until June 15 to decide.
Scooter
I agree. But, I'll bet LM is willing to extend that deadline. Norway can still get new C-130Js delivered in 2009.
BladeLWS From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 386 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (5 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2794 times:
Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 13): The Norwegian government announced today before breaking for summer-recess, that a decision to purchase 4 Lockheed-Martin C-130Js
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 15, posted (5 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2791 times:
Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 6): On another note, the opposition to the C-130J claims that it is "more dangerous" to parachute off this plane than from the old C-130H. Seems that the jumpers gets sucked back towards the plane?
Anybody heard of this?
No..it's not true.
Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 7): How often do people parachute off a C130?.
Every day, almost. The 82d Airborne jumps from them, the other active duty airborne units (SF, Ranger, Alaskan, 101 sub-unit, etc) all jump from these airplanes not counting the Marines, Navy and AF SOF troopies. Plus the Parachute Regt, the Italian Airborne, the ...I could go on but you get the point.
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8): Parachute jumpers had no problems with the (now retired) C-141, or the current C-17. The jumpers will always fall away from the airplane.
Well, usually. The jets require an air dam to provide a break in the slipstream since they fly a little faster.
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8): no the 101st Airborne Division no longer has the parachute jump mission).
They have a battalion on jump status, or did last I checked. So does the brigade in Alaska and the 173d in Italy.
Brendows From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (5 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2765 times:
Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 13): The Norwegian government announced today before breaking for summer-recess, that a decision to purchase 4 Lockheed-Martin C-130Js
Great to see that there's finally a solution to discussion.
BTW:
NRK, the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, reported this evening that Airbus hired a PR agency to send out false information about the abilities of the C-130Js to the Norwegian press, putting the politicians that would decide whether to proceed with the C-130J order or not under pressure...
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11711 posts, RR: 52 Reply 18, posted (5 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2708 times:
Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 17): Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 13):
before breaking for summer-recess
...as everybody can understand, they HAD to make a desition
That may be the case in Norway, but that rule in no way has ever applied to American Politicians. They never have to commit to a decision.
Quote: "'This is important not only because of the vital tactical airlift capability it brings to a key NATO ally, but also it marks the first sale of the new J model via FMS,' said Brig. Gen. Joseph M. Reheiser, the AFSAC commander and a C-130 pilot.
The need for a quick response to the Norwegian initial request was twofold, said Russ Burton, the Norway command country manager for AFSAC. There were three proposals before the Norwegian parliament, he said. One was to purchase a different aircraft, another was to refurbish the older C-130Hs and the third was to purchase the new C-130s.
'The Norwegian ministry needed the specifics from us to properly inform their parliament,' Mr. Burton said. 'And that meant we had to act fast.'
The Defense Department standard for processing a request of this nature, including navigating the inherent legal hurdles, arranging production schedules, set prices, etc., is 180 days. With the help and support of members of the Aeronautical System Center's 516th Aeronautical Systems Group and the staff of the deputy undersecretary of the Air Force for International Affairs, AFSAC officials processed Norway's request in less than half that time.
The other reason prompting quick action was the need to deliver the initial aircraft as quickly as possible which required additional negotiation with Lockheed Martin to accommodate their production schedule."
Lockheed Martin Receives Contract for C-130J Super Hercules Airlifters for Norway
(Source: Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company; issued Nov. 7, 2007)
Quote: "MARIETTA, Ga. --- Lockheed Martin has received an Undefinitized Contract Action (UCA) from the U.S. government valued at $304 million for the purchase of four C-130J Super Hercules airlifters, plus initial spares and training, for Norway through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program.
The UCA initially funds 50% of the program and will allow Lockheed Martin to begin long-lead acquisition of production materials. A fully definitized contract for the Norwegian aircraft is expected to be signed early next year."
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11711 posts, RR: 52 Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2200 times:
Quoting Mortyman (Reply 22): Anyone know what different option of a plane that was discussed ?
The only other option available for delivery now is the C-17. The A-400M is not an option because it is not available.
Sponsor Message: 
From Norway, joined Nov 2006, 1155 posts, 
(appologies to Roger Abbott and crew)
From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6019 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 6361 posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4429 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
