Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 25401
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sat Jan 02, 2021 4:50 pm

The US Navy seeks to employ the stretched Lockheed Martin C-130J-30 Super Hercules in the Take Charge and Move Out (TACAMO) airborne survivable nuclear command, control and communications (C3) mission.
The service announced that it intends to acquire three examples for testing and analysis purposes in FY22/23.

https://www.key.aero/article/us-navy-se ... =150498164

=

A retro move, as the EC-130Q Hercules served in the Navy TACAMO mission prior to the E-6 Mercury fleet being introduced
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sat Jan 02, 2021 5:54 pm

Oof. Their reasoning makes a lot of sense, but I'd hate to be one of the guys/gals in the back after making that transition. Quality of life is much greater with a smooth turbofan (with proper toilets!) as compared to a multiengine turboprop!
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
Reddevil556
Posts: 271
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sat Jan 02, 2021 6:20 pm

LyleLanley wrote:
Oof. Their reasoning makes a lot of sense, but I'd hate to be one of the guys/gals in the back after making that transition. Quality of life is much greater with a smooth turbofan (with proper toilets!) as compared to a multiengine turboprop!


Yeah I have talked to guys who went from the P-3 to the P-8...much better quality of life while aboard. But on the other hand, it wouldn't be overly difficult to modernize the interior of the Herc to make it more friendly to passenger flying instead of mostly cargo.
Jumped out of: C130H, C130J, C17A, C212, CH47, and UH60. Bucket list: C160, A400, C2
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sat Jan 02, 2021 6:41 pm

Very true. Now, whether the Navy will actually do that is a whole other matter :lol:
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 2561
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:15 pm

Are TACAMO aircraft on alert status?
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sat Jan 02, 2021 8:02 pm

Yes, they are. I don't know what their times are or if they're always on alert at each location, but they do pull alert. At Travis AFB, the TACAMO operation is literally at the old SAC alert facility near the intersection of 21L/R.
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 2561
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sun Jan 03, 2021 2:37 pm

LyleLanley wrote:
Yes, they are. I don't know what their times are or if they're always on alert at each location, but they do pull alert. At Travis AFB, the TACAMO operation is literally at the old SAC alert facility near the intersection of 21L/R.


Interesting I didn't know that there was a TACAMO operation at Travis.
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sun Jan 03, 2021 4:48 pm

Yep. They're permanently based at Tinker, but forward 'deploy' to Travis for Pacific ops and Pax River for Atlantic ops. At any given time there are between 1 and 3 E-6Bs on their dedicated alert ramp at Travis.
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
Newark727
Posts: 2416
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sun Jan 03, 2021 5:15 pm

Are these meant to be replacements for, or supplements to, the existing E-6 fleet?
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 7409
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:27 pm

LyleLanley wrote:
Very true. Now, whether the Navy will actually do that is a whole other matter :lol:

Was thinking they'd adapt a KC-46 derivative for this role...or at least a P-8A..... :scratchchin:


Wouldn't the Herc be too slow in moving out :confused:
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Mon Jan 04, 2021 12:50 am

Devilfish wrote:
Was thinking they'd adapt a KC-46 derivative for this role...or at least a P-8A..... :scratchchin:

Wouldn't the Herc be too slow in moving out :confused:


I could see the Navy not wanting to introduce yet another weird multi engine turbofan, but a P-8 derivative made a lot of sense performance-wise. It seems like the basing flexibility and ready C-130 training/crew pipeline made their choice. Perhaps the Navy will also refresh their C-130 fleet in the coming years. Perhaps with an eye towards reducing their dependence on big-wing AF tankers.
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2368
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Mon Jan 04, 2021 7:15 am

The C-130J could land on an aircraft carrier. I wonder if that was part of the requirement.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10296
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Mon Jan 04, 2021 9:02 am

Or maybe the electronics of the C-130 are more hardened against EMPs than the commercial based P-8/KC-46. Also the C-130 is able to land at austere airfields.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 7779
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Mon Jan 04, 2021 3:50 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
The C-130J could land on an aircraft carrier. I wonder if that was part of the requirement.


It was a one-shot demonstration 55 years ago, never repeated. Pretty sure it wasn’t a requirement
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 7409
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Mon Jan 04, 2021 5:13 pm

LyleLanley wrote:
I could see the Navy not wanting to introduce yet another weird multi engine turbofan, but a P-8 derivative made a lot of sense performance-wise.

Indeed it does...nothing weird about the P-8..... :thumbsup:


Or if it's still too much plane, they could go for the smaller 737-7NG..... :scratchchin:


seahawk wrote:
Or maybe the electronics of the C-130 are more hardened against EMPs than the commercial based P-8/KC-46.

Couldn't they accomplish that with the P-8 as well?
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
UPlog
Posts: 727
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:45 am

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Mon Jan 04, 2021 6:26 pm

Could be a twin-engine option like P-8 does not provide the redundancy and survivability for critical command and control aircraft.

Like AF1 requirements the TACOMA requirement might call for 4 engine design with special features like additional oil capacity and engine shielding from EMP, etc.
I fly your boxes
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:26 am

Devilfish wrote:
LyleLanley wrote:
I could see the Navy not wanting to introduce yet another weird multi engine turbofan, but a P-8 derivative made a lot of sense performance-wise.

Indeed it does...nothing weird about the P-8..... :thumbsup:

I wholeheartedly agree: an absolutely terrific plane, both inside and out! Just in case it sounded like I was throwing stones, the "another weird multi engine" allusion was towards the current E-6B - being an orphan jet with no other role in the Navy and it's own separate pipeline (VQ-7).

seahawk wrote:
Or maybe the electronics of the C-130 are more hardened against EMPs than the commercial based P-8/KC-46.

Couldn't they accomplish that with the P-8 as well?


I could be wrong, but I don't think the C-130 is hardened against EMPs at all, as the C-130 doesn't have an 'end-of-civilization' mission. The KC-46, on the other hand, IS hardened against EMPs, as it very much does have that mission.
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:28 am

UPlog wrote:
Could be a twin-engine option like P-8 does not provide the redundancy and survivability for critical command and control aircraft.

Like AF1 requirements the TACOMA requirement might call for 4 engine design with special features like additional oil capacity and engine shielding from EMP, etc.


Tacoma is a weird-smelling Army blight in Washington state, or a pretty good pickup truck made by Toyota. I think you meant TACAMO :bigthumbsup:
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10296
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Tue Jan 05, 2021 6:20 am

LyleLanley wrote:
Devilfish wrote:
LyleLanley wrote:
I could see the Navy not wanting to introduce yet another weird multi engine turbofan, but a P-8 derivative made a lot of sense performance-wise.

Indeed it does...nothing weird about the P-8..... :thumbsup:

I wholeheartedly agree: an absolutely terrific plane, both inside and out! Just in case it sounded like I was throwing stones, the "another weird multi engine" allusion was towards the current E-6B - being an orphan jet with no other role in the Navy and it's own separate pipeline (VQ-7).

seahawk wrote:
Or maybe the electronics of the C-130 are more hardened against EMPs than the commercial based P-8/KC-46.

Couldn't they accomplish that with the P-8 as well?


I could be wrong, but I don't think the C-130 is hardened against EMPs at all, as the C-130 doesn't have an 'end-of-civilization' mission. The KC-46, on the other hand, IS hardened against EMPs, as it very much does have that mission.


The EC-130Q surely will have been protected.
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:59 pm

seahawk wrote:
The EC-130Q surely will have been protected.


Perhaps. If not against EMP then surely against the EMI it would generate. I was just trying to say the KC-46’s avionics, though civilian derived, are far better protected against EMP than the C-130’s MILSPEC, though not EMP-protected avionics.
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
studedave
Posts: 478
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 4:21 am

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Wed Jan 06, 2021 3:38 am

LyleLanley wrote:
Tacoma is a weird-smelling Army blight in Washington state,


The Air Force has a base there as well.... ;)



StudeDave
Classic planes, Classic trains, and Studebakers~~ what else is there???
 
Noshow
Posts: 2495
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Thu Jan 07, 2021 11:43 am

Wouldn't something like a KC-46 base air frame make more sense?
 
texl1649
Posts: 1798
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Thu Jan 07, 2021 1:15 pm

Noshow wrote:
Wouldn't something like a KC-46 base air frame make more sense?


My guess is the services realize they have...a surplus of C-130’s (and more budgeted each year), but not KC-46’s.
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 7409
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Thu Jan 07, 2021 6:31 pm

UPlog wrote:
Could be a twin-engine option like P-8 does not provide the redundancy and survivability for critical command and control aircraft.

A very important requirement was ample juice for all the electronics and sensors...thus the beefed-up engine generators (IINM, below is the usual location?).....

Image
https://img.aeroexpo.online/images_ar/p ... 433535.jpg
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Fri Jan 08, 2021 12:08 am

Noshow wrote:
Wouldn't something like a KC-46 base air frame make more sense?


Only if you're thinking of replacing the E-6B with someone very similar to it, then a KC-46 variant makes perfect sense. Remembering the C-130 served in the TACAMO previously, it's logical to assume the C-130J could also fill that role, again. Each airframe brings its own sets of strengths and weaknesses, so the real question is "what airframe makes more sense for the Navy, now?"
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 2561
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sun Jan 10, 2021 6:34 pm

At first I thought using the C-130 for the TACAMO mission would be an odd replacement for the E-6B but perhaps the C-130 would do better in a nuclear war environment.
 
Reddevil556
Posts: 271
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:06 pm

LyleLanley wrote:
Noshow wrote:
Wouldn't something like a KC-46 base air frame make more sense?


Only if you're thinking of replacing the E-6B with someone very similar to it, then a KC-46 variant makes perfect sense. Remembering the C-130 served in the TACAMO previously, it's logical to assume the C-130J could also fill that role, again. Each airframe brings its own sets of strengths and weaknesses, so the real question is "what airframe makes more sense for the Navy, now?"


It would make more sense to use the MC-130J platform given the extra range and capabilities. Also the MC can be refueled in flight where a regular Herc cannot.
Jumped out of: C130H, C130J, C17A, C212, CH47, and UH60. Bucket list: C160, A400, C2
 
User avatar
LyleLanley
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:33 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:38 pm

Valid. I meant it more that the non-J C-130 served as TACAMO previously, so it would make sense that a J model (MC, for instance) could probably also fill the role. I don't know enough about 130s to guess which 130 platform would be best, but having a UARRSI would pretty much be a necessity for so important a role. Maybe the MC like you mentioned but with extra fuel tanks where the wing pods would normally be?
"I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and, by gum, it put them on the map!"
 
Reddevil556
Posts: 271
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:33 am

LyleLanley wrote:
Valid. I meant it more that the non-J C-130 served as TACAMO previously, so it would make sense that a J model (MC, for instance) could probably also fill the role. I don't know enough about 130s to guess which 130 platform would be best, but having a UARRSI would pretty much be a necessity for so important a role. Maybe the MC like you mentioned but with extra fuel tanks where the wing pods would normally be?


MC-130Js have fuel pods between the two engines on each wing and the refueling pod distal to the engines. Regular C-130Js aren't equipped with wing tanks like the standard H models used to be. The range difference between a regular Herc and an MC is about 1K nm.
Jumped out of: C130H, C130J, C17A, C212, CH47, and UH60. Bucket list: C160, A400, C2
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 25401
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: US Navy seeks to use C-130J-30 in TACAMO mission

Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:56 pm

The admiral in charge of the nation’s strategic nuclear deterrent forces has praised the Navy’s decision to acquire the C-130J-30 Super Hercules aircraft as a platform for communicating with its deployed ballistic-missile submarine force.

“The Analysis of Alternatives results indicated that the four-engine, militarized C-130J-30 is optimally configured aircraft for performing the TACAMO mission. The characteristics of this airframe also maximize the operational deployability of the assets to austere environments. The C-130 is currently extensively fielded within the Department of Defense, and deployed at various bases that create operation, training and logistics support synergies for TACAMO execution. Lockheed Martin already has an established domestic production line that has the ability to produce test units for PMA271 that will enable acceleration of the risk reduction and subsequent engineering and manufacturing development test program.”


https://seapowermagazine.org/strategic- ... o-mission/
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos