Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
SteelChair wrote:I've wondered for a long time why the production rate was so low....why the military (foreign and domestic) weren't keen on replacing their 30-50 year old airplanes at a higher pace. These are truly useful military airplanes.
I think the rate is 2/month.
SteelChair wrote:I've wondered for a long time why the production rate was so low....why the military (foreign and domestic) weren't keen on replacing their 30-50 year old airplanes at a higher pace. These are truly useful military airplanes.
I think the rate is 2/month.
texl1649 wrote:The C-130 is also not pressurized
From the beginning, the C-130 has featured a large, unobstructed, fully-pressurized cargo hold
Noray wrote:texl1649 wrote:The C-130 is also not pressurized
Then return it to Lockheed so they can bring it to production standard.
C-130 History, lockheedmartin.com:From the beginning, the C-130 has featured a large, unobstructed, fully-pressurized cargo hold
finnishway wrote:ASL Aviation ordered LM-100J for Safair. As far as I know LM-100J is not EASA certified. Does it matter though?
texl1649 wrote:Noray wrote:texl1649 wrote:The C-130 is also not pressurized
Then return it to Lockheed so they can bring it to production standard.
C-130 History, lockheedmartin.com:From the beginning, the C-130 has featured a large, unobstructed, fully-pressurized cargo hold
I’d guess less than a quarter of herc flights are actually pressurized. Happy to be educated to the contrary, though.
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
On what do you base that supposition? Everything but airdrop missions, which are mostly trainers, would be pressurized.