Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Career Builder > Military
😔 Guard C-130 Down >

😔 Guard C-130 Down

Search
Notices
Military Military Aviation

😔 Guard C-130 Down

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-04-2018, 05:22 AM
  #41  
Disinterested Third Party
 
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,026
Default

Originally Posted by A Squared View Post
It's possible. There are systems in the prop intended to prevent a prop going into flat pitch in flight, but like anything, they're not infallible. I know of at least one instance where a prop has gone below the low-pitch stop in flight.
An overspeed with a failure to pitch lock and a runaway propeller can cause a severe yawing motion and application of power makes it worse, as does any increase in airspeed.
JohnBurke is offline  
Old 05-04-2018, 05:49 AM
  #42  
Gets Weekends Off
 
aeroengineer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2016
Posts: 324
Default

According to one witness aircraft impacted flat. Base on the condition of the tail/rudder I'm inclined to agree. Maybe trying to recover from whatever occurred and just ran out of altitude. My .02.
aeroengineer is offline  
Old 05-04-2018, 06:07 AM
  #43  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,292
Default

Originally Posted by aeroengineer View Post
According to one witness aircraft impacted flat. Base on the condition of the tail/rudder I'm inclined to agree. Maybe trying to recover from whatever occurred and just ran out of altitude. My .02.
The video shows vertical and rolling but it does look like the roll might have stopped and pitch up started at the last moment.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 05-04-2018, 07:04 AM
  #44  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Posts: 304
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
The video shows vertical and rolling but it does look like the roll might have stopped and pitch up started at the last moment.
FWIW, my first reaction on seeing the pictures of the wreckage was that it must have hit in a fairly level attitude.
A Squared is offline  
Old 05-04-2018, 07:40 AM
  #45  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 834
Default

Something else to consider is that historically [not saying it's the case here] when an aircraft is prepped for a flight to the boneyard, especially to meet the ax [vs flyable storage] they are often stripped to various degrees and also low time/cycle components are removed and replaced with high time/cycle, sometimes nearly run out components.

As an example, I know of a flight, many years ago, where a ferry crew delivered a 4 engine jet airliner for demolition. Besides being prepped for its 2 Hr last flight, it had been stripped to the point of being a lighter weight than even the factory had ever flown one; so the crew had to extrapolate data... And flying with essentially a ferry kit of instruments.

Apparently this accident aircrew was very experienced, as is typical of these sorts of flights; so I am of the opinion that this was not likely pilot error, more likely something they did not have the ability to deal with.

God bless this crew, and all of our troops...
Yoda2 is offline  
Old 05-04-2018, 08:44 AM
  #46  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Position: Stretch DC-9 Gear Slinger
Posts: 615
Default

Originally Posted by A Squared View Post
No, it was an H, #65-0968
Ok I guess I’m wrong. I had a few hours in an old 65 model WC and that one was an E. Because of that I figured they were all Es. I’m going to stop speculating because I have no idea what went wrong or even what model Herk it was.
Klondike Bear is offline  
Old 05-04-2018, 09:59 AM
  #47  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Posts: 10
Default

Definitely an "H" model. After they left Keesler, they were sent to Willow Grove ARS for storage. Once we had our E models taken away, and then the 4 H-3 loaners taken away (2 to C Springs; 2 to Niagara) in late 2006/early 2007, we got permission to fly the WC-130H's. There were no rollers in them, so not much chance of carrying cargo... we flew them on off station trainers and simply to maintain currency (kind of like a flying club at that point). Eventually it was discovered that a few of them had some serious cracks in the wing structure (don't remember exactly where, and I think two were pretty much no longer flyable). Once Willow Grove closed, the remaining WC-130's went to the TN (Nashville) ANG and I guess on to the PRANG after TN. I think most of them had the modified nose for the fulton recovery system, as they actually started out as HC-130's... They were old then and I was surprised to hear they're still being used, esp considering the fact (at the time), that putting rollers in them was out of the question and they're usefulness was severely limited (considering AF mobility operations and the missions we fly and the way we move/handle cargo). I wish they'd been retired earlier and we weren't having this conversation today.
Snag41 is offline  
Old 05-04-2018, 11:52 AM
  #48  
Gets Weekends Off
 
hindsight2020's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Center seat, doing loops to music
Posts: 825
Default

It may be too soon, but I think this is going to expedite the discussion about the fate of the flying mission for the PRANG. It's been a decade and a half of back and forth regarding the follow-on mission and potential outright flying mission loss. At least such has been the case since they lost the fighters.

RC-26s were discussed back a while ago but a certain congressional delegation were apendage-blocking PR from having them because one Congressperson flies them (or used to) in his home state (RUMINT). At any rate, for a while it looked like the flying mission was over for the unrepresented territory of Puerto Rico, flying these sloppy third hand me down airframes. Local leadership apparently had insisted in the push for Hs due to having the extra crews (a J model or RC mission would represent aircrew job losses for the wing, so political interests abound).

This accident changes the game imo. Hopefully it galvanizes an improvement in conditions, though it could very well likely represent complete and permanent ANG mission loss for the territory on account of lack of political top cover. What else is new with colonialism....And I digress.
hindsight2020 is offline  
Old 05-04-2018, 12:50 PM
  #49  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 281
Default

As critical as the Caribbean is I don't see why the USAF doesn't have an active-duty base at the old Ramey AFB with a Guard unit as tenant. Same for the Navy base at Roosevelt Roads and their associated Air Station. And why would you have decrepit C-130s with wing cracks as weather airplanes? Surely they were not asked to fly into hurricanes in those things?
F4E Mx is offline  
Old 05-04-2018, 12:59 PM
  #50  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 17
Default

Originally Posted by F4E Mx View Post
And why would you have decrepit C-130s with wing cracks as weather airplanes? Surely they were not asked to fly into hurricanes in those things?
Those tails aren't currently flying the weather reconnaissance mission. They did in a past life.
4FanFlyer is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
WarEagle28
Military
18
02-07-2018 07:39 AM
Laughing_Jakal
Major
76
01-17-2016 09:19 PM
jcountry
Regional
51
11-26-2015 05:57 PM
Javichu
Flight Schools and Training
2
09-07-2012 09:18 AM
Bri85
Hangar Talk
11
04-12-2008 08:41 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices