Air Force grounds 116 C-130Hs

The Air Force has announced that they have grounded 100 C-130Hs, 8 MC-130H Combat Talons, 7 EC-130H Compass Call, and 1 TC-130H after finding a persistent leak in a C-130H propellor after it completed Depot maintenance. After removing the prop, a crack was found in the barrel assembly. Further inspections found two more cracked barrel assemblies. The grounding covers the older 54H60 propellors. It's unconfirmed, but apparently 20 barrels are considered good, and 464 props are needed. There's a TCTO for the replacement and repair of the props, but maintenance units are going to have to wait on the Depot to get props shipped out to them. There are maybe 174 props available currently.

WASHINGTON — The Air Force has grounded most of its older C-130H Hercules cargo planes and variants due to a problem with their propeller barrels.

Air Mobility Command on Friday confirmed a wide swath of its C-130H fleet, which numbered 128 at the beginning of fiscal 2022, is unable to fly, and it’s unclear how long it will take to replace all the defective propeller assemblies.

AMC said 116 C-130Hs, including variants of the mobility aircraft, were grounded on Tuesday due to concerns their propeller assemblies are defective, and that inspections over the coming days will show how many of those are affected.

AMC said the groundings are “widespread” and primarily affect the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard.

www.defensenews.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

The grounding covers the older 54H60 propellors

Who manufactures them? or where is the raw materials from?

a reply to: Zaphod58



How much does this further put the Air Force in a spot right now?

On a scale from nuisance to nuts in a vise.

Aren't we fairly short on aircraft that can perform similar tasks?

a reply to: TritonTaranis

The 54H60 has caused problems in recent years due to their age. The 54H60 caused the KC-130T crash in Mississippi when it failed and separated, passing through the fuselage. Twelve of the 16 blades were found with corrosion after the accident. It caused the Navy to ground their K/C-130T fleets, and replace them with J models, as well as replacing their props with new Hamilton Sundstrand NP2000 8 bladed props. The Air Force grounded their H models until inspections were completed, and have been replacing the props with the Hamilton Sundstrand NP2000.

a reply to: MidnightWatcher

The H is mostly Guard or Reserve. There are a total of 428 C-130s in the inventory across Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve. The biggest component is Guard at 181, with Active Duty having 145. It's going to hurt, especially with the Combat Talon and Compass Call being involved, but it's not going to screw anything too badly in the short term. It's going to depend mostly on how fast the Depot can turn them around and get them back out to the units.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TritonTaranis

The 54H60 has caused problems in recent years due to their age. The 54H60 caused the KC-130T crash in Mississippi when it failed and separated, passing through the fuselage. Twelve of the 16 blades were found with corrosion after the accident. It caused the Navy to ground their K/C-130T fleets, and replace them with J models, as well as replacing their props with new Hamilton Sundstrand NP2000 8 bladed props. The Air Force grounded their H models until inspections were completed, and have been replacing the props with the Hamilton Sundstrand NP2000.

Fair enough, just age and not enough to mothball?

You'd think right now they were consider important workhorses and maintained very well

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: MidnightWatcher

The H is mostly Guard or Reserve. There are a total of 428 C-130s in the inventory across Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve. The biggest component is Guard at 181, with Active Duty having 145. It's going to hurt, especially with the Combat Talon and Compass Call being involved, but it's not going to screw anything too badly in the short term. It's going to depend mostly on how fast the Depot can turn them around and get them back out to the units.

Great to hear!

Air Force guy here. C-130 one hell of an aircraft.

a reply to: TritonTaranis

Both the prop and the H model itself are being replaced, but it takes time. The props are being done as they go to PDM, unless they find a reason they can’t wait that long. The MC-130H is being replaced by the J, and the EC-130 is going to be replaced by the EC-37, the first of which is in testing.

I'll bet money that I helped install a bunch of those. I worked for a place in Alabama in 1989 where we replaced engines and props on C-130's as an upgrade.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TritonTaranis

Both the prop and the H model itself are being replaced, but it takes time. The props are being done as they go to PDM, unless they find a reason they can’t wait that long. The MC-130H is being replaced by the J, and the EC-130 is going to be replaced by the EC-37, the first of which is in testing.

The C-130J differs from older C-130 models in having four Rolls-Royce AE 2100 turboprops driving six-bladed Dowty R391 composite propellers that are swept at 35 degrees. The EC-130J was retired this month, leaving just the EC-130H in service. I should mention that the C-130J designation was first used provisionally for an assault transport version of the C-130 Hercules proposed in April 1966 in response to combat reports from the Vietnam War, but this was not built.

Imagine how things might have been different in US tactical airlifter needs if Lockheed Martin had chosen to go ahead with a jet-powered derivative of the C-130 like the North American NA-382 after having quit the Future International Military Airlifter (FIMA) group.

originally posted by: musicismagic
Air Force guy here. C-130 one hell of an aircraft.

Another Air Force guy here. I can confirm that. I was an engine troop on the C-130E. As I separated, LRAFB was just taking receipt of brand new H models. I still remember the smell and how equipment snaps became Velcro and it wasn't CONSTANTLY leaking hydraulic fluid from the aileron booster pack.

I recall just starting to hear about J models making their way to our base. They have them now of course, but it was a big deal for us then because most of our airframes were Vietnam era with heavy hours. Clinton was cutting everything so we had to cannibalize other tail numbers for parts to stay FMC (full mission capable).

Maintenance crews are going to be busting butt, most likely 12 hr shifts for a good while..

I don't miss those days, lol.

⭐+🇺🇸

It’s almost been 50 years now but I remember when this C-130A crash happened near here in Michigan.
Number 3 prop separated and caused the crash.
My older brother was stationed at Selfridge when it happened, he was in the avionics maintenance section for the C-130 squadron.
He knew all the guys that died.

aviation-safety.net...

originally posted by: Potlatch
The EC-130H is the EC-130 that has been replaced by the EC-37

No it hasn't been. The first EC-37 is just now in testing. They did a show and tell at Davis-Monthan last month, but it's a long way from being operational. They aren't planning on the first one being delivered until sometime next year if the testing program goes well, with modifications going on through 2025.

and the EC-130J is the EC-130 variant currently in service.

Davis-Monthan flies the EC-130H. The EC-130J Commando Solo was flown out of Pennsylvania, and was retired earlier this month. The only EC-130s still flying are the EC-130Hs out of DM.

a reply to: EternalShadow

The first C-130J did a Pacific tour and stopped in Hawaii. The H model, going from Hawaii back to Marietta, had to stop in California for fuel to make it all the way, with two external tanks on the wings. The J model was going from Hickam to Marietta non-stop, and would have just enough fuel to get there, with a small reserve, with no external tanks added.

a reply to: RazorV66

That's not that different from the 2017 KC-130T crash in Mississippi. A blade on the number 3 prop separated, passing through the fuselage, and embedding itself in the inner fuselage wall. The vibration from the unbalanced prop caused part of the engine to separate, impacting the right horizontal stabilizer, as the forward fuselage, just behind the cockpit separated.

originally posted by: Zaphod58

originally posted by: Potlatch
The EC-130H is the EC-130 that has been replaced by the EC-37

No it hasn't been. The first EC-37 is just now in testing. They did a show and tell at Davis-Monthan last month, but it's a long way from being operational. They aren't planning on the first one being delivered until sometime next year if the testing program goes well, with modifications going on through 2025.

and the EC-130J is the EC-130 variant currently in service.

Davis-Monthan flies the EC-130H. The EC-130J Commando Solo was flown out of Pennsylvania, and was retired earlier this month. The only EC-130s still flying are the EC-130Hs out of DM.

What was the justification for the US Air Force deciding to retire the EC-130J while keeping the EC-130H flying, given that the EC-130Js were newer aircraft than the EC-130H? In light of the propeller barrel defect discovered in one of the C-130H aircraft, the Air Force might one day make a decision to retire some of the Compass Call aircraft in service if the propeller barrel defects in those aircraft are found to be very severe.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: RazorV66

That's not that different from the 2017 KC-130T crash in Mississippi. A blade on the number 3 prop separated, passing through the fuselage, and embedding itself in the inner fuselage wall. The vibration from the unbalanced prop caused part of the engine to separate, impacting the right horizontal stabilizer, as the forward fuselage, just behind the cockpit separated.

I was only 9 years old when that crash happened but I remember my brother talking to my mother and father about it.
The prop did pass through the fuselage and the rumor was witnesses saw someone who was probably the loadmaster, standing at the side door as it was going down and he was missing a leg.
Sounds crazy but that’s what I remember my brother saying the most, it haunted me to think about it.
Obviously I don’t know how true that would have been, it was a low level flight and they probably didn’t have much time to do anything.

a reply to: Potlatch

They're all short body C-130Js that would eventually need a new center wing box to continue flying. They have a few SJs, but it's a roll on/roll off platform instead of the dedicated mission system, and can be used for the Rapid Dragon system, as well as infiltration/exfiltration, resupply and other missions.

The Air Force is finding workarounds to the grounding, including prioritizing inspections of aircraft that may be able to fly without having the propellers replaced. The Reserve has 34 aircraft impacted, at the 910th Airlift WIng, the 934th Airlift WIng, the 302nd Airlift Wing, and the 94th Airlift WIng (Youngstown, Minneapolis-St Paul, Peterson Space Force Base, and Dobbins AFB). The 94th Airlift Wing is the least impacted, with seven aircraft having received the new NP2000 props, and the eighth at the Depot receiving the upgrade. Dobbins also has a few propeller assemblies on hand, and once its determined which aircraft are the highest priority to get back in the air, they'll ship them out.

www.defensenews.com...