+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Lockheed Offers USA a $6B C-130J Deal

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    29 Mar 07
    Location
    Peoria,Arizona
    Posts
    132
    Country: Italy

    Lockheed Offers USA a $6B C-130J Deal

    Lockheed Offers USA a $6B C-130J Deal (defense procurement, military acquisition, defence purchasing)


    The Hill magazine reports that Lockheed Martin is lobbying the US Air Force to buy an additional 120 C-130J aircraft, under an offered multi-year contract worth more than $6 billion.

    The USAF has about 20% of its C-130E/H Hercules fleet on the ground or under significant flight restrictions right now, and has been pleading to be able to retire them instead of spending time and maintenance dollars on aircraft that will probably never fly again. This percentage will continue to grow as the hours continue to pile up. Meanwhile, the C-130Js are performing well in Iraq and Afghanistan, where their performance suffers much less from the heat and high altitude than C-130E/H versions. US Special Forces are also looking to renew their aging C-130 specialty aircraft and gunship fleet, but they worry that platforms like the C-130 won't be survivable 15 years from now.

    Both groups have made noises lately about a competition that could involve Airbus' recently-delayed A400M, which breaks through the 20-ton cargo barrier that has stymied several US armored vehicle programs. Those rumblings, and the delay, may have handed Lockheed both motive and opportunity to make its proposal….
    Last edited by Rossiman; 11 Nov 07, at 08:43.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    29 Mar 07
    Location
    Peoria,Arizona
    Posts
    132
    Country: Italy
    continued...

    Lockheed's offer reportedly involves 120 C-130J aircraft in different configurations between 2011-2015, at a production rate of 24 airplanes a year. This would double its existing production rate, and extend the line's guaranteed operating period from 2010-2015.

    Costs per C-130J-30 would reportedly drop from $60-70 million in current FY08 dollars to $50.4 million in constant FY08 dollars; the KC-130J tanker variant would be $51.8 million, and a shortened version (which was disqualified from the Joint Cargo Aircraft competition) would be $47.8 million. In real dollars with inflation et. al. factored in, this could rise to about $60-65 million per plane between 2011-2015.

    Note that specialty versions like US SOCOM's MC-130 Combat Talon/Shadow/Spear covert insertion planes, HC-130 King Bird SAR & aerial tankers, EC-130H Compass Call electronic warfare aircraft, EC-130J Commando Solo flying broadcasters, and AC-130 Specter/Spooky gunships tend to be more expensive, as they involve substantial changes and costs beyond the basic aircraft. The proposed agreement does not cover aircraft of these types, but the basic airframes could be bought under this multi-year agreement, and extra funds appropriated for the refit work.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    29 Mar 07
    Location
    Peoria,Arizona
    Posts
    132
    Country: Italy
    continued...

    With Airbus A400M production unlikely to begin at any serious level before 2011, and 190 orders already on the books that must be filled, Lockheed's 2011-2015 deal offers the US military immediate relief for its aging force, before the competition can realistically deliver an alternative.

    The important thing, from Lockheed Martin's perspective, is to raise the size of the USA's C-130J fleet high enough that competitive alternatives become too expensive due to the scale of duplication required for training, logistics, maintenance, et. al. An additional 120 aircraft would almost certainly achieve this goal, locking in a much larger volume of long-term orders, while keeping the production line open long past 2015 for other international customers.

    The 20-ton space is likely to become rather crowded by 2020, however, with the Indo-Russian MRTA, Embraer C-390, and Chinese Y-9 all vying for market share, and the possibility of the American AJACS program as an additional complicating factor. Meanwhile, Airbus will be offering a competitor that offers major performance advantages, while remaining within the financial reach of existing customers like Chile, Malaysia, and South Africa.

    For all of these reasons, the C-130J has little chance of duplicating its predecessors' international success. Regardless, Lockheed Martin has invested $1 billion of private funds in the aircraft's development, and wishes to recover them. To do so, however, it must remain in the competitive game. Offering substantial discounts now is a smart way to do it.

  4. #4
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    12,615
    Country: United States
    Hm...interesting. I've read a lot about the C-130J being a pork barrel project that Congress is jamming down the Air Force's throat.

    By the way, Rossiman, a quick primer in posting articles like that; you can post the entire article in the same post, makes it a little easier to read.

    A lot of members will copy and paste the article and then use the Quote tags to set it off from their own comments, like this.
    This also makes it a little easier to read.

    Anyway, welcome to the board.

  5. #5
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    16 Nov 05
    Posts
    1,854
    Country: United States
    I've heard good things about the J model. I think if it werent for the other things the AF needs much much worse (tankers, fighters) they'd be all over the C-130J.

  6. #6
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    12,615
    Country: United States
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy View Post
    I've heard good things about the J model. I think if it werent for the other things the AF needs much much worse (tankers, fighters) they'd be all over the C-130J.
    Oh no reflection on the J model itself. Everything I've read says that it's a real performer and then some.

    It's just that I've also read that - as you said - the USAF has other things they need to buy but Congress is pushing the J down their throats to keep their districts in business.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    29 Mar 07
    Location
    Peoria,Arizona
    Posts
    132
    Country: Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
    Oh no reflection on the J model itself. Everything I've read says that it's a real performer and then some.

    It's just that I've also read that - as you said - the USAF has other things they need to buy but Congress is pushing the J down their throats to keep their districts in business.
    Yes the J model is a great capability that we need, as it will close the gap on are heavy lift program that is in need of some love.

  8. #8
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    15 Sep 06
    Posts
    6,755
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy View Post
    I've heard good things about the J model. I think if it werent for the other things the AF needs much much worse (tankers, fighters) they'd be all over the C-130J.
    I heard a serving RAF type say the J model has still not been cleared for as many loads as the earlier models which is why the old girls are burning up hours faster than forecast.
    Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

  9. #9
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    9,269
    Country: United States
    The crews at Little Rock love the J.

  10. #10
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    15 Sep 06
    Posts
    6,755
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    The crews at Little Rock love the J.
    It would be remarkable if the crews of any modern aircraft type didn't love their cabs.
    Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    29 Mar 07
    Location
    Peoria,Arizona
    Posts
    132
    Country: Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    The crews at Little Rock love the J.
    As do I if you heard my thread on are heavy lift program you would understand how much I think it needs work. Not to mention the new tankers we need to field and produce in a vast amount.

+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Walker's World: India's nuke deal falters
    By gamercube in forum International Politics
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 13 Mar 07,, 18:43
  2. Iran’s strongman loses grip as ayatollah offers nuclear deal
    By troung in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 21 Jan 07,, 04:53
  3. Pakistan Offers Osama Bin Laden A Deal
    By Hari_Om in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 03 Oct 06,, 07:02
  4. Blackwater USA Offers a Brigade
    By Wraith601 in forum The Field Mess
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 13 May 06,, 05:45
  5. How clean is India?
    By Neo in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 163
    Last Post: 04 May 06,, 01:09

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts