C130 Lack of Thrust

#1

Firstly let me begin with an apology as I cannot post this in the relevant thread - maybe a kind hearted Moderator can leave this up for long enough, or move it over for me.

I have noticed some issues with the C130J that I simply cannot ignore anymore being from an Air Force background.

The severe lack of thrust in the IF C130 - it struggles to even taxi at 25% throttle, these machines are well known and used for their short take off ability and the insane amount of thrust the 4 RollsRoyce engines can kick out. That teamed with the increased number of the improved props gives it a great thrust to weight ratio.

Max TO weight/MLW - this is the same number, factually incorrect as a landing weight is always higher than the TOW, the C130J max take off is 165,000lbs or a little under 75,000kg.

It would be massive if these were corrected so the Herc was more realistic and easier for those who’re less experienced flying it - this could be a couple of reasons as to why it has lost its popularity.

I welcome your thoughts and comments, but this isn’t a witch hunt and I didn’t want to offend anyone - so apologies if anyone is offended by any of this content.

14 Likes
#2

I see a max normal takeoff weight as being the same as max overweight landing weight. The normal MLW is about 25,000 pounds lighter. I’m just reading a spec sheet, so I’m open to the possibility that pilots of the craft know much more than me, but it seems you’re comparing two separate things as if they were the same.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/c-130j-specs.htm

3 Likes
#3

Yeah I worded it poorly. The figures should be different, and the C130 fully loaded can still take off. Not be overweight with no fuel onboard. The specs need looking at and revising on IF as they’re so far off it’s unreal. The main issue with the model is the poor thrust, these things have an insane amount of “torque”, it’s as if the FDS team (God Bless them) have just copied and pasted the Dash8 figures across for the power aspect.

3 Likes
#4

Apparently IF’s models are 100% accurately based on the real life aircraft - soooo huh

4 Likes
#5

They can’t be, MLW &a TOW are off? 😂

3 Likes
#6

Concerning the lack of thrust; the manual states that high about of thrust are required in order to put the aircraft in motion (roughly 60% for the C130H). This data was confirmed by a FAF C-130H pilot I know. :)

2 Likes
#7

May well be, but doesn’t the H use T56 and not RollsRoyce engines? What manual are you talking of? I wouldn’t mind having a look myself :)

#8

Yes it does, but C130J data are more difficult to find in all honestly. If you have accurate and reliable data, I’m sure the devs would love to see it! :)

1 Like
#9

Yup, I can easily get hold of some data. If the devs want the proof I’m more than happy to supply it, you never said what manual you were working from? Honestly like to have a look before I give a random RAF squadron a call for some data haha

6 Likes
#10

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.