I have no idea and I am certainly no expert but in Antarctica it was very common for a Herc to haul loads of fuel to the South Pole and other bases and then be converted back to hauling pax and cargo.

VMGR stands for Squadron, Marine, Heavy lift, Refueling.
 They are a dual role aircraft. So yes. Its quite common.

All the time..the aircraft can do anything.

More than dual

(V means fixed wing, btw)

 Sorry. Its only been 31 years.

Ass, Gas or Trash.

You call, we haul.

VMGR is a fixed wing Marine cargo refuel.

For these planes, they do just as much duty as cargo and troops as they do IFR

I get that the herky bird is a capable aircraft, I was mainly wondering if it was common practice to fly passengers on tankers. 

So does a tanker like a KC-46 carry passengers? 

Yes, it can fulfill aerial refueling missions with or without the fuselage tank installed. I've done plenty of AR with cargo/pax in the cargo compartment.

I'm hearing that VMGR 452 is planning a memorial service in early August.

Did this A.C. have some sort of flight data / cockpit voice recorder? If so, I'm assuming any useful data for the investigation would've been cut off the instant the cockpit separated.

Yes, our KC-10s and KC-135s can carry cargo and passengers, and do routinely.

And in my time with both VMGR 234 and 452 (both are Marine reserve squadrons and this particular aircraft had been both too) I only recall seeing the fuse tanks being installed in 3 or 4 aircraft (out of 12) at any given time, unless they were deploying to Al Asad, etc. where the tank might be again removed. 

IIRC, 165000 was also one of the few NVG-configured aircraft, making it an asset desired more for supporting the sort of ops that Raider Bn would conduct, rather than providing IFR or RGR tanking.

Their demand for Cargo and Pax missions is/was much higher than tanking, a task which could still be filled by the cargo-configured airframes, since the difference in fuel capacity is only 3600 gallons, only about 25% less.

A Herc hauling fuel to Antarctica likely wouldn't be a "tanker" in the sense of being a refueling aircraft - the fuel would be carried as cargo (e.g. 55 gallon drums or possibly a bladder) which would be much more convenient to offload, re-position, and store on site.

Mike

The KC130's are always tankers..the plumbing, systems, etc are all there to tank anytime..there is an ADDITONAL tank that get's pushed inside for increased fuel payload for tankering..

LOL. I doubt many here are old enough to know the significance of that saying.

It can - there is a cargo compartment of (roughly) the same size as the passenger compartment in a passenger aircraft, with the fuel tanks located below the floor.  The aircraft could never carry the weight of enough fuel to fill the fuselage, so there is volume available for cargo/pax if the weight allows.  That cargo compartment can be configured with passenger pallets or cargo, or a combination.

A tanker mission over Afghanistan, for instance, wouldn't be carrying passengers because it would be taking off from its base, orbiting and refueling aircraft, and then returning to where it started, and would not be stopping anywhere to drop off passengers.  A tanker traveling cross country (e.g. crossing the Atlantic) and refueling aircraft enroute could carry cargo or passengers in theory, if the weight of the required fuel allowed for additional carriage, though there may be some restrictions due to procedures/safety regulations.

Mike

One of the Ice crews had a streamer type patch made for their helmet bags.


Flying
Urgent
Cargo
Knowing
It's
Trash

Short Simple Uncomplicated answer .


The KC-130 is a multi-role, multi-mission tactical tanker/transport which provides the refueling support required by the USMC for its aircraft. This versatile asset provides in-flight refueling to both tactical aircraft and helicopters within a 500-nautical-mile (930 km) operating radius, as well as rapid ground refueling when required. Additional tasks performed are aerial delivery of troops and cargo, emergency resupply into unimproved landing zones within the objective or battle area, emergency medical evacuation, tactical insertion of combat troops and equipment, and evacuation missions.

Now if u want to Get Complicated Google KC-130 Harvest hawk and be like WTF can the C-130 not do .

VMGR = Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron

V = Fixed Wing
M = Marine
G = Transport
R = Refuel

The numbers (VMGR-452) the first number is the Marine Air Wing = 4th MAW.
The only Marine KC-130 squadron that does not conform to this is VMGR-234, they belong to the 4th MAW.

VMGR-152 = 1st MAW
VMGR-234 = 4th MAW
VMGR-252 = 2nd MAW
VMGR-352 = 3rd MAW
VMGR-452 = 4th MAW

LC-130's won't use the fuselage tank, it makes no sense.
The weight restrictions  for landing on a prepared skiway preclude the use of the fuselage tank ever since the LC-130R/H models came with the external tanks.

When VXE-6 had the pre G-Whipped (Gross Weight Improvement Program) LC-130F's (C-130B) (no external tanks, less capable landing gear) then installing a fuselage tank made sense.

After the G-Whip mods were done they stopped using the fuselage tanks.

Even running from the Ice Runway to the Pole at max take-off weight made no sense because you still could only land at the pole at 130K.

So the eyewitness account of one guy getting out with a chute is incorrect?

I had seen something about a deployed chute with no person in it. Idk if thats even possible.

Would jumping out of a doomed plane ala Travis Pastrana cross my mind if I was in that position...and trying to put it on/deploy? Sure.

Realistic... not likely.

Link to info about cockpit separated from fuse? Had not heard this but pics look like it.

There was speculation about it, but if it nosed in at any nose down angle at all it's not unlikely that the flight deck is crushed under the wreckage, IMO.  I think it had to do with all the rumors of a 5 mile debris field (indicative of an in flight breakup), and bodies "scattered throughout" the area.  It's all speculation and rumor-mongering at this point, and nobody who knows should be speaking about privileged information in public.

It is hard seeing this happen to the best of us.

Its the Commanding Officer of the 4th Marine Air Wing and the head of the Mississippi State Police who are stating that the debris field covers 5 miles, I have to assume that means square miles, and that their are main wreckage sites on either side of Highway 82 with about 1/2 mile between them and that at least one body was 1 mile from the main impact site where the fuselage and wings are.  

But that is about all they have said.  I thought I read earlier today that the smaller wreck site away from the fuselage was just an engine.  But I cant find that mention now. The Atlanta Journal has a small clip of video from ground level apparently taken by firefighters that shows a bigger crater under the front of the airframe than the aerial photos showed. But you still cant really tell if the nose is missing or just crushed and burned.

Here's a clip of the procession escorting the fallen Marines to the Air National Guard Base at Jackson International Airport.

https://www.facebook.com/WLBT3/videos/10154527863550653/?fref=mentions

Should a press conference this morning some time.

I can understand troops with arms and weapons but would an aircraft have live explosives on a flight such as this?

Yes, we (.mil) carry passengers and cargo as a package all the time.  If they are duty pax as these were the cargo could certainly include explosives, small arms ammunition, etc.

  It was a training excersize.  Sometimes those are live fire.  You fight like you train.  Where MARSOC goes, there may not be assets available so they carry their weapons and ammo with them. They most certainly had M203s with HE at a minimum

I know. I was making it simple.  Read my replies in this thread.ive worked on 000

http://www.wingmanfoundation.org/

I was just adding to your info.
It's not directed at you.

http://www.public.navy.mil/AIRFOR/nalo/Documents/INSTRUCTIONS/NAVSUPPUB%20505%20Preparing%20Hazardous%20Materials%20For%20Military%20Air%20Shipments%203DEC2012.pdf
Chapter Three...

I speculate that the man who claimed he saw one person use a parachute... heard the explosion, looked up, saw a man falling, and the cockpit falling looked like a parachute.  His gaze quickly went to the bigger item, the C-130.

I think the 'chute he saw was the cockpit, and it was an honest mistake, but sadly gave some false hope that there was at least one survivor.

The witness wanted to see a parachute and saw what he thought was one - it would make sense in your head, rather than a cockpit separation.

This is a real tragedy, and should remind all of the daily dangers, and sacrifices of our servicemen and women.

What I remember reading was they found an unused chute.  Not sure where it was found though.   This makes me think that there was an opening in the fuselage somewhere that allowed items to be thrown clear as it was descending.  Depending on the G forces being experienced by those on board I doubt anyone would be up trying to put a chute on.

Not always true. I've done this exact same lift for the USMC in our birds. Sometimes they will use ground transportation or another bird to take the explosives separately. All depends on the type of Haz. Some things are pax restricted. And even restrict duty pax.

I would be pretty sure that they have an idea what happened. These guys were certainly talking on open frequencies during the mishap. Also the CSFIR has probably been located and already examined. The o Lt think I can think of to cause this in the normal sense of NATOPS emergencies would be an in flight release of the life raft(s).  Other than that I won't even speculate.

Saw this over on airliners.net.


In 1992, during a logistics mission over the Bering sea in Alaska, my crew suffered a catastrophic gearbox failure of the #3 Engine at 21000
ft.. The prop departed and folded in between the nacelle and the
fuselage. One of the blades struck to the air-frame causing a 4x8 foot
hole just forward of the booster hydration system. From the engineers
seat, the rapid decompression sounded and felt like a clap of thunder
next to you. Instant fog developed and I couldn't see below the
windscreen. The left wing dropped slightly with heavy vibration in the
airframe and I honestly thought she was going to roll over on her back
and fall. We had no idea up front that the prop separated. As the fog
cleared, we first noticed a "throttle control failure " of the # 3
engine. The throttle was moving back and forth from stop to stop so fast
you could not even see it. We initiated the emergency engine shutdown
checklist as this was one of the conditions listed in the AFM. The Pilot
in the left seat concentrated on flying the plane in interior "IFR"
conditions and the right seater was working the "mayday" call on the HF
and VHF radios. We went on O2 as fast as we could and had the ELT signal
going off in our headset as it was activated by the prop striking the
ELT antenna. The prop had gone over the right wing at the root and cut
the hydraulic lines that kept the MLG charged in the up position. This
depleted the hydraulics in the utility Hydraulic system. The condition
of the hydraulic systems on the aircraft at this point was that we only
had hydraulic pressure for a portion of the primary flight controls.
everything else would now be a manual mode of operation. We slowly
descended, taking care not to descend in IFR conditions over the Alaska
peninsula and run right into a mountain. As I did a damage assessment,
it was noted that the #3 engine nacelle looked like it had been run
through a meat grinder and I wasn't sure if the wing was going to be
there much longer, especially not know what the extent of total aircraft
damage was. The external fuel tank had a large dent in it..

We were in the air for another 1.5 hours working through challenges as they
came up ( Had a problem verifying right gear as down and locked.
Hydraulic fluid had smeared the inspection window and the flight deck
indicator didn't work) We made a no flap approach to a no flap landing
in marginal VFR conditions at Cold Bay Alaska. Visual walk around showed
where the prop slid across the top of the aircraft and sliced a 3 foot
cut up the vertical stab. Inside the vertical, you could see where the
blade had gotten in there and was cutting the stringers. We had a crew
of 9 and 7 passengers and I give full credit to everyone on board..crew
and pax alike that worked together for the positive outcome. I will not
attempt to surmise what happened to this crew..but I can bet the crew
did everything they could do to reach for a positive outcome....

( The video link below will show the aircraft damage from my flight)






C130 Crash Thread

If I was a C130 pilot right now I would be having a conversation with my flight engineer about pulling the power supply or what ever powers the wing life rafts...if it was or has a breaker you can bet it would be disabled until I am doing my ditch checklist.

Got ya.

I don't know any of the names released, but they are still in my thoughts.

Condolences to all involved. I work with the CO of 452.

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/life/mslife/2017/07/14/true-mississippi-delta-spirit/478607001

Save the whales!

The only thing that some drug addict could use to score, (in my opinion) would be jewelry or wallet from the fallen.  Just the thought of that makes my blood pressure skyrocket.  If such happened, I would be irate if there weren't severe consequences.

No such mechanism exists. The rafts bucket releases are connect via cable direct to two handles in the forward 245 of the cockpit and two above the aft toilet and one under a bird patch in each wing.

And to disable any emergency equipment purposely outside of published norms would be grounds for being grounded and subject to disciplinary action.