C-27 Spartan

[chefjavier]

The US Air Force's C-27 Spartan, nicknamed Chuck, is modified from the G222 airframe manufactured in Naples, Italy, by Alenia, SpA. Chrysler Technologies Airborne Systems, Inc., as prime contractor, procured G222-710 aircraft from Alenia, and modified those aircraft by installing upgraded navigation, communication (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/c-27.htm#), and mission systems required for C-27A operation.
The C-27A Spartan is a twin turboprop engine aircraft designed to meet an Air Force requirement for a rugged, medium size airland transport. The Spartan, which looked like a toned-down, twin engine version of the C-130, gave US military troops a unique, short-take-off-and-landing capability, providing access to airstrips otherwise unreachable by fixed-wing aircraft.
The C-27 can carry up to 18,000 pounds of fuel and cargo and can fly farther than cargo helicopters. Much like its big brother, the C-130 Hercules, the C-27 also has the unique ability to land and take-off on extremely small (less than 3,000 feet) undeveloped strips of land. These advantages made the C-27 a key player in delivering food, water and other supplies to remote areas that other airplanes and helicopters can not get to.
The aircraft was particularly suited for short-to-medium range tactical operations into semi-prepared airfields as short as 1,800 feet. The C-27A is an all-weather, day/night transport with capabilities to perform medical evacuation missions. It can carry 24 litters and four medical attendants, or 34 ground troops. The Spartan has a cargo capacity of more than 2,000 cubic feet, or 12,000 pounds. The C-27A operates with a three person crew of aircraft commander, copilot and loadmaster.
The C-27 Spartan, in the Air Force inventory since 1990, has played an integral part in other Southern Command missions as well. Missions such as counter-drug operations and peacekeeping missions kept the C-27 busy during its tenure with SOUTHCOM. One of the C-27's main missions in the late 1990s was MOMEP (Military Observation Mission Ecuador Peru). MOMEP was a peacekeeping mission to help settle a border dispute between Ecuador and Peru. The airstrip utilized for MOMEP operations was only capable of handling C-27s.
Despite the C-27's accomplishments, the Air Force retired its inventory of Spartans in 1999 for financial reasons. Parts and maintenance costs were the leading reasons for the program's cancellation. The final seven C-27A Spartans were flown from Panama to the Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Center in January 1999. The event marked both the end of an era in Panama and the first sign of the impending closure of Howard AFB in accordance with the terms of the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977.
The C-27 returned to the US military scene in 2005 with the issuing of requirements for the US Army's proposed Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA) program. An updated variant of the C-27, dubbed C-27J by the manufacturers (in references to the leveraged technology (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/c-27.htm#) from the C-130J program), was entered for consideration against the EADS C-295. The FCA program was poised to select the C-27J during 2005, but delays in selection came after the Department of Defense proposed merging the FCA program with the similar Light Cargo Aircraft program being conducted by the US Air Force.
The merger of the programs was completed in March 2006, becoming the Joint Cargo Aircraft program. The JCA program announced in June of 2007 the decision to select the C-27J as the winner of the competition. The team of Raytheon and EADS, who submitted a proposal based on the C-295 (as in their proposal to the FCA program), filed a formal protest against the selection process in the same month. The protest was resolved, with no affect on the aircraft selection, pushing back JCA procurement by 3 months according to program officials.
The delivery date for the first aircraft was planned for September 2008. The system was scheduled to undergo initial operational test and evaluation from September to November 2009 and its initial operational capability was planned for February 2010. Program officials reported to the Government Accountability Office for a 2008 assessment that the production maturity was at a high level because the aircraft was commercially available, and production lines already established.
Does anyone know how come they are using this type of aircrat to replace the AC-130 Spectrum? Does anyone know what new weapons is going to be loeaded to do the job?

[SpartanWarrior198]

Does anyone know how come they are using this type of aircrat to replace the AC-130 Spectrum? Does anyone know what new weapons is going to be loeaded to do the job?
News to me. :cantbeli:

I googled "AC-27" and nothing regarding gunships came up.

[JJB1970]

This might be what you are thinking of:

"SOF To Convert One C-27J To Gunship Lite

Jul 25, 2008
Amy Butler

The Pentagon is planning this fiscal year to buy one C-27 for quick modification as a prototype gunship to augment U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command’s (AFSOC) existing AC-130 fleet."

LINK: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aerospacedaily&id=news/AC27-072508.xml

There was an thread on it too--I don't know where though.

[SpartanWarrior198]

This might be what you are thinking of:

"SOF To Convert One C-27J To Gunship Lite

Jul 25, 2008
Amy Butler

The Pentagon is planning this fiscal year to buy one C-27 for quick modification as a prototype gunship to augment U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command’s (AFSOC) existing AC-130 fleet."

LINK: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aerospacedaily&id=news/AC27-072508.xml

There was an thread on it too--I don't know where though.
Interesting.

[chefjavier]

This might be what you are thinking of:

"SOF To Convert One C-27J To Gunship Lite

Jul 25, 2008
Amy Butler

The Pentagon is planning this fiscal year to buy one C-27 for quick modification as a prototype gunship to augment U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command’s (AFSOC) existing AC-130 fleet."

LINK: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aerospacedaily&id=news/AC27-072508.xml

There was an thread on it too--I don't know where though.
Do you know what weapons is going to be using?

[Bro Jangles]

Do you know what weapons is going to be using?
when i read it at the time the only one mentioned was the new 30mm chaingun that was going to be put on the AC130.

PS- hellfires would be sweet. hold a couple dozen.

[Little J]

Once read an article in Flight magazine (i think), saying that the "AC-27" was going to be used only to test future weapons for the AC-130, guess that must have changed.

[chefjavier]

I read an article on "Air Forces Montly" in the December 2008 issue pg.20 it states "On Oct. 16th saw the formal hand over to the US Army of the first C27J Joint Cargo Aircraft. An total order of 145 going to DOD; 75 for the Army and 70 for the Air Force". I am trying to figure out what the Army is using them for?

[Silent Reader]

i think it was mentioned in another thread that the Spartan Gunship will be army and the AC-130s will stay Air Force... i guess the army just wanted to have a similiar asset for its special forces etc

[chefjavier]

On another Article it states the Air Force is going to use it for gunship operation but to another smaller scale. The Air Force want to use a smaller version of the AC-130. But it doesn't say's what weapons is going to use. I know the gattling guns and the 30mm bushmaster are going in for sure. I wonder if they are going to use 105 MM or 40mm?

[retrobob]

I read an article on "Air Forces Montly" in the December 2008 issue pg.20 it states "On Oct. 16th saw the formal hand over to the US Army of the first C27J Joint Cargo Aircraft. An total order of 145 going to DOD; 75 for the Army and 70 for the Air Force". I am trying to figure out what the Army is using them for?
The Army intends to replace it's C-23B Sherpas with C-27's.The C-23B's are mostly operated by the Army National Guard in the 'intra-theatre transport' role.

[AVZ]

i thought they wanted to go just with the 30mm bushmaster. the same weapon was supposed to be build in the spectre gunships but it didn't come so far. there were some accuracy problems. i think they will put some new hellfires on it too.

just found it:



Aviation Week & Space Technology
07/28/2008 , page 30

Air Force Special Operations Command (Afsoc) plans to buy a single C-27 by October for use as an AC-XX Gunship Lite prototype. The Pentagon wants $32 million in a $1.8-billion Fiscal 2008 reprogramming request to procure the aircraft. Another $11.5 million is expected for feasibility and engineering analysis of various sensors and armaments. The Army and Air Force are developing the C-27J with an L-3/Alenia North America team. The smaller gunship, if procured in numbers, would augment the massive firepower offered by the AC-130 fleet. Meanwhile, Afsoc has abandoned plans to outfit new AC-130U gunships with a common 30-mm. gun after misfires in airborne testing.

[chefjavier]

i thought they wanted to go just with the 30mm bushmaster. the same weapon was supposed to be build in the spectre gunships but it didn't come so far. there were some accuracy problems. i think they will put some new hellfires on it too.

just found it:



Aviation Week & Space Technology
07/28/2008 , page 30

Air Force Special Operations Command (Afsoc) plans to buy a single C-27 by October for use as an AC-XX Gunship Lite prototype. The Pentagon wants $32 million in a $1.8-billion Fiscal 2008 reprogramming request to procure the aircraft. Another $11.5 million is expected for feasibility and engineering analysis of various sensors and armaments. The Army and Air Force are developing the C-27J with an L-3/Alenia North America team. The smaller gunship, if procured in numbers, would augment the massive firepower offered by the AC-130 fleet. Meanwhile, Afsoc has abandoned plans to outfit new AC-130U gunships with a common 30-mm. gun after misfires in airborne testing.
I am in shock to hear the problems with the 30-mm bushmaster. Do think are they going to use the 40mm double barrel (WWII) guns and 105mm howitzer?

[Bro Jangles]

Will it it fit the 105?

[chefjavier]

Cannon Could Host AC-27 Gunship: Cannon AFB, N.M., Air Force Special Operation Command’s second home since last October, could host the new mini AC-27 gunship that the Air Force wants to develop, Gen. Michael Moseley, Chief of Staff, said during a Congressional hearing March 12. The Air Force is exploring a “Gunship Light” concept (http://www.airforce-magazine.com/DRArchive/Pages/2008/March%202008/March%2010%202008/1060faster.aspx) with US Special Operations Command that would be based on a modified version of the C-27 transport aircraft, which is smaller in size than Air Force Special Operations Command’s current AC-130 gunships. The AC-27s would carry a 30 mm gun (http://www.airforce-magazine.com/DRArchive/Pages/2007/September%202007/September%2025%202007/1200jca.aspx), Moseley said. Cannon gives AFSOC’s 27th Special Operations Wing access to the vast range space (http://www.airforce-magazine.com/DRArchive/Pages/2007/December%202007/December%2011%202007/1090melrose.aspx) of nearby Melrose range as well as White Sands Missile Range and Fort Bliss, Tex.., so that it can conduct realistic gunnery and bombing training with AC-130s, Moseley told the Senate Appropriations defense committee in response to a question posed by Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.). This could also apply to AC-27s. “We now have some opportunities to do some very, very creative training,” including in concert with the Army, he told Domenici. Already the 27th SOW has certified areas of the Melrose Range to receive cannon fire from AC-130 gunships, he said. (For more on AFSOC at Cannon, see Marc V. Schanz’s piece Special Operators Head West (http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2008/March%202008/0308west.aspx).)



3/14/2008
Subject: USAF Special Ops Developing C-27 Gunship
Softwar 7/28/2008 9:13:18 AM
Aviation Week & Space Technology
07/28/2008 , page 30

Air Force Special Operations Command (Afsoc) plans to buy a single C-27 by October for use as an AC-XX Gunship Lite prototype. The Pentagon wants $32 million in a $1.8-billion Fiscal 2008 reprogramming request to procure the aircraft. Another $11.5 million is expected for feasibility and engineering analysis of various sensors and armaments. The Army and Air Force are developing the C-27J with an L-3/Alenia North America team. The smaller gunship, if procured in numbers, would augment the massive firepower offered by the AC-130 fleet. Meanwhile, Afsoc has abandoned plans to outfit new AC-130U gunships with a common 30-mm. gun after misfires in airborne testing.

Amy Butler
http://www.aviationweek.com/media/images/defense_images/Miscellaneous/c27jspartanALENIAAERONAUTICA.jpg The Pentagon is planning this fiscal year to buy one C-27 for quick modification as a prototype gunship to augment U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command’s (AFSOC) existing AC-130 fleet.
A $1.8 billion reprogramming request from the Pentagon for FY ’08 includes a set aside for $32 million for the purchase of a single C-27, which would be modified to include “proven/known” weapons, sensors and other tactical systems for what AFSOC is calling an AC-XX Gunship Lite prototype. “This prototype will serve as a risk mitigation effort to field a new platform to operate in austere locations, with increased operational flexibility and a smaller support tail of manpower and logistics,” the reprogramming request states, noting the effort is a new start.
The U.S. Army and Air Force are already on contract to buy the first C-27Js for use as light cargo transports. The aircraft are being built by an L-3/Alenia North America team, with Boeing continuing negotiations to help stand up a U.S.-based final assembly plant in Florida.
Another $11.5 million is requested to execute an AC-XX feasibility study and engineering analyses associated with the so-called Gunship Lite. Further funding for the procurement of the aircraft is likely to be in the FY ’10 budget, which is now being crafted at the Pentagon.
In congressional testimony earlier this year, the Special Operations Command’s (SOCOM) chief said SOCOM was trying to roll out a small fleet of gunship-oriented C-27Js but was struggling under competing Air Force budget pressures, as well as the need to pursue necessary funds via an unfunded priority list to Congress that is not part of the regular appropriations process. He told senators that it would be an “exaggeration” to say SOCOM and the Air Force were equally eager to fund the small gunship variant, but the armed service supported the combatant command’s effort nevertheless (Aerospace DAILY, March 10). SOCOM, which has limited acquisition authority of its own, listed $30 million for a “gunship lite prototype” as a high priority in its annual unfunded procurement wish list this year.
Meanwhile, AFSOC has also dashed its plans to field a 30mm weapon on the AC-130U gunship. Command officials had hoped to replace the AC-130’s 40mm and 25mm weapons with a common 30mm system. But it fell short in testing. “Flight-testing revealed that it is operationally unsuitable due to unsatisfactory gunfire accuracy,” the reprogramming says.
Legacy systems
AFSOC is adding the 40mm and 25mm weapons back to the four AC-130Us delivered with the 30mm gun configuration. The omnibus includes a request to shift funding from the 30mm program back into the legacy systems.
Also for AFSOC, the Pentagon requests $7.5 million be transferred from an account for the MC-130W weapon system trainer to one that will purchase a U-28A trainer. AFSOC has begun to purchase the modified Pilatus PC-12 fixed wing aircraft for use in low-profile intratheater lift missions.
A separate line-item in the omnibus reprogramming also calls for $23.9 million to be dedicated toward the purchase of six PC-12s for use as communications relay systems for the Air Force. The mission is now being handled by C-130s and EA-6B Prowlers, which are badly needed to conduct other missions. This is also a new start program.
Photo: Alenia Aeronautica

[3rdMillhouse]

when i read it at the time the only one mentioned was the new 30mm chaingun that was going to be put on the AC130.

PS- hellfires would be sweet. hold a couple dozen.

Jesus Christ, I'd give away my anal virginity just to see some C-27 unloading Hellfires into ground targets. Like an aerial submarine.

[chefjavier]

What you guy's think the new armament would be in the C-27?

[JJB1970]

Everything I have read (mostly here!) has been vague on what the intentions are for armaments.

If a minigun or chaingun of some type is selected, wouldn't it make sense to carry more than one in case of malfunction?

[wild_wild_wes]

AC-XX Gunship Lite: The C-27J “Stinger II”

In July 2008, an Aviation Week report noted that the Pentagon’s 2008 budget reprogramming request includes $32 million from Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC), in order to buy a C-27J and convert it into a small prototype AC-XX gunship, using “proven/known” weapons and systems.

The proposed acquisition comes against the backdrop of an AC-130 fleet that is quickly being flown to the limits of the fleet’s airframe flight hours. At present, the AC-130s reportedly need 14 hours of maintenance for every hour in flight, while wing cracks are prompting major center wing box replacement operations 5 years ahead of schedule.

AFSOC has also become concerned about its AC-130 gunships’ long-term survivability, and has investigated a number of options [PDF format] including smaller aircraft and even stealth designs. What AFSOC appears to have decided is that it needs an immediate, affordable stopgap that can let it try some new concepts, without foreclosing future options…

That effort is still in early days, and has yet to bank even a firm contract for a protoype, but it’s something AFSOC is pursuing hard.

The C-27J is not stealthy, but it is smaller than existing AC-130s; an AC-27J “Stinger II” would trade less firepower for the ability to operate from smaller airstrips closer to the action.

Additions are certain to include defensive systems, electro-optical surveillance and targeting turrets, flight and/or ground surveillance radars, weapons, and computerized gun control systems. L3 spokesman Jason Decker has been quoted as saying the AC-27J’s guns are likely to be between 25mm – 40mm caliber, as opposed to the 105mm howitzer carried on AC-130s. Depending on their model, however, the AC-130s’ other guns have been 40mm Bofors guns or 20-25 mm gatling guns, so the only thing that changes is the top-end firepower. On the other hand, proposals to arm AC-130s with precision weapons like GBU-44 Viper Strikes, Hellfire missiles, et. al. have always stumbled against the issue of integrating them into an old airframe. Integration into a new-build aircraft may offer a tempting opportunity to give the new gunships new capabilities, at an affordable price.

This is the “Stinger II” protoype’s other benefit: its ability to serve as a systems integration platform to help define the current state of the art, without sidelining even more of the in-demand AC-130 fleet for long refit periods. All of which may help to explain why AFSOC, who fields the $100+ million AC-130H/U gunships based on the larger C-130 Hercules tactical transport, also wants $11.5 million to execute an AC-XX feasibility study and engineering analyses. Overall:

“This prototype will serve as a risk mitigation effort to field a new platform to operate in austere locations, with increased operational flexibility and a smaller support tail of manpower and logistics.”

Sept 9/08: DoD Buzz reports that Lt. Gen. Donald Wurster, commander of Air Force Special Operations Command, reiterated his strong support for the C-27J “Stinger II” gunship at the US Air Force Association’s annual meeting. During his presentation, Wurster said AFSOC is looking to field about 16 of these aircraft.

July 25/08: Aviation Week reports that AFSOC is looking to reprogram $32 million of its budget to field an AC-27J prototype. Based on known airframe and conversion costs for the C-27J and other platforms, further funding for the AC-XX effort will almost certainly be required in FY 2010.

[JJB1970]

AC-XX Gunship Lite: The C-27J “Stinger II”
L3 spokesman Jason Decker has been quoted as saying the AC-27J’s guns are likely to be between 25mm – 40mm caliber

Thank you WWW. That answers my question.

[Gunge]

i dont think hellfires will be used, its a high circling type of direct fire the spectre uses so this will prob follow suit

keep in mind the 30mm bushmaster is pretty new,
the 25 mm is in use all over the place but may be understrength for the job(longer range needed)

the 40mm bofors is available in an updated version that is already tested,
and has the kinks worked out

and the 105 seems big but im sure it could be done.

hope they can work it out

[wild_wild_wes]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3d/Alenia_C-27J_%28Pratica_di_Mare%29_edit1.jpg/800px-Alenia_C-27J_%28Pratica_di_Mare%29_edit1.jpg

Look how short the fuselage is, though. I wonder how many gun positions they can fit in there.

[chefjavier]

It's going to be hard to put a 105 mm howitzer. I think the only possible solution is four Gattling gun 30mm & 40mm.

[Crewdog]

Looking at the size of the airframe... I would think two weapon systems. They still need room for the fire control box and the ammo. All of which weighs a lot. I doubt a 105 is even in the question here. It would have to be aft of the main gear wich would put a lot of weight back there.

[Martial]

They could always stretch the fuselage to accommodate more weapons, etc. Even better, they could just use an AC-130!

[Chapstique1567]

It is only going to replace a few of the "Spookys" not all of them. The basic idea is that the airforce wants to utilize the C-27's light weight and compact size to create a smaller gunship, not necessarily to be a replacement. And the AC-27 will more than likely be equipped with the 20mm cannon and the Bushmaster 30mm gun and that it probably going to be it, no 105mm ;)

[chefjavier]

It is only going to replace a few of the "Spookys" not all of them. The basic idea is that the airforce wants to utilize the C-27's light weight and compact size to create a smaller gunship, not necessarily to be a replacement. And the AC-27 will more than likely be equipped with the 20mm cannon and the Bushmaster 30mm gun and that it probably going to be it, no 105mm ;)
The Air Force is getting 75 planes and the US Army 75 now, difine few.:roll: I think they are going to this direction. Keep in mind the AC-130 is old and need alot of hours of repairs per hour of flying. Remember the first spooky C-46 use in Vietnam.p-) They use all Gattling guns 308. p-)

[Crewdog]

I do not think the hour they give are a fair way to detirmine reliability or operational cost. I believe that is an average number for total combined airframes. Which will include things like wash rack, lube, engine swaps, windshield replacement.... all of which are time consuming operations.

As for getting 75 planes, that is AF wide and they will be distributed across the MAJ commands. Only one is being used at this time for a study as a gun ship.

[AFACadet]

You're all getting the C-27J and AC-27J confused. Both are different aircraft. Both will be used in different ways. The 70 something quoted is the C-27J designed for transport only. Some in the Air Force want the C-27 in order to fly into smaller airfields or to fly routes needing less cargo space than a C-130.

If AFSOC has their way, they will get the AC-27. The AC will be a different program with different aircraft in order to help reduce the work load of the current AC fleet. And no, the Army isn't getting any AC-27s.

[chefjavier]

You're all getting the C-27J and AC-27J confused. Both are different aircraft. Both will be used in different ways. The 70 something quoted is the C-27J designed for transport only. Some in the Air Force want the C-27 in order to fly into smaller airfields or to fly routes needing less cargo space than a C-130.

If AFSOC has their way, they will get the AC-27. The AC will be a different program with different aircraft in order to help reduce the work load of the current AC fleet. And no, the Army isn't getting any AC-27s.
The Army is getting C-27J (75 planes) is to replace a few cargo plane they use.

[AFACadet]

I say again, you're all getting the AC-27 and C-27 confused. Please re-read my post above.

[yasotay]

Army will (as mentioned already) use C-27 to deliver time sensitive materials to austere locations. That's right from the briefing slides. The Army will not have any "Gunship" versions within the 75 they are to get. That is an AFSOC mission.

While I doubt that you would see Hellfire on a gunship version, it certainly is technically feasible. You would not have to always do left hand turns to prosecute the target and an eight klick standoff is mighty fine.

[geminif4ucorsair]

Also, Lockheed Martin has been marketing for a few years an maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) version of the C-27J as well; thus far without any orders. They have fliers at various aerospace exhibitions worldwide for this version, as well.

[chefjavier]

Also, Lockheed Martin has been marketing for a few years an maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) version of the C-27J as well; thus far without any orders. They have fliers at various aerospace exhibitions worldwide for this version, as well.
Do you have a picture of the aircraft?

[geminif4ucorsair]

Actually still a concept aircraft, with only computer calculations as to various spec's, etc based on known console weights, ordnance weights - and all volume considerations - calculated. Hence, still a "paper" airplane...if on computer!
Stiff competition out there for this role: ATR-72, CN-235-200M, CN-295, and Embraer alternative designs among more commonly known.

[DasBoost]

As a supplement to the aging AC130 force already in evaluation, will there be any possibility of a complete replacement, say with 2 or 3 smaller AC27 for every 1 AC130? The AC27 seems like a great COIN air-support aircraft with small size and light weight. Any word on STOL capabilities? Sorry for the questions, but the links to articles brought up blank pages.:cantbeli:

[geminif4ucorsair]

Have my doubts is AC-27J will see light of day under US flag for nearly a decade. Several reasons. Some USAF funds have been allocated (see articles) that explore development issues - there are hundreds of these applied research allocations every budget year. So, its not a panacea that guarantees a full development program will follow.

Second; economic / budget issues: USAF has higher funding priorities, laid totally to the F-22A Raptor aircraft. It would allocated funds from any program and re-direct it to the F-22 if it could, or suppress support of other programs to prove it can support more F-22 (183 is current planned number; over 100 have been delivered). Part of the problem there is so many aircraft are allocated to Test and Development aspects, that the number of actual F-22s for the field is significantly less than the total production count - IIRC, at least a squadron worth if not more - just forgot actual number ATM.

Third; President Obama & FY-09/10 defense budget years - anticipate several high-end program cancellations (already, Navy's Zumwalt DDG-1000 class will be stopped at two units). While we have not seen the Air Force FY-10 budget, it is likely it will be greatly impacted by the change in presidency and economic issues.

Fourth; USAF has been modernizing and replacing aged AC-130s in recent years and they are not particularly old or in the high-age category; the Air Force has 25 aircraft in the active inventory (TAI) and 19 in primary aircraft (PAI) category (those assigned to meet authorization levels. None are in Air Force Reserve or ANG.

The Air Force does not keep separate stats for age between C-130s and AC-130U aircraft types; but the average age of 209 C-130s is 24+ years - average fleet age is 33-years (10 new C-130Js are less than 3-years old). The AC-130U was introduced only in 1994-95 (when assigned AFSOC 4th SOS squadron).

The old aircraft are the eight remaining AC-130H versions, introduced in 1972 (IIRC).
The two aircraft versions have very dissimilar avionics and other systems; H-models were upgraded with FLIR, LLTV, in-flight refueling, ETACS, LAIRCM, etc over the years.

Thus, if one was going to replace the already stable fleet, it would be replacing 8 aircraft (AC-130Hs) - not a high number of aircraft to start of high-end program with!

Might be cheaper to allocate eight future production C-130J Super Hercules to AC variant - either new production or conversion - and transfer weapons, sensors, etc from current H-model aircraft (to the extend they are up-to-date) and boneyard the rest of the H-model aircraft.

Lastly, while the C-27J is great for most small air force missions (buyers include Lithuania, Bulgaria, etc - and after Italian hand-over G.222s begin to wear out in Afghanistan, its another candidate), the AC-27J might have its best sales potential in allocation to either Iraq or Afghanistan air forces somewhere in the mid-next decade period.

Just do not see it coming down the USAF budget pipeline - unless funded by other sources (Grant Aid or other) for either Iraq or Afghanistan.

There is always next decades guerrilla or related threats in other countries to consider - largely at the unpredictable level today. But, one might consider Peru and Columbia as candidates. But remember, the aircraft would be significantly more expensive in an "AC"-version, because the sensors and weapons (just few #) would be the same as a AC-130. If you are Columbia, why not buy a surplus C-130E or H model, overhaul and return to Zero Hours and install the minimal sensor and weapons suite that you can afford?

Hope this helps.

[DasBoost]

Thanks Gemini. From what articles I could read and what other posters were saying, I got the impression that the AC130 was fairly older than the actual numbers. I also wasnt sure of the costs of AC27 compared to AC130, thinking that having 2 or 3 'gunship lites' to one AC130 would be able to spread resources and reduce stress on individual airframes i.e; the same aircraft isnt flying the majority of missions in an AO, rotating aircraft compared to limited gunship resources now.

Either way, I've always been a fan of the AC130 since I saw one 8 yrs ago at an airshow. The concept seems fit for COIN.p-)

[geminif4ucorsair]

My guess is you were thinking of the Vietnam Era AC-130A conversion, which was long ago retired.

And, even the AC-130H are 'younger' than most of the C-130H transport models, as their introduction came well along in the production cycle of the H-model and therefore have less age to them, but don't have the actual model numbers ATM to do the year of manufacture.

But, the newer AC-130U conversion were made when a lot of upgrading was being down to AFSOC, benefitting greatly to new technologies, monies, etc.

As for "2 or 3 for One"...when you factor in 4-engine vs 2-engine, its by no means getting a 2 for 1 deal with the twin-engine aircraft, because both still have to have cockpit instrumentation, avionics & GPS, sensors, weapons, etc that are beyond strictly airframe and engine costs - and those come essentially at the same price, whichever airplane you are installing them into.

[chefjavier]

C-27J For the JCA Program


The Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA) is central to the U.S. Army's Aviation Modernization program, a restructure and revitalization of its aviation assets to reflect current and anticipated needs. As a key component in its fixed wing fleet, the Army will procure the JCA to support operations and to transport supply items and personnel to forward deployments in remote locations. The JCA will also augment the Air Force's existing fleet of intratheater airlifters. The JCA will play a key role in providing responsive aerial sustainment and critical resupply support for the maneuver force to maintain operational momentum.
The C-27J Spartan provides the U.S. Army and Air Force with unsurpassed performance, an unmatched level of interoperability, enhanced tactical flexibility, excellent reliability, unparalleled survivability and best value to the warfighter - making it the ideal choice for the JCA program. The C-27J is the low risk, best value and only military-off-the-shelf solution for the JCA program.
The C-27J has been purchased by NATO and coalition countries Italy, Greece and Bulgaria and is competing around the world. It is the only aircraft in its class that is capable of carrying standard NATO 463L pallets (3.5), up to two uparmoured HMMWVs and heavy, dense loads such as aircraft engines and ammunition. The C-27J can carry over 5,000 lbs more cargo than its competition, has a max cruise speed 75 ktas great, and significantly better landing and take-off characteristics in any environment than its competition, making it the most capable, low risk, aircraft available to support the warfighter.
Unlike other twin engine cargo aircraft in this class, the C-27J boasts interoperability with both CH/MH-47s and larger, intratheatre lift aircraft such as the C-130s. This interoperability means the C-27J can play an effective and flexible role in supporting the soldiers the last tactical mile. Whether that is flying pre-configured pallets for the Chinooks from one fire base to another, or taking larger, critical loads directly off C-130s directly to the warfighter, the C-27J has the capability to get the job done.
The C-27J Spartan embodies GMAS' uncompromising commitment to deliver a proven interoperable and survivable airlifter to the U.S. military. Born a rugged military airlift platform, the C-27J has a maximum payload of over 25,000 lbs. that can be configured for any mission: troops, medevac, airdrop or cargo. In an austere environment, the C-27J provides the autonomous capability to get in, get out, and get the job done.
Combining peerless interoperability, extended range, superior payload and essential STOL capability, the C-27J Spartan more than meets the requirements of the U.S. Army/US Air Force JCA program.

[chefjavier]

Performance


The C-27J Spartan is the perfect fixed wing multi-purpose cargo aircraft for today's diverse missions. Extremely maneuverable and versatile, the rugged C-27J boasts highest in its class power-to-weight ratio, and the ability to perform fighter aircraft-like, 3.0g force maneuvers - enabling it to make tight turns, and climb and descend quickly.
Farther and Faster
The C-27J features the best performance in its class:

2,300 nm with over 13,227 lbs (6,000kg) of payload
3,200 nm ferry flight
325 ktas maximum cruise speed
Modern, Dependable and Proven Technology
The C-27J Spartan has a state-of-the-art suite of standard off-the-shelf military equipment integrated with military standard digital data bus architecture. The avionics represent the most advanced system available in tactical airlifters, and is compatible with emerging Future Air Navigation System (FANS) requirements. The avionics and cockpit were designed with growing capability in mind to satisfy specific customer needs.
The C-27J is equipped with electronic flight instrumentation system (EFIS), incorporating five liquid crystal color multi -functional display units (CMDU) that provide aircraft control, operations and navigation data.
The basic avionics configuration includes:

Modern Electronic Flight Integration System (EFIS) with Night Vision Imaging System (NVIS) compatible programmable displays and controls
Military based Flight Management Systems (FMS)
Dual Digital Autopilot/Flight Directors (DA/FD)
Dual Embedded GPS Inertials (EGI)
Communication, Navigation, and Identification - Management System (CNI-MS) compatible with military and civilian agencies
Two Very High Frequency (VHF)/Ultra High Frequency (UHF) radio sets, Two High Frequency (HF) radio sets
Low Power Color Radar (LPCR) with high resolution ground mapping, long range weather and turbulence detection with selective wind shear and air target detection
Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR)
Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR)
Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT)
Powerful Engines
The C-27J is powered by two Rolls-Royce E 2100D2 engines capable of up to 4,637 shp each, and equipped with full authority digital electronic control. The strong propulsion system allows for access to a wide range of airfields, enabling landings on short, unprepared strips, in hot weather and high-altitude conditions - all while transporting heavy loads. With a maximum take-off weight (in a combat scenario) of 67,241 lbs (3.0 g), a cruising ceiling of 30,000 ft and a maximum speed of 325 knots, the C-27J Spartan is guaranteed to get in, get out and get the job done.
A third APU makes the aircraft completely independent from external support, increasing the operational effectiveness in forward deployed areas. In addition, the APU is fully operational in the entire flight envelope, including engine-starting capability up to 22,000 ft.
Perfect for Logistics Operations and Unbeatable for Tactical Operations With a full suite of navigation aids, Night Vision Imaging System (NVIS) compatible cockpit and NVIS compatible internal and external lighting, the C-27J Spartan can operate in all weather conditions, day and night.
The C-27J's extreme short take off and landing capability, combined with its advanced braking system and landing gear ensure the aircraft can complete any mission required of a medium lift transport aircraft and more.
http://www.c-27j.com/files/Image/logis.jpg
Click here (http://www.c-27j.com/files/File/tactical.pdf) for a print-ready PDF of this image.

»

[chefjavier]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3346/3236004170_84e03ec575_o.jpg

[chefjavier]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3485/3236002486_d0a04297f5_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3504/3236004054_343bf447e4_b.jpg

[chefjavier]

Washington - June 17, 2008 - Alenia North America, a subsidiary of Alenia Aeronautica and part of the Finmeccanica Group, announced today that the first C-27J Spartan (http://www.air-attack.com/page/85/C-27J-Spartan.html) for the U.S. Army's Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA (http://www.air-attack.com/news/topic/topic/17/Joint-Cargo-Aircraft-Program.html)) successfully completed its maiden flight at the Alenia facility in Turin, Italy.

“This is an outstanding achievement for the Alenia Aeronautica team in Italy and demonstrates Alenia’s clear capability to achieve critical program milestones,” said Giuseppe Giordo, president and chief executive officer of Alenia North America, Inc. “On this great day we also look forward to many more important milestones including the industrialization of the C-27J in the United States.”

JCA #1 took off from Alenia’s aselle plant on Monday June 16 under poor weather conditions and remained in flight for 40 minutes. The flight included takeoff, functional checks and landing operations. This marks the beginning of a flight test campaign including approximately 70 hours of flight and 180 hours of ground tests. The preponderance of the tests will be conducted in Caselle.

The Joint Cargo Aircraft program selected the C-27J Spartan with Alenia as the aircraft manufacturer. The team (L-3 and Alenia) won the $2 billion contract in June 2007 for up to 78 aircraft for the U.S. Army and Air Force.
Follow-on contracts, as well as international, foreign military and variant sales are expected to push the aircraft number over 200.

The C-27J Spartan has been in production in Italy since 2001, with deliveries to Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Lithuania. The C-27J has also been selected by Romania, with contract negotiations currently underway.

The C-27J is a mid-range, multifunctional and interoperable aircraft able to perform logistical re-supply, MEDEVAC, troop movement, airdrop operations, humanitarian assistance and homeland security missions for the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force. The C-27J will replace the U.S. Army’s C-23 Sherpa, C-12 and C-26 aircraft and augment the U.S. Air Force’s existing fleet of intratheater airlifters. The aircraft will play a key role in
providing responsive aerial sustainment and critical re-supply support for the maneuver force to maintain operational momentum.

The C-27J Spartan is the latest in a successful tradition of military airlifters, including the C-27A Spartan and the G-222, which have been deployed by the United States, NATO, Coalition Forces, the United Nations and Italy in support of military and humanitarian operations in Albania, Armenia, Bosnia, Cambodia, Congo, Operations Desert Shield and Storm, East Timor, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Honduras, Kosovo, Libya, Mali, Panama, Rwanda, Somalia, Uganda and Yemen. C-27A Spartans currently are carrying out vital counter-drug activities for the United States in Central and South America.

[chefjavier]

In July 2008, an Aviation Week report (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aerospacedaily&id=news/AC27-072508.xml) noted that the Pentagon’s 2008 budget reprogramming request includes $32 million from Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC), in order to buy a C-27J and convert it into a small prototype AC-XX gunship, using “proven/known” weapons and systems.
The proposed acquisition comes against the backdrop of an AC-130 fleet that is quickly being flown to the limits of the fleet’s airframe (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080218/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/air_force_worn_out_by_war) flight hours. At present, the AC-130s reportedly need 14 hours of maintenance for every hour in flight, while wing cracks are prompting major center wing box replacement operations (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/keeping-the-c130s-flying-center-wing-box-replacements-03185/) 5 years ahead of schedule.
AFSOC has also become concerned about its AC-130 gunships’ long-term survivability, and has investigated a number of options [PDF format] including smaller aircraft and even stealth designs. What AFSOC appears to have decided is that it needs an immediate, affordable stopgap that can let it try some new concepts, without foreclosing future options…

AC-27J: “Stinger II”
Contracts and Key Events
Additional Readings
AC-27J: “Stinger II”
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_C-27J.jpg (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_C-27J_lg.jpg) C-27J Spartan
(click to view full)

That effort is still in early days, and has yet to bank even a firm contract for a protoype, but it’s something AFSOC is pursuing hard.
The C-27J is not stealthy, but it is smaller than existing AC-130s; an AC-27J “Stinger II” would trade less firepower for the ability to operate from smaller airstrips closer to the action.
Additions are certain to include defensive systems, electro-optical surveillance and targeting turrets, flight and/or ground surveillance radars, weapons, and computerized gun control systems. L3 spokesman Jason Decker has been quoted as saying the AC-27J’s guns are likely to be between 25mm – 40mm caliber, as opposed to the 105mm howitzer carried on AC-130s. Depending on their model, however, the AC-130s’ other guns have been 40mm Bofors guns or 20-25 mm gatling guns, so the only thing that changes is the top-end firepower. On the other hand, proposals to arm AC-130s with precision weapons like GBU-44 Viper Strikes (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/gbu44-viper-strike-death-from-above-03127/), Hellfire missiles, et. al. have always stumbled against the issue of integrating them into an old airframe. Integration into a new-build aircraft may offer a tempting opportunity to give the new gunships new capabilities, at an affordable price.
This is the “Stinger II” protoype’s other benefit: its ability to serve as a systems integration platform to help define the current state of the art, without sidelining even more of the in-demand AC-130 fleet for long refit periods. All of which may help to explain why AFSOC, who fields the $100+ million AC-130H/U gunships based on the larger C-130 Hercules tactical transport, also wants $11.5 million to execute an AC-XX feasibility study and engineering analyses. Overall:
“This prototype will serve as a risk mitigation effort to field a new platform to operate in austere locations, with increased operational flexibility and a smaller support tail of manpower and logistics.”
Contracts and Key Events
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_AC-130H_Specter_Firing.jpg (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_AC-130H_Specter_Firing_lg.jpg) AC-130H Firing
(click to view full)

Sept 9/08: DoD Buzz reports (http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/09/19/afsoc-would-almost-kill-for-new-gunships/?wh=wh) that Lt. Gen. Donald Wurster, commander of Air Force Special Operations Command, reiterated his strong support for the C-27J “Stinger II” gunship at the US Air Force Association’s annual meeting. During his presentation, Wurster said AFSOC is looking to field about 16 of these aircraft.
July 25/08: Aviation Week reports (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aerospacedaily&id=news/AC27-072508.xml) that AFSOC is looking to reprogram $32 million of its budget to field an AC-27J prototype. Based on known airframe and conversion costs for the C-27J and other platforms, further funding for the AC-XX effort will almost certainly be required in FY 2010.
Additional Readings

DID Spotlight – Joint Cargo Aircraft: We Have a Winner(?) (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/joint-cargo-aircraft-we-have-a-winner-03372/) The JCA program chose the C-27J, bringing that type into American service. AFSOC base aircraft would almost certainly be bought under that umbrella contract, then modified.


DID – A Spookier Spooky, 30mm at a Time (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/a-spookier-spooky-30mm-at-a-time-03023/). The experiment sought to install 30mm Bushmaster chain guns in the existing AC-130 fleet, replacing older 25mm and 40mm guns and providing wide commonality with land and naval forces. The 4 concerted aircraft were rolled back to their original weapon set, however, after the Bushmasters displayed accuracy issues when mounted in an aerial gunship.


DID – Keeping the C-130s Flying: Center Wing Box Replacements (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/keeping-the-c130s-flying-center-wing-box-replacements-03185/)


DID Spotlight – GBU-44 Viper Strike: Death From Above (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/gbu44-viper-strike-death-from-above-03127/).


DID (Aug 11/05) – Viper Strike for AC-130s? (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/viper-strike-for-ac130s-01004/) There have been a number of demonstration contracts, but nothing fielded yet.

[DasBoost]

As for "2 or 3 for One"...when you factor in 4-engine vs 2-engine, its by no means getting a 2 for 1 deal with the twin-engine aircraft, because both still have to have cockpit instrumentation, avionics & GPS, sensors, weapons, etc that are beyond strictly airframe and engine costs - and those come essentially at the same price, whichever airplane you are installing them into.

My bad:oops:, I made the mistake of reading/posting on this when writing an economic analysis of China's claim to double dead-weight shipping tonnage by 2010 and was thinking in terms of higher production~lower cost per unit. :cantbeli: Overall, it seems like a good choice for a versatile STOL(?) transport.

[chefjavier]

C-27J Joint Cargo Aircraft, Boeing Bows Out
Posted by Robert Wall at 2/26/2009 7:25 AM CST

It's been a rocky engagement period, but Boeing and Alenia Aeronautica have decided to get divorced before they were ever formally married on the C-27J Joint Cargo Aircraft for the Pentagon.

Our Senior Pentagon Editor Amy Butler got the scoop in Orlando, Florida:

The two companies have terminated all discussions on partnering on JCA. That leaves L-3 as the prime contractor, and Alenia in charge of the final assembly site being set up in Florida.

The two companies have been in talks for 2.5 years to come to an industrial partnering agreement and parted ways last year. But the Boeing boss wasn't quite ready to give up on that market and pushed the two companies back to the bargaining table. This time the separation is for good, say reps for both contractors.

The change in strategy is being blamed on the general economic conditions. “It was not about the team, it was not about the airplane,” says a Boeing official. The two companies also were able to navigate problems around the dollar-euro exchange rate. What exactly proved a bridge too far isn't entirely clear, yet.

Boeing says it is no longer interested in getting into the small airlifter market, instead focusing its efforts in the “mobility” sector on the C-17 strategic airlifter.

Alenia North America officials insist the turn of events is not affecting JCA plans. The design for the final assembly site at Cecil Field, Jacksonville, Fla., is now frozen, and site clearance should commence next week.

The first U.S.-assembled JCA is due to come of the production line in late summer or early fall of 2011, a year later than first planned. Alenia says it is spending around $100 million on developing the Jacksonville facility. The first batch of JCAs are coming off the Italian production line.

[chefjavier]

DEFENCE MINISTER MACKAY’S PROPOSED SELECTION OF C-27J QUESTIONED (http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/2009/01/04/defence-minister-mackay-s-proposed-selection-of-c-27j-questioned.aspx)



By Dave Pugliese (http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/members/Dave-Pugliese/default.aspx) 01-04-2009 COMMENTS(26) (http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/2009/01/04/defence-minister-mackay-s-proposed-selection-of-c-27j-questioned.aspx#comments) David Pugliese’s Defence Watch (http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/default.aspx)
Filed under: Peter MacKay (http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/tags/Peter+MacKay/default.aspx), FWSAR (http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/tags/FWSAR/default.aspx)




Defence Minister Peter MacKay’s plan to select the C-27J as Canada’s new fixed wing search and rescue aircraft (a hot topic of late on this blog) is also attracting attention out on the west coast. The Victoria Times Colonist editorial in Saturday’s paper is recommending Mr. MacKay at least look at a made-in-Canada solution, in this case a modernized CC-115 (Buffalo) variant from Viking Air. Here’s the Times Colonist editorial below:


CONSIDER OPTIONS FOR RESCUE PLANE

Defence Minister Peter MacKay and the federal government should welcome a proposal from Victoria-based Viking Air to replace the air force's aging CC-115 Buffalo search-and-rescue planes.

It's not that Viking Air is asking for special consideration because it is a Canadian company. The firm's president, Dave Curtis, says Viking has a solution that would be cheaper by about $1.5 billion than what it would cost to buy and service a fleet of Italian-designed Alenia C-271Js.

While Viking's proposal to modernize the Buffalos would also create 350 jobs, its primary appeal is that the company is willing to compete with the world for this work. In that way, it differs dramatically from the arguments supporting construction of B.C.'s new ferries in Canada as opposed to in Germany, where they were eventually built. B.C.'s shipbuilding industry simply couldn't match the Germans on price and value.

If the military is going to consider Viking's proposal, then it might also have to take another look at Bombardier's proposal to replace the Buffalos with the Q200, which had already been rejected for lack of a rear ramp. As much as any Canadian company, Bombardier has survived and thrived on the fat of federal government pork.

Unfortunately, one perverse good reason for buying outside the country is that it would avoid the regional battles over these kinds of contracts. Witness the challenge from Irving Shipbuilding in Halifax last year after B.C. shipyards were awarded $1.5 billion in contracts to maintain Canada's four submarines.

Of course, Viking will have to prove it can produce planes that meet air force specifications for search and rescue. One of the more attractive features of the C-271J is its cruising speed of 600 kilometres an hour, nearly twice that of the Buffalo. That means the C-271J can zip from airbases in southern Canada to the Arctic much more quickly. On the other hand, the Buffalo is far superior at short takeoffs and landings, which is also valuable in Arctic and other extreme conditions.

Another asset of the Alenia C-271J is its pressurized cabin, although an unpressurized cabin also has advantages. Such a plane has a lighter airframe and the doors can be removed to facilitate cargo drops, according to a posting on the website of the Canadian American Strategic Review.

The review argues that the military's fixed-wing search-and-rescue project has become an air force catch-all, encompassing "tactical transport, spares delivery and Arctic utility" on top of SAR. The review also notes that most of Canada's allies are privatizing that function.

More significantly, the review says the Alenia C-271J can't match the Buffalo's performance as a search-and-rescue plane.

That raises the question of whether or not the federal government should re-evaluate what it wants of the Buffalo replacements.

If it wants a versatile, high-speed aircraft, then the Alenia C-271J makes sense. If the government wants a superior search-and-rescue plane, then Viking might have the best answer.

Viking demonstrated earlier this year that it can modernize a classic flying workhorse, the Twin Otter. The company announced in November that it already had orders for 40 of the $4-million aircraft.

So Viking doesn't need the federal government's help to build a vibrant business. The government, though, might benefit from Viking's help in developing the search-and-rescue aircraft best suited for this country.