C-130 NG, so the rest will now be referred to as the C-130 classic  .
Looks like Lockheed are taking a leaf out of Boeing's book.

Lockheed Developing Winglets For C-130, C-5

Oct 6, 2011

Lockheed Martin is testing winglets and other drag-reducing modifications to cut the fuel consumption of C-130 Hercules and C-5 Galaxy airlifters.

With large-scale wind tunnel testing completed, Lockheed is fabricating a shipset of winglets for flight testing on a C-130 in 2012. The modification could be available for both retrofit and forward-fit by early 2014.

Computational analysis and small-scale tunnel tests have been completed on the C-5 winglets. Large-scale tunnel tests are planned for 2012, leading to flight tests in 2014 “if the customer is interested,” says Jack O’Banion, director of advanced development programs at Lockheed’s Marietta, Ga., plant.

The 5-ft.-tall winglets are projected to reduce cruise fuel flow by 170 lb./hr. on the C-130J and “probably more” on older versions of the Hercules, he says. They are designed to be fitted to any C-130 with the beefed-up “enhanced service life” center wingbox. This has the extra structural margin to accommodate winglet-induced bending loads.

Winglets for the C-5M are 6 ft. tall and projected to reduce cruise fuel flow by 1,100 lb./hr. This is on top of the 8-20% improvement in fuel efficiency that comes with re-engining of the C-5 with General Electric CF6-80C2 high-bypass turbofans, O’Banion says, adding that the wing already has sufficient margin to accommodate the winglet loads.

Lockheed Martin in August flight tested an aft-body drag-reduction modification on the C-130. This comprises a series of 36 vortex generators mounted on the aft fuselage. These “microvanes” alter the aft-body flowfield to pull the underbody vortex closer in and reduce base drag, he says.

Results are still being analyzed, but indications are the microvanes will reduce total drag by up to 3.7%, O’Banion says, for a fuel-consumption reduction of 2-3%. No significant changes in aircraft handling have been observed, he says.

The vortex generators, mounted in rows on the aft fuselage on either side of the rear loading ramp, are planned to be available by the end of 2012 for forward-fit and retrofit to the C-130J and earlier Hercules.

Another fuel-saving modification being studied for older C-130s is an upgrade to the latest Series 3.5 version of Rolls-Royce’s T56 turboprop, coupled with Hamilton Sundstrand’s NP2000 eight-blade propeller.

For the C-5, Lockheed also is working on a drag cleanup that is expected to improve fuel efficiency by 2-3%. This would include new seals on the flight controls to minimize aerodynamic leaks that cause drag; and new seals in the pressurization system to reduce bleed-air demand on the engines and thus improve their fuel efficiency.

In addition, equipment installed on the C-5s over time — such as defensive systems — would be cleaned up to reduce parasitic drag. “We are in the process of laying out a detailed program for the Air Force, including the business case and potential benefits,” O’Banion says.

The C-130 and C-5 drag reductions are part of an initiative by the U.S. Air Force to cut its fuel consumption. Other elements include drag cleanups on the Boeing C-17 and KC-10 and engine upgrades on the KC-135.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news...

Lockheed Explores Niche For Widebody C-130

Oct 1, 2008

Lockheed Martin is studying widebody derivatives of its Hercules military airlifter able to carry larger loads, but believes the “C-130XL” would only be a niche product and not a replacement for its C-130J tactical transport.

The C-130XL is one of several concepts being studied to fill the “white space” requirement for intra-theater transport of heavy U.S. Army equipment in the 2020 timeframe, says Jim Grant, vice president of business development for global mobility.

“If today the C-130J can carry 95-percent-plus of everything in theater, in 2015-25 we still see the J carrying 90 percent of what the Army wants to move,” he says. “But there are some vehicles [such as the Future Combat Systems] that will be too big for the J.”

As a result, Lockheed Martin sees a “small white space to carry outsize equipment that will have to be moved by something,” Grant says, and it is looking at “how to fill that white space in the out-years.”

In addition to three notional sizes of larger C-130J derivative, the company is studying stealthy short-takeoff-and-landing (STOL) concepts for the Air Force and tiltrotor vertical-takeoff-and-landing (VTOL) concepts for the Army.

The Air Force and Army are trying to combine their battlefield transport requirements under the Joint Future Theater Lift program, but it is not clear whether their competing desires for STOL and VTOL capability can be reconciled in one program.

“There are things we don’t know,” Grant says. “What payload? What ranges? What runway conditions? If they need Hercules-size field operations, then could it be a derivative of the C-130?

“If it’s down in the 1,000-2,000 foot STOL, none of the aircraft out there can routinely do that,” he says. “If the Army pushes hard for VTOL, none of today’s aircraft can carry an FCS-size vehicle in a vertical environment.”

The three sizes of conceptual C-130XL being studied are targeted at payloads of around 62,000, 72,000 and 80,000-85,000 pounds — up from around 42,000 pounds for the C-130J. All would have a wider, but not necessarily longer, fuselage.

“If we size the payload bay to handle larger vehicles, how much do we have to change about the aircraft? Can we increase the STOL capabilities? That depends on the requirements,” he says.

While a 62,000-pound payload design could use the C-130J’s wing and engines, the larger concepts would require more changes. “What can we do with the current propulsion? At what point do we need different propulsion? We are looking at all options,” he says.

Lockheed Martin sees a C-130XL complementing and not replacing the C-130J. “It would run in parallel, to meet a very specific requirement,” Grant says. Although it could end up similar in size to the Airbus A400M, he does not foresee a big international demand for a larger Hercules. “You could see a small fleet within a fleet – someone with 12 Js and two to three XLs.”

Fishbed7701 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2012 at 5:59pm:


The B-52 will likely be in service until all of us are dead and gone. 

OVERLORD_CHRIS wrote on Jan 8^th, 2012 at 4:45pm:


The B-52 is an excellent design and it's very well maintained.  I don't see a problem with it.