Home » Aviation » Marine Corps Grounds Remaining 12 KC-130Ts While Investigation Into July 10 Crash Continues


Marine Corps Grounds Remaining 12 KC-130Ts While Investigation Into July 10 Crash Continues

A U.S. Marine Corps KC-130T aircraft from VMGR-452 prepares to taxi during Weapons and Tactics Instructor Course (WTI) 2-15 in Yuma, Ariz., April 11, 2015. WTI is a seven-week event hosted by Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron One (MAWTS-1) cadre. US Marine Corps photo.

The Marine Corps grounded its remaining KC-130T aircraft as an investigation into the July 10 airplane crash continues, the service announced today.

“Out of an abundance of caution, the Marine Corps took the prudent action not to fly our KC-130T aircraft in the wake of the mishap on July 10 until further notice,” Marine Corps Forces Reserve spokeswoman Lt. Stephanie Leguizamon told USNI News today.

The grounding was first reported by Defense News.

Only 12 KC-130T airplanes remain in the Marine Corps, all of them belonging to Marine Air Refueler Transport Squadron (VMGR) 452. It was that squadron that was involved in the July 10 crash that killed 16 Marine reservists and members of a Marine special forces unit. The rest of the Marine Corps has upgraded to the newer KC-130J model. Leguizamon said only the 12 KC-130Ts are affected by the grounding, not the KC-130Js.

VMGR-452’s parent command, the 4th Marine Aircraft Wing within Marine Corps Forces Reserve, made the decision to ground the remaining KC-130Ts while an investigation into the crash continues. Leguizamon said she could not comment on the ongoing investigation.

  • publius_maximus_III

    I guess the obvious question is, what are the differences in the KC-130T and the KC-130J? Or is it simply a matter of age?

    • Frederic Clarke

      Basically the same airframe with different engines/props. Big difference is in the electronic systems, both aircraft and weapons system.

      • publius_maximus_III

        So, a structural design proven by a half century of service, and one would not expect a turboprop engine to be prone to explosions. So, what could have caused that “boom” heard on the ground by eyewitnesses? Would not appear to be the aircraft itself. Something from inside it, or outside it? Will be very interesting reading once the findings are made public. Unless they become classified for whatever reason, in which case foul play would move to the top of the list.

        • El Kabong

          Structures do fail.

          Was the airframe overstressed at any point?
          Corrosion?

          • publius_maximus_III

            Back in my college days, I was a co-op student and worked at Delta’s Jet Maintenance Base in ATL. They had regularly scheduled inspections, maintenance, and complete overhauls of those commercial jets, all under the watchful eye of the FAA.

            During major overhauls, they would bring a jet into the hanger and replace every single rivet and bolt that had any signs of distress, essentially returning a like-new aircraft to the fleet afterward. In addition to routine checks and repairs, there were aircraft-specific alerts called Airworthiness Directives (AD’s) for any safety problems like corrosion or cracking in critical areas, spelling out mandatory inspections within so many flight hours.

            I would be willing to bet the maintenance on military aircraft is just as rigorous, or even more so, due to the greater operational demands and environments

      • El Kabong

        Redesigned structure also.

    • El Kabong

      The “J” is a thoroughly updated/revamped Herc.

      Different engines, redesigned cockpit with the nav position removed, one less window below the cockpit, redesigned structure, etc.

  • seamarshal

    C130 J is the newest C-130 around. The “T” is for tanker, but the original designation of the aircraft might be a “C” or “D” model, much older. Better look at the passengers….what do you think they blew up the plane to die. Get a brain!! I would bet the plane broke up in the air because of metal fatigue.

    • Frederic Clarke

      The K indicates Tanker, not T. The KC-130T is roughly equivalent to the Air Force C-130H models, the difference between a T and a J is mainly engines/propellors and systems. The airframe is basically the same. The USMC used F models (circa 1962) and later the R model. The Ts (circa 1992) went primarily to the Navy and Marine reserves, with a couple at test activities and one to the Blues. An Engineering Investigation will ascertain whether metal fatigue or another cause was involved. Wait for the Mishap Report before espousing any theories.

    • El Kabong

      “The “T” is for tanker…”?

      Yeah, no.

      The “K” in “KC” is for AAR tanker.

      The “T” is merely a model designation.

      Using that logic, are you saying the RC-135T Rivet Dandy was a tanker?

      “Better look at the passengers….”?

      Better take off the tinfoil hat.

  • seamarshal

    Thanks for the correction. K stands for Kerosene if I’m correct. Will wait.

    • El Kabong

      “K stands for Kerosene if I’m correct.”?

      Really?

      Where do you get that nonsense?

      The “K” was used because “R” was used for recce aircraft.

      • seamarshal

        I like my explanation better. Makes more sense to me.

        • El Kabong

          Yet, STILL wrong….

  • El Kabong

    LOL!

    Lay off the bong.

    I was quoting YOU, sparky…

  • El Kabong

    LOL!

    Do try to keep up, sparky…