C-130 problems
Fri Apr 24, 2009 3:31 am
News in Australia just released is that C-130 Hercules maintainers from the past, at Richmond Air base have suffered massive and serious cancer problems in cleaning the wings and fuel tanks it seems.
This is very akin to the RAAF long drawn out saga with the F-111 fuel tank problems wing etc where many men died and suffered from the toxins.
The same has now come to news tonight regarding the C130 toxic cleaning.. many men have died and others are potentially nearing death.
It raises issues are all other C-130 world wide maintainers been exposed to the nasty chemicals if so how many have died or etc?
This is a down side to warbirds.. maybe one reason why C-130s and F-111 may never be seen in private hands?
This is very akin to the RAAF long drawn out saga with the F-111 fuel tank problems wing etc where many men died and suffered from the toxins.
The same has now come to news tonight regarding the C130 toxic cleaning.. many men have died and others are potentially nearing death.
It raises issues are all other C-130 world wide maintainers been exposed to the nasty chemicals if so how many have died or etc?
This is a down side to warbirds.. maybe one reason why C-130s and F-111 may never be seen in private hands?
Fri Apr 24, 2009 5:38 am
I suspect this has more to do with the chemicals used in the cleaning process and less to do with the individual airframes. Fuel tanks on any aircraft are a health hazard unless proper precautions are taken...
Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:32 am
Any of those epoxy based paints can be nasty if you don't wear the right protective gear.
The exposures to toxic chemicals probably happened during the 'good old days' with people cleaning aircraft tanks in shorts and t-shirts.
I did a quick touch up with some epoxy paint yesterday with a charcoal filter face mask and not a helmet and man I was sorry , after 15 mins my lungs were hurting ! Never again , helmet , overalls and gloves next time.
The exposures to toxic chemicals probably happened during the 'good old days' with people cleaning aircraft tanks in shorts and t-shirts.
I did a quick touch up with some epoxy paint yesterday with a charcoal filter face mask and not a helmet and man I was sorry , after 15 mins my lungs were hurting ! Never again , helmet , overalls and gloves next time.
Re: C-130 problems
Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:40 am
Can you provide a source to these news reports, please?
1/ The C130 has been, is and will be operated by civilian organisations. It's unlikely to get much mileage as a 'warbird' however. 2/ This issue is a long way down the list of why the F-111 won't appear as a warbird. The first million or so are the eye-watering fuel costs, and aircraft's complexity, and the fact that no government will be particularly keen to have such a type outside their direct control, the US requirements, not to mention they're being retired because they're tired.
Standing around in stubbies, watching A and H bombs go off at test sites (or crawling through radioactive dirt for Army tests) wasn't a great move either, sadly. The military may not have your best interests at heart.
flyingheritage wrote:This is a down side to warbirds.. maybe one reason why C-130s and F-111 may never be seen in private hands?
1/ The C130 has been, is and will be operated by civilian organisations. It's unlikely to get much mileage as a 'warbird' however. 2/ This issue is a long way down the list of why the F-111 won't appear as a warbird. The first million or so are the eye-watering fuel costs, and aircraft's complexity, and the fact that no government will be particularly keen to have such a type outside their direct control, the US requirements, not to mention they're being retired because they're tired.
Standing around in stubbies, watching A and H bombs go off at test sites (or crawling through radioactive dirt for Army tests) wasn't a great move either, sadly. The military may not have your best interests at heart.
Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:22 pm
I spent 6 years as a fuel cell mechanic on C-130s and the past 15 years passing a flight physical to be a Flight Engineer and I am as fit....achogh..achogh...as a fittle...snifh...
Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:38 pm
hurk130 wrote:I spent 6 years as a fuel cell mechanic on C-130s and the past 15 years passing a flight physical to be a Flight Engineer and I am as fit....achogh..achogh...as a fittle...snifh...
Right on, Herk FE's are tops in my book!
" It's unlikely to get much mileage as a 'warbird' however."
JDK please explain this one so I can feel stupid while calming down and promptly get my panties out of a wad!
Re: C-130 problems
Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:55 pm
JDK wrote:1/ The C130 ... It's unlikely to get much mileage as a 'warbird' however.
Lucy! You got some 'splainin' to do!
Them's fightin' words!
The largest gun fired from an aerial platform is fired from...a C-130.
The largest conventional bomb in the inventory is dropped from...a C-130.
The SF & SEAL platform of choice is...a C-130.
The longest continuous production military aircraft in history is...the C-130.
Slicks, Special Ops, Electronic Combat, Airborne Command & Control, Satellite Retriever, Hurricane Hunter, Gunship, Refueler, Airdrop Platform, Bomber, you name a military mission and the Herk has probably done it (well, DCA might be one glaring exception!
)
In fact, your signature line, Alone, unarmed, & unafraid, applies perfectly to the mighty C-130!
Fri Apr 24, 2009 11:24 pm
Perhaps he means as a civilian owned warbird...hercules130 wrote:" It's unlikely to get much mileage as a 'warbird' however."
JDK please explain this one so I can feel stupid while calming down and promptly get my panties out of a wad!
Fri Apr 24, 2009 11:30 pm
Perhaps, but that is not really all that valid of a statement. Let's hear from the horse. T2 Ernie needs closure too.
Sat Apr 25, 2009 3:14 am
my son is shipping out for the usmc in june after high school graduation. his job field will be aircraft mechanic. i'm very interested in this finding of illnesses, & it's cause. from the previous posts, it sounds as if the c-130 is typhoid mary!! with such a stellar performance history & great reputation of versatilty i'm taken aback at these supposed findings. no other ground crews of other birds haven't fallen ill or died performing simular maintenance duties??
Sat Apr 25, 2009 5:50 am
The Herc is no different health wise than any other aircraft out there. It's perfectly safe provided the proper precautions are taken when it comes to paints, solvents, fuels, fuel tanks, exhaust, etc. Working inside a fuel tank is an inherently dangerous place to be in ANY aircraft but the risk is minimized with proper protective equipment and training. The average military line mechanic does not venture into a fuel cell. This difficult duty is left up to the fuel cell specialist...
Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:55 am
bdk wrote:Perhaps he means as a civilian owned warbird...hercules130 wrote:" It's unlikely to get much mileage as a 'warbird' however."
JDK please explain this one so I can feel stupid while calming down and promptly get my panties out of a wad!
I think its clear James was referring to it being unlikely that anyone would operate a C-130 as a privately owned "warbird" in reply to, and in context of "flying heritages" comment at the end of the first post;
"flyingheritage": This is a down side to warbirds.. maybe one reason why C-130s and F-111 may never be seen in private hands?
"JDK": 1/ The C130 has been, is and will be operated by civilian organisations. It's unlikely to get much mileage as a 'warbird' however.
regards
Mark Pilkington
Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:41 am
Understood
From my military experience....Fuel Cell is its own career field. Air Force Speciality Code (AFSC) 2A4X1. There is a school at Shepard AFB just for it. It was at Chanute AFB, Ill when I went through in 1988. They were fanatical about safety and proper equipment. Just like the fire fighting and scuba diving folks.
I could see a civilian contractor or organization not having the equipment, training or facilities to do it correctly, running into health problems. The USAF banned the use of MEK and MIBK along with dyes used in troubleshooting leak sources and powders to indicate a fuel leak vs. oils or hydro fluids.
I have spent 21 years on the plane and the most dangerous thing on the aircraft is still the pilot! LOL!!!!!
If anyone hasn't figured it out by now, Herk crews love their "Four Fan Trash Can" and get defensive when anyone even looks at her funny. That is the nature of our culture in the Herk world.
Now I am off like a cheap prom dress! Things to do before my 5th deployment to Iraq this summer. Ciao.
From my military experience....Fuel Cell is its own career field. Air Force Speciality Code (AFSC) 2A4X1. There is a school at Shepard AFB just for it. It was at Chanute AFB, Ill when I went through in 1988. They were fanatical about safety and proper equipment. Just like the fire fighting and scuba diving folks.
I could see a civilian contractor or organization not having the equipment, training or facilities to do it correctly, running into health problems. The USAF banned the use of MEK and MIBK along with dyes used in troubleshooting leak sources and powders to indicate a fuel leak vs. oils or hydro fluids.
I have spent 21 years on the plane and the most dangerous thing on the aircraft is still the pilot! LOL!!!!!
If anyone hasn't figured it out by now, Herk crews love their "Four Fan Trash Can" and get defensive when anyone even looks at her funny. That is the nature of our culture in the Herk world.
Now I am off like a cheap prom dress! Things to do before my 5th deployment to Iraq this summer. Ciao.
Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:55 am
Issue here at hands is MANY ex RAAF aussie men have suffered cancers, nasty ailements and many have died from these cancers as sources have raised.
It seems to hint to past practises used by the RAAF in overhauling but who knows when it stopped - maybe late 70s.
It seems to hint to past practises used by the RAAF in overhauling but who knows when it stopped - maybe late 70s.
Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:30 am
So are C-130 fuel tanks the source of most cancers among RAAF personnel? There are plenty of hazmat activities around a typical military airbase I would think.flyingheritage wrote:Issue here at hands is MANY ex RAAF aussie men have suffered cancers, nasty ailements and many have died from these cancers as sources have raised.
It seems to hint to past practises used by the RAAF in overhauling but who knows when it stopped - maybe late 70s.