The Case for Propellers: Why the C-130 Hercules Shuns Jet Engines

[rangerrebew]

The Case for Propellers: Why the C-130 Hercules Shuns Jet Engines
Story by Nancy Maffia • 18h

Have you ever wondered why the C-130 Hercules, the versatile military transport aircraft that has been a workhorse for the U.S. Air Force since the 1950s, uses old-school propellers instead of modern jet engines?

It may seem odd, considering most military planes these days are powered by jets. But there are actually several very good reasons why propellers are the ideal choice for the C-130’s unique missions and roles.

Propellers Provide Unmatched STOL Capability
 
The key factor driving the use of propellers on the C-130 is the unmatched short takeoff and landing (STOL) capability they provide.

Propellers generate superior lift and thrust at low airspeeds compared to jet engines
This allows “Hercs” to operate from short, unpaved, roughly prepared airfields that jets simply cannot use
The C-130’s beefy Allison T56 turboprop engines (ref) and large four-blade propellers enable it to lift off from dirt and gravel runways as short as 3,000 feet – impossible for a jet-powered transport

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-case-for-propellers-why-the-c-130-hercules-shuns-jet-engines/ar-AA1sNpEf?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=e5d69a1cd17f464faa5eb730beffb216&ei=76

[PeteS in CA]

Speaking of dirt and gravel runways, propellers mean no jet engines ingesting FOD.

[Smokin Joe]

Speaking of dirt and gravel runways, propellers mean no jet engines ingesting FOD.

Yep. Throw a rock into a prop and it might get pinged off somewhere. Chuck it into a jet engine intake, and you can get an expensive mess real fast.

[PeteS in CA]

The A-10 is designed to land on rudimentary makeshift runways, but its engines are mounted high (unlike the Russian Su-25, BTW).