Would conversion of C-130 into REK bomb truck help PAF strategic bombing?

[Philip the Arab]

I was on another thread talking about saturation bombing, and strategic bombing in PAF future and was other members were suggesting a dedicated bomber which will be too expensive for inventory. My proposition is integrating Twenty or so MK82 250kg REKs onto a C-130 and using that for bombing Indian airbases, and strategic targets up to 80 km away from LOC instead of using JF-17 and wasting A2A loadouts. Lockheed Martin the OEM would be needed for integration to insure safety, and make sure this could even be done. GPS coordinates and the ability to input them from the cockpit or from inside the aircraft could be done and even 3 aircraft could drop 60 bombs taking out 60 targets.

C-130 Underside
I propose a few pylons underside carrying 10-15 on multiple racks and maybe 5-10 under wings for a total of 15-25 bombs.

The AC-130 can carry 4 120kg SDBs on each wing so I think C-130 could support 4 REK on each wing.

The C-130s could easily become multirole transport/SOW carrier with a few hours of modification.

 

[Philip the Arab]

 

[Irfan Baloch]

I was on another thread talking about saturation bombing, and strategic bombing in PAF future and was other members were suggesting a dedicated bomber which will be too expensive for inventory. My proposition is integrating Twenty or so MK82 250kg REKs onto a C-130 and using that for bombing Indian airbases, and strategic targets up to 80 km away from LOC instead of using JF-17 and wasting A2A loadouts. Lockheed Martin the OEM would be needed for integration to insure safety, and make sure this could even be done. GPS coordinates and the ability to input them from the cockpit or from inside the aircraft could be done and even 3 aircraft could drop 60 bombs taking out 60 targets.

C-130 Underside
I propose a few pylons underside carrying 10-15 on multiple racks and maybe 5-10 under wings for a total of 15-25 bombs.

The AC-130 can carry 4 120kg SDBs on each wing so I think C-130 could support 4 REK on each wing.

The C-130s could easily become multirole transport/SOW carrier with a few hours of modification.

yes it would
if its up against Afghanistan or has absolute air superiority like America and has already decimated entire air defense network of its enemy.
until then leave it for America

 

[Philip the Arab]

yes it would
if its up against Afghanistan or has absolute air superiority like America and has already decimated entire air defense network of its enemy.
until then leave it for America

Why would it need air superiority? You are dropping bombs from inside Pakistani airspace thus making the need to get up close and dirty is not needed.

 

[V. Makarov]

> My thinking is that, such big planes are extremely vulnerable and even a mig 21 from the enemy could lock on to the aircraft and and shoot it down from 130 KMs away. Not to forget that such big planes are also quite vulnerable to MANPAD systems which Indian infantry can carry in large quantities near the border.

> Large bombers can only be deployed when a full air superiority is achieved in the sky and the Airforce is positive that the survival of the big bombers can be ensured. If Pakistan had for eg. additional 90 Chinese J10s or 50 F-16 Block Vs, then air superiority could be easily achieved meanwhile our JF thunders could provide cover to bombers.

> NOW = If you want to destroy enemy airbases with bombers and fighter jets in 2019 something went really wrong. Pakistan has a very capable missile arsenal that in itself is a force to reckon with. Pakistan needs to invest in the accuracy, quality and quantity of the Babur cruise missile because a few hundred of these missiles can wreak havoc on the enemy airstrips, bunkers, shelters and command centers. Other benefits include:
- Cruise missiles can be launched within 10 minutes in large numbers with high probability of hitting targets.
- The aspect of stealth in case of surprise attack can be ensured.
- We have only around 20 C-130s and they are the backbone of our military transport. Using them for bombing missions could cripple our logistics.

> See what a few cruise missiles did to an airfield in Syria :

> Cruise missiles were inducted by USA in the early 80s, and are still indispensable to them, infact they are the first ones to see the battle wherever USA is engaged : Libya, Syria, Afghanistan and more...

> I think the use of bombers to bomb strategic locations was made obsolete with cruise missiles. However, if you want to carpet bomb entire areas for some reason, then bombers would be more 'economical'.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Pakistan only has present focus to use the transporters as Transport unit
We don't have luxury such as US to have 100+ C130

I find the Bombers to be quite relevant asset in sky that is my own personal view

USA
Russia
China

All maintain a bomber fleet of some form it is not mere coincidence it is a devastating strategy

 

[Signalian]

I was on another thread talking about saturation bombing, and strategic bombing in PAF future and was other members were suggesting a dedicated bomber which will be too expensive for inventory. My proposition is integrating Twenty or so MK82 250kg REKs onto a C-130 and using that for bombing Indian airbases, and strategic targets up to 80 km away from LOC instead of using JF-17 and wasting A2A loadouts. Lockheed Martin the OEM would be needed for integration to insure safety, and make sure this could even be done. GPS coordinates and the ability to input them from the cockpit or from inside the aircraft could be done and even 3 aircraft could drop 60 bombs taking out 60 targets.

C-130 Underside
I propose a few pylons underside carrying 10-15 on multiple racks and maybe 5-10 under wings for a total of 15-25 bombs.

The AC-130 can carry 4 120kg SDBs on each wing so I think C-130 could support 4 REK on each wing.

The C-130s could easily become multirole transport/SOW carrier with a few hours of modification.

C-130's have transportation tasks to fulfill. Mirage-3 and Mirage-5 can carry SOWs. They are abundant in quantity.

 

[Shane]

yes it would
if its up against Afghanistan or has absolute air superiority like America and has already decimated entire air defense network of its enemy.
until then leave it for America

Thats what I told him and the OP that you need complete air superiority to use C130 meaningfully as a bomber... but here we are in another thread now.

Here is my reply from the other similar thread:

This is not out of the box thinking at all by the OP but rather a result of being ignoramus.

The entire C130 fleet of PAF was used as a bomber in 1965 war. The C-130 aircraft played an important role in the 1965 war and destroyed Many Bridges as well as Indian fighter jets during the air missions as per a TV documentary aired on AirMarshal Nur Khan. Special guns were installed at the ramp of C-130 aircraft for Gilgit air mission to target the Indian aircraft too. But that was another era altogether. The rules of the game have changed.

Not repeating the obvious flaws of the Idea already explained by some posters like much needed air superiority etc as well as common sense...

There is however one particular strike role that C130s can possibly fulfil without the much needed airsuperiority requirements over eastern border areas; Carry a couple of Nuclear tipped ALCM like Babur on modified pylons and hover around KPK Baluchistan boundary to provide "additional" and much needed "second strike" capability to our strategic weapons arsenal.

We have 18 C130s (B/ C/ E and H versions). If PAF adds ALCM capabilities to half of them for additional or "multi-role" use, then it potentially gives us a good 18 ALCMs to hit back at Indias as a Second Strike option from the air when our cities and installations are already hit.

I did use the term "additional second strike" capability as the best of it is still Submarine LCM or SLCM. Limiting the comment on purpose.

Do read up on second strike capability, its unequivocall deterrence value and why its needed and more importantly, what the implication of its use means.

C-130's have transportation tasks to fulfill. Mirage-3 and Mirage-5 can carry SOWs. They are abundant in quantity.

 

[ziaulislam]

Why would it need air superiority? You are dropping bombs from inside Pakistani airspace thus making the need to get up close and dirty is not needed.

And being shoot down from inside india with 100km meteor once they pick you up with their AWECS

Regardless we have so many itger assests...uf PAF like air launched CM..just grab couple of h6s from china...mastan will be happy too

 

[Philip the Arab]

And being shoot down from inside india with 100km meteor once they pick you up with their AWECS

Regardless we have so many itger assests...uf PAF like air launched CM..just grab couple of h6s from china...mastan will be happy too

I didn't say inside India... I said inside of Pakistan with a glide bomb (100 km) launched over the border towards targets inside India. I doubt Meteor could be launched towards it before it could get all its weapons off.

I don't think many of you understand what I am saying... I'm saying deploy glidebombs with GPS coordinates from inside Pakistan. I doubt India could reliably launch BVRAAMs towards C-130s by the time they left the and the bombs where on their way. Why would the C-130s have to get anywhere near the target?

 

[Ultima Thule]

I didn't say inside India... I said inside of Pakistan with a glide bomb (100 km) launched over the border towards targets inside India. I doubt Meteor could be launched towards it before it could get all its weapons off.

I don't think many of you understand what I am saying... I'm saying deploy glidebombs with GPS coordinates from inside Pakistan. I doubt India could reliably launch BVRAAMs towards C-130s by the time they left the and the bombs where on their way. Why would the C-130s have to get anywhere near the target?

are you stupid then what BVR for C-130 has big RCS can easily lock by SAMs/ air superiority jet radars and itt is also slow when C-130 reaches to target aera it will be game over for C-130 by enemy fighter jets/ SAMs @Philip the Arab

 

[mhosein]

I was on another thread talking about saturation bombing, and strategic bombing in PAF future and was other members were suggesting a dedicated bomber which will be too expensive for inventory. My proposition is integrating Twenty or so MK82 250kg REKs onto a C-130 and using that for bombing Indian airbases, and strategic targets up to 80 km away from LOC instead of using JF-17 and wasting A2A loadouts. Lockheed Martin the OEM would be needed for integration to insure safety, and make sure this could even be done. GPS coordinates and the ability to input them from the cockpit or from inside the aircraft could be done and even 3 aircraft could drop 60 bombs taking out 60 targets.

C-130 Underside
I propose a few pylons underside carrying 10-15 on multiple racks and maybe 5-10 under wings for a total of 15-25 bombs.

The AC-130 can carry 4 120kg SDBs on each wing so I think C-130 could support 4 REK on each wing.

The C-130s could easily become multirole transport/SOW carrier with a few hours of modification.

Too big, to slow and presents a juicy target for modern day peer adversary in conventional war.

 

[Philip the Arab]

are you stupid then what BVR for C-130 has big RCS can easily lock by SAMs/ air superiority jet radars and itt is also slow when C-130 reaches to target aera it will be game over for C-130 by enemy fighter jets/ SAMs @Philip the Arab

Even if target area is behind LOC and inside Pakistan?

 

[khanasifm]

With guided weapons now you can accomplish by launching two guided weapons vs in the past, when you would need to take 10-20 bombs and during world war multiple missions

 

[MastanKhan]

yes it would
if its up against Afghanistan or has absolute air superiority like America and has already decimated entire air defense network of its enemy.
until then leave it for America

Sir,

Whys is this forum allowing children to run worthless threads on a continuous basis---?