Lockheed Martin Aeronautics has begun briefing the U.K. and other governments over the possible formation of an international consortium to develop and integrate systems on a maritime patrol version of the C-130 Hercules. (Lockheed Martin UK)
Defense News is reporting that Lockheed is seeking to establish an international consortium to develop an Maritime Patrol Aircraft version of the C-130 and they are touting the Coast Guard’s C-130J as the baseline configuration.
They expect two upgrades, an anti-surface version and an anti-submarine version that will be marketed as replacement for P-3s at a lower cost than the new P-8. They also expect that services that already operate C-130s in other roles will see logistical advantages in adding more C-130s rather than unique MPA air frames.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
Why not, I think the US Coast Guard could upgrade the HC-130J to SC-130J Sea Hercules standard. I even heard, that Lockheed is trying to market the SC-130J Sea Hercules to replace their Nimrod and be a lower cost alternative to the US navy P-3 and P-8
Plagiarize much?? Why do you parrot comments from the article posted and then repeat them in your comment as if they are your own?? You didn’t
‘hear it” you just read it in the above article! And why would the Coast Guard need to waste limited and desperately needed funding for new ships on an ASW and anti-ship version of a C-130 when it’s not part of our mission set?? Stop fantasizing about the Coast Guard doing the Navy’s mission. Let the Navy worry about adapting C-130’s for those missions.
And when we are done with this we can buy the AC130 for port security, everytime Nicky disappears from the blog for a while I have high hopes…then he comes back…
see also the CG-9 article about upgrading/sustaining the older C-10H Hercs which goes to the improvement needed already to keep older a/c flying:
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg9/newsroom/updates/lrs010713.asp
Very smart move by Lockheed. When I was reading about the new P-8, I immediately thought how it would be too spendy for our more budget-constrained allies. As far as the USCG goes, hopefully it sells well to other states, because that gives more motive for Lockheed to continue development and upgrades, which USCG may benefit from in terms of future upgrades.
I think it’s a very smart move for Lockheed to come up with a lower cost MPA using a USCG C-130J as a basis for SC-130. It would fit well for countries who have C-130’s and want an MPA, but can’t afford the P-8 or P-3. On top of that, it would add to the list of missions that the C-130 is capable of performing.
If you can’t afford the P-3 you probably can not afford the SC-130J, The SC-130J will also double as a transport, and will probably be easier to upgrade due to roll on roll off technology.
P-8 I laugh at. because its not a MPA, its a spy plane with ASW capability. Even the Chinese know that.
Nor making any new P-3 though their are still many out there.
I suspect a lot of the users will only be interested in the surface surveillance capabilities–just like the Coast Guard.
I suspect not for the US, but for US allies who want a low cost MPA that won’t break the bank and perform MPA, ASW & ASUW missions in one aircraft.
Lockheed seems to think China has become their best salesman. http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lockheed-eyes-c-130-maritime-opportunities-in-south-east-412493/
What I want to know is how much will a SC-130J cost compared to a P-8, and can the P-8 operate in rough weather conditions? Will it be able to operate in Inhospitable conditions like the SC-130J can? I think the P-8 is overkill that can not operate in all the conditions that a maritime security aircraft is going to have to operate in that is why the SC-130J should succeed.
Just my opinion.
The P-8 is based on the 737 airliner and, like airliners, it is expected to operate at medium to high altitudes, flying above the weather. Other than the Indian version (P-8I) they do not have a MAD boom. They use a recently developed winged version of the torpedo to get it down to the water safely. I’m pretty sure the Navy made sure that they could operate in at least all the conditions where they could operate a P-3.
On the other hand it like an airliner also requires a nice long runway, unlike C-130s, so it may not be able to be based as close to where they are wanted to operate.
Will it be able to operate in conditions like Alaska. And I wonder how much dose it cost per flight hour? I say Alaska cause when was the last time you saw a major navy asset up there?
Countries like Iceland, or Greenland, or Even British Falkland’s I feel would benefit more from the SC-130J than the P-8. And if you can do it for the C-130J you should be able to do it for the C-27J.
Just my opinion.