Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
C-5 Crews Thoughts On M Model  
User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1443 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5592 times:

Came across this about the C-5M enjoy.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/04/airforce_c5m_dover_042909/


I would help you but it is not in the contract
16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31240 posts, RR: 85
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5519 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quote:
C-5M aircrews crow about new engines, avionics

I expect they're just happy to actually be in the air and not on the ground, considering how poor the dispatch reliability rate is said to be for the C-5 fleet. Big grin


User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5288 times:

Amazing how four brand new CF-6 engines will make flying so much more enjoyable.  Wink

I've been around CF-6 powered aircraft for a little over ten years. The CF-6 is a dependable engine, that's why they have been around for so long. We, AA, just had a CF-6 that was on wing on a 767-300 for 40000 hours. It was the engine that was delivered with the aircraft.


User currently offlineNicoEDDF From Germany, joined Jan 2008, 1106 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5277 times:



Quoting LMP737 (Reply 2):
We, AA, just had a CF-6 that was on wing on a 767-300 for 40000 hours. It was the engine that was delivered with the aircraft.

40.000 EFH?? Even for a first runner thats quite a bit too much, isn't it?


User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5271 times:



Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 3):
40.000 EFH?? Even for a first runner thats quite a bit too much, isn't it?

It's a lot of hours but I wouldn't call it to much.


User currently offlineA350 From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1101 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 5118 times:

Congratulations to the "new" transport plane  champagne 
I'm still hoping that also the A's will be converted since after all it's an economic way to get a great airlifter, but I'm probably dreaming.

Cheers

A350



Photography - the art of observing, not the art of arranging
User currently offlineGalaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 628 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4822 times:

Only two of the Ms are at Dover, and for the majority of the time, one has been in a hanger the entire time, lol. About a third of that time was scheduled maintenance, but since both of these jets were on the ground for so long, and subject to extreme weather testing, they developed alot of leaks. The third C-5M, 9024, is at Robins doing its normal programmed depot maintenance. 6025 has flow a few missions from Ramstein and back, but 6013 hasn't gone anywhere since it was delivered. There are still alot of legacy problems with the "new" jet. I guess when they actually start tracking the operational capability later in the year, we will get the true results. The next jet is being inducted in August.

User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12840 posts, RR: 25
Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4582 times:



Quote:
DOVER AIR FORCE BASE, Del. — From a distance, the gray C-5 Galaxy parked on the flight line looks the same as the dozen or so others lined up on the concrete.

Up on jacks?  Smile

Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 6):
Only two of the Ms are at Dover, and for the majority of the time, one has been in a hanger the entire time, lol.

Some things never change!



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5477 posts, RR: 30
Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4083 times:

Does anybody have a breakdown of the expenses which add up to 148 million dollars to upgrade a C-5 to the M model?

Is it just me or does that seem like quite a bit of cash for upgrading a plane using mostly off the shelf technology?



What the...?
User currently offlineNicoEDDF From Germany, joined Jan 2008, 1106 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3930 times:



Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 8):
Is it just me or does that seem like quite a bit of cash for upgrading a plane using mostly off the shelf technology?

Nah, thought the same...for that money you nearly can buy brand new C17


User currently offlineGalaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 628 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3910 times:



Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 9):
for that money you nearly can buy brand new C17

260 million for a new C-17, that only carries half of what the C-5 carries...296 million for two modernized C-5s that can do the job of 4 C-17s.... Must I go on? Go C-5!


User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5477 posts, RR: 30
Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3843 times:

So what's the cost breakdown?


What the...?
User currently offlineHawaiianHobo From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 3833 times:



Quoting Galaxy5007 (Reply 10):
296 million for two modernized C-5s that can do the job of 4 C-17s.... Must I go on? Go C-5!

Hahaha, never underestimate the usefulness of the C-5....until you break in Guam for a week.

...I think I'm sun burned.  Smile



...
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3796 times:



Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 8):
Does anybody have a breakdown of the expenses which add up to 148 million dollars to upgrade a C-5 to the M model?

4 CF6-80s and a spare ... $50 million?

HPT disc failures should AD'd now. The CF6 was developped from the TF39, which probably eased integration compared to a totally different engine.

I think a big operation plus for the CF-6-80 is that you can get MRO and parts everywhere. Is it the most used turbofan? A300, A310, A330, B747, B767, MD11, C-X all use CF6-80 versions.

CF6 shops, warehouses everywhere. Not that MRO will be outsourced but its handy to e.g. top up stocks fast/ efficiently. Probably more important then the better fuel efficiency the GENX could have offered.

Maybe this mod will have the C5 fleet finaaly meet its original dispatch reliability targets. Bad news for the An124 operators that made a fortune out of US / NATO operations during the last 15 yrs.


User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5477 posts, RR: 30
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3636 times:

So 50 mil on engines. Besides avionics, what make up the other 100 mil?


What the...?
User currently offlineGalaxy5007 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 628 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3576 times:

New APUs, ATMs, almost all the hydraulic actuators were replaced with rebuild/new ones, a new anti-skid system, lighting system, computer system (replaced MADAR), the new pylons, wiring, etc. It adds up quick. I think they put some of the legacy problems that needed to be fixed before RERP could happen were thrown into the cost as well.

User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8697 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3440 times:

Needless to say, it's just another sweetheart contract (they all are), but it is great to see the mighty C-5 being shined up. It's great to see such a legendary aircraft get some respect and much needed work.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic C-5 Crews Thoughts On M Model
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
# Of Flight Crews On Air Force One posted Thu Jul 22 2004 10:46:21 by 28S
Some Life-Cycle Questions On USN Aircraft posted Sat Apr 25 2009 02:02:07 by Loran
Live Earth Pix. On Your TV. 24/7 posted Thu Apr 23 2009 19:00:05 by ZANL188
Uscg HH-60 Jayhawk On "Deadliest Catch" posted Wed Apr 22 2009 10:26:53 by Khobar
Spies Get Terabytes Of Info. On F-35 posted Mon Apr 20 2009 22:30:26 by Greaser
Two Shuttles On Two Pads For One Last Time posted Mon Apr 20 2009 15:32:07 by Csturdiv
FKB - SXB (42kms) On An A340 posted Sun Apr 5 2009 16:45:03 by SXB
Which Boeing Model Is Best For New Air Force 1? posted Mon Mar 23 2009 18:13:34 by Nitepilot79
Story On Crashed Air Force C 17 Is Incorrect posted Mon Mar 23 2009 10:34:16 by WarRI1
Listen To CAP Onloine On 271.000 posted Wed Mar 18 2009 09:59:44 by Wardialer

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format