kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2208 posts, RR: 3 Posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6629 times:
Should the U.S. Air Force start a special lift cargo airline? I am thinking something similar to Antonov.
The recent news about the concrete pumps being sent to Japan via Antonovs got me thinking, they have a monopoly on specialty air cargo. It is a small market, I will admit. However, it wouldn't hurt if the USAF can make some money on the side by carrying around cargo when their C-17s and C-5s are not in use. This could also be an incentive for the USAF to look for more cargo aircraft (something I feel the Air Force needs).
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14315 posts, RR: 26 Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6615 times:
Quoting kaitak744 (Thread starter): Should the U.S. Air Force start a special lift cargo airline?
No. The market seems pretty well covered as it is. There aren't many items that can only be transported by the An-225, and there are several operators operating An-124s and even more still with Il-76s.
Quoting kaitak744 (Thread starter): However, it wouldn't hurt if the USAF can make some money on the side by carrying around cargo when their C-17s and C-5s are not in use
The planes are already pretty well in use I would imagine. Boeing did offer the C-17 to civilian customers as the BC-17X (as did McDonnell Douglas I believe as the MD-17) but the cost for the aircraft was just too much.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2208 posts, RR: 3 Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6571 times:
At present, can a non-government agency or entity charter a C-5 galaxy for cargo transport?
wn700driver From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6485 times:
Quoting kaitak744 (Reply 4): At present, can a non-government agency or entity charter a C-5 galaxy for cargo transport?
No.
Also, the military would immediately run into a capacity problem as they already rely heavily on civilian contractors for cargo shipments.
Plus, with the FRED there, (I think there are people here who can comment better than I on this...), I think the dispatch reliability is on the order of 70%. That's pretty awful by civilian standards.
bj87 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 444 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 6266 times:
Quoting kaitak744 (Thread starter): Should the U.S. Air Force start a special lift cargo airline?
I don't think the market is big enough.
Besides, don't Air Forces from around the world require special landing clearance to be allowed to land in a country? That could seriously hamper operations. Especially in Africa where a lot of these specialist cargo flights take place.
Quoting wn700driver (Reply 5): Plus, with the FRED there, (I think there are people here who can comment better than I on this...), I think the dispatch reliability is on the order of 70%. That's pretty awful by civilian standards.
70% dispatch reliability, that is a sad statistic. How can they wage war when the chance of their plane going tech is 1 in 3?
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 7754 posts, RR: 26 Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 6198 times:
Quoting bj87 (Reply 7):
Besides, don't Air Forces from around the world require special landing clearance to be allowed to land in a country? That could seriously hamper operations. Especially in Africa where a lot of these specialist cargo flights take place.
there is a miracle fee that allows anything, it is called "non-objection fee", once paid, all permissions are given....
Especially in Africa.
Venus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1409 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 6076 times:
Makes me wonder as they park C-5A's in the desert, could a civilian company take a C-5 and make a go of it, I am sure Lockheed would be more than happy to sell them parts. Dispatch rate is awful but under civilian rules like a Atlas or Kallita running it could it make money? Did the C-5 ever get certified by the FAA?
kanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2459 posts, RR: 21 Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5969 times:
while the Air Force doesn't lease them per se, I think there have been instances where both the C-17 and C-5 were used for civilian projects.. wasn't one moving a whale to Greenland?
mffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 908 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 5850 times:
Quoting bj87 (Reply 7): 70% dispatch reliability, that is a sad statistic. How can they wage war when the chance of their plane going tech is 1 in 3?
This is just too funny to pass up... " How can they wage war "
I can think of at least a half dozen armed conflicts that the C-5 has been utilized in... Maybe one of our C-5 a-netters can provide a complete list?? Maybe even including those pesky civil unrest operations...
I have personally been delivered into two different operations on the C-5 without incident...
As for going Tech?? The only times that the C-5 ever went Tech while I was on board was when we where in nice places like Bermuda, Hawaii or in Europe...
DiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1294 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5830 times:
Quoting bj87 (Reply 9): But that does make me wonder how many cargo aircraft does the USAF have? They must have well over a hundred.
Pure cargo aircraft only? They've got 205 C-17's ( plus some more on order), 108 C-5's and 400 some C-130's. Couple that with all the other "C" designated aircraft (C-12, C-23, C-26, C-27, and the various business jets that are under the C designation), you'd have a large airline for sure. You could throw in the KC-135's and KC-10's as well, as they can carry some cargo as well.
747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3301 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days ago) and read 5721 times:
Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 11): Makes me wonder as they park C-5A's in the desert, could a civilian company take a C-5 and make a go of it, I am sure Lockheed would be more than happy to sell them parts. Dispatch rate is awful but under civilian rules like a Atlas or Kallita running it could it make money? Did the C-5 ever get certified by the FAA?
That would be a cool ideal, but those C-5A's would need a good hush kit, because those T-39 are loud.
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1588 posts, RR: 4 Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5383 times:
AFAIK, from the time the contract is signed, all hardware relating to building US Military equipment belongs to the US Military. This would include any tooling, test and developmental, show and tell etc . . . hardware that was purchased or built under the Government contract (no matter at what stage of production).
kanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2459 posts, RR: 21 Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5364 times:
Quoting bikerthai (Reply 21): So they are in fact transporting their own stuff.
full circle now... the US Air Force does in fact serve as it's own cargo airline (and charters with commercial carriers)... so the question of this thread is moot.
ebj1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 2 Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5070 times:
Quoting kanban (Reply 22): full circle now... the US Air Force does in fact serve as it's own cargo airline (and charters with commercial carriers)... so the question of this thread is moot.
MATS and MAC used to have regularly scheduled flights on specific routes. Does AMC operate in a similar fashion?
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 7754 posts, RR: 26 Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4828 times:
Quoting kanban (Reply 22): ull circle now... the US Air Force does in fact serve as it's own cargo airline (and charters with commercial carriers)... so the question of this thread is moot.
well, that is the purpose of the MATS or MAC , the question was, should the USAF contract to third parties, like the Russians and Ukrainians did and still do. Now, contrary to my reply# 3 I give a tongue-in-cheek answer, they might be required to do so if budget cuts and Dollar value melt-down continues.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 7754 posts, RR: 26 Reply 18, posted (1 year 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4195 times:
Interesting I just read an article about an "ALPHA MAGNETIC SPECTROMETER" which was transported from the CERN facility near Geneva Switzerland from GVA to Kennedy Space centre via US Air Force C5A.
From there it was flown via Shuttle "Endeavour" to the space station.
This involved an interesting transport by commercial heavy lift truck over snowy mountain roads to the airport, the actual weight of the device was only 7 tons which is nothing for heavy lift air cargo. However, with a value of € 1,5 Billion and special requirements for cooling this was definatley not an "every daqy" job.
After all, one outsized air cargo which was not flown on an An124.
dispatcher From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 247 posts, RR: 6 Reply 19, posted (1 year 11 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4044 times:
The US government has no business in the commercial cargo business, or any other commercial business for that matter.
Spacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2735 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (1 year 11 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4047 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 25): Interesting I just read an article about an "ALPHA MAGNETIC SPECTROMETER" which was transported from the CERN facility near Geneva Switzerland from GVA to Kennedy Space centre via US Air Force C5A.
You sure it wasn't one of the two -C models? They are specifically modified for transporting space hardware for the USAF and NASA. IIRC the rear upper deck is removed inside, offering max volume.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 7754 posts, RR: 26 Reply 21, posted (1 year 11 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4048 times:
Quoting Spacepope (Reply 27): You sure it wasn't one of the two -C models?
you could be right. They refer in the article to a "Super Galaxy". There are 2 pictures shown but I cannot identify the numbers except 6026 on the front of the fuselage, just where the noselocks are.
The transport was arranged by the AMS consortium in CERN Geneva under assoistance of the NASA , the supervision was in the hands of the Technical university in aachen, germany. packaging and road transport by a German freight forwarder.
ZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3244 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (1 year 11 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4019 times:
Quoting Spacepope (Reply 27): You sure it wasn't one of the two -C models?
airplaneaddict From United States of America, joined May 2010, 11 posts, RR: 4 Reply 23, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3764 times:
I would have to agree with dispatcher on the fact that the US government couldn't run a commercial business because of all of the bureaucratic nonsense that leads to a bloated system.
gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 24, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3759 times:
You mean that business that is making the government money back on its investment? Oh right, sorry, didn't mean to let facts get in the way of your bitchy comment.
Now back to on topic - I'd think there is insufficient capacity available to fly a cargo airline, despite not really being the major purpose of the armed services.
NS
[Edited 2011-06-05 23:47:00 by SA7700]
25 Galaxy5007: It was 6025; a C-5M that carried the AMS. Although the two C models were originally modified for NASA, they actually rarely do NASA missions. In fact
26 wvsuperhornet: Maybe if the C-17 is in such demand they need to stop displaying it at airshows anyway I think anyone in the US has a good grasp of what a fantastic
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2208 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2005, 7754 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 444 posts, 
From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2735 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
